An Anglican Church in North America bishop has been found not guilty by an ecclesiastical court of mishandling abuse cases in his diocese.
According an ACNA press release from Monday evening, Bishop Stewart Ruch III of the Anglican Diocese of the Upper Midwest, which is based in Wheaton, Illinois, was found not guilty on the charges of “Habitual neglect of episcopal duties,” “Conduct giving scandal, including abuse of ecclesiastical power,” “Violation of ordination vows” and “Disobedience to canons.”
“The Court unanimously found Bishop Ruch not guilty on all four charges, citing the prosecution’s failure to meet the canonical burden of proving the charges by clear and convincing evidence,” stated ACNA.
ACNA included a link to the 71-page final order, in which the ecclesiastical court acknowledged “its recognition of the profound suffering experienced by victims of abuse and the pressing need for institutional reform within the Diocese and the Province.”
“These truths stand in full view and must shape the Church’s future safeguarding efforts,” explained the final order. “But under the Canons of the ACNA, and based on the evidence presented, the Respondent has not been shown to have committed any canonical offense.”
The proceedings against Ruch stem from reports in 2021 of an “erosion of trust” within the Upper Midwest Diocese over claims that it was mishandling allegations of sexual misconduct.
One highly publicized example was ACNA lay leader Mark Rivera, who was found guilty of multiple charges of sexual assault, with one victim being his 9-year-old goddaughter.
Objections over how the diocese was handling the allegations led to the launch of ACNAtoo, a watchdog group centered on abuse survivors and their advocates within the denomination.
While his diocese was under investigation, Ruch took a 16-month leave of absence. In October 2022, he returned to his office, with Bishop Martyn Minns serving in a supervisory role at the regional body.
In August 2023, ACNA announced that Ruch was going to face a church trial on the charges of violating ordination vows, “conduct giving just cause for scandal or offense, including the abuse of ecclesiastical power” and for “disobedience, or willful contravention” of denominational bylaws.
The legal proceedings became a source of controversy when, in July, Alan Runyan resigned as provincial prosecutor, claiming that the process had been “tainted.”
In his letter to ACNA Archbishop Steve Wood, Runyan explained that he was resigning because of an incident during the fifth day of the proceedings in which a member of the court began a line of questioning based on evidence not presented at trial.
“The Court member’s statements and questions put the integrity of the investigative process at issue in these proceedings despite the Court’s prior ruling that those inquiries were improper,” wrote Runyan.
“At that point, all six of the other members of the Court had been exposed to an unwarranted suspicion of provincial investigative bias brought into the trial by a single Court member, contrary to the Court’s duty to determine the outcome based solely on the evidence in the trial record.”
Runyan wrote that he believed “the trial process had been irreparably tainted” and that a “trial process that bears within it the seed of impropriety, no matter the outcome, must change.”
Later that month, Deputy Prosecutor Rachel Thebeau wrote a multi-page letter to ACNA members where she alleged that “very important information is being withheld from you by the Court, the Archbishop, and the Archbishop’s staff.”
“The trial process was tainted because a member of the Court, enabled by the Archbishop’s staff, made a series of decisions that fatally undermined the Court’s integrity, culminating in his lengthy domination of the court proceedings,” Thebeau alleged.
According to Thebeau, the yet unnamed member of the court had been given access to some of her Dropbox folders by ACNA officials without her permission or knowledge.
“It was abundantly clear that the court member had just enough information to be dangerous. What he has is not a complete set of documents and files, and he does not have the context of the documentation in his possession,” Thebeau added. “Based on incomplete and misunderstood information, he made damaging insinuations and handed Bishop Ruch his favorite red herring which now enables him to obscure the facts of the case as part of his defense.”
In a statement posted to Anglican Ink at the time, the ACNA Archbishop’s Office said the “parties to the case (i.e. the prosecutor and the defendant) are entitled to raise any concerns directly with the court or the chancellor.”
“The Province has consistently emphasized that public statements by those involved in the trial, or by other church leaders, imperils the integrity of the process and reduces the chances of a just and acceptable verdict, which has already taken too long to see,” the office stated.
“It is not appropriate for the Province to litigate in public any complaints that the former prosecutor or his legal assistant, Ms. Thebeau, have with the Court or this process until it has reached a conclusion.”
In October, The Ecclesiastical Trial Court for the Trial of a Bishop announced that the trial had concluded, and that the court had adjourned for deliberation. A decision was to be released no later than Dec. 16.
