He ran his monastic order from 1960 to 1977, i.e. during the time of Seaman (till 1970) and Newsome. I can understand that Newsome will have had some sympathy with him (ecclesiastically), but Seaman was very different in this regard. So when you say 'under ... Seaman' CH allowed pupils ...., how much of this was Seaman, and how much the chaplain (Robson, I think)?robert totterdell wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 9:37 pmPeter Ball originally was a monk of his and his brothers own order, down in Sussex. He became Bishop of Lewis. He was not 'a favourite of the later Bishop of Chichester' although he had been with the previous. He ran a strange institution (with his brother (twin)) and various schools (public) used him to help children with certain boarding school difficulties such as 'homesickness'.
CH under headmasters Seaman and Newsome (and others) allowed pupils to spend time at his 'retreat' where the regime was harsh, no, very harsh. At that point, no one officially knew he was a Paedophile - that is other than those who sent pupils to him.
I imagine the 'previous' Bp of Chichester, of whom he was a favourite, was Roger Wilson, who himself was a favourite of the entire establishment, including the royal family. I gather Ball was also well connected.
Incidentally Ball's twin brother Michael was also a bishop, of Truro. Not himself accused of sexual offences, he was criticized for not investigating them in his diocese more forcefully. A rum pair, indeed.