Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Should the King make a statement about the Welby situation?

82 replies

CurlewKate · 13/11/2024 03:37

As the Head of the CofE, he must surely have been aware of what was going on?

OP posts:
FaceLikeACrackedScreen · 13/11/2024 08:18

It is pedantic @AgileGreenSeal , and for the common man/non bible educated folk your clarification means naff all.

FaceLikeACrackedScreen · 13/11/2024 08:19

And actually @AgileGreenSeal I find your approach extremely exclusive. Christians should welcome all into debate and not just those with a working knowledge of the bible.

AgileGreenSeal · 13/11/2024 08:22

FaceLikeACrackedScreen · 13/11/2024 08:18

It is pedantic @AgileGreenSeal , and for the common man/non bible educated folk your clarification means naff all.

I would have thought it isn’t too much to expect some comprehension (at least among those who are exercised by the subject) that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of His church.

SensibleSigma · 13/11/2024 08:25

Safeguarding is simultaneously the most important duty of the church and the one that gets in the way of everything else. The constant stepping back of people while investigations are underway, returning to position months later when it’s established they did nothing wrong, and then the occasional appalling crime/breach of trust is relentless. It takes months and years. I wish there was a more effective solution.

SensibleSigma · 13/11/2024 08:28

@AgileGreenSeal arguing about the wording of Charles’s position is a bit of a distraction from safeguarding and responsibility, imo.

Henry was Head of the Church of England as opposed to the pope as the Church of Rome. It’s shorthand, and doesn’t impact the conversation.

hairbearbunches · 13/11/2024 08:30

@AgileGreenSeal What do you think the Head of the Church makes of his loyal servants being either abusers or abuse enablers? Surely he’d want the whole lot to resign? Would be nice to have a statement from Him! He never seems to be willing to stick His head above the parapet! Pfft!

TheHangingGardensOfBasildon · 13/11/2024 08:34

Presumably, at some stage, Welby applied for/made known his interest in the job and was judged by somebody to be a suitable candidate and a solid man of faith according to the CofE tenets - however wise or not this judgment turned out to be.

Charles is in his position in the church because he effectively won a competition - whether he wanted the job or not.

It's a little bit like me winning a prize draw for a year's supply of Dairy Milk and then having everybody demanding of me to know exactly why Cadbury chocolate doesn't taste like it used to anymore and what I'm going to do about it!

AgileGreenSeal · 13/11/2024 08:37

SensibleSigma · 13/11/2024 08:28

@AgileGreenSeal arguing about the wording of Charles’s position is a bit of a distraction from safeguarding and responsibility, imo.

Henry was Head of the Church of England as opposed to the pope as the Church of Rome. It’s shorthand, and doesn’t impact the conversation.

I’ve absolutely no desire to distract from safeguarding and responsibility- actually the opposite. The seriousness of the subject cannot be overestimated. Nor the consequences for those who offend against “one of these little ones”.

BitOutOfPractice · 13/11/2024 08:40

FrenchFancie · 13/11/2024 06:13

No, because ultimately this is a political (and legal) matter and the royal family does not (and should not, IMHO) comment on those kinds of matters.

But it’s not just that is it? KC is head of the Church of England. The AoC is the chief minister.

I mean people (including former AoCs) have lost their heads / been burned in the past for saying whether they believe they answer to the church or the king in the past. And while Obviously feelings about it don’t run quite so high now, to deny that the monarch and the CofE aren’t legally, constitutionally and morally bound together is just wrong.

and @TheHangingGardensOfBasildon (great name!) no it would be more like you eating all the chocolate, keeping it all to yourself, then denying you had, even though you had chocolate all round your mouth.

user47 · 13/11/2024 08:42

It's obvious to me that these men: Welby, the King, those at the top of the BBC, Civil service and government don't consider normal people, especially women and children to even be human or have any rights at all. Of course Charles knew, he was mates with Saville - wanted him to be Williams Godfather. And if my mother, aged 17, growing up in a back to back in Salford knew about Saville, Charles with his network of advisers certainly did. These men protect each other again and again and women and children suffer.

PlumPeony · 13/11/2024 08:42

Can't imagine Charles wanting to make a fuss about this, considering how he's enabling Andrew.

BustingBaoBun · 13/11/2024 08:52

Of course Charles will be silent.

There's a list of dodgy people that the Royal family have turned a blind eye to over a very long time.
Louis Mountbatten, Peter Ball, Savile and of course Andrew and his appalling behaviour.
It wouldn't surprise me if QE2 or Charles hadn't had conversations with Welby over the years about Smyth who was, after all, the most prolific child abuser in the Cof E

AgileGreenSeal · 13/11/2024 08:52

hairbearbunches · 13/11/2024 08:30

@AgileGreenSeal What do you think the Head of the Church makes of his loyal servants being either abusers or abuse enablers? Surely he’d want the whole lot to resign? Would be nice to have a statement from Him! He never seems to be willing to stick His head above the parapet! Pfft!

Resignation is nowhere near what awaits them.

He has already made statements on this matter.

“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!”
Matthew 18:6-7

and

“ But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of.

He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Matthew 24: 48-51

downwindofyou · 13/11/2024 08:55

username358 · 13/11/2024 03:39

He should make a clean breast of why he hangs out with paedophiles and those who collude with paedophiles. Then he should step down.

Yep
The whole freaking family. Look at Andrew now. He's got some mysterious benefactor who is paying he can stay in his big house.

Fergie had debts paid off by Epstein.

People don't just give money away for jokes.

Corrupt. Dirty family.

BustingBaoBun · 13/11/2024 08:55

I really can't read bible ramblings when such an important and reprehensible cover up has taken place

Cynic17 · 13/11/2024 08:56

No. This issue has nothing to do with the King. The Sovereign doesn't even appoint the AoC.... that is done by the Prime Minister, on advice. And the resignation has already happened, so it is not even a question of trying to exert influence (which would be too political, anyway).

TheHangingGardensOfBasildon · 13/11/2024 08:57

I'm still amazed at how Charles' strong, long-lasting close links with Savile seem to have largely gone under the public radar.

He was considered a wise advisor, as well as a friend; and - like with his position of privilege in hospitals - he never seemed to have any actual qualifications, experience, reasons or other justification for being there, other than that he wanted access.

As PP said, just like ordinary powerless folk knew, those in power knew exactly what JS was like - they just endorsed and accepted it without any issue.

Everybody is rightly and vocally repulsed by Andrew and his close friends; but barely a whimper about Charles and Jimmy.

downwindofyou · 13/11/2024 08:57

FrenchFancie · 13/11/2024 06:13

No, because ultimately this is a political (and legal) matter and the royal family does not (and should not, IMHO) comment on those kinds of matters.

As the head of the CofE of course the king should comment. He's not just a figurehead in this instance.
He is the:

The Supreme Governor of the Church of England is the titular head of the Church of England

downwindofyou · 13/11/2024 08:57

Cynic17 · 13/11/2024 08:56

No. This issue has nothing to do with the King. The Sovereign doesn't even appoint the AoC.... that is done by the Prime Minister, on advice. And the resignation has already happened, so it is not even a question of trying to exert influence (which would be too political, anyway).

The king is The Supreme Governor of the Church of England is the titular head of the Church of England

In this instance he is more than a figurehead

Cynic17 · 13/11/2024 08:58

mitogoshigg · 13/11/2024 07:25

No because I don't think m he would have had a clue until the report came out. I didn't think welby should have resigned either because it was the incompetence of the police investigation here and abroad not taking it seriously that meant he died before he could be convicted. You can't hold leaders to account for actions long before their time, neither would have been aware nor part of decision making back when it was happening or he was essentially shipped overseas nor did the victims report to the police at the time. It was absolutely awful so we learn and prevent it happening again rather than blaming people who weren't the perpetrator nor in a position of power at the time

Excellent post. Sadly, some people seem to need a scapegoat, because the perpetrator has died and therefore cannot be punished.

AngelinaFibres · 13/11/2024 09:05

CurlewKate · 13/11/2024 05:26

@FaceLikeACrackedScreen "Thank god for people like Helen-Ann Hartley who is strong enough to put her head above the parapet and principled enough to make a stand."

Indeed. Can you say why you don t think the King should get involved??

The Royal family, the C of E ,the Catholic Church are cess pits . The King can hardly say anything given the behaviour of his brother Andrew.

hairbearbunches · 13/11/2024 09:06

Cynic17 · 13/11/2024 08:58

Excellent post. Sadly, some people seem to need a scapegoat, because the perpetrator has died and therefore cannot be punished.

oh, ffs! If Welby had done his job, smyth could have faced legal justice. He didn’t die until 2018. Welby was still sending the fucker Chridtmas cards. He also ignored 16 letters from one of Smyrh’s survivors.

TameRockChick · 13/11/2024 09:09

CurlewKate · 13/11/2024 03:37

As the Head of the CofE, he must surely have been aware of what was going on?

@CurlewKate please would you consider asking MN to move this to the royal board. It's an important thread and won't get lost there.

AngelinaFibres · 13/11/2024 09:17

hairbearbunches · 13/11/2024 09:06

oh, ffs! If Welby had done his job, smyth could have faced legal justice. He didn’t die until 2018. Welby was still sending the fucker Chridtmas cards. He also ignored 16 letters from one of Smyrh’s survivors.

I would imagine that there were plenty of people around JS who knew exactly what he was doing because they were doing similar things. If they tried to take him down he would have taken them with him. They fudged and faffed until he was dead. Epstein had evidence on other people. Jimmy Saville befriended those in power . Our local vicar was removed because of totally inappropriate behaviour. The police only became involved because the parents and the local community wouldn't accept him being quietly moved elsewhere. My sons' music teacher retired and went to work at the local Cathedral . He was very involved with the choir there. He now has a suspended sentence for inappropriate behaviour towards young boys. The young man who exposed him was not in the choir. He was an online contact and tremendously brave. Had it been brought up by a choir boy I dare say the man would have been quietly asked to disappear. He'd have appeared at another church in 5 minutes .