Prince Charles and other bigwigs supported abusive bishop

Prince Charles and other bigwigs supported abusive bishop May 11, 2019
Bishop Peter Ball, left, was admired by Prince Charles. Images via YouTube

AN inquiry has concluded that the Church of England put its own reputation above the needs of victims of sexual abuse – and that prominent establishment figures such as Prince Charles were were ‘misguided’ in their expressions of support of Bishop Peter Ball as he battled abuse accusations.

The inquiry said there was a serious failure of leadership by the former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey, in its handling of the case of the bishop who eventually went to prison.

Ball, a former bishop of Lewes and Gloucester, was jailed in 2015, more than 20 years after allegations were made against him that were largely ignored or downplayed by the church. Ball accepted a police caution in 1993 and resigned as bishop but was allowed to continue officiating in the C of E.

Ball “seemed to relish contact with prominent and influential people”, a 250-page report published on Thursday by the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse (IICSA) said.

He sought to use his relationship with His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales to further his campaign to return to unrestricted ministry.

The Prince and his private secretary spoke about Ball with the Archbishop of Canterbury and arranged for the Duchy of Cornwall to buy a property to be rented by Ball after he resigned as a bishop.

The Prince had been “misguided”, and his actions:

Could have been interpreted as expressions of support for Peter Ball and, given the Prince of Wales’s future role within the Church of England, had the potential to influence the actions of the church.

It said Carey, above, showed compassion to Ball that was not extended to the bishop’s victims, and displayed overt support for Ball’s innocence despite having no justification. Carey was Archbishop of Canterbury from 1991 to 2002.

The church’s response to allegations of abuse by Ball and others in the diocese of Chichester was marked by secrecy, prevarication and avoidance of reporting alleged crimes, the report said.

Disclosures of abuse were handled inadequately by the church, and responses failed to display an appropriate level of urgency or appreciation of the seriousness of allegations made.

Following publication of the report, a Clarence House spokesman said:

It remains a matter of deep regret to the prince that he, along with many others, was deceived by Peter Ball over so many years.

As he made clear in his voluntary witness statement to the inquiry, at no time did he bring any influence to bear on the actions of the Church or any other relevant authority.

His thoughts remain with victims of the abuse suffered over many years.

"He's just putting the atheist thinking of the time, as revealed in the literature, into ..."

Atheism, Race, and the Freethinker at ..."
"Atheists were certainly not immune from the racism common in the nineteenth and early twentieth ..."

Atheism, Race, and the Freethinker at ..."
"A scenario:A heterosexual, very religious, couple decide to get married. They approach a baker for ..."

Franklin Graham leads paranoid charge against ..."
"Franklin's new-found concern for women is laughable, especially, like his father, he lives in terror ..."

Franklin Graham leads paranoid charge against ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • CoastalMaineBird

    at no time did he bring any influence to bear on the actions of the Church or any other relevant authority.

    His thoughts remain with victims of the abuse suffered over many years.

    The correct version of this would be:

    at all times he brought influence to bear on the actions of the Church and other relevant authorities.

    His thoughts remain with bishop Peter Ball and the abuse inflicted over many years.

    But, alas, such is not the case.

  • Raymond Metcalfe

    Anything that Charlie does will influence people if he spouts some homeopathic nonsense people will run for their sugar pills. If he says something nice about someone he becomes untouchable saying something nice about a peado in the church of England and gets him a house then the peado become untouchable.

  • David Ocadhla

    Charles and Savile, Charles and Bell, and perhaps Charles and a great many other child-rapists. Perhaps in 50 years’ time, long after his death, the truth will be allowed to be told.

  • Freethinker

    Can’t expect much from a royal buffoon, who will soon be king, who once famously fantasized about turning into a tampon that could live inside his mistress.

  • persephone
  • barriejohn

    He reminds me of someone, but I can’t think who…

    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/IlI642mFZlw/hqdefault.jpg

  • Broga

    Charles, surrounded by “courtiers”, i.e. tax funded sycophants, has been out of touch with real life since the day he was born. How could he not be? Now, he has been removed from the limelight by first William and now, catastrophically for him, by Harry with a wife who seems a tad too intelligent and independent for the royals.

  • rubaxter

    He’s a monster without being mythical, which is unfortunate.

  • Ann Kah

    Isn’t Charles the one that’s supportive of homeopathic “medicines”? So not the brightest porch light on the block…

  • Martin Penwald

    Yeah, “misguided”…
    He is the futur head of this church, obviously he will hide any inconvenient people from scrutiny.