Welby must change his stance on Bishop Bell

SIR – Archbishop Justin Welby’s refusal to apologise for the traducing of Bishop George Bell’s reputation (report, January 23) is indefensible.

He continues to ignore established principles of English law. He fails to recognise fully the Church of England’s flawed handling of the case, highlighted in Lord Carlile’s report. Despite the opinions of judges, academics and people who knew Bishop Bell, he refuses to change his position and now seems to quote in his support the case of Bishop Peter Ball. The two cases are not comparable.

By apologising only for failures of process, while impugning Bishop Bell’s character by stating that he was “accused of great wickedness”, the Archbishop has taken a stance that is not moral, legal or, indeed, Christian.

Sir Edward Heath, Lord Bramall and Lord Brittan – to name a few – have all been the subject of allegations besmirching their otherwise good reputations, despite their innocence in law. In over 40 years of professional practice I encountered numerous situations where allegations did not stand the test of rigorous inquiry.

In the absence of a fresh independent review of Bishop Bell’s case, which there has been more than sufficient time to commission, the Archbishop should not just consider his position but resign before more damage is caused to the Church.

Rev Peter W Sherred

Dover, Kent

SIR – Two pillars of British justice: innocence until guilt is proved and punishment which fits the crime.

Yet Bishop Bell is declared guilty by the Church when this is in grave doubt. And Lord Carey is forbidden to preach or minister to any congregation of the Church he once led, not for a crime, but for “an error of judgment” for which he has apologised.

I count myself a fully paid-up member of the Church of England. I am also fully fed up with the failure of its leaders, who have made substantially greater errors of judgment on both counts.

Gerald Atkinson

Hungerford, Berkshire