Thursday, 9 February 2012

Father Gregory Chillman

Time for a recap. Paragraphs 57 and 58 of the Carlile report stated the following.
57. There remained continuing concerns about what should happen to monks who had been convicted, banned (named in List 99) so that they should not work with children, or otherwise should not have any access to children in the school. This was a concern of mine from the earliest stages of my Inquiry. I have discussed the issue with the Abbot, who was alert to the inevitability of a change from previous practice. I recognise that the sense of responsibility felt by the Community for its Brothers, even those who have strayed and sinned heinously, is considerable.

58. I am pleased to say that the Abbot has accepted that another dwelling has to be found for any member of the monastic community falling within the categories described, and that none is at the Abbey now. This must continue as a permanent policy.
Simple enough. Monks on restricted ministry because of behaviour towards children can't stay at the Abbey.

It isn't just Carlile who made this point. it was previously made by the ISI in its April 2010 supplementary inspection report, and Carlile reported that the issue had attracted high-level interest in the DfE. This is paragraph 68 of the Carlile report.
68. The Department for Education, to Ministerial level, has been following carefully the progress of the ISI inspections. I have reviewed the correspondence. The Minister of State for Schools in July 2010 sought reassurance that all the recommendations the ISI had made would be implemented promptly. This has been done. The Minister was particularly concerned about the arrangements whereby monks, after conviction or being placed on List 99, had continued to live at the Abbey, even under restrictions imposed by the Abbey in consultation with the Archdiocese of Westminster. These arrangements were described as ‘ineffective’ (and the practice no longer continues).
One of the monks mentioned by Carlile as having substantiated allegations against him is Father Gregory Chillman. It indicates that the outcome of an allegation against him was "Deemed inappropriate behaviour, restrictions imposed." At the press conference for publication of the report, the BBC caused a great deal of confusion when they asked where Father Gregory Chillman was now living. It was subsequently clarified that he was away from the Abbey at the time.

Well, he wasn't away for all that long, just long enough for the dust to settle. He has continued to be listed on the abbey website among the monks resident at Ealing Abbey. I thought that might be an error, so I wrote to Peter Turner (the diocesan safeguarding adviser) and he replied as follows.
Fr Gregory Chillman is still residing in the Monastery under restrictions and is not allowed to partake in any public ministry.
So, despite the inspection report of the ISI, despite the recommendation of Lord Carlile, despite the assurances made to the Minister of State for Schools, despite the Abbot being "alert to the inevitability of a change from previous practice", despite Lord Carlile's belief stated in the report itself that "the practice no longer continues", Chillman remains at the abbey under restriction.

What on earth is going on there?


  1. this is shocking...enough is enough...abbot martin is as guilty as anyone...

    it is ultimately aiding and abetting...and he should resign or be prosecuted for failing to protect the children whilst knowingly supporting these monsters!

    its a shambles - they havent got a be honest in light of all their atrocities, i am glad they are digging their own graves!!

    Keep up the good fight Mr West!

  2. The problem is that Martin thinks he is ablove the law and does not give a dam.

    The Gumley Mason's at St. Augustine's also thought themselves also above the law and paraded Chillman at various events while he was under restricted ministry. Look what happened to them !.

    Oblivion awaits you Martin, just like the Gumley Mason's.

  3. How long before we see the Cheshire cat smile of Father David at Ealing Abbey. He will of course promise to never do anything wrong again. I understand, but don't agree with the need for father abbot to show forgiveness but believe others need to put pressure on him to do the right thing.

    The headmaster of the school must have a duty of care for the children. He needs to tell the abbot that he must comply with all directions about ensuring the exclusion of anyone who is a danger to children. No matter how old or how well he is liked and respected in the community. The buck stops with the headmaster

  4. Surely nobody seriously expected the Abbot to keep his word?

  5. Father David Pearce abused his last known victim while living at the Abbey on a "restricted ministry" and the victim was a pupil at St Benedict's.

    There is to going to be a Parental Forum at the School on Wednesday 15th February. If parents are serious about ensuring the safety of their children I hope that they will attend and ask why the recommendations of the ISI and Lord Carlile have not been fully implemented with regard to Father Gregory.

  6. Slippery - bless him, adopts the shape of the last person who sat on him.

    "Gay Dave - where are you sweet pea? Forgiveness is the way forward, never mind the children!"


    Martin xx

  7. From Oct 12 2011

    Shipperlee is just waiting for the thud of car doors and the crunch of gravel on the drive as the cars leave. Then it’s back to normal.

    Future ISI inspections? Well there is the first joke except it’s not funny.

    Welcome oh welcome the ISI incompetents!

    Found the school - just!
    Team inspectors - Benedictine Headmasters only.
    Naked pole dancers in the quad - missed.
    Referrals of child abuse - missed.
    Shit child protection policy - Errrrr missed.
    Bullying - missed

    But the governors are marvellous and the BSA's utterly brill!

    Tea anyone?

  8. I don't know if the school and the Abbey are actually breaking any law by housing Chillman in their midst but it is obviously sheer madness to do so and PR suicide (though PR has never been the school and Abbey's strongest suit). The message the school seems intent on sending loud and clear to parents and prospective parents alike is that, even after what has gone on, and the attendant shaming media exposure, that the school remains unwilling to implement even the most basic and obvious child protection procedures, even those it has ostensibly signed up to.

    It is a head-shakingly incomprehensible that the Abbey should continue to house Chillman and until the culture of the school changes(lead, as it surely must be,by a new senior management team), the school should not be surprised if prospective parents look elsewhere.

  9. The Abbot has chosen not to implement the recommendations concerning monks on "restricted ministries". I have serious doubts whether he really intends to implement any of Lord Carlile's other recommendations.

  10. He's a practitioner of "minimalism."

  11. But Shipperlee is guaranteed to keep schtum about this at the next parents meeting!

    And Cleugh (rhymes with 'rough' - fascinating that) despite being an ISI inspector - will make no attempt to prosecute the Carlile recommendation regarding dodgy monks 'living in' at the abbey because let's not forget, his salary is paid by Shipperlee. The players are entirely conflicted.

  12. We were assured that all of Lord Carlile's recommendations would be fully implemented.

    How quickly promises are forgotten!!

  13. Shipperlee is clearly incapable of supervising members of the monastic community who have had restrictions placed on their ministry. This was clearly demonstrated by the case of David Pearce who was able to abuse at least one more St Benedict's pupil while under restrictions that banned him from contact with children.

    After all that has happened, why should we believe that Shipperlee can be trusted to enforce the restrictions that the Diocese of Westminster has imposed on Gregory Chillman?

  14. Do we still have an Archbishop of Westminster. His silence on this issue is deafening.I appreciate that Ealing Abbey is a Benedictine order, but they are still ROMAN CATHOLICS the last time I checked. Please could we have some leadership. I suspect that any leadership would probably be welcomed by the Abbot and the community. Sometimes people who want to be good kind and forgiving have to be told where the line is drawn

    Mr. West you have done a good job and prevented a cover up. Please believe that everything will fall into place. Please press Westminster not Ealing for results.

  15. Mr West is being very clever with words again

    The words used in the Carlisle report were

    Convicted, banned (named in List 99)

    Mr West knows that Father Gregory was neither of these but was placed under restrictions for inappropriate behaviour which does not preclude him from living at the Abbey.

    I think Mr West is just determined continue this vendetta against Father Gregory without actually saying anything in the public domain that he can be held accountable for

  16. 05:34
    I think you have just been selectively quoting from paragraph 57 of the Carlile report. Carry on with that paragraph, and it goes on to state "so that they should not work with children, or otherwise should not have any access to children in the school."

    At the time Pearce committed his last offence, he had not been convicted. He had not been banned. He had not been placed on List 99.

    But it was known to the Abbot that he "should not have any access to children in the school", because inappropriate behaviour towards children was known about.

    The same applies to Chillman, as documented in the Carlile report itself.

    And Paragraph 58 of the report went on to say the following.

    "I am pleased to say that the Abbot has accepted that another dwelling has to be found for any member of the monastic community falling within the categories described, and that none is at the Abbey now."

    And yet Chillman remains. Do you have an explanation that you can share with us?

  17. @ 05:34

    The question of Chillman's continued residence at Ealing Abbey has now been raised with the Department for Education. We won't have too long to wait before we see whether they support your view of the situation or Mr West's.

    I feel that you ought to prepare yourself for a disappointment.

  18. Firstly how on earth is it down to the Department of Education where someone lives, unless it is in the school itself?

    Secondly I feel Mr West is still splitting hairs and I would reiterate my point which is that Father Gregory has not been convicted or banned for abusing children but has been found to have acted inappropriately at another school for which he has been put under restrictions.

    Inappropriate means not proper or suitable which most people will have been guilty of at some point in their lives, we are not perfect.

    Why doesn’t Mr West enlighten us as to what Father Gregory did inappropriately as I am sure he must know!

    I will try and find out in the meantime

    1. "Secondly I feel Mr West is still splitting hairs and I would reiterate my point which is that Father Gregory has not been convicted or banned for abusing children but has been found to have acted inappropriately at another school for which he has been put under restrictions.

      I get it - we are playing cluedo. Bully!

      My turn - was it a fixated monk, making lewd suggestions, in the kitchen, to a sweetie!

      Am I close? No!

      Or was it the groundsman, in the bike shed, with a stirrup pump?

      No I've got it - last try:

      The Devil in damart, with a suspender belt in the bursars office (shredding) over a bank holiday weekend whilst fielding chat line callers?

      I thought I would be good at this game. I've failed again 5.55 - please tell us.

  19. 05:55
    So the Abbot's broken promises don't matter?

    Also, you have no idea what Chillman did - I have had several reports of various of his activities. They were clearly enough to justify placing him on restricted ministry, and the Abbot had agreed that monks on restricted ministry could continue to live at the Abbey next to the school.

    As for the DfE, it registers the school and has the right to deregister it if it has reasonable cause. Deregistration would mean closure.

  20. ah, now we are getting to the nub of the matter. closure is what you want. well sorry to disillusion you but you just ******* in the wind

  21. What a ridiculous person you are 03:46.

    All of us can read West's answer, except it seems you. This is common among Abbeyvistas so I am presuming your are one?

    Come on now, fess up.

  22. 03:46 - Being able to mentally rewrite the words on the written page so 'creatively' perhaps explains why the administration of St Benedict's mistakenly believes the current child protection policy is credible.

  23. As to the d***h*** defending the school, do you not want to come forward and name clearly work high up, i am guessing next to de cintra (or even her 03:46)...

    I know it is not about Chillman, (lets be honest they are all perverted pricks) Old Priorian I know well had an incident with Fr Stan...must have been early 90's...he went to the boys house, and tried to touch him in his bedroom while his parents were downstairs making a cup of tea for the sick f*** least he had the decency to tell the sick dog to f off! shame he didnt tell his old man who would have killed him!

    So fair enough no sexual abuse took place, but you would say he acted inappropriately. Still doesn't add up to inappropriate behaviour in light of the 21st century, the guy had clear intentions to abuse...modern society shows that this behaviour is not inappropriate, it is totally unacceptable!!

    3:46 Comment 'Inappropriate means not proper or suitable which most people will have been guilty of at some point in their lives, we are not perfect.' many houses did he go round before my friends? Ahh...the old 'let it slide under the table' trick!

    Keep supporting the devils in the dog collar de cintra....just as guilty as them.

    You are rightthough...people are not perfect...but they strive to be...

    Also, if you have been accused of inappropriate behaviour to any degree, it should be reported to the police...just imagine if that had happened...St Benedict's wouldnt have a senior management team!

  24. De cintra has given up supporting the dog collars as she is about to get what she wants - total rule of the school without any pesky meddling from the monastery! But, yes, you're right she is just as guilty. It was her deparment that authorised and paid Pearce's last victim to work in the monastery kitchen.She has not only managed to slip under Carlile's radar screen but he has played right into her hands!

  25. I was at the school for a number of years when Gregory was there. He was an alcoholic bully but I never thought of him as a sexual abuser.

  26. Heathrow airport could slip under Carlile's radar - its why (his mucka) Tony Nelson recommended the safeguarding illiterate peer to the task.

  27. 12.21 - you are making a huge and mistaken assumption. Being unfit to work with children does not necessarily mean an individual is a sexual abuser.

  28. You are correct 03:59, a member of staff can be deemed unfit 'to work with children' by being diagnosed with a contagious disease.

    This site is very educational.

  29. observe how we are all resigned to the fact that the church and the school will find anyway possable to enable fellows like capt. pearce to carry on doing as he pleases. in effect its like putting a parking ticket on a diplomats appears that justise is being done when in fact it is not. the scales of justice on the old bailey can't move. they should but they dont. why are we not banging on brussels door, soper has developed the schools crisis to the point where it is at a diplomatic level. what is the british embassy doing in rome. making sure that they can still be invited to all the best places (as long as they dont pry) it certainly appears to be so. why arent questions being asked in the house as to his whereabouts? also who helped him run? and why?

  30. questions in the house? the man is innocent until proven guilty (by a court)not a bunch of old school boys with axes to grind. get a grip.

  31. 11:49
    Nobody is sending Chillman to prison. The issue is whether he poses a threat to the safety of children. And since Chillman has been placed on restricted ministry with no pubic ministry and contact with children, clearly the Abbot believes he does.

    The Abbot promised that such people would not be allowed to remain at the Abbey. He is breaking that promise.

  32. You are once again incorrect 11.49. You appear to read very little. It has been made clear on the site many times in the past that if it is decided, using channels and protocols that exist, that an individual may pose a risk to children (unfitted to work with children) then this aspect of their lives can cease. The person has a right to appeal a decision to ban which absolutely does not need to go through a court.

    As 12:00am above informs us a ban could be because of the persons health and absolutely nothing to do with child abuse. Going to court for the clap - only an Abbeyvista could make such a stupid assertion.

    Ignorance is bliss. Pip Pip 11.49!

  33. i note that your ignorance is bliss. rest easily my friend.

  34. Chillman was placed under restriction when the incidents at St Augustine's Priory finally came to light after having been covered up by Gumley Mason and Strahan.
    There is no smoke without fire!

  35. It is only in Catholic settings that a cleric gets placed on 'restriction.' Everywhere else he gets booted!

    Why on earth is anyone tolerating this crap?

    Any answers.

  36. ..............because opus dei can do pretty much anything they like. father stan should be able to fill in any details regarding that. i recall a few lessons where he spoke of nothing but opus dei and self flagellation.

  37. so who helped soper, and where is he?