By Anonymous
Editor: This is an account of an individual who, in the setting of a university Christian Union, encountered terrible spiritual abuse leading to serious trauma. I do not intend here to draw out all the lessons to be learned in this story but the depth of cruelty exhibited in the mentoring by a female Christian leader is breath-taking. To call such conservative teaching biblically faithful is a dishonouring of the Christian message. Is it necessary to impose such grotesque suffering on an individual in the name of Christian Orthodoxy? Spiritual torture is strong language, but for this description of Anon’s experience it seems fully justified.
This story begins in 2001 when I began medical school training to become a doctor. From that year until 2023 I believed that the emotional and spiritual torture I was enduring was part of the cost of being a Christian trying to follow Jesus. In summary I have now come to understand that my entire adult life has been destroyed by abuse within the part of the church that describes itself as conservative evangelical.
Looking back to the beginning of my medical training I can remember vividly the welcome given me by Christians as a young vulnerable woman of 19. I was then desperately missing the close-knit rural community which was my home and my boyfriend of some years. The relationship we enjoyed was deep and committed and it was maintained during the first university years in spite of the inconveniences of distance and train travel.
My initial relationship with the Christian Union was unexceptionable and the group I mixed with were inclusive and non-judgmental, though I was aware from early on that something stricter reserved for those who made more spiritual commitment. For the first two years I was on the fringe but in my third year started to attend events more regularly. I was drawn by the clarity, certainty and earnestness of the Bible studies and gospel presentations. Two of my best friends had committed to a large student C of E Church and I followed their lead.
I started to realise that my relationship was not approved of – it was sexual and he wasn’t a Christian. These issues around sex were a major focus of teaching among students at the time with the “Pure” course being promoted heavily by UCCF. The CU in my city had also split over doctrinal issues and only students from the four most Conservative Churches were attending. The inference was that if you could not sign the UCCF doctrinal basis of belief you were not a true Christian. Churches that did not teach these doctrines were considered not biblical and not true to Jesus.
I found myself in an irreconcilable bind. On the one hand I believed Jesus had died for me and wanted to follow him. But I also loved my boyfriend of five years and we were totally committed to each other. He didn’t want to pursue a faith but was supportive of me doing that.
I felt under pressure to stop the sexual side of our relationship, and he still stood by me.
I was invited to join a six-week course with a group of girls from the Church, looking specifically at what the Bible had to say to female students. This was led by a full-time female staff member of the Church and a medical student, also female, who had taken a year out to work for the Church.
The course started with broad messages of forgiveness and acceptance through Christ. As the weeks went on the applications became more focused on analysing our thoughts and behaviours looking for areas where we weren’t living with Jesus as Lord. The last session wasn’t on university premises but at the home of the main leader. She delivered a blistering case for how having a non-Christian boyfriend was not consistent with a wholehearted commitment for Jesus. She said that marrying a non-Christian was unthinkable.
Hearing this caused me to break down in tears at the impossibility this presented. The younger leader put her arm around me. The older leader looked disdainful, angry and pleased. Following the course, I tried to put this out of my mind and continued in my relationship with my boyfriend. I wanted to pursue my faith but in a way that was faithful and loving to my boyfriend.
Sometime later, I had the offer of a one-to-one Bible Study was made through the Church and I signed up. My friend had had two very good experiences of this with older women in the Church. Either of whom I now think would have been much better equipped to mentor me.
However, I was allocated (and I wonder if this was intentional to my circumstances) to the woman who had led the course which had caused my upset.
To start with, I was wowed by the way she explained Mark’s gospel and Jesus seemed to walk out of the pages. Jesus’ deity, authority and the stark call to follow him wholeheartedly, or not at all, seemed impossible to deny or resist.
This mentor also encouraged me to attempt to present my own evangelistic talks for her to critique. I tried to decline saying that I didn’t think I would ever do that in real life. She was stern and overrode me. Said it was important to “train for the harder thing”. She gave me clear pointers from the passage for the first talk and was full of praise for what I produced and my “gifts” and intelligence. The next session was a different matter. She did not guide me on what my main point should be that time. She slated me for my misinterpretation of the passage. I felt humiliated.
In our sessions, we would often talk about my boyfriend and his family. I hoped that, as she realised the depth and quality of the relationship, she would see that the hard line, “you must not have a non-Christian boyfriend” didn’t apply in my situation. However, when we came to talk about it several months in, she indicated firmly that her view had not changed at all. She added that none of the vicars at the Church would marry us as it would be against their conscience.
She took me on a tour of the Bible pointing out many passages that forbade a Christian to marry a non-Christian. She was persuasive, convinced and zealous on the issue.
I felt utterly trapped with no right course of action ahead of me. Both my boyfriend and my parents thought this teaching was bizarre and wrong, but their opinion was dismissed by my mentor because they were not Christians. The same thing was said about the opinion of believers from other denominations. It was decried on the basis of it not being biblical and coming from a lack of submission to the authority of Scripture.
My boyfriend went on a Christianity Explored course and started to attend Church. He even made a profession of faith and begged me to marry him. I desperately wanted to but had been made to feel that to do so without certainty he was a Christian was unwise. My mentor advised me that if I couldn’t marry him then I should end the relationship to reduce the damage to each other and so my boyfriend had more chance of meeting someone else.
I was beside myself.
I went on my elective placement in West Africa for six weeks. As soon as I got back I went to see my boyfriend. I was delighted and relieved to be reunited with him. It had been very difficult to communicate while I was abroad. We did not talk about matters of faith until later in the day. But, when we did, he told me that he hadn’t been to church while I was away. He wanted us to stay together but he couldn’t pretend that he could live the conservative evangelical lifestyle.
A guttural sound of pain came from out of my chest. I felt that I had no choice but to end our relationship, that it was what Jesus required of me. But nothing in me wanted to do it.
We said an agonized goodbye and I was utterly distraught. We had been together for nearly seven years. I had never known adult life without him. I went back to university in a dreadful state. My mentor met with me but was harsh. She said that my pain was the consequence of sex outside of marriage. She suggested I ask the Holy Spirit to show me more of my sin.
That night I prayed and came to think that I was so selfish I hadn’t wanted my boyfriend to become a Christian. That I had selfishly wanted the relationship to meet my own needs but that I hadn’t put God or him first. A couple in the Church noticed my distress and tried to support me, though they still kept to the party line that I couldn’t marry him. I had done the right thing.
I went to speak to a Church staff member who was known to offer grief counselling. He was also desperately cruel, told me to put my grief in a box, stop wallowing and that I was going around trying to find people to tell me what I wanted to hear. Chillingly, he also said if I continued in that way, I was in danger of never getting over my boyfriend.
The couple continued to support me but stopped me from phoning my boyfriend or from contacting him when I went home for Christmas. They primed me not to listen to my parents who were begging me to reconsider and worried I was in a cult. The couple said they couldn’t understand as they weren’t Christians. Over this time, the husband gradually groomed me into a sexual relationship with himself. He told me it was good for me to realise I could fall in love and have sex with someone else.
He knew that I was suicidal and hearing voices. He and his wife set themselves up as the only people who could support me through my trial.
The earlier coercive control by the Church leaders and the couple rendered me additionally vulnerable to the sexual abuse from a predator.
Eventually I escaped them and tried to build a life. I had convinced myself that I had followed the only biblical course of action, that I could not have married my boyfriend. Though I never understood why God would put me through all of that.
I became a GP, married a Christian, had three children. I thought I was perfectly happy.
Then my ex-boyfriend’s Dad died. My life imploded, I was hit with a wave of dreadful realisation that what I had believed to be conviction by the Holy Spirit 18 years previously had in fact been coercion.
This triggered an unravelling in my life akin to coming out as gay. I realised that I had suppressed an exclusive lifelong love for my ex-boyfriend because of the pressure from my Church community. That suppression was only ever going to be temporary and time had run out.
I have had extensive counselling and fantastic support from friends (mostly outside the Church) and family. I believe the best outcome from here is for me to get through each day as best I can for the sake of my children. I fight for admission of wrongdoing and apology from those involved but (apart from one person who has apologised repeatedly and supported me hugely) this has not been given.
To return to my title, what about the women?
Attempts were and have been made to achieve justice in some form for John Smyth’s and Jonathan Fletcher’s male victims during the lifetime of the abusers.
David Fletcher’s female victims were not acknowledged until after his death.
Does the Church find it even easier to discredit, blame and discard the testimony of women abused while under their “care”?
Does this make it unsafe for women to disclose until much later in life?
Carrying the shame and blame that belongs to their abusers for them. Potentially twenty years longer than their male counterparts?
This misogyny provides a greater protection for those who abuse women. They may never have to face up to the consequences of their actions in their life.
I believe research is being carried out into what happens to women when they speak out about their abuse in faith settings.
My experience suggests this is greatly needed.
The psychological, spiritual and relational scars I bear are lifelong and debilitating.
Not all abuse is visible – or provable.
Not all torture involves physical injury.
Coercive control in a spiritual setting removes meaningful choice and invalidates consent as much for women as for men.
The effects wreak havoc and destruction at the deepest level of your being, regardless.
I send the author of this my deepest sympathy. My own experiences were not dissimilar (my own post is here somewhere) though directed differently, and I had hoped that all this shitty coercion and control was a thing of the past but this more recent account shows it’s still prevalent. I echo, what about the women?
NEW WINE, and also the Pilavachi case, came to mind on reading this. Thanks for sharing this experience, and I hope it now proves empowering to have done so.
A vicar once spoke to a group of us about sin generally being rooted in the abuse of power-money-sex. We see each of these domains in Church scandals. Groups will sometimes pressurise or nudge people to tithe. They will at times try to coerce people around intimate life dimensions. Control is to the fore in many cultist settings, where total obedience to the whims of a leadership clique is demanded. The concept of the -‘Church family’-can ring hollow retrospectively, when safely escaped from cultist influences. As a middle aged or older person it is still relatively easy to get drawn into cultish groups. As a child, or a student, a person is ever so much more vulnerable.
Two professional female friends knew me for a very long time before they shared their own background of acute disillusionment with university Christian Union life. Both saw extremely ugly and arrogant behaviours from men, which repelled them and caused them to leave the institutional Church scene for many years or decades, or perhaps permanently. Yet they had to know me for a very long time before detailing their problems. Most male friends would probably have spat out the raw detail immediately over coffee or a beer, with a few expletives added!
Evangelical bullies are often very well experienced at manipulating and coercing people , and also at getting away with it. Two out of five Anglican ministry trainees (both around the age of 50) left my year group. The course was run by New Wine. Both of the victims felt unfairly accused of sexual misconduct by a New Wine tutor in crude language. One student was witnessed crying by me (a retired NHS doctor), by a female professor and by a senior schoolmistress. Yet Archbishops and Bishops failed to fix any formal inquiry into savage student maltreatment.
As a single student, tied up with intensive coursework, and feeling conflicted, this would have been a mighty difficult crisis for you to deal with. Bullies always need to be confronted. But it took me a couple of decades, working as a GP and hospital doctor, to learn this painful lesson fully. Also, there is often a randomly fortuitous element to how a situation evolves. A single witness or whistleblower can sometimes have a gigantic impact. “A word of truth outweighs the whole world”.
Sometimes a church member or leader (or an NHS leader) will intervene and undermine bullies. I have seen this happen with dramatic effect and protect innocent people. But the situation you describe involves the first years of a medical degree. Your prospect, in that phase of local church involvement, to have deeper and more chronic relationships of quality, was probably quite minimal.
By sharing this life story you help reduce the likelihood of evangelical cliques doing similar harm to other people. Thanks for your boldness in sharing this material.
It’s also interesting to consider how evangelical bullies will readily forgive themselves, or each other. You are quite right to tie this in with the John Smyth QC case.
The sequelae in these situations can be enlightening over future years. The ‘hand of God’ catches up with an awful lot of Church bullies over time. I have been stunned at how some situations have worked out for bullies and concealers of Church bullying.
We enter 2026 with the Church landscape changing. By degrees it gets easier for victims, witnesses and whistleblowers to get a fair hearing in some quarters.
*We should possibly raise a glass to Stephen Parsons contribution*
With a similar medical background and conevo early saturation, I offer my heartfelt sympathies.
Much church isn’t like this , but if you find yourself in the middle of a place like this it can be impossible to believe there’s a totally healthy world, completely outside where love is cherished and not forced, manipulated and controlled. It’s ugly, deeply wrong, in my opinion, and I in recovery I’ve made it my business to point out as much, and support others, such as our host here, wholeheartedly.
I’ve been reading the bible every day for 45 years. It rarely says (with the emphasis they use) what they say it does. Specific texts are weaponised to support a narrative agreed by the top men. It’s remarkably similar in similar conevo churches despite the different denominations.
Disagreement with the rules is not allowed. Even those of us with a scientific bent were easily lured into the certainties and simplicity of teaching. Answers.
Most people part of this system are entirely sincere. With the exception of the awful predator, which is a pattern replicated across the territory. Other predators, for example Smyth, seem to end up in leadership. This is partly because, on the face of it, they embody the extreme commitment that we, as young ones, are so attracted to. At least I was. I’m an all-in person, or at least I was.
Conevo damages relationships by trying to pre, post and current regulate them by controlling sex. Sex is an evangelical obsession. The emphasis in the bible is no where close to the church’s. Many years later, I regard it almost completely as none of my business. Or the church’s.
I think it’s a major tragedy that a love like this was lost, but courageous and right to make the best of things in supporting the children. More typically, conevo churches cajole young people into premature marriages, trapping them into premature commitment and foreclosing on more realistic and mature later relationships. The name of the game is control. Sex is the easiest way of finding areas of guilt to leverage for “mentoring” people into obedience.
Ironically, almost all the church scandals involve sex. It’s time for them to shut up about it. They’ve an abysmal record of modelling it healthily.
Of course you won’t get anywhere trying to argue with a conservative evangelical. The answers are rigid and fixed. They’ll immediately announce that you’re not a Christian. Biblically this pronouncement is only God’s, as far as I can understand it, but they won’t be interested in what I or anyone else thinks. Thinking for yourself is frowned upon.
What we can do is share brave testimony like this, to warn others not to join, and to encourage fellow sufferers who may have thought they were alone on a miserable journey.
I feel so much for this woman and everything she’s been through.
The depth of cruelty, coercion, manipulation, misguided thinking, and supposed “purity” is evil.
Not a single shred of it was love.
Yes, is there a vast amount of hidden sadism within Anglicanism, and with some associated para-Church groups like New Wine?
Also, Anglicanism, even at the highest leadership level, can be shamefully cowardly when confronted with clear witness evidence of bullying-abuse-harassment stories.
Yes, is there a vast amount of hidden sadism within Anglicanism, and with some associated para-Church groups like New Wine?
Also, Anglicanism, even at the highest leadership level, can be shamefully cowardly when confronted with clear witness evidence of bullying-abuse-harassment stories.
This is so well written and heart wrenching. It resonates with pain.
I am so sorry this happened to the writer. The coercion and control are very apparent.
It’s so utterly arrogant when church leaders think they can tell ppl how to live their lives.
The reason it feels like a cult is because it IS a cult – albeit one within the established vhurch
I held out for many years so I could marry a fellow Christian. It was not something forced on me, it was something I wanted – I didn’t want to spend my life with someone who didn’t share my deepest values. But men are in short supply in the church and I ended up, in my mid-thirties, marrying someone I wasn’t in love with but felt I had a strong friendship with. We have struggled to stay together for over thirty years, had a child together, and somehow survived, but the relationship hasn’t been sexual for many years now. Now he no longer identifies as a Christian and won’t come to church with me. I’ve ended up where I didn’t want to be, married to a non-Christian and what’s more, one I’m not even attracted to. And Christian teaching about premarital sex meant I have never had a really satisfactory sexual relationship. The evangelical rose-tinted spectacles view of the perfect Christian marriage is abusive in itself.
A 7 Sept 2019 interview with an evangelical bishop includes: ‘Q: Have you any major regrets? A: That I wasn’t even more intentional about raising up a new and younger generation in the faith. Nothing matters more for a Christian.’
Can a cultist obsession with growth and youth be dangerous? Can the institutional Church, or indeed an-‘intentional’-charismatic-evangelical bishop, ever bring revival? Does our New Testament speak about revival being a mysterious work of the Holy Spirit?
No amount of coercion, sometimes including contempt for Church rules or disregard for national law, can ever bring revival. But worst of all is kangaroo court justice, where abusers get protected and elevated, with victims-witnesses-whistleblowers getting DARVO Deny-Attack-Reverse-Victim-&-Offender.
The idea of authoritarian processes fixing safeguarding, or guaranteeing revival, is a fallacy. Have authoritarian bullies done a vast amount of harm to the Anglican Church?
My best Sunday school teacher was a “Miss”. She was good at presentation, but more, when she talked of the love of Jesus, it was clear she experienced it and was able to convey warmly to us what it felt like. So I listened to her and took in what she said.
Years later I was wondering what had become of her in the church, and hints were made of her female companion and living arrangements. As a child I had no comprehension of what this could mean, but later I began to understand. We were taught to disparage. She was probably expelled, either directly or “constructively”.
We hurt each other with our clumsiness, false sense of self righteousness, and ignorance. I’m no longer a young man, but am still learning, and trying to put things right.
The institutional Church killer for Anglicans, quite perversely, is the exceptionally skilful ‘camouflaging’ of sins and vices. Leaders are ever so good at it. A great strength of the written testimony above is the reference to John Smyth QC. Is the ghost of Smyth alive, well and un-exorcised across great swathes of Anglicanism? Does bah (bullying-abuse-harassment) still gets concealed in the Anglican Church?
‘Take risks’ and assert ‘authority’ caught my attention repeatedly while a 2015-2016 student on a New Wine programme as an Anglican trainee. But when terrible problems are manifested, as a result of fundamentalist lunacies, we then see senior Anglican leaders who fail to ‘take responsibility’ or embrace ‘humility’, even when their personal hypocrisy starts to get exposed and serious harm is exposed.
I would agree that conservative evangelical attitudes to women are often abusive and need to be called out as such. It is in my view the female equivalent of John Smyth’s abuse of young men.
I myself experienced what I consider ‘conservative evangelical abuse’ at the hands of some staff members of the Church Missionary Society when my husband and I were working with then as missionaries in Beirut. The organisation was totally dishonest; in the case of married couples it required both partners formally to be ‘missionaries’ of the organisation (otherwise if one of the couple was already a missionary they were required to resign). But having insisted that both partners needed to be missionaries the reality was that they treated the husband as ‘the’ missionary and the wife was expected to know her place as submissive accompanying wife focused on her domestic duties and supporting her husband’s professional vocation. In my innocence I did not realise the utter duplicity of CMS until after I had married and moved to Beirut. I had assumed since I had had experience before my marriage as a theological lecturer, the organisation would be ‘interested’ in helping me to develop what was and is for me a deeply loved vocation. Not so. It was made clear to me in a variety of ways, some of which were just appallingly rude, by CMS personnel both in London and Beirut, that I was now not to be really treated as a human being – rather I had become sub-human in their eyes. After about 2 years of this, when I had a CMS medical in London while on a brief leave, the CMS doctor challenged me over my attitudes. Actually I think for her to bring it up in a medical was in itself professionally abusive and unacceptable. I am not sure how she had heard of my views, and it certainly felt that professional boundaries had been transgressed. I tried to explain how I felt. She didn’t really listen. Her response was ‘We believe in Christian marriage’. ‘Christian marriage’ in ConEvo speak in those days meant precisely the model of marriage in which the wife was expected to be submissive to her husband, focus on his domestic needs, and not work outside the home in her own professional sphere. The clear implication was that the model of marriage that my husband and I have lived throughout our life together viz one in which we seek to take take seriously and mutually support both our professional vocations was and is ‘not Christian’. I think that that comment made by a medical practitioner acting on behalf of CMS in those circumstances was evil and unforgiveable. I use the word demonic to describe it. CMS has never really acknowledged the level of discrimination it practised against married women missionaries or sought to make amends.
Clare, that’s appalling, and so two-faced. The doctor evidently felt it was OK for her to practise her professional vocation, but not for you to practise yours!
There was so much hypocrisy among evangelical missionary organisations and churches. Many forbade women to preach at home, but it was OK for women to preach on the mission field abroad, to the ‘natives’. And it was also OK for female missionaries on furlough to take the sermon slot in church – nominally to talk about their work – but it was never called a sermon. Male missionaries preached, female missionaries ‘gave an address’. The same was true of the (very rare) female speakers at university CU meetings – it was an ‘address’.
‘Demonic’, used above, is a good choice of word for savage Church bullying. ‘Occult’ would be another one. Church bullies practice secretively. There can be cliques or covens at work. They often use terror and fear. They sometimes delight in total cruelty, with force or devices far beyond what is required even for their own narrow or selfish agenda. There could be a strange paradox here. In an age when the reality of supernatural evil has been largely forgotten, does the Church get away with brutal evil in plain sight rather frequently without many people noticing or talking about it?
Why would the church want to use quotes from the Bible that can be used as weapons against women I wonder? Holding onto old attitudes, keeping power between men or keeping away the love and empathy and truth that we are all God’s people?
These attitudes are amazingly still rife in marriages and church well into the 21st century. Isn’t it time for the church to let go and let God…….
My mother was amongst the unpaid curate brigade – vicar’s wife. Unsung heroes running the music, flower arranging, MU, etc Supportive and loyal. Never noticed by the church but a vital pillar. Just assumed that they would be cooperative.
Are men actually scared of women (being cleverer than them)? Is this behind some of the current and historic misogyny? A sort of gynaephobia?
In the outside world of course, women are still discriminated against but not as badly as in parts of the Christendom, I suspect. As an armchair economist it seems an absurd and appalling waste to ignore 50% of your talent.
It fascinates me that during ww2 women staffed up the Spitfire factories with no problem at all, but as soon as the war was over, were expected to return to domestic duties. Having done this as a job over extended periods, I can vouch that aspects of the work can be very challenging. I do wonder whether the push to keep women at home is because men simply prefer not to do it. I don’t see any theological justification for it.
I still bear scars for being castigated for taking the role of house husband. When I look at my son and how he shares keenly in the upbringing of his son, I am very proud indeed of him, and now wish I’d borne my responsibility with greater ease and fended off the barbs with more confidence.
Similarly women ran the railways and buses, (save for actually driving the engines – but there was a very good and valid reason for that) kept the country moving and staffed the war factories – purely for the period of the emergency, to release the men for the front line. (No, I’m not forgetting all the Women’s Auxiliary military units, who basically did the same thing.) Once the killing was over, jobs were for men, women were for housework – not so very different to Hitler’s “Kuche, Kirke und Kinder’ idea.
Men, naturally, were the masters, the breadwinners, the ones who ‘did important things’ – because God, the church and the pecking order said so. It seems there are a good many people around at the moment who would love it if we returned to those ways.
Women also ran the railways, doing everything bar drive the engines, for which there was a good, practical reason. They kept everything going, even the armed forces, whose women’s auxiliary units released men for the front line.
Of course, when the killing stopped, the female civilian employees very quickly got the push so the returning men could have the jobs; it wasn’t too different from Hitler’s dictum of ‘Kinde’, Kirche’ und ‘Kuche’, and stemmed from the same basic ideas. There are plenty of people around now who want to revert to those days, and in too many cases, have the power to force it on their countries.
‘The church is an anvil which has worn out many hammers’………..
Good to start 2026 with a positive thought, and a Happy New Year to contributors.
Any New Year resolutions for our Anglican Bishops and Archbishops?
The Church of Ireland Primate, Archbishop John McDowell of Armagh, could come clean in 2026 on the paedophile buried by his cathedral door.
Why not end half a century of Anglican Church in Ireland failure to name Rev Canon Dr W G (Billy) Neely?
Reading the original article triggered a profound mental reaction within me, of pain, frustration and anger at the betrayal of trust which, clearly, we both encountered in the teachings .I’m a (hopefully) moderately normal, intelligent male, and so many of the pressures mentioned were common to my own experiences at around the same time. It seemed, with hindsight, that our sole purpose, having ‘come to Christ’ and ‘given up our small ambitions’ was to basically become unpaid gospel workers, with the ideal of becoming full time, paid gospel workers if we were good enough.
Emotional and sexual needs all too clearly didn’t enter into the divinely called equation, unless it was to warn us of the fearful consequences of disobeying God’s will, and the terrible dangers which our (supposedly God given) desires presented to us. I was brought up in a similar vein in a religious’ family where anything sexual was ‘unclean’ and unfit for discussion, or most certainly, any sort of interest. Following CECU conversion, I very quickly realised that this background of ‘good news’ reinforced that upbringing – Lord, did I really have a Christian upbringing after all?
Let’s just say that with all the bilge, tommy-rot and trottle which I’ve picked up over my lifetime – most of it contradictory to each other, and all of it detached from the reality of life’s experience, I’m looking forward to the day I lose this corrupt body, with all the confusions and damned nuisance that lodge within it. From what Jesus said, sexual desires, problems and activities don’t exist in Heaven. Roll on the day we’re free!
(A total stranger, without warning at a church event asked me outright if I thought sex was God’s greatest gift to humanity. My immediate reply, that no, it was nothing but a bloody nuisance, left him stunned and shocked – well, he wanted my opinion, and he got it.)
Bullying-abuse-harassment and misogyny still gets covered up in the Anglican Church.
The Scottish Episcopal Church has faced concern over allegedly massive problems in Aberdeen and Orkney Diocese.
The Bangor Cathedral scandal saw off the Welsh Primate, Andrew John.
Justin Welby shamefully stayed on for as long as he could, before resigning over the John Smyth QC case.
Bishop Mullally is in trouble before she takes up the Archbishop of Canterbury post.
Paedophile priests even get posthumous protection in Ireland. Canon W G Neely still cannot be officially named by the Church of Ireland, but got a prominent grave site in Armagh Cathedral and a funeral service in the Cathedral.
Irish journalists have red-flagged this but Archbishop John McDowell of Armagh, Irish national Primate, has little or nothing to say about the matter.
You are right to be angry,John. But our collective anger needs to be channeled productively, and to ensure much needed change.
Anglican abuse extends beyond the historical or the sexual, and injuries inflicted on the highly vulnerable.
It is a live issue. No amount of woke episcopal waffle, on systems and processes, will ever cure it.
We need Bishops and Archbishops who confront bullies……..
Bishops and Archbishops who bully, or who cover up bullying, need to be rooted out.
PRIEST SHEPHERD FRIEND, all in block capitals, runs the bottom of a gravestone inscription to ‘Reverend Canon Dr. William George Neely’.
How did a paedophile vicar get buried by an entrance door to a national Primate’s Cathedral seat? Why is the Primate unable to name Neely as a paedophile, or come up with a credible response to the tombstone problem?
These questions perhaps can relate with the reflection in this excellent 29.12.25 article above. Our natural response, on hearing of J.C.Smyth QC and similar cases, is to imagine Anglican Church maltreatment of people is historical, sexual and connected to mistreatment of very young adults or children.
The genius of the article above comes with the punchline: ‘To return to my title, what about the women?’
The answers which follow continue the theme:-
‘Attempts were and have been made to achieve justice in some form for John Smyth’s and Jonathan Fletcher’s male victims during the lifetime of the abusers. David Fletcher’s female victims were not acknowledged until after his death.Does the Church find it even easier to discredit, blame and discard the testimony of women abused while under their “care”?’
When we see extreme cases, like John Smyth QC, our next question should surely be along these lines: If a fish of Smyth’s size slips through the net for decades, then how great a mass of lesser everyday bullying-abuse-harassment goes on with nobody ever remotely even noticing it?
The John Smyth QC case should open our eyes to the wider scale of ongoing Anglican bullying-abuse-harassment. Similarly, an Anglican national Primate, who has a paedophile priest buried at his cathedral door, yet cannot name the offender, reminds us how deep the bullying-abuse-harassment crisis in our denomination really is.
Those three words on the inscription are potentially very insensitive to victims or their family members: PRIEST SHEPHERD FRIEND.
The article and comments make several fair points (some of the latter not strictly relating to the article), but certain major ones haven’t yet been addressed at all.
Nobody who’s written previously appears to have spared a thought for the writer’s husband, and the humiliation he must feel if he’s read this knowing the writer’s identity – that his wife of c. 20 years is still pining like this over an old boyfriend, particularly that her ex’s father’s passing has been so impactful. It doesn’t sound at all normal or healthy for the death of someone far in the rear view mirror of life to cause one’s “life to implode” as she puts it.
It’s also worth asking, hypothetically, if the writer had indeed married her original boyfriend, how well their children would have been brought up – would it have been better for them spiritually than it’s been for her actual children? I think their interests also deserve to be taken into account.
But the really important point has been totally skated over by more than 20 comments so far. Simply this: Jesus warned several times about the potential cost following him would entail. I don’t need to reference any of the passages in question, they’re too well-known – and yet, strangely, never referred to in any of the previous discussion on this page.
The apostles say much the same – “we must enter the kingdom of God through many tribulations,” “everyone who wants to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,” and much more. Possibly the problem is that we expect opposition to the Christian life to come from a given quarter or in certain forms, so that we feel struck in the solar plexus when it comes from a different direction, etc. We just need to be prepared for whatever comes.
It’s actually very common for relationship-related issues to be a sticking point in this regard, as Jesus’ own language makes clear. We also know is that when faced with a specific obstacle to discipleship, Jesus didn’t compromise but preferred to let the subject “go away sad”. In that instance it was the love of money; for someone else it would be something quite different.
I’d really encourage anyone who’s already been on this article/thread to comment along these lines.
Dear Dan
‘Be not yoked to an unbeliever’-Presumably this is the sentiment which you are alluding to, is my guess.
To inflict this teaching on a younger adult, and then sexually maltreat them in a Church context, is not my idea of proper application of the Bible’s message. Lots of Church connected people gravitate between full blown commitment and connection to the institutional church, and at other times fade as they are overwhelmed by very challenging questions or life situations.
Married couples can go through these cycles or seasons, where they remain tied to a parish or denomination, but the commitment of each partner fluctuates over time. Also, lots of citizens are quiet believers, but give the Church something of a wide berth. This is hardly surprising, given the scandals within some denominations.
I can relate to the experience described above. It illustrates what a horror story we have in some congregations. My partner has longstanding health problems, and we have been averse to the risks of reproduction, so opted for a long term celibate relationship.
I was accepted onto a New Wine and Anglican training course as an evangelist. My situation was no secret. Yet at the end of the course we felt pressurised to get married by senior clergy or church workers, as a condition of being commissioned by the Church.
Even in our early 50’s the situation was horrible. The Anglican Church demanded that I had to leave our shared home indefinitely, as a condition of being considered for unpaid ministry work and getting commissioned. My partner felt it was pointless trying to negotiate with abusive bullies who could not be trusted.
By the grace of God, a very senior minister got wind of the bullying. They advised me to insist on getting commissioned as a celibate person in a stable relationship. They advised me not to leave my home or be harassed by senior Anglican clergy.
They advised me to forget about any ministry opportunities in the local diocese, and to urgently leave it after getting commissioned, to avoid further trauma and bullying. The bullying which I witnessed was horrific.
I can relate to the victim’s story above, and the inherent hypocrisy of some Church people. I saw savage maltreatment of people get cynically covered up while doing the 2 year New Wine training course. It really was horrible, and it hard to watch, even as an NHS medic nearing retirement.
One of the New Wine trainees in our course, an ex-prisoner, appeared to have limited connection to the Anglican Church. Yet the Church fixed up a ministry position for them. The ex-prisoner then disappeared very rapidly. I noted bishops having absolutely nothing to say about the reason for this.
The modern Anglican Church is a horror story in many regards. Why drive away faithful Anglican Church members with savage bullying, yet fix a ministry position for an ex-prisoner, who did not seem in any way strongly connected to the denomination.
Our denomination really is in a mess, and it is getting hard for bishops to cover up bullying-abuse-harassment. I note a new story emerging about a Global Primate based in a UK Cathedral. They have a notorious paedophile cleric’s grave close to a door entrance of the cathedral. The bottom words on the paedophile’s gravestone are-PRIEST SHEPHERD FRIEND-in block capitals.
The GP giving the testimony above deserves encouragement. Keep sharing this story anonymously please. The John Smyth QC horror story is possibly just the tip of a massive bullying-abuse-harassment iceberg which remains hidden.
Dan – your statement if “It doesn’t sound at all normal or healthy for the death of someone far in the rear view mirror of life to cause one’s “life to implode” as she puts it.” is correct.
This is not normal and is the result of coercive control, abuse and emotional bullying that took place in the church.
Your statement “Jesus warned several times about the potential cost following him would entail” and following text appears to be implying that this is the cost of following Jesus?
I may have misunderstood, but there is no place for religion or someone religious justifying cost which is coercive control, emotional and sexual abuse.
I think I might frame this comment and put it on my wall. I agree. This is the reality I must try to navigate – I was coerced into actions which Jesus was not asking of me and then I was further abused. I didn’t realise that for eighteen years. When I did, the eighteen years in between became uninterpretable to me.
It’s not meant to be miserable, it’s meant to be good. A good Father knows how to give good gifts to His children. Marriage was meant to be wholesome for all involved, including children.
Some of the things we do, we rule, and we enforce in the church, ensure the exact opposite. Probably the children suffer the most, as I’ve experienced directly.
When we stand before the Lord and remind him of all the great things we did, but didn’t bother doing ‘for the least of these’, we could well be in for a nasty surprise. When rules trump humanity, as they did in the above account, I’m more convinced than ever, that this isn’t of God.
Decades later, when we can see the results of following those damaging teachings, is it any wonder people hanker after a long lost love? Perhaps more deeply they are grieving over their own lost life.
We have just heard on Christian Today and other media sources of yet another broken Christian Marriage, as Phillip Yancey confirms an 8 year affair. That’s 2 marriages and children and probably grandchildren all affected directly, thousands of followers gutted, and a ministry holed below the waterline. Did the problems just start 47 years into a 55 year marriage? Of course not. We idolise these people and just pretend everything’s fine.
And again yesterday I was reading from Julie Roys how disgraced Christian apologist, the late Ravi Zaccarias has family members (a son I believe) trying to resurrect RZ’s books and teaching materials, these having been dropped by those who previously strongly promoted them. The man hasn’t been able to come to terms with what his father did wrong. Denial.
It’s time to re-visit the coercion, control and sermonising on “Christian Marriage” and introduce some honesty and realism.
That’s interesting! I picked up an RZ book left at a give away shelf a few days ago. The donor had stripped the outer cover off. Perhaps they were ambivalent about the book and the author.
RZ drops names of people, places, universities, ministry successes etc…etc…etc…
He comments on-BAYSHARAM-‘devoid of shame’, somewhat ironically. But is there a big mismatch between what is projected, and what really went on?
With age and experience, do some other charismatic-evangelical ministry activities feel dubious? I have recently watched some JAD (Jesus at the Door) short online films.
When I was growing up the ministers visiting schools emphasised the evidences for belief in a tactful, gentle and intelligent fashion. There was an emphasis on tolerance, kindness, moral consistency and rationality. Has that largely gone?
The testimony above is excellent at several levels. BAH (bullying-abuse-harassment) is not only sexual, historical or relating to VA’s and children. That an intelligent young lady could get coerced and maltreated is a wake up call.
UK medics got a wake up call post-Shipman. It was a shocking zone to live through as a GP or hospital medic. Some changes were daft, but some exceptionally good things happened to UK medicine.
The Church is decades behind on BAH. An unfolding Northern Ireland Church story is revealing. The Irish Anglican Primate has a notorious paedophile priest buried by the front entrance of his Armagh cathedral.
Within the last few weeks (Sunday Life, page 22, 21-12-25) a local newspaper has run a photo of the vicar’s grave, with block capitals at the bottom of the inscribed tomb stone: PRIEST SHEPHERD FRIEND.
The Anglican Church hierarchy are asleep and tolerate anomalies which would probably see a medic or nurse in dire trouble. I think they are living in the equivalent of the pre-Shipman era in NHS medicine.
*I wonder if the author here, above, might consider national publications* ‘The joy of the Lord is your strength’. It’s a really positive taking apart of abusers and secrecy. Well done!
The Welsh story of Saint Melangell (patron saint of hares) and the beatifully situated shrine Church at Llangynog stands in contrast to the Legend of Gelert story shared here.
The Church (and society) perhaps needs a lot more of the protective kindness described in the story of Saint Melangell. Odd how missionaries frequently describe the vast positive value of human kindness and meeting human need.
But has the UK church to a degree lost this essential feature?
Thank you anon. for your courage to share your harrowing account, my heart has gone out to you.
Having already left the church in 2001 I knew nothing of the purity culture which I have had to research.
For others like me here are two links:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6wH0jNBZAI
http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/37104/1/Thwaites_C_School%20of%20PRHS_PhD_2025.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
I haven’t watch the video yet but the PhD thesis is incredibly relevant. Thank you for sharing that and for your sympathy.
The Anglican element here is interesting. I was not interested in Church or CU as a student in the 1980’s. But as an NHS medic pre-retirement, who kept in contact with student friends, and also developed new contacts, the Anglican Church vs. CU ethos has come to my attention by degrees.
In the late 1990’s, while a GP locum and relief practitioner in the Hebrides, weeks of quiet on call allowed me to examine philosophy-history-spirituality. The case for belief stunned me, and I professed belief around 25 years ago. What really strikes me now, about this grimly painful maltreatment testimony, is how there is potentially a lot of this stuff hidden, potentially a vast amount.
A female NHS colleague relayed how the university CU had over a short exposure driven her away from mainstream Church attendance. They complained about domineering males with zealous overconfidence, and feeling repelled.
Another female friend, once again only after a long number of years of acquaintance, told me how they had left the university CU and Church after vulgar and unpleasant comment from males around sexuality.
It’s also interesting how lots of male friends or contacts, formerly very committed to CU and Church, became sicked by fundamentalist conservatism and coercion, so that they left for ‘open’ churches or Anglo-Catholic venues.
I lean towards a Bebbington’s Four Point kind of evangelical belief, and the theological statements (not the political ones or bits about Kings/Queens!) in the 39 Articles of religion. But I can now fully understand the draw of Anglo-Catholic or Catholic expressions of belief.
This is a very moving testimony above, and also an exceptionally powerful one. In a subtle sort of way it hits the core killer weakness in attempts to expose Anglican BAH (bullying-abuse-harassment).
Our Archbishops and Bishops love a little fairy tale: “abuse-bullying-harassment was historical, and relates largely to the sexual mistreatment of children or very young or vulnerable adults. Our systems and statutory laws now have the problems covered (and also covered up!)”
The reality is very different. In practice concern is often relayed to the police and a file closed. If there is no prosecution, do lots of bishops wash their hands of a situation when the police decide not to prosecute, caution or interview.
I think our longer term aim should be a very basic independent inquiry into every bullying-abuse-harassment allegation. Independent panellists lay/clinical/legal function across all sorts of social security or other queries. Why can the Church not fix this up?
Lots of cases might get rejected, or quickly resolved, but others would be reflagged for a fuller formal inquiry or hearing. The Anglican Church situation, as it stands, is a very sick joke.
I would encourage you to continue sharing this experience. Would you consider quality papers, The Spectator or other publications. It is a very powerful testimony at many levels.