Concerned Parish 2

Thanks concerned St John's for describing exactly how I feel about this. You are right, we worried and prayed for him for 9 months. We were never formally told of the circumstances of his death and I'm sure we were only told of his arrest once they knew the story was going to press, even then it was merely a "safeguarding issue" which could be interpreted in so many ways. I think it was cruel to leave us to find out the details from the daily mail of all places - I just can't understand this.

OK. Thanks KidKruger, now I?ve had time to wait outside the head teacher?s office, received my telling off, perhaps I can try and explain ? not excuse. For anyone who has been in the congregation at St John?s, Fr Charles has been a big part of our lives. He was charismatic, funny, sensitive and a good preacher. He baptised our children, officiated at weddings and buried friends and relatives. He listened to our problems and visited us when we were sick. Essentially he was at the centre of many of our most intimate joys and sorrows. For anyone close to him, this is a shock that will inevitably take some time to come to terms with. Put this on the background of terrible communication from the church. For 6 months the party line was that he had stepped back from ministry. We were worried for his safety and wellbeing in this time. In November we were informed of his death. The circumstances behind his death were not disclosed and it was left to Rev Google to impart the news of his violent end. Personally I have found this latest news immensely distressing, coming after the months of emotional upheaval. I am sorry if I have offended anyone by my comments and I certainly don?t think that I am without sin. I am well aware of my many limitations and weaknesses and aware that I have many I cannot see. I really don?t wish to sound sanctimonious but I do care about the victims of these crimes ? where ever they come from.

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think Loz's point was (though I don't want to > appear presumptuous, so please correct me if I'm > incorrect Loz) that Christians advocate > 'forgiveness' and 'understanding' and there was > little evidence of it on this occasion, or does > Christianity have a high-water mark above which > it's a free for all ? That's my impression of > what was said and it was a reasonable comment > IMO. > > I think Mr Ben's point was (though I don't want to > appear presumptuous, so please correct me if I'm > incorrect Mr Ben) purely an observation that it's > not uncommon for an abuser to have been abused and > (if I may again be so bold) that in some cases > therein lies a contributory factor to the > behaviour. I did not see an 'apologist' or an > excuse for what happened. You may see the remark > that was made as unwarranted but that's the worst > you could hurl at it surely. > > It's easy, and lazy (and common on this forum) to > draw the worst connotation from what someone has > written, but in these cases IMO such challenges > were obtuse and over-emotional. > > If the Reverend looked at such images then he > contributed to exploitation of children. > If he did not physically abuse children himself > but did extract excitement from the images he > viewed then presumably he had made a conscious > decision to either limit his interest or maintain > the care of those he came into contact with. > I don't know all the facts, as most of us surely > don't. Of course there is potential for more to > come to light, as in any such case, but let's hope > for no physical abuse of individuals before > listing the damage done to them. These are videos of children. They are non consensual and NOT porn. Someone has to have suffered to make these and that is why it is a crime. I hope that he has had no physical contact with any local children but what makes children of ED special? Children somewhere have suffered. Probably vulnerable children with no hope of the support that could be provided here. I wonder if the police have looked into his "holidays" to the far east?

Penguin, I hope you are right. I can?t help thinking that although they don?t have any allegations or filming they can place here, it?s certainly not unprecedented for those who watch such footage to also be involved in abuse and grooming. Only at the end of last year there was a paediatrician, Myles Bradbury from Cambridge who was identified by this very same project, admitted to filming his patients and sexual assault. I very much hope that Fr Charles was only watching but the almost veneration with which he has been treated accompanied by the wall of silence from the church would make it very difficult for any local victim to come forward? I am appreciative of the fact that he clearly ended up in a bad place and knew what he was doing was very wrong. I feel like I am grieving for the person I thought he was (the lovely man described above!). However, I cannot get the thought out of my head of what he may have been doing before he came into church and blessed my children at the altar rail! Am I wrong to feel like this and to find it very hard to take the good with the bad? My biggest problem is with the church. This has been hushed up, probably to protect his family and perhaps even us from this hurt. Have the national events of the past few years still not sunk in, that institutional silence instigated and maintained by an establishment cannot end well? I hope that God can show him mercy but I also pray for healing for his victims.

I go to St John's and I am glad this has been published. I do not particularly like the DM but at least this information is out in the open after the complete silence and lack of openness from the church authorities. I actually thought the article was informative and measured considering it's content.