Former advisor to Archbishop Sentamu says suspension is 'contrary to common justice'

Writing for The Yorkshire Post, The Ven. John Barton, said that the review into the incident “all hinges on a letter copied to him ten years ago”, adding that the Archbishops of Canterbury and York can be “deluged by correspondence”.

Lord Sentamu stepped back from his role as an honorary assistant bishop in the diocese of Newcastle after he rejected the findings of a review which found he failed to act on allegations of sexual abuse.

Rev Matthew Ineson wrote to Lord Sentamu in 2013 where he said that he had been abused by the late Rev Trevor Devamanikkam in Bradford in the 1980s when he was 16.

Devamanikkam was charged with six serious sexual offences in May 2017 but was found dead at his flat after killing himself before he was due to appear in court.

A review, commissioned by the national safeguarding team of the Church of England, said clergy “failed to act” on the victim’s disclosures after Rev Ineson had sent a June 2013 letter to the then Bishop of Sheffield in which he disclosed the historical abuse he had suffered, and copied it to the then Archbishop of York.

The review said the then Archbishop of York had replied to acknowledge the communication, adding: “Please be assured of my prayers and best wishes during this testing time.”

The then Archbishop of York said he had believed he had “no authority” to act on the matter and the letter was not a disclosure to him as he was only copied in.

“In the past, the Church undoubtedly failed to understand or acknowledge the evils of paedophilia and victims’ need of support,” said the Ven. Barton, a retired Archdeacon of Aston who worked closely with Lord Sentamu.

“Like other organisations, we have been inexcusably slow to wake up to the enormity of the damage done to young people by abuse. Recent developments are trying to put this right.”

He argues that safeguarding practices in the church have rightly changed in recent years, and that now “safeguarding now trumps all other church laws and recognised practices.”

“That was not the case in 2013 when ‘the’ letter was sent,” he said, adding that safeguarding procedures were at the time part of diocesan structures, meaning that they were for individual bishops to deal with, rather than those in another area, such as Lord Sentamu.

The Ven. Barton said the judgement by the Church of England “equates to retrospective legislation, which is contrary to common justice.”

He added that Mr Ineson’s complaints about the then-Archbishop to both the Clergy Discipline Measure - the Church of England’s misconduct scheme - and the The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), were not upheld.

The Ven. Barton said that Mr Ineson has since rejected attempts by the Church to apologise to him.

“This is tragic, but for everyone involved to accept culpability even when there is none, is neither just nor spiritually wise.

“Apart from ‘the’ letter, Dr Sentamu invited Matthew, both informally and in writing, to meet him, in the hope of finding a constructive way forward.

“Sadly, these were also rejected.”