Commissioner criticises Synod decision as a “delay” to independent safeguarding
Labour MP and Second Church Estates Commissioner, Marsha de Cordova MP, called the Church of England’s decision not to vote for wholly independent safeguarding a “delay” to “real progress.”
She said that she was honoured to take up the position of Second Church Estates Commissioner in October 2024, but “could not have foreseen the storm that was about to engulf the Church and erode so much trust and good faith.”
“Since the publication of the Makin Review, following many prior reviews, that exposed historic safeguarding failures and more recent failures – including the most recent revelation about David Tudor – many MPs, including myself, have rightly expressed concern, she said.
The MP said she has received correspondence from constituents, distressed clergy victims and survivors.
She said that General Synod had the opportunity “to commit to real change to its approach to safeguarding,”and that she wholly supported Model 4, which would bring about independent safeguarding operations, complaints process, an independent scrutiny function, and audits.
“The Church must show victims, the public and Parliament that it is serious about tackling safeguarding failures and, ultimately, keeping people safe, she added.
“Bringing those responsible for safeguarding from across the Church under one body would have brought about much-needed consistency of approach in dealing with abuse, she said.
Cordova said that despite this “approach preferred by victims and survivors and a recommendation of the Jay Review” Synod “effectively dropped Model 4 and instead replaced it with Model 3 – that only provides for independent scrutiny of safeguarding.”
She called this model “less robust” adding that she is “deeply disappointed.”
Cordova pointed out that “the majority of laity members, who provide fantastic services and support on the frontlines of Church work, voted against removing Model 4.”
“They understand all too well that recent safeguarding failures means the Church has not proved itself capable of marking its own homework in any capacity, she added.
“The decision taken puts back the progress we need. The road to rebuilding trust and confidence in the Church remains long.” She said.
Chairwoman of Women and Church (WATCH) Martine Oborne called Synod’s decision “disappointing and dangerous.”
“It seems particularly extraordinary that Synod should choose not to follow the advice of most survivors of abuse, who were campaigning outside for full independence; its own lead bishop on safeguarding, Joanne Grenfell; the Chair of the recent independent report into child sex abuse that it commissioned, Professor Alexis Jay; and the Second Church Estates Commissioner who represents Parliament at Synod, Marsha de Cordova MP, she noted.
“For reasons that are hard to comprehend, Synod instead decided to follow the advice of the Bishop of Blackburn, Philip North – one of about ten bishops who do not accept female clergy, who suggested a sort of halfway house, she added.
Philip North is a member of Forward in Faith, a conservative organisation that upholds Catholic order. Founded in November 1992, following the General Synod’s approval of the legislation permitting the ordination of women to the priesthood, they believe that ordaining women to the episcopate and priesthood lacks any precedent in the history of orthodox Christianity, as well as ‘catholic consent’.
Oborne said that Synod has yet to address “problems of culture that facilitate abuse,” including “not only a culture of deference and power imbalances but also a culture of sexism and discrimination.”
She said these issues “make the Church an unsafe environment for those who are expected to accept and cope with discrimination.”
She called it “particularly ironic” that a “bishop, who will not ordain women as priests and will not receive communion from a female priest or bishop, should be usurping the lead in advising Synod on the way forward for safeguarding.”
“There is a clear and well evidenced correlation between systems that condone male privilege and abuse against women and girls. We will not have a safe, unsexist environment in our Church while we refuse to treat women and men equally.” She added.
Meanwhile, he Bishop of Newcastle, Helen-Ann Hartley called in unhelpful, given Synod’s decision to pass Model 3, that bishops make statement “like ‘I take safeguarding seriously’ or ‘I want the highest possible standards in safeguarding’ or ‘I am confident in my diocese because we have…’.”
“The events of the past weeks have clearly demonstrated that there are significant issues with the leadership of the Church, she said.
“This is not the time therefore for a bishop (of all people) to have moved an amendment that even hints at the perceived power imbalances that exist in our structures. I need say no more than that. I await more detail about how this ‘model 3.5’ will be implemented.” She added.