Abuse in the Church of England: The aftermath of the Makin Review

The Church of England announced last week that they intend to initiate disciplinary proceedings against 10 members of the clergy following the Makin Review.

The Makin Review exposed the devastating abuse suffered by children and young people by John Smyth. The review found that Symth was the most prolific serial abuser to be associated with the Church of England. The review detailed that Symth used horrific and brutal abuse against more than 120 boys and young men at Christian camps from the late 1970’s in England until his death in South Africa in 2018.

Justin Welby, the previous Archbishop of Canterbury and other clergy faced criticism in the Makin review.  It was this review that led to the resignation of Justin Welby for what he acknowledged was his “personal and institutional responsibility”.

Following the Makin report, the Church’s National Safeguarding team has confirmed that they have reviewed the evidence against almost 40 clergy and have decided that some meet the threshold for further action. Those who are facing disciplinary proceedings are accused in varying degrees of failing to act during the timeline of Smyth’s abuse.

The former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, who gave up his permission to officiate in December, following a BBC investigation into the Church of England’s handling of a separate sexual abuse case, was criticised in the report as it was said that he had been “ informed of the abuse in a report in 1983 which contained enough information about abuses to signal a need for action regarding Symth.”

Canon Andrew Cornes who is a retired clergyman from the Chichester diocese is reported to have taken no action in 1982 when a survivor of abuse from Symth disclosed his abuse to him.

Mark Stibbe who was groomed and brutally beaten by Smyth has stated that, “I along with my fellow Smyth survivors, wait with keen interest to see whether any disciplinary measures are enforced.” He also commented that, “I am surprised that those senior clergy who in 2013 knew the full extent of Smyth’s abuses, and who did not properly ensure that Smyth was brought to justice are not named in the list.”

The next step is for the Church’s President of Tribunals to approve the disciplinary process for each of the 10 clergy.  It is understood that given the vulnerability of the survivors involved, that they are likely to proceed. The disciplinary process could result in anyone being found guilty being prohibited from exercising church ministry for life.

In early February, Members of the General Synod which is the Church’s parliament voted for new measures for handling abuse allegations. These measures did not go as far as some hoped as instead of a new independent body to oversee all Church employed safeguarding offices, a short-term model will be introduced which will see some national staff to move to a non-Church body, but cathedral officers and other diocesan will remain with their current Church employers.

In practical terms this means that if you suffer abuse by a vicar you will need to report the abuse to their bishop. “Safeguarding staff will still be located in church offices and employed by the very same bishop.” One survivor has been reported as commenting, “At the top end of the Church, there are people who don’t believe that they need to do more. There is a real danger that people think they are doing everything they can. Unfortunately, survivors of abuse don’t think that. They don’t feel like they’re being heard.”

Meanwhile, the former Bishop of Liverpool, John Perumbalath, who denies any wrongdoing has announced his retirement in February after accusations of sexual assault and harassment made by two women. 

Anthony Pierce, the former Bishop of Swansea and Brecon admitted in February five historical counts of indecent assault on a male under the age of 16. It is also being investigated whether a separate allegation of abuse against him was reported to “senior figures” in the church, 17 years before it was passed to the police.

It is clear that The Church of England is facing a difficult period of time with many left thinking that the church is “choosing a path of reputation over the welfare of abuse survivors” and that not enough is being done by the Church to acknowledge the abuse which has been suffered within the church and ensure that their safeguarding is improved to prevent future abuse from taking place.

It was announced in January 2025, that The Church of England Redress Scheme whose purpose is to demonstrate an acknowledgement and regret of their safeguarding failures and their effect on victims and survivors, whilst noting the importance of ongoing safeguarding work, will be delayed and will not be laid before the General Synod until July 2025. 

This is for final checks to be carried out to ensure that its eligibility criteria are robust enough to “ sufficiently recognise negligence of Church office-holders who have received a safeguarding allegations or disclosure and have not responded appropriately.”