As a young child in the 50s, I grew up with very little understanding of politics in Britain. I knew, of course, that there were two major parties called Labour and Conservative, but no one explained to me the idea of left-wing and right-wing politics. Still less was I aware of the endless permutations of political ideology that existed. It was on a visit to Italy in 1964 that I began to be educated in the huge range of political options that people in European countries take for granted. The meaning of left and right began to take some sort of shape in my mind. For the first time I was observing the reality of high octane political life – strikes, demonstrations and governments collapsing every week, or so it seemed. The pattern of daily life in Rome, where I was staying for several weeks, seemed to continue in spite of the political dramas. It was not until I lived in Greece in the academic year 67-68 that my experience of politics took on a serious, even frightening, turn. In April 1967 a group of military men, mainly with the rank of colonel, had taken over the government of the country with the ostensible justification of preventing a left-wing government coming to power. I do not propose to say much about the ideology of this militarised regime, but it is safe to describe it as a fascist dictatorship. The aim of the governing clique was to establish their political will over the entire nation. Fascism is about unchallengeable political power which is typically focussed on the personality of a leader who knows how to ‘seduce’ large numbers of citizens. In taking over all the organs of power in a society, a fascist system does not have to concern itself with the irritations of a legal system, the press or public opinion. In Greece at that time, the will of the governing military clique reached right across society and affected even me, a foreign student with no prior political allegiances of any kind. If I was entering Greece as a political innocent in the autumn of 1967, I was, certainly by the time I left in the summer of 1968, a would-be political subversive, though without any platform from which to ventilate my stirred-up passions. The story of how I unsuccessfully tried to return to Greece in 1969 to write a report for Amnesty International must remain for another day.
What was it about the fascist ideology that riled me to the point that I might have been tempted to do something equivalent to the young men and women who joined the Spanish International Brigade in the 30s? Fascism. whether in its 60-70s Greek manifestation, or as the ideology of modern Russia, Hungary or pre-war Italy, Germany or Spain, challenges and threatens the human soul. The fact that an authoritarian government can take power and, in using that power, can redefine reality for its citizens, is hard to take. This reality, where the will of a few dominates the whole, diminishes the happiness and well-being of a substantial swathe of a country’s population. This is, or should be, a matter for great concern. Even if we are fortunate not to be beholden to such a rule in Britain currently, a natural concern for the happiness of humankind around the world should make us want to understand more about this poisonous but apparently attractive political option in our world today.
Going back to my 1960’s experiences of the lived reality of fascism, I want to draw attention to three interrelated facets which it manifested. These three dimensions revealed by Greek fascism are not a textbook exposition of this ideology, but a personal impression based on one person’s experience. The first aspect was the suffocating and infuriating promotion of propaganda. I was not an avid reader of Greek newspapers, partly because of their censored content and partly because the writers were forced to use an archaic style of Greek which was not the spoken form that I was studying. I was however subject to the dreadful experience of newsreels at the cinema. The ‘news’ was the content of the speeches by the ruling group. I quickly became familiar with this style of sloganized speech. We were constantly exposed to the main slogans, such as ‘Long live the 21st April 1967’ and ‘Greece of Greek Christians’ and frequent references to the ‘revolution’. The Greek word for the latter idea was uncomfortably close to the Christian word meaning resurrection. No doubt we were meant to think of Easter and the Colonels’ takeover in a similar way. The Colonels were also fairly adept at creating a form of Christian nationalism that is not dissimilar to Trump’s MAGA version of Christianity.
Propaganda was infuriating and frustrating, but it could be borne if it had been the only trial. Propaganda is, however, indicative of a second deeper and more insidious poison that was penetrating Greek society: the corruption of truth. The salient versions of political truth were those which the population was expected to assimilate without question. There was also a ‘correct’ version of history to be imbibed, particularly by children at school. The rewriting of history included the trashing of the previous generation of ‘failing’ politicians. Correct thinking, as defined in the turgid speech making of the political leaders, was mandatory, particularly if you worked in any capacity for the State. This included civil servants, teachers and those working for universities. Deviation of any kind was downright dangerous. Spies were everywhere and the suspicions that were created by this fact poisoned many potential relationships. Britain, then under the Labour government of Harold Wilson, was not considered a friendly nation. Critical remarks from the British were taken with great seriousness and the Greek press was encouraged to attack the Britain government in return. My own situation in my student hostel became increasingly uncomfortable. Thankfully there were places of refuge once I travelled away from the urban centres. The rural areas, particularly on the island of Crete, remained largely politically peaceful. Greek monasteries also always remained free of the nauseating political propaganda. But, speaking of the bulk of the population, the abnormal was becoming normal and the capacity to distinguish truth from falsehood was being blunted for many around me. Bland unquestioning conformity became the safe option for the majority. Those who resisted this social pressure were careful not to utter opinions in a public place. Loss of livelihood, imprisonment or worse awaited those who thought thoughts that were unacceptable to the ruling powers.
The fate of what happened to some of the political opponents of the Colonels’ regime leaked out during the winter of 67/68. Unheard of forms of torture were meted out to some prisoners and these notoriously included the beating of the soles of the feet with a metal pipe. The use of such torture on politically active citizens, pointed to an appalling fanaticism and cruelty that was infecting parts of the police and other state bodies. The Greek word ‘fanatikos’ is made to cover a number of levels of conviction, from the mild to the extreme. Greece saw during its fascist period the unleashing of the worst kind of fanatic. These types will always appear when fascism or other extremist ideologies become dominant across a society. We need to understand how convinced politicians, who want to change the world with high-sounding principles, may sometimes have surrendered themselves to tolerating, even promoting, cruel and immoral behaviour as a way to achieve those ends. Conviction, commitment and total dedication to an ideology all have a very nasty shadow side which is devoid of justice and compassion. The gradual descent from conviction to a tolerance of cruelty is the third stage in the corrupting force of fascism. In summary, we suggest that fascism is a state of mind that is so convinced of its correctness that all the human rights of those who disagree can be totally disregarded.
My story of interactions with the Colonels’ fascist regime and their acts of stupidity and cruelty could be lengthened considerably. During my ten months in the country, I managed to upset the powers that be sufficiently to appear on a list of those forbidden re-entry to the country. This ban remained in place until the collapse of the government in 1974. Whatever my exact misdemeanour, I had acquired a visceral dislike of fascist ways of thinking and this aversion continues to this day. I have identified the use of propaganda combined with the enforcement of a political ideology where disagreement or even discussion is strictly forbidden. This promotion of an infallible way of thinking results in a level of fanaticism which drives out all generosity of spirit in favour of a steely and determined grasp of the ‘truth’. Fanaticism as a close companion of fascism could, in the case of the Colonels and their supporters, lead to the horrors of physical torture.
One of the reasons for writing this short piece was a realisation that the Sunday 21st April was the 57th anniversary of the Greek military take-over. This had triggered in my mind a memory of the way an entire nation had been bombarded with fascist fantasies and cruelty for seven long years. Might this powerful triggering also have some connection to the struggle that I continue to have with forces of propaganda, power abuse, manipulation of truth and deliberate cruelty that I still find in some of the institutions I observe to this day? Is it too strong a claim to make to suggest that fascism, as a state of mind or a temperament, is still to be found in some of these institutions, even our churches? It is especially to be found among those individuals who accept the blandishments of ‘certainty’ while ignoring the gifts of human compassion and democratic reasoning and debate.
Yes, I can see why this would lead you along the path you have chosen.
Adult victims of bullying in the Church will connect with what is written here, although the stakes are obviously infinitely higher for political dissidents. A Church leadership system can become so authoritarian and unchallengeable that national law and Church rules are shown absolutely no reverence. Evangelicalism can choke itself through a suicide of logic, where biblical principles of natural justice are just blasphemously disregarded. Witnesses must then be silenced, blackballed, shifted or ejected. Church collapse and scandal are the predictable consequences of leaders covering up widespread adult abuse. Diocesan websites are plastered with plans to perfect the statutory safeguarding of ‘children and vulnerable adults’. Even the Pilavachi debacle has failed to open our bishops eyes to the widespread scale of what we might call NVAA (non-vulnerable adult abuse). Over 100 witnesses emerged in the initial inquiry. Does the bible says ‘2 or 3’ suffice? DISABUSING THE CHURCH (2-3-24 entry on ‘Faith Today’) should be mandatory reading for every Anglican Bishop. For decades have we had-‘an abusers’ charter’-with predictable consequences arising from senior Church leader’s negligence?
I have a portrait of a Cretan widow, who lost both son and husband in the Greek troubles of the 60s. It was painted by Christine Healey, the resident artist at Salford University when I was chaplain there. I have no idea which side the widow’s menfolk were on, but in the weathered lines of her face and her deep-set eyes I see both the depth of her suffering and a glimmer of hope. The painting has always meant a lot to me but it will mean more after reading your piece, Stephen.
The singer Nana Mouskouri also suffered during that time, and I think was banished from the country for a while. She took the Chorus of the Hebrew Slaves (aka the Song to Freedom) as her theme song. It was quite an experience to hear her sing it, live.
‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (i.e.people in modern parlance) to do nothing’ is sometimes attributed to Edmund Burke. Have Anglican Bishops (and Archbishops) who bully innocent people benefited from the collective silence of the wider denomination?
Thank you for your personal story Stephen. It resonates with me for personal reasons. Those of us who have previously observed/sufferred under fascist regimes realise very quickly what happens when truth is subverted, propaganda employed, and punishment meted out to those who don’t toe the official line. The official line of the Church that safeguarding is premeinatly important whilst trying (unsuccessfully) to hide the lamentable lack of safeguarding, the statements repeatedly given out that safeguarding is being “dealt” with whilst bypassing reports and inquiries showing this to be untrue, and the reported bullying, threats and legal action taken against those who disagree show similarities with what happens when a tyrant/ tyrants try to force their invalid worldview on others. Dissidents, victims /survivors and their supporters are bullied and threatened because they are feared by those in power, not least because the uncomfortable truth is just that, deeply uncomfortable to those who try to close their eyes to their own abuse of and of authority.
Thank you Stephen for a most interesting and informative article which I enjoyed reading. The last two sentences had a particular resonance with me.
I have recently revisited Kenneth’s Risk Assessment which claimed he is ‘High Risk’. I have found many untruths in that assessment. For example on a colour coded chart he is in ‘brown’ which means ‘possibly a risk’ but was designated ‘High Risk’ which should have been in the ‘red’ section.
The Core Group made an accusation but when Kenneth challenged it they admitted they had confused his case with “that of another person”. Nevertheless they still considered that as being evidence against Kenneth. They also made the lack of CCTV as an accusation against him proving his guilt. Although the Diocesan Safeguarding Adviser claimed their role was “not to prove guilt’ she doesn’t say what designating him ‘High Risk’ was if not that. Nor is it explained the reason the lack of CCTV is a contributory factor to his being ‘HighRisk’. There were several other untruths and anomalies within that assessment.
I was privileged to be personally interviewed by Professor Jay and she was aware of the details of Kenneth’s case. Her report and recommendations seem congruent with the very shoddy and shambolic practice in this case. I do but hope Kenneth could be made a test case for others in a similar position and at long last they all find justice. I also fervently hope that Stephen’s last two sentences will have some influence in this.
All of this has led me to the conclusion that now after four years of no investigation or scrutiny of evidence (and even suppression of evidence which might have exonerated Kenneth), that in this slow destruction of his life, Kenneth has become the abused victim, the Complainant and the Diocesan Safeguarding Adviser, the Respondent.
In the last few days I have written a detailed explanation of Kenneth’s flawed and fabricated assessment and sent it to senior clergy in the Diocese; not the ‘old guard’, they have left, but people new to their posts.
I optimistically hope that as people new and independent they will give a fresh appraisal to the case ignoring the tired and cliched phrases of the past.
I shall keep you informed of developments.
I wish you and Kenneth well as you soldier on. The problem for the Church is that evidence, such as yours and the evidence of others, cannot be made to disappear simply because those “investigating” do not carry out adequate and just investigation and scrutiny. The problem for survivors and their supporters is that they keep getting nowhere. So far that is. However matters have shifted in favour of survivors with reviews and media coverage favouring their versions and disparaging the Church’s responses. Survivors and their stalwart supporters have not given up. Just taking as examples the blood donor and post office scandals, the Hillsborough and Bloody Sunday tragedies, show that eventually those responsible, including those covering up, are held up as in a mirror, shown for what they are. I believe the Jay report stated something about Bishops not being held to account, or were unaccountable, something like that. Perhaps there will be more questions asked about the roles of DSAs , particularly in cases such as Kenneth’s where innocent people can be shown to be suffering. As the professionals in the process, their work merits an independent review now that the ISB is no more. As always, prayer and best wishes to yourself and Kenneth.
Thank you once again Mary for your support, needed and appreciated as always.
Stephen speaks of: ‘ ignoring the gifts of human compassion and democratic reasoning and debate’.
In four years there has not been any of those things shown in Kenneth’s case. How many more are suffering for those same reasons?
‘ However matters have shifted in favour of survivors with reviews and media coverage favouring their versions and disparaging the Church’s responses. ’
I think Mary is right here. It’s a long struggle but everybody’s efforts are beginning to coalesce into an impetus for change. It still requires consistent effort and mutual support on this , in person and on other media.
HOLD TOXIC LEADERS TO ACCOUNT was a 10 May 2024 commentary in Church Times on a widespread Anglican bullying crisis involving leaders like Canon Mike Pilavachi MBE. For decades Pilavachi wrestled interns or massaged them partially clad in his bedroom. ‘Concerns substantiated in Mike Pilavachi investigation 06/09/2023’ is an official C of E statement. Yet Archbishop Welby & Co still show zero resolve to immediately introduce independent safeguarding for every Church member. The article above on Greece shows a much more extreme authoritarianism. But the golden rule is that bullies of every type or shade need to be confronted and challenged. Sleeping sickness has afflicted our Anglican Archbishops and ‘The sleep of reason produces monsters’.
-‘Sadness’ as church rejects baptism changes’-is a 25-05-24 item on BBC Northern Ireland website. Is this more ‘Authoritarian Thinking’? 2024 Church of Ireland General Synod ran ‘Lay’ and ‘Clergy’ votes on a proposed new open baptism policy. It sought to avoid any inference of prejudge against baptism of children conceived outside of wedlock. Lay voters were in favour of this. Clergy voted against it so the motion failed. ‘Ideas have consequences’ and does narrow fundamentalism close the Church entrance door or drive people away?
That’s awful, I had no idea there was still this kind prejudice in Northern Ireland.
The link can vibe found here. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx77ve1djjlo#:~:text='Sadness'%20as%20church%20rejects%20baptism%20changes&text=Currently%20it%20is%20up%20to,to%2069%2C%20meaning%20it%20failed.
*can be found*
See Church of Ireland statement below:-
DIOCESAN NEWS09 DEC 23
Statement by the Bishop of Down and Dromore
The Bishop of Down and Dromore, the Right Reverend David McClay, has issued a press statement,
following the conclusion of a civil case arising out of child abuse by a late Church of Ireland rector. It states:
“I have been both shocked and saddened to hear of the pain and hurt inflicted in the 1970s by the late Church of Ireland rector. We are prevented under the new Justice (Sexual Offences and Trafficking Victims) Act, which received Royal Assent in 2022, from either identifying the complainant or the clergyperson involved.
“Any young person who suffered abuse should know that it was not their fault and that such evil acts can never be excused.
“I am deeply sorry for the hurt that was caused to the victim. Saying sorry is inadequate, but it’s important that the victim hears our heartfelt, deep and sincere apology for the terrible pain he and his family endured. I am willing to meet with the victim to express this apology face–to–face if the victim felt that would bring healing or add to a sense of closure.
“We pledge ourselves to listen to and care for victims and survivors of abuse in any and every way that we can.
“Our Church has robust processes and procedures in place today to protect children from the risk of abuse. Trained safeguarding staff can offer professional, practical advice to help ensure children are protected from harm by any person in a position of trust in the Church in as far as humanly possible.
“Our God is full of grace and truth, a God of love to whom every individual is someone treasured. Abuse perpetrated on children, young people and adults at risk of harm is abhorrent and something that deeply pains us.
“This marks the conclusion to this long–running case. It is my fervent hope that the victim can feel his suffering has been fully recognised and acknowledged and that he can receive a sense of closure.
“In the mid–1990s,
the Church referred a complaint against the rector to the RUC. The police conducted an investigation, and a file was passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for final decision. In January 1996, the DPP wrote to the RUC recommending ‘no prosecution’.
“I would encourage anyone who has been abused by an individual in a position of trust in the Church to report what happened to the appropriate police authorities and to know they can come forward and be supported and heard by our safeguarding staff. We are always willing to provide ongoing pastoral support to anyone who comes forward
Was 1970’s child abuse covered up for decades by the Church of Ireland Diocese of Down and Dromore? Why was Bishop David McClay unwilling to name the abuser and victim, and was this decision justified? The BBC had already covered the story: ‘Mount Merrion minister moved in 1976 after abuse allegations Published 29 September 2022’
The link to the BBC story is here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-63066301#:~:text=In%201976%2C%20he%20moved%20to,losing%20the%20rank%20of%20canon.&text=Canon%20Barry%20said%20he%20believes,of%20the%20sexual%20abuse%20allegations.
Bp McClay’s statement is better than that produced by most C of E bishops. It comes across as heartfelt and sensitive. The victim/s have a legal right to anonymity, but it’s odd he wouldn’t name the abuser. And, as you say, he fails to mention the 1970s cover-up and moving the priest on. Maybe there will be an inquiry?
The Church of Ireland holding any inquiry would cause me profound surprise. Bishop McClay displaying the wisdom (or integrity) to fix an independent inquiry into ill-treatment of innocent Church of Ireland members might require a miracle! The New Wine Ireland group (Bishop McClay is a significant leader) have run a new Belfast evangelism training course. But two out of the five students commissioned in my year group made complaints. We complained about being called to meetings, then unfairly accused of sexual misconduct in language we both found foul or offensive. These matters were passed to Bishop David McClay, but he preferred Kangaroo Court Justice to respecting Church-Bible-Law or natural justice. Education experts (a Cambridge-educated professor and senior schoolmistress) were aghast at the clearest evidence imaginable of bullying and harassment of students). Both ladies had every good reason to feel personally hurt, or even implicated in unfair questions raised about sexual misconduct. As an experienced medic the mental state of one victim stunned me. It was akin to that of survivors of attempted terrorist assassination seen in A&E. After over an hour of tremulous shaking and crying, a victim spoke to me in my living room about exactly what he felt had offended him so deeply. As a faithfully married man he claimed to have felt insulted by an interrogation around potential adultery ,and a phrase he claimed was used [“Any of us might fancy a change of XXXXXXX”]. None of this pressed the Church of Ireland to fix a formal inquiry. We were shocked when yet another student (Joe Turner) later also mysteriously disappeared. He appears in this YouTube Olive Tree Media film about revival at St Brendan’s Parish in Belfast: ‘Karl Faase interviews Joe Turner for Jesus the Game Changer Season 2’. Will it take child abuse, rapes, suicides or other serious victim trauma, before Archbishop John McDowell in Armagh has the wit to finally call a formal and independent inquiry, exploring various forms of abuse potentially being concealed in Down and Dromore Diocese by David McClay. David McClay appears to have shown scant respect for Church rules, anti-discrimination law or biblical principles of natural justice. The Canon Mike Pilavachi MBE case has exposed the scale of cover up defiling our Church tradition. Is there a major crisis relating to New Wine Ireland, and serious professional or unethical misconduct by David McClay. Mercifully, a top flight cleric got wind of the New Wine Ireland abuse, and advised or implored the two victims referenced above to leave Down and Dromore Diocese ASAP. Has Bishop David McClay got the blood-sweat-tears of innocent victims on his hands? Should the Church of Ireland be asking him to resign in disgrace at a scandal which drove a businessman and three senior professionals (Medic-Teacher-Professor) to leave Down and Dromore Diocese?