Mechanisms

Well here we are, in vacation time, and I am still tapping away at the computer. 

The weather, after being hot for so long, is now cool and cloudy, and there has been a rush by British people in France to return to the UK, sparking funny stories about dinghies crossing the English Channel. 

With the recent IICSA hearings, and I don't have much faith in the IICSA to fully deal with all abuse, I was observing the account of the JWs blocking access to safeguarding policies and records. It's that infuriating situation where protecting the institution is more important than protecting the children and the vulnerable. I can imagine that blocking, that closed ranks, I can feel it, I've been there. 

I once read a book by a choir boy in Ireland, and I can't find a copy, we must have sent it to the charity shop during one of those heartbreaking clear-outs. The book tells of how the boy, innocent and helpful and devoted to the church, was groomed by a Catholic Priest, much to his horror, and it affected his whole life, but he didn't dwell on it, but kept his devotion and was aiming for Catholic Priesthood. Although there he had no evidence of a link between his complaint against the priest, who remained in his position after the complaint, and his being turned down for ordination. He suffered, both from the abuse and from being turned down by the priesthood. 

Religious bodies seem to constantly go against their own ethics when it comes to abuse, Christian Churches seem to forget the teachings of Jesus completely in their scramble to protect the church's image. A God that is more important than the suffering of the innocent and vulnerable is not a God worth worshipping. Religion is supposedly a set of ethics on how to live, and if living that way means criminal activity or complicity, it is not a viable way of life. 

The book by the victim of the Catholic church exposed poor safeguarding and poor responses to abuse by the Catholic Church, and showed the affect of abuse on an innocent boy. He was a forgiving man and when his abuser was convicted for other offences, he didn't join in protests and threats relating to the priest when he was released. 

There should be a neutral body. Back to the CofE, so-called neutral charities are conflicted, Macsas and ThirtyoneEight for example, are both conflicted by Church of England safeguarding members, and church of England safeguarding is a car crash. 

The matter of 'Core Groups' has been raised recently regarding C of E abuse. Apparently, in a very conflicted and incestuous church, a complaint is investigated by either local or national groups chosen by the Bishop of Archbishop. As you can imagine, these groups would be so incestuous and so conflicted, that friends, enemies, acquaintances and fellow Masons would be investigating people who they knew or knew of. How ridiculous. What an opportunity for revenge and corruption in the so-secular and corrupt Church of England. 

The Church of England has a technique for being untouchable, as well as ignoring or failing to process allegations unless the police convict the abuser, they cover up at parish level, with disastrous consequences, forcibly silencing those who question. And at the top they have all the judges, Lords and high powered lawyers and dignitaries, some hold several of those roles and abuse these to protect the Church of England.

The most famous of the church protectors who make a mockery of Christianity and show that it doesn't exist in the C of E is baroness Butler-Sloss. She has interfered in more cases than is realised. Her famous work was telling a victim of Peter Ball, Graham, one of the Stockholm Syndrome Group, that 'She didn't want to give the press a Bishop', ie she would rather protect Ball and the C of E than bring the horrendous abuse by Ball out into the open. 

Despite this and other harmful actions against victims, she went on to head the IICSA, the rather farcical child abuse inquiry, and resigned because of other conflicts of interest and not the Ball case. No one spoke up loudly about her unsuitability and conflict regarding the C of E, which is a patter that the C of E rely on. 

The next head of the IICSA, Fiona Woolf, was also a C of E dignitary. Both would have been able to destroy evidence to suit them. Not a murmur and no investigation. Shambles.

Further to that there is a group of repeated names in this 'Protect the C of E' game:

• Rupert Bursell QC, well known for intervening in abuse cases and allowing harm or failing to prevent harm to vulnerable people involved.
• Lord Carlile - fraternizer with some of the worst historic paedophiles such as Greville Janner, Cyril Smith and others, left his wife for his mistress and made shocking public insults against his wife, sympathiser with abusers and has whitewashed cases where abuse was later evidenced to have occured. 
• Lord Faulkner, part of one of the biggest cover ups in the C of E history, sits on the Ecclesiastical Committee who enable the C of E to behave lawlessly by corruption in the Lords and Commons he works alongside Butler Sloss on this mission despite both being guilty of serious misconduct. 
• John Gladwin, conflicted Bishop who deliberately failed to protect an abuse victim from harm and tried to deny that they were being harmed. 

There are a number more in this group but I am tired and distressed by what I have seen and heard of the IICSA this week and I need to quit for the night. Basically Justin Welby thinks or knows it's all a joke and is already planning his sickening fake apology run. 

Unless the invincible church protection gang of thugs is dis-empowered, the dictatorship and the sadistic treatment of victims of all kinds in the church will continue.