Growing Calls for Transparency
Open Letters, Released Correspondence, and an Ecclesial Trial Update
Over a six-day period in May, ACNA clergy and parishioners wrote three separate open letters concerning the impending ecclesial court trial(s) of Bp. Stewart Ruch. Each letter raises concerns about the ACNA’s lack of transparency around the trial process and the unexplained decision of senior ACNA bishops not to inhibit Bp. Ruch from ministry pending the trial’s completion.
Authors of the lay-led presentment against Bp. Ruch (one of two presentments that provoked the upcoming trial or trials) echoed these calls when they illustrated the Province’s non-transparency by publishing documentation of their entire correspondence with the Trial Court and the ACNA Provincial office from June 21, 2023, to present. The final email from the ACNA communications team to the presentment authors, which is dated May 17, does contain a substantive update on the trial proceedings, although the Province has not yet made this update public.
Open letter #1: ADOSC clergy
On May 15, 89 clergy and lay leaders from the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina (ADOSC) sent an open letter to the ACNA’s Court for the Trial of a Bishop. The body of the letter reads:
We, the undersigned clergy and leaders of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina, write today with heavy hearts for the sexual abuse victims and their families who have endured the delays and dearth of communication provided by the ACNA provincial structure in the presentment against the Rt. Rev. Stewart Ruch. The fact that Bp. Ruch has not been temporarily inhibited and continues to function in his Diocese and as a member of the College of Bishops in good standing while under two presentments is an affront.
We therefore implore the court for the trial of a Bishop to meet promptly, as outlined by our canons, and the presentments against Bp. Ruch be adjudicated as expediently as possible. We further request that a new transparency about the status and timeline of the process be communicated to the victims and to the people of the ACNA prior to June.
We know full well that “justice delayed is justice denied.” For too long, our silence has signaled a passive complicity with this travesty. Our Gospel imperative is to be a voice for the voiceless, so we are compelled to speak up.
Open letter #2: ACNA clergy at large
Five days later, clergy from multiple dioceses published an open letter to fellow ACNA clergy. The letter, which currently has over 80 clergy signatories, makes the following requests of the ACNA’s bishops:
Regular updates to the clergy of the province and the survivors related to the progress of the trial in a spirit of transparency.
The creation of a timeline that allows us to know what to expect and when, alongside clarifications and explanations of any delays.
An update on the matter of the inhibition of Bishop Ruch and a clarification of the rationale of inhibitions more broadly.
“We are not liturgical independent congregations; we are a part of a communion of dioceses and provinces,” the authors write concerning their first request. “Therefore attending to the case in the Upper Midwest is part of our pastoral duties. We write in recognition that we ourselves have not done all that we could to support survivors. Although clergy cannot address every issue, the matter of abuse warrants the ongoing attention of us all.”
Per their second request, the clergy assert that ecclesial courts should not have a lower standard than secular courts, whose proceedings are often available to the public. “This lack of information,” they write, “makes it difficult for clergy to understand the matters at issue or to engage the process in ways that are helpful. Silence can instead fuel speculation and communicate a lack of concern to survivors.”
Concerning their final request, the authors point out that Bp. Stewart Ruch has not yet been inhibited from his role as Bishop during the pendency of the canonical trial process. Quoting from the ACNA’s Constitution and Canons (IV.9.1), they remind leadership that an inhibition is issued when it is believed that “it is in the best interests of the accuser(s), the Church, and/or the accused to do so…” They ask that the most senior bishops explain why they ruled that an inhibition was not in the best interests of any of those three entities.
The authors are still accepting signatures and will be submitting the letter to the College of Bishops on June 17.
Open letter #3: ACNA parishioners
On May 21, a group of current and former ACNA lay members joined the call for transparency in a similar open letter to fellow laity, writing:
ACNA Canon I.10.2 outlines the duties of the laity and reminds us that “the effective ministry of the Church is the responsibility of the laity no less than it is the responsibility of Bishops and other Clergy.” Paying attention to the case in the Upper Midwest and the provincial response is part of what it means to participate in the growth and health of the unified Body of Christ (Eph 4). Furthermore, the matter of abuse warrants the ongoing attention of us all, because “if one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it. Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it (1 Cor 12, emphasis added).” Given this, we believe that asking our leaders for transparency in these matters is in accord with our baptismal promises and duties as laity in the ACNA.
The lay authors’ requests are nearly identical to those of the clergy (words in bold differ from those in the second clergy open letter):
Regular updates to the clergy and laity of the province and the survivors related to the progress of the trial in a spirit of transparency.
The creation of a timeline that allows us to know what to expect and when, alongside clarifications and explanations of any delays.
An update on the matter of the inhibition of Bishop Ruch and a clarification of the rationale of inhibitions more broadly.
Clearly outlined and accessible procedures by which laypeople can register documented concerns and questions.
The authors are accepting signatures through June 14 and plan to present their letter alongside the clergy letter to ACNA bishops on June 17.
Supporting documentation: the lay-led presentment team
In response to skepticism regarding the open letters’ concerns, authors of the lay-led presentment against Bp. Ruch publicly released documentation of their correspondence with the Provincial office and Trial Court since filing the presentment nearly one year ago. The presentment team affirmed the three open letters and joined their signatories in publicly calling for more transparency concerning the trial.
The preface to their documentation begins:
On June 21, 2023, 43 laypeople and clergy (13 who notarized their signatures) submitted their Presentments against Bishop Stewart Ruch to the College of Bishops. On August 18, 2023, the ACNA’s Provincial Communications Director Canon Andrew Gross explained that the Court for the Trial of a Bishop (“Trial Court”) would determine the timing, schedule, location, and level of publicity of Bp. Ruch’s trial “in the weeks ahead.” To date—over nine months later—the Presentment Team has not received basic information about Bp. Ruch’s trial.
The presentment authors explain that they have two goals in sharing the correspondence:
To make our clergy and fellow laity aware of the little information in our possession, and our persistent efforts to communicate with the Province. We hope this transparency will be of value to them as we all continue to plead with the Province to be transparent and forthcoming with its people.
To document the slow or inadequate responses received from the Provincial Communications Team.
The final document in the correspondence is an email dated May 17, 2024, from Director of Communications Canon Andrew Gross and Deputy Communications Director Rachel Thebeau. It is the first notice of any motion or opposition filed in the trial process. The email explains that Bp. Ruch has recently filed a motion to disqualify the prosecutor chosen by the Province and has opposed the prosecutor’s motion to consolidate the two presentments against Bp. Ruch into one trial:
The Province released 16 filings in a September 7, 2023 public announcement that revealed a prolonged battle between Bp. Ruch’s legal team and the Province’s legal team over canonical procedures and the jurisdiction of the Trial Court. The Province published August 15 and November 6, 2023 announcements that the Board of Inquiry had determined that the lay-led and bishops’ presentments, respectively, constituted “reasonable grounds to bring the accused to trial.” To date, they have not released any further filings or other updates on the trial process.