Bishop of Bath and Wells: Bishop Peter Ball Should Not Have Been Allowed to Serve in Langport Area
Western Gazette
THE Bishop of Bath and Wells has said that former bishop Peter Ball should never have been allowed to serve in the Langport area during his retirement. Bishop Peter Ball, from Aller, was sentenced to 32 months at the Old Bailey on Wednesday after pleading guilty to sexual offences. His former employer, the Right Reverend Peter Hancock, has said that checks are now "more robust" and has apologised "unreservedly" to the public. Bishop Ball, 83, served as Bishop of Lewes between 1977 and 1992, and was subsequently Bishop of Gloucester between 1992 and 1993. Four years after leaving this post, and retiring to the village of Aller, he was given permission to officiate (PTO) by the Diocese of Bath and Walls. Ball's PTO status allowed him to assist with ministry and hold communion, but he could not confirm people into the church or ordain other clergy. A diocese spokeswoman said: "Peter Ball retired to the village of Aller in Somerset and assisted with occasional Sunday ministry there, under the authority of the team rector. "We understand he assisted in a similar way in up to eight other parishes in the surrounding area. However, the details of dates and services where those with PTO are involved are not held centrally. In 2009 the diocese was made aware of concerns about Bishop Ball's conduct elsewhere in the UK, as part of a police enquiry. His duties were restricted through a written agreement, which stated that he could have no unsupervised contact with children. His PTO was terminated in 2010. The Right Reverend Peter Hancock, the incumbent Bishop of Bath and Wells, has given his reaction to Ball's sentencing at the Old Bailey. He said: "It is now clear that the PTO should never have been granted in 1997. Since that time, much more robust, victim-centred policies and procedures have been put in place but this will be of little comfort to Peter Ball's victims and all others involved this case. "I apologise unreservedly that he was able to continue to operate as a retired member of clergy in Bath and Wells during this time." Bishop Hancock has also welcomed an independent review by the church, which will include a "detailed account" of how Ball's case was handled within the clergy. He added: "The Church of England clearly has questions to address and lessons to be learned from its handling of the case. "It takes any allegations of abuse very seriously and is committed to being a safe place for all. There can be no excuse for such abuses and we must remain vigilant and robust to ensure they cannot happen." At a previous hearing in September, Bishop Ball admitted indecently assaulting a man between December 31, 1980 and January 1, 1983, and indecently assaulting another victim between October 7, 1990 and November 1, 1991. He also confessed to misconduct in public office by "misusing his position and authority to manipulate and prevail on others for sexual gratification", relating to 16 young men. The court heard that Ball had avoided prosecution for sexual abuse in 1993 after the intervention of the royal family. He was sentenced after using religion as a "cloak" to groom aspiring young priests for his own "selfish sexual motive" during the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. Ball was sentenced to 32 months for misconduct in a public office and 15 months for the two counts of indecent assault, which will run concurrently. Ball pleaded not guilty to two additional counts of indecent assaults against two teenage boys, one aged 12 or 13, and one aged 15. These charges will lie on file. Mr Ball's twin brother Michael, who also served as a bishop in the Church of England, has not responded to the Western Gazette's request for comment. Anyone who has been affected and distressed by this case should contact the Church of England's Safeguarding team on 01749 685135 or visit
|
.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.