The Tatchellisation of Child Safeguarding in the Church of England

792

No normal person who comes across the paedophile words of Peter Tatchell would have any reticence about expressing their abhorrence for them.

Noone who follows Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour would do any other than express abhorrence.

So why do child safeguarding officers in the Church of England refuse to do so?

I recently had occasion to raise two serious child safeguarding concerns regarding a quite newly ordained priest in the Bristol Diocese and a member of a Parochial Church Council in the London Diocese.

It arose from a Twitter exchange in which they had both refused to condemn these paedophile words of Peter Tatchell:-

‘IF HIM, WHY NOT HIM?’

You can read for yourselves their responses here.

I would note that the Bristol diocesan priest clearly clicked on the video link as he references another video of mine he could only have got to by doing so.  He disparaged everything in that video apart from the paedophile words of Peter Tatchell.  That, and other comments, negated his pro-forma claim that he condemns paedophiles.

The London churchman fell over himself to claim the documented facts before him don’t exist because Peter Tatchell says they don’t, and tried to intimidate me into a retraction with the word “libel”.  Despite being provided with Mr Tatchell’s glowing review of a paedophile anthology he himself contributed to, the London churchman doubled down on his west country colleague’s claim that opposing paedophilia is “homophobic”.

Jimmy Hinton is a pastor who’s pastor father is serving 20-30 years for child sex abuse within the church after he reported him to the police.  Today he specialises in advising churches on guarding against predators.  He says churches are targetted by paedophiles because of easy access to children and trusting adults.

I raised child safeguarding concerns with the churches these paedophile apologist churchmen belong to.

As a confidence builder I asked the child safeguarding officers I contacted to comment by email on the above words of Mr Peter Tatchell.  Obviously, if they weren’t willing to recognise that the words of Mr Tatchell are manifestly paedophile and indefensible, they clearly weren’t going to deal properly with the concerns I had to raise.

They weren’t, and it’s not hard to figure out why.

The Biggest Child Safeguarding Danger in the Church of England

The biggest child safeguarding danger in the Church of England is His Grace, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Revd Justin Welby.

He openly colludes with the paedophile agenda of Peter Tatchell.  I’m clearly pretty duff at doing videos as basically only my cats watch them, but I do them anyway when I can’t see anyone saying things that need to be said, and what I said in this video was screaming out to be said.

He joined forces with Mr Tatchell in turning the words of the Archbishop of Uganda back to front to intimidate churchmen from protecting children.  Watch the video.

Not long after his double act with Mr Tatchell he was trying to put the frighteners on Synod member Mr Samuel Margrave to stop tweeting about the child safeguarding dangers of Pride and queer theory.  Issues Mr Margrave was due to bring up in the forthcoming Synod.  More on that later.

When Dean of Liverpool in 2011, the Daily Mail reports:-

“Justin Welby failed to alert police when a priest was accused of sexually assaulting a worshipper – despite knowing that he was a convicted paedophile.

“Canon John Roberts was later jailed for offences against three people, one of them the accuser who had gone to Mr Welby.”

Justin Welby is in the same class as Peter Tatchell in dissembling.  Which is to say, state of the art.  The Mail quotes a Lambeth Palace spokesman saying:-

‘’The archbishop has said publicly that had he known the full details of Roberts’ 1989 conviction, he would have handled it differently.’

He doesn’t deny he knew of the conviction – his court testimony at Roberts’ prosecution states he did – he just tries to make out what he knew of Roberts’ conviction for sexual assault didn’t make a new accusation of sexual assault worth referring to the police in accordance with Church of England guidelines at the time.

An internal Church of England child safeguarding review cleared the Archbishop of Canterbury of any wrongdoing.

Nice.

Somehow, as Archbishop of Canterbury since 2013, child safeguarding under Justin Welby has had an unhappy history.  Somehow.

In his first year as Cantuar (Archbishop of Canterbury) he had his first of 5 teas with Mr Tatchell and threw open the school gates of every CofE school in the country to Stonewall.

After the IICSA reported in 2020 that the Church of England was “a place where abusers could hide” it recommended independent oversight of church safeguarding, which was implemented.

Just prior to the July Synod this year, the Archbishop’s Council fired two key board members of the CofE Independent Safeguarding Board for opposing efforts to curb their independence, and the Board was disbanded.

Cantuar had difficulty with the actualité on whether he had voted for their dismissal.  One might be forgiven for thinking he bought time when Sam Margrave asked him directly about that in Synod.

His answer that he and the Archbishop of York “wanted to wait” led Synod to believe they had voted against.

A report the following day in the Church Times made it emphatically clear this was not the case.

There must have been a sharp intake of breath next day in Synod when Robert Thompson said it seemed to many in the chamber the Archbishop of Canterbury had “lied”.  Sam Margrave demanded accountability “for misleading that was knowingly done”.

If one might argue that there is room for jiggery pokery within the bounds of propriety – as I certainly would – was Cantuar’s misdirection within those bounds, or was it the act of a liar and a charlatan?

That takes us back to Cantuar’s open collusion with Peter Tatchell’s massive paedophile lie to intimidate churchmen from protecting children.  The last thing they want is for the Most Revd Stephen Kaziimba’s approach to child protection to serve as an example.

And in turn that takes us back to the inaction of CofE ‘child safeguarding officers’ over two churchmen running cover for the manifest paedophile advocacy of Peter Tatchell.  A glaring red flag in anyone’s money.

Noone in a child safeguarding role in the Church of England should remain in post if they’re not willing to call upon Justin Welby to resign as the biggest child safeguarding danger there is in the Church of England.

The Bishop of London the Rt Revd Sarah Mullalley is another reason why ‘child safeguarding’ is not fit for purpose in the CofE.  At Synod in February she refused to answer Sam Margrave’s question on the child safeguarding dangers of Pride and queer theory.

If one looks at the female bishops of the Church of England, radfem lesbian atheists care far more about child protection than they do.  Jane Conalty, suffragan Bishop of Birkenhead, is the only honourable exception I can see.

Across the denominations, barely a husk of faith remains.  Faithful Anglicans are haemmoraghing to the last redoubts of true belief in the Catholic Church and the parallel Anglican Communion GAFCON.

But the remnant of faith that remains is a tattered remnant.

In the view of this Christian of 40 years, the best of the best that British Christianity has to offer is nowhere near good enough to meet the moment we are in.  The patent paedophile front of LGBTQ is closing in on its final destination of abolition of the age of consent.  Unbridled tyranny and depravity will be loosed on our nation if they get there.  This is the moment of the true church.  It is our sacred duty to stand in their way and say ‘only over our dead bodies’.  But we’re not doing that.  We’re showing a watching world that our main objective is to avoid suffering for Christ outside of our western comfort zone.  It is not a witness of salt & light to the resurrection power of the Lord Jesus Christ in our lives.

Read it all at Lord Ha-Ha on Substack