Skip to main content.
« Previous entry: Lambeth Conference launch videos | Main page | Next entry: C of E Olympic Tsar licenced »

January 23rd, 2008

Trumpington Vicar Tom Ambrose loses tribunal case

You might remember the story of Tom Ambrose, the Cambridge Vicar who has been appearing before a tribunal to see whether there has been pastoral breakdown in his parish (here are some Church Times reports from last year to remind you: 1, 2).

Today’s reports in the Times and Cambridge News are saying that Tom Ambrose is to be sacked – ‘‘Bully’ vicar Tom Ambrose to be sacked‘ was the headline in Ruth Gledhill’s first piece, though later on after she had heard from Tom on the phone (blog link worth reading) the story was softened to ‘Vicar branded a liar and a bully should be sacked, tribunal rules‘. The Cambridge News also has an article.

I have little inside information, but it really does appear from the outside as if justice has not been done. John Pettigrew, an ex-blogger whose opinion I trust who was at the Tribunal, and he says this in Ruth’s comments:

Yes, Tom has lost. Personally, I have little idea why. He’s not always a sensible man, but he is not the monster he’s being painted as. And it is certainly the case that there is no breakdown between “the parish” and the priest. There is a breakdown between certain members of the PCC and the priest, and quite a bit of collateral damage scattered around. At the Tribunal itself, I had the distinct impression that the prosecuting lawyer was simply trying to score points and to unsettle witnesses, rather than the proceedings being a tribunal seeking facts.

(Update) Also:

The view of most of the “ordinary” parishioners at Trumpington (i.e. those outside the circles of politics that bedevil the parish) seems to be that this has been a power play from the moment Tom arrived in the parish. Neither side is guilt-free, but I am perfectly clear in my own mind where the causes lie, and they’re not with Tom. To dismiss him would be a manifest injustice.

I recommend reading the whole post if you’re interested in more background.

This is the Trumpington church website. I suspect John has something to do with it as he is good with that sort of thing.

Those who pray might like to remember Tom and his wife Gill at this present time.

Update: Reports like this one from HR zone really irritate me:

  1. They’ve lost the quotes around the word ‘bully’ (as used by the Times) from the headline, thereby telling the reader that the vicar in question is guilty
  2. The other side of the story isn’t reported, and there is no link to enable the reader to hear the other side of the story.

9 Comments »



Share this on Facebook:

If you enjoyed this post you might also enjoy these (possibly) related articles:

If you liked this post why not send it to someone else by e-mail? Click here to do so.

This is a single post on the Cartoon Blog by Dave posted on Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008 at 11:16 pm. Click here to read all of the latest posts. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Other things technologically advanced people may like to do: trackback from another site, follow responses via the comments feed, bookmark on del.icio.us or digg.

9 Responses to “Trumpington Vicar Tom Ambrose loses tribunal case”


  1. Richard says:

    Unfortunately, I don’t think that justice could be done. The tribunal was about proving that there has been a pastoral breakdown – which there has been with some members of the PCC.

    The recommendation is about how to resolve that breakdown, and the only thing that the Church has the power to do is to – however unfair this may seem – remove Tom Ambrose, as they can’t get rid of the duly elected PCC members.

    Ultimately, the only people who could have done anything are the people on the electoral roll in Trumpington – read in particular in Ruth’s posting the comments from the PCC member who stopped going to meetings. The congregation is saying that the PCC is unrepresentative. It may be unrepresentative, but it is the duly elected church council.

    As somebody in Ruth’s comments said, pity the poor priest (if indeed any will take the job) who has to follow Tom Ambrose.

    January 24th, 2008 at 1:05 am
  2. Gareth says:

    That’s tribunals for you.

    Their brief is not to “find the truth.” It is to investigate complaints.

    And they are seldom, if ever, interested in justice.

    You are far more likely to ‘win’ a tribunal hearing by playing the system than by presenting overwhelming evidence.

    January 24th, 2008 at 6:26 am
  3. Richard (a different one) says:

    they can’t get rid of the duly elected PCC members

    Section 10(6) of the Incumbents (Vacation of Benefices) Measure 1977 as amended does allow the Bishop to disqualify parishioners from being Churchwardens, PCC members or officers, for up to five years, if the parishioners contributed over a substantial period to the pastoral breakdown.

    See here

    Richard

    January 24th, 2008 at 9:28 am
  4. Steve Hearn says:

    Unless you could have actually been there, it’s hard to understand where both sides of the argument are coming from. I often wonder when we bring new people into the church, what it is they are going to experience? Church all too often creates problems with groups of people. Faith is a passionate personal thing that many cannot let go and will defend to the death. Even in a small church you can see clashes going on in the background. I wonder what God thinks?

    January 24th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
  5. Phil says:

    I’d be suprised if this is the only PCC in the country getting upset that their vicar is trying to cause the church to grow. Scary.

    January 24th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
  6. Richard (the first one) says:

    Okay, I stand corrected over the PCC members.

    Will certainly be interesting to see the full report when that is released.

    As to Phil’s comment, it’s certainly not the only PCC where there are heated discussions trying to balance what the current Church members want against changes that would encourage growth. Thankfully most of them can actually be resolved without recourse to this kind of thing, as ultimately everybody loses when something like this happens.

    January 24th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
  7. Justin Lewis-Anthony says:

    And this is just weeks before General Synod considers the Ecclesiastical Offices (Terms of Service) Measure and Regulations, which include “procedures to assess the performance of office holders, including remedies for inadequate performance.” As this ties in with the already in force Clergy Discipline Measure, who would like to place a bet on when the first sacking under EOToS takes place?

    January 24th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
  8. Roy says:

    I was saddened to read about Tom & the PCC. I do not know the rights and wrongs of either side but it reminded me of an address by a former Bishop of Chester at an Archdeacon’s Visitation many years ago. He was speaking about the reluctance of some churches to move forward and referred, inter alia, to serving coffee after morning service to promote fellowship. His remark was that if a church doesn’t move forward it will die.
    I pray that this will not be the case in Trumpington.
    It would appear that some humility is needed.

    February 11th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
  9. Ian Howarth says:

    “At one point he was towering over me and shouting at me and I actually thought he was going to grab my shoulders and shake me or hit me.”

    If this is true, whatever good he has done, that is bullying behaviour, and needs addressing.

    April 11th, 2008 at 11:35 am