The reason for annexing the regius Divinity chair to the 5th prebend (plus the rectory of Ewelme) in 1617 and the regius Hebrew chair to the 6th prebend in 1632 was money. The stipends of the chairs were too slender to support their respective office holders. Similar expedients were adopted with other university positions (in 1840 the Lady Margaret chair was switched from Worcester to Christ Church for reasons of convenience as well as cash). By the time the pastoral theology chair was created in 1848 and the ecclesiastical history chair a decade later, and by which time stipends had been evened out under the terms of the Cathedrals Act 1840, it was thought that annexing chairs to stalls increased their ‘dignity’. This explains what happened in 1995: it was an attempt to preserve prestige for the Church (even though Henry Mayr-Harting was/is RC), and not to break all connection with the cathedral, as happened in 1959 when Godfrey Driver (who had been Cuthbert Simpson’s deputy and, arguably, superior as a Hebraist) agitated successfully for the severance of the connection on the grounds that there were not enough clerical Hebraists of sufficient stature (Driver’s father, Samuel, had himself held the Hebrew chair, and his ‘Westminster’ commentary on Genesis is still worth reading). Survivors could be forgiven for thinking the Lead Safeguarding role is now little more than a purgatorial stepping stone to a bigger mitre. Do the three years and field your way through the unethical mess of it all and we’ll give you a diocese. That seems to be the way it works. Anyone remember the anger felt by survivors after the Synod? When a list of failures and major questions about accountability were skipped over and erased by a deeply cynical Archbishops Council. It was to be hoped that the next Lead Bishop would at least start with visible drive and recognition of the anger and hurt expressed by survivors, some resolve to mend bridges and show herself impelled by the call for justice, redress and institutional honesty. The point I am making is that it is now impossible to staff the present chapter other than via ‘inventive’ expedients. The present arrangements are, bluntly, played out and have been since the early/mid 1980s.

The circumstances in which Joanne Grenfell became a member of the House of Bishops are, I suspect, not well-known, and are not without controversy. These, then, are the facts concerning Bishop Joanne’s election to the HoB: Work closely in partnership with statutory agencies to protect the vulnerable and support those who seek justice. What I think is clear from this display is that (as many will have suspected all along) it is not really worth anyone’s while to engage with the Church, and that if effective reforms are to be made, they will need to be implemented by parliament and the government without reference to the Church’s wishes (and whether the Church likes it or not). Perhaps survivors’ groups should simply stop wasting time with bishops and Church officials, and should devote time to engaging solely with MPs and civil servants. The behaviour of the Church replicates that of their abusers who told them “ Who will listen to you… you are not important… I can do with you whatever I please”. These recurring chapters are indication that literally nothing has got through to them. If you didn’t know that already, simply read the plethora of ignored messages from Survivors across social media, often screaming with pain.A new initiative focused on survivors of church-based abuse and those who support them has been launched today.

I once had a rather naughty antique dealer friend (think Lovejoy), who used to defend his wheeler-dealing trading by saying: “ Truth is a precious commodity – we must use it sparingly”. When I read and listen to many of the Replies to our Questions at Synod, I often wonder why those answering us have so much to say yet are so evasive and sparing with the truth. At a time when trust and confidence in the leadership has never been lower, truth and delivery on promises looks so problematic. Under the Synod’s election rules, when a casual vacancy occurs within two years from the last ‘general’ election, instead of there being a by-election, the votes in the general election are recounted after eliminating the person who (in this case) is no longer a suffragan bishop and any of the unsuccessful candidates who indicate that they no longer wish to stand. In the constituency for southern suffragans in October 2021 there were ten candidates, of whom five (including John Perumbalath) were elected and five were unsuccessful. The five unsuccessful candidates were: Introducing Ms Atkinson to General Synod in February 2022 the Lead Safeguarding Bishop Jonathan Gibbs hailed the ISB as “ fully independent “ – a sentiment the new Chair echoed, Some members of General Synod were already slightly sceptical and were seeking clarifications We believe that one of the best ways we can help individuals and communities to respond well to abuse is through creative projects. This creates space for a conversation between those with lived experience and others in their communities. Imagination is one of the most powerful resources God gives us to foster a more empathetic understanding of the needs of survivors and what helpful responses might look and sound like as we journey forwards together. That being so, what I feel survivor’s groups need to do is to develop their own draft legislation and present it to some interested MPs. It might be worth engaging with a parliamentary agent (usually a Westminster law firm) to draft legislation.I have asked for a major investigation like the police are doing and every Diocese and Parish Safeguarding Advisors in the Church of England are re-vetted, and, incompetent Diocese and Parish safeguarding advisors are removed from being able to practice. those with lived experience of abuse in a church context, those who have spoken out and those who have not yet found a voice