Former Bishop of Sheffield did nothing when victim of child sex abuse by priest asked for help, review finds

The scandal over how a victim suffered historic sex abuse at the hands of the late Rev Matthew Devamanikkam in Bradford in the 1980s has been laid bare in a report published yesterday (May 14). The damning enquiry has shown how several high ranking clergy were approached for help by the survivor, Rev Matthew Ineson, but then did nothing to help.

In a statement on May 11, the former Bishop of Sheffield, Rt Revn Dr Steven Croft, apologized for the failing, saying he did not realize it was a formal disclosure of abuse at the time or the context.

Already, the report – published by the national safeguarding team of the Church of England – has led to the former Archbishop of York, Lord John Sentamu, being urged to step down from active ministry. He reportedly rejects the findings.

Mr Ineson, who was 16 at the time of the abuse and later became a vicar who practiced in Rotherham for more than 10 years, told the church about it 10 years ago. He has waived his legal right to anonymity.

The report found one of the clergy Rev Ineson confided in was the then Bishop of Sheffield Steven Croft, who was told in a letter by the victim in June 2013 about the abuse he had suffered, and copied it to the then Archbishop of York. In it, the victim said he had already disclosed the abuse twice to the Bishop of Sheffield but the bishop had not acted on this.

Rt Revd Dr Croft – a member of the House of Lords – became the Bishop of Oxford in 2016, which was protested in person by Iveson and was seen on national television.

In a public statement – that can be read in its entirety here - Dr Croft said Iveson’s letter was “a passing reference in the context of a pastoral phone call” and “I did not understand him to be making a formal disclosure of abuse”.

However, he stressed: “A little over ten years ago I made a mistake in my safeguarding practice. That mistake was costly for the survivor and for this I am very sorry.

"I accept the reviewer’s findings and I have repeated my apologies to the survivor; I am very sorry for what happened.

"There was some publicity about my handling of the case around the time of my translation to Oxford in 2016. I had offered to meet with the survivor in order to apologise, but I was very hesitant to comment publicly on his allegations against me; I did not want to make life any more difficult for him by publicly disagreeing with some of his claims and it was important to allow the Church and Police investigation processes to conclude.

"It is never easy confronting one’s own mistakes and weaknesses. In 2016 I wrote that these events had made me determined and committed to listen well to survivors of abuse and to help the wider Church do so as well. My commitment holds firm and I share this learning lessons review with you today in the firm hope the Church avoids such mistakes in future.”

Devamanikkam was charged with six serious sex offences in May 2017, all relating to the survivor. He was found dead in his flat after killing himself the day before he was due to appear in court.

Following the findings, Bishop Joanne Grenfell, safeguarding lead for the House of Bishops, said it “should be ashamed” that it let down a vulnerable child in its care who was abused by someone in a position of trust.

The review found the then Archbishop of York should have sought advice from his diocesan safeguarding adviser at the time on how to proceed with the letter he had received. 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.

But the reviewer said “no Church law excuses the responsibility of individuals not to act on matters of a safeguarding nature”.

Lord Sentamu rejected the findings, insisting there had been a “fundamental misunderstanding on (the reviewer's) part of the jurisdictional, pastoral and legal responsibilities of diocesan bishops and archbishops in the Church of England”.

He added that the safeguarding matter had been in the Diocese of Sheffield “and therefore not for the diocesan safeguarding adviser for York diocese”.

Lord Sentamu said he had told the review what he told the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) when it considered the matter - “namely that the action following a disclosure to the bishop of Sheffield was his and his alone in line with established safeguarding procedures and guidelines.”