A disappointing and dangerous decision on safeguarding

Many people were dismayed and disappointed to see that General Synod, the legislative body of the Church of England, failed this week to vote for full independent safeguarding to be implemented as soon as possible.

Although Synod did agree to steps towards this, I feel it is a disappointing and dangerous decision not to go the whole way.

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, the Rt Revd 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.

For reasons that are hard to comprehend, Synod instead decided to follow the advice of the Bishop of Blackburn, the Rt Revd Philip North - one of about ten bishops who do not accept female clergy, who suggested a sort of halfway house.

At least, you might say, the Church is making some steps in the right direction, but for small churches all over the country who are working really hard to restore trust in the Church, it seems less than ideal. And we put ourselves in a dangerous position – not only of doing less than the maximum to protect future victims of abuse but also of embarrassment when the next abuse scandal is revealed (and it’s hard to believe that this will not happen.) And we will then be faced with all the same questions – especially why we are continuing to refuse to allow full independent oversight of our safety processes right now.

Having said all this, and recognising that some progress has been made with improving safeguarding processes within the Church, Synod has also not yet addressed problems of culture that facilitate abuse. This, I believe, includes not only a culture of deference and power imbalances but also a culture of sexism and discrimination, that make the Church an unsafe environment for those who are expected to accept and cope with discrimination.

As Chair of WATCH, a charity that campaigns for equality for women in the Church of England, I am particularly concerned for women. Currently, all people in the Church are required to accept the status quo, which is that institutional discrimination continues - whereby churches can still say no to a female vicars, no to female bishops and teach that women need to be under the authority of men.

I would say that it is hard to find any women in the Church who have not experienced sexism – everything from small belittlings and sexist jokes to significant sexual harassment and abuse.  But there is a huge pressure on women to keep smiling, not make a fuss and to accept that, even if they do report misconduct, it is unlikely to be dealt with well.

It is in 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.

One possible way forward would be to find a generous way to bring the institutional discrimination to an end and also, in the meantime, to appoint a lead bishop for Justice for Women in the Church. This Bishop might not only address the concerns of women in the Church of England, who are the minoritised majority representing two thirds of our congregations, but would also be a voice for the millions of women throughout our world who are suffering all kinds of harm because of patriarchal behaviours and abusive theology.