Archbishop of York Faces Resignation Demands Over Mishandling of Sexual Abuse Case.

Archbishop Stephen Cottrell of York is under intense scrutiny for his handling of a historical sexual abuse case involving priest David Tudor. The criticism arises just days before Cottrell is set to temporarily lead the Church of England. The controversy stems from decisions made during his tenure as Bishop of Chelmsford, where he allowed Tudor to remain in his role despite grave allegations and prior legal actions.

Tudor, who has faced multiple accusations of abuse spanning decades, admitted to historical sexual misconduct involving two girls earlier this year, which finally led to his permanent removal from ministry. However, survivors, advocates, and even some Church leaders argue that the Church’s response, including Cottrell’s actions, was woefully inadequate.

Tudor’s history of alleged abuse includes multiple criminal trials. In 1988, he was acquitted in one case but convicted in another for indecent assault on three girls. The conviction was later overturned due to judicial errors. Despite this, Tudor was reinstated in ministry following a five-year suspension. Over the years, additional allegations emerged, but disciplinary measures remained limited.

In 2019, Tudor faced suspension following fresh allegations, and only then was he permanently barred from ministry. However, questions linger about why action was not taken earlier, especially since Tudor was involved in a 2012 settlement with one survivor, Jessica (name changed), who accused him of violent abuse beginning when she was just 11 years old.

Jessica, who received £10,000 in compensation, expressed frustration that Tudor was allowed to remain in his position despite the settlement, arguing that such a payment suggested culpability.

When Stephen Cottrell assumed the role of Bishop of Chelmsford in 2010, Tudor had already been operating under a safeguarding agreement that barred him from being alone with children. However, shortly thereafter, Tudor was appointed an area dean overseeing 12 parishes, raising concerns about the Church’s oversight and accountability.

Cottrell’s office has stated that he acted within the constraints of existing legal and procedural frameworks, asserting that no new allegations emerged until 2019 that would have justified stronger action. Nevertheless, critics argue that Cottrell could have taken more decisive steps, such as initiating disciplinary proceedings or escalating concerns within the Church hierarchy.

Bishop Helen-Ann Hartley of Newcastle, one of the few high-ranking clerics openly critical of Church leadership on abuse issues, has called for Cottrell’s resignation, citing his inability to act decisively in managing Tudor’s case. She questioned his moral and ethical authority to lead, especially in light of the harm caused to survivors.

Tudor’s career, which spanned more than 46 years, reveals systemic failings within the Church of England to adequately address allegations of abuse. Despite his troubled history, Tudor was made an honorary canon in 2012, a move critics called inappropriate and damaging to survivors. The Church has since clarified that this appointment was procedural rather than celebratory, but the decision has been widely condemned.

Former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey also played a role in Tudor’s reinstatement. In 1993, Carey approved Tudor’s return to ministry under supervision, a decision described as misguided by today’s standards. Additionally, Carey agreed to remove Tudor’s name from a record of clergy subject to disciplinary actions, further complicating accountability.

The case has sparked broader demands for accountability within the Church. Survivors and advocates argue that Church leaders, including Cottrell, prioritized protecting the institution over addressing abuse. Some have pointed out inconsistencies between the Church’s public statements about addressing abuse and its actual practices.

Cottrell has defended his actions, stating that he took immediate steps when new allegations surfaced in 2019, including Tudor’s suspension and subsequent prohibition from ministry. However, critics contend that his response was too little, too late.

Rev. Jenny Penn, a former safeguarding adviser, expressed frustration over the Church’s handling of the case. She highlighted discrepancies between the Church’s promises of reform and its apparent reluctance to take meaningful action against Tudor earlier.

The effects of Tudor’s actions and the Church’s mishandling have been profound for survivors. Jessica, who suffered abuse during her childhood, described feelings of betrayal, stating that the Church’s failure to act made her feel as though her experiences were dismissed.

Another survivor, Debbie (name changed), who was involved in Tudor’s 1988 trial, recounted the lasting psychological toll of her abuse, which she described as exacerbated by the Church’s decision to reinstate Tudor. Debbie shared how she had to rebuild her life away from her community, grappling with shame and trauma for decades.

Both women, along with others, have emphasized the need for the Church to prioritize survivor-centered approaches to safeguarding and accountability.

This case comes at a time of heightened scrutiny for the Church of England. The resignation of Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, followed a report exposing widespread failures to address abuse. Cottrell is set to step into Welby’s role temporarily, but calls for his resignation threaten to overshadow this transition.

Bishop Julie Conalty, the Church’s deputy lead for safeguarding, acknowledged that questions remain about the decisions made under Cottrell’s leadership. While she praised his actions in 2019, Conalty questioned why Tudor was allowed to continue in ministry for so long despite his history.

In response to the controversy, Cottrell has called for independent oversight of safeguarding within the Church. He reiterated his commitment to addressing systemic failings and ensuring survivors are heard and supported. However, critics argue that genuine reform requires more than public pledges; it necessitates structural changes and accountability at all levels of Church leadership.

For survivors like Jessica and Debbie, the damage inflicted by Tudor and the Church’s response has left deep scars. They hope that the increased attention on cases like Tudor’s will prompt meaningful change, ensuring no one else endures similar harm.

As the Church of England grapples with this crisis, its leaders face mounting pressure to demonstrate that safeguarding is not merely a priority in words but also in action. The fallout from this case may well determine the Church’s ability to rebuild trust with its congregation and broader society.