Thanks very much for such a well ordered and clear article that engages with the facts. Great point about the failure of the Iwerne group after the Rushton Report and their subsequent influence. In Cambridge in the mid 1980s I saw the way they operated close up.
“He was, according to Graystone, beaten twice by John Smyth but only as an adult, after he had left Winchester. “
One adult man going of his own volition to be beaten by another adult man sounds like consensual s&m, no? Is that the implication here? Or am I missing something?
An army of philosophers would not be sufficient to change the nature of error and to make it truth. In my opinion the title of your piece is inappropriate, much of its content misdirected, even its apparent aim.
That is not to say that your clumsy titular assertion is false or true, but (1) the matters that you choose to address are too many, too varied, and too very sensitive for victims, to allow such a strident, pompous remark, and (2) your reduction to ‘guilt’ or ‘innocence’ is absurd, provocative, incendiary in such a complex context, against such a broad historical canvas, at such a difficult time for the many who matter most.
I’m told that truth is now subjective. However one objective truth is that in far too many ways the CofE is a disgrace, trusted to fudge and favour, a sleight of hand; another such truth is that as a CofE Bishop +Stephen must swim those messy waters. He has probably done his best so far, albeit without complete success.
The proof of the calling is in the doing. I hope that +Stephen will beg reconciliation as a good man who will now at last in all his roles stand tall and take a leading role in stamping out enablers of any kind of abuse, its practitioners, its defenders, and its covering-up, anywhere.
Urgent implementation of Prof Jay’s nine-month-old Future of Church Safeguarding Report will be a start. Institutional self-regulation in this domain is hogwash - and new tech is now armed, poised, ready to strike.
Hello Andrew. Your piece about Stephen Conway and Makin is commendable, and needs a wider audience. It is depressing to see so much comment, some supposedly professional, that reads into Makin evidence that is not there, and which seems just keen to see heads roll. Can you draw your piece to the attenntion of Thinking Anglicans? And how do I provide a URL to it? Hugh
Thanks very much for such a well ordered and clear article that engages with the facts. Great point about the failure of the Iwerne group after the Rushton Report and their subsequent influence. In Cambridge in the mid 1980s I saw the way they operated close up.
“He was, according to Graystone, beaten twice by John Smyth but only as an adult, after he had left Winchester. “
One adult man going of his own volition to be beaten by another adult man sounds like consensual s&m, no? Is that the implication here? Or am I missing something?
An army of philosophers would not be sufficient to change the nature of error and to make it truth. In my opinion the title of your piece is inappropriate, much of its content misdirected, even its apparent aim.
That is not to say that your clumsy titular assertion is false or true, but (1) the matters that you choose to address are too many, too varied, and too very sensitive for victims, to allow such a strident, pompous remark, and (2) your reduction to ‘guilt’ or ‘innocence’ is absurd, provocative, incendiary in such a complex context, against such a broad historical canvas, at such a difficult time for the many who matter most.
I’m told that truth is now subjective. However one objective truth is that in far too many ways the CofE is a disgrace, trusted to fudge and favour, a sleight of hand; another such truth is that as a CofE Bishop +Stephen must swim those messy waters. He has probably done his best so far, albeit without complete success.
The proof of the calling is in the doing. I hope that +Stephen will beg reconciliation as a good man who will now at last in all his roles stand tall and take a leading role in stamping out enablers of any kind of abuse, its practitioners, its defenders, and its covering-up, anywhere.
Urgent implementation of Prof Jay’s nine-month-old Future of Church Safeguarding Report will be a start. Institutional self-regulation in this domain is hogwash - and new tech is now armed, poised, ready to strike.
Very, very well said 👏👏
Hello Andrew. Your piece about Stephen Conway and Makin is commendable, and needs a wider audience. It is depressing to see so much comment, some supposedly professional, that reads into Makin evidence that is not there, and which seems just keen to see heads roll. Can you draw your piece to the attenntion of Thinking Anglicans? And how do I provide a URL to it? Hugh
I know that Sarmiento has seen it, so Thinking Anglicans should in due course. The URL is https://open.substack.com/pub/andrewbrown/p/stephen-conway-is-innocent-ok?r=3hvho&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Really bad form . Graham and Makin should consult defamation lawyers.
Thanks. Typo..There is a brutal irony here. Graham, rather than Alasdair Quirk.
Can I share your blog on Facebook?
By all means share. Apologies for the typo. I was in a hurry to get it up on Sunday