THE Church of England has apologised for the abuse of children by its priests and other officers. In issuing “an unreserved apology”, the General Synod said the scandal of child abuse would remain “a deep source of grief and shame for years to come”.

Is that what it will be? I would say rather it’s a great lump of humbug. For an institution cannot meaningfully say sorry for the sins of its individual members. Responsibility always belongs with the individual will. I am sorry for my misdeeds and you must be left to be sorry for yours.

But the C of E has form when it comes to the spurious apology. In 2006 it apologised for the slave trade – forgetting that it was bishops, priests and people of the church who campaigned for ages against the slave trade.

Besides, how far back do we go with this business of the gratuitous apology? Should Italian ice cream sellers apologise for the fall of the Roman Empire? You would expect, of course, that such an ideologically prejudiced body as the General Synod would apologise only very selectively. Why don’t they apologise for their support for the lunatic policies of the CND? For trotting out the same failed socialist remedy for relief of the poor, rather than keep the commandment to act charitably?

Why don’t they go about in sackcloth and ashes for appointing the Stalinist “Red Dean” Hewlett Johnson to Canterbury.

(Johnson was awarded the Stalin International Peace Prize, which tells you all you need to know about the creep).

There’s more, and worse, from the Synod.

They are promising to set up a “commission on abuse”. Well now, some put their trust in chariots and some in horses and others in the Lord our God, but the C of E prefers to put its trust in bureaucracy – presumably on the dubious grounds that what an individual cannot achieve by himself can be readily accomplished if enough individuals like him get together and establish an everlasting talking shop.

The church’s bureaucracy pervades the atmosphere like poison gas. Clergy are obliged to report to the diocesan office every now and again to “prove their identity”. What do I do?

Turn up and announce, “Hi guys – this is me, myself, honest. I’m not someone else.”

It’s not as if I’m a mysterious stranger, having been an ordained priest for 43 years with service in town, country, schools, universities and, most recently, the City of London.

What is all this bureaucracy for – except to give the bureaucrats something to do? Bureaucracy and systems – here we go again on the wild goose chase of what TS Eliot called “men dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good”.

Anyone who wishes to stand within three miles of a child must undergo a disclosure and debarring service (DBS) check. This was formerly called a CRB check. But they changed it. Why? Because changing the notepaper is the only thing bureaucrats are fit for. But who checks the debarring service checkers? These checks are not worth the paper they’re written on.

For example: Ian Huntley of Soham infamy passed his CRB check. Were his checkers surprised that after their rigorous examination of his career he proceeded to murder two children?

No amount of Uriah Heepish hand-wringing or proliferation of bureaucratic dung heaps can take away from the truth which is that sins and crimes are the responsibility of the individual. It is the individual miscreant alone who should be called to account.