The Church-led National CSA Inquiry

Dear Home Secretary,

I am writing to talk about the National CSA Inquiry, and the mess it has got into. I am sure you receive a lot of correspondence about it.

My letter to you is about the Church of England involvement in the CSA inquiry.

Both Baroness Butler-Sloss and Fiona Woold were not neutral, not just because of their connections in politics and law, but also because they were both Church of England positions holders. Baroness Butler-Sloss was famously a Church position holder and tried to avert the misconducts of a Bishop reaching public knowledge, but Fiona Woolf, as well as being in public office, was also a church position holder, and was on the PPC of a church. Now while some may count that as insignificant, I don't believe it is, especially not after Paul Butler. the Church of England's PR guy, started shouting in the press about the CSA inquiry. It really made me think.

The Church of England remain unable to deal with Safeguarding as they are still in the dark ages where abuse was pretty much a 'perk of the job'. I am sorry if that offends you as I realise that you are a Vicar's daughter and you may well have a bias to the church that will enable them to elect yet another of their own to lead the inquiry, but the thing is, that will not be an effective inquiry if you do, because the Church have done great wrong and a huge amount of institutional and serious abuse is their responsibility, which is why they should not be allowed to influence the CSA inquiry.

Undoubtedly you have heard of Kendal House and the horrific abuse that was carried out there, and as yet there has been no justice and no apology to victims, from the Church of England, who ran Kendal House, and it has had effects on generations of Kendal House survivors.

I also do not want the Kendal House victims to be further used as I have been, I was used for a PR stunt by the church, who seemed to be desparate to claim that they are good at safeguarding, and yet they publicly 'apologized' to me in the press, didn't bother to personally apologized, lied that they did, and spewed my private life all over the press which led to a smear campaign by my abusers' supporters and the wrongdoers who covered up for the abuse at my expense and vilified me.

As yet, nothing has been done about this and I remain anguished, unheard and living in fear because of the church and press vilifying me and leaving me driven from one community and another.

This would be catastrophic for Kenday House Survivors if they are allowed to be treated the same as I have been. 

So, your inquiry, much as you may love the Church of England, needs to be independently led, not led by a Church position holder, because the extent of the church's past and continuing cover up and harm to victims does need to be seen, and as they still can't handle safeguarding but have continued relentlessly to harm me, they should not lead the inquiry, they should be being investigated from the outside either through the inquiry or through an independent body.

I am absolutely sure that Paul Butler or Justin Welby can and will do a PR stunt apology to Kendal House, and make a lot of noise about caring, and probably needlessly defame me as they did in a recent church times article, but public lavish showing off won't change the reality of the horrendous culture of the Church of England, which is a club where government and society condone and pay for these wealthy old people to throw their weight about, influence the press and abuse their power, the CofE most of the time forgets Jesus teaching and example. Jesus lived simply, homeless, dependent on others, and without the affectation and propaganda that the church spew into the press to cover for themselves.

I live simply and in poverty, the church took my career and home from me and I sleep on a mattress and look in bins and will never be able to have quality of life due to what the church have done to me. They are the modern day pharisees and they do not look after children or the vulnerable, in fact they have a very very discriminatory policy against the vulnerable and they call that 'safeguarding' and they actually believe themselves.

sincerely,