What a mess! This entire matter has been opaque to me from its beginning.
I attended the REC national meeting two summers ago in Charleston. At that meeting, there was a contentious discussion among canon lawyers about REC canon law and its proposed revision. I understand these matters have been resolved. Two observations from that experience: The REC discussion occurred in the open, at the national meeting, for all delegates to hear. And, process matters a great deal. The lawyers' discussions were aimed at getting REC canons right, BEFORE any difficult matter arises.
It seems to me, based on reading these letters, that the entire process will need to be re-done, in fairness to the accused.
I view this entire trial as illegitimate for a number of reasons.
- Bp. Stewart Ruch has not been treated with a presumption of innocence
- Bp. Stewart Ruch has not been given due process. Rules, procedures, documents, people, and processes have all been changed and altered along the way.
- Bp. Stewart Ruch has not been afforded a timely, speedy trial. We are years away from any of the events that are being considered.
- The ACNA has not been transparent, open, and forthcoming regarding all the pertinent details of the accusations against Bp. Stewart Ruch and the trial. They still have not released all the third-party investigations and documents as promised. The trial is being held in private.
- The ACNA has not prosecuted or disciplined those who have broken Jesus' and NT teachings on resolving church conflicts, and have used worldly practices and platforms to slander and gossip Bp. Stewart Ruch in public and on social media. Where is their prosecution, and when do those trials and/or church discipline begin? This is pure hypocrisy, which is a sin.
If I were in leadership at the ACNA, I would lead in public institutional repentance for the ungodly and worldly nature of the charges being brought and the trial. I would issue a directed verdict of "Not Guilty"! Immediately following, I would issue a public statement of apology to Bp. Stewart Ruch and his family, to the Diocese of the Upper Midwest, and humbly ask for their forgiveness.
I am guessing I will never be asked to serve in any ACNA leadership role (ha-ha)!
However, nothing less than what I have described is acceptable to me, and I will continue to perceive this mess as defaming the name of Christ and the cause of the Gospel. It is a dark spot on a tradition I have come to love and appreciate in my later years. Shame on us!
Mark, I do not know, but I will ask others in the diocese. Regardless of his personal preferences, I think the ACNA was unwise to make it 100% private.
Apparently they were formed due to ACNA’s lack of transparency in the past. Is there anything more demonic than child sexual abuse in the House of God! Yet ACNA appears timid and weak in the face of evil.
Because, like Julie Roys, they are apostates who weaponize abuse accusations against the orthodox. One can be appalled at that and at child sexual abuse.
But a letter was sent over a year ago from ACNA clergy demanding the suspension of Ruch until his level of culpability could be determined in this horrible crime against a child. Why did the Archbishop fail to follow Canon rules? Once again feeble weakness in the face of evil.
To be clear, there has never been any hint or accusation that Bp. Ruch participated in any kind of abuse against a child. The perpetrator of the abuse was reported immediately upon discovery, arrested, tried, and convicted. There have been no allegations of anything illegal against Bp. Ruch. He acted 100% according to the law.
All of this trial has to do with others - outside his diocese, and who do not know Bp. Ruch - making accusations because they do not like his strong theological positions on human identity, sexuality, marriage, divorce, and women's ordination to the priesthood.
ACNAtoo has been a copy of the worldly MeToo movement, devoid of due process, the presumption of innocence, and ignoring the rule of Christ in Matthew 18. They have disregarded the charge to not listen to charges against an "elder" except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. The three "elders" (bishops) who brought the charges to the ACNA, do not know Bp. Ruch. They may as well be total strangers. Hard to understand how they meet the scriptural requirements of a "witness."
Just because there are "victims" who claim abuse, does not automatically make them meet the biblical requirements for a "witness" against an elder/bishop. ACNAtoo has committed the worldly fallacy of asserting that we must believe all victims, just like the MeToo movement told us we had to believe all women. It's a lie from the pit of Hell.
There were three outside, independent investigations (by credible legal investigative firms) costing tons of $$ with no allegations of wrongdoing against Bp. Ruch. One of those investigations, the ACNA has never released. Why?
So, I'm sorry to disagree with you very strongly. If there is "feeble witness in the face of evil", it is committed by other leaders in the ACNA against Bp. Ruch. They need to be held accountable and vigorously pursued for church discipline in accordance with Matthew 18. Nothing less will bring glory to God and regain the ACNA's claimed witness to the Gospel.
What a mess! This entire matter has been opaque to me from its beginning.
I attended the REC national meeting two summers ago in Charleston. At that meeting, there was a contentious discussion among canon lawyers about REC canon law and its proposed revision. I understand these matters have been resolved. Two observations from that experience: The REC discussion occurred in the open, at the national meeting, for all delegates to hear. And, process matters a great deal. The lawyers' discussions were aimed at getting REC canons right, BEFORE any difficult matter arises.
It seems to me, based on reading these letters, that the entire process will need to be re-done, in fairness to the accused.
Thanks for summarizing this well and for sharing the information.
I view this entire trial as illegitimate for a number of reasons.
- Bp. Stewart Ruch has not been treated with a presumption of innocence
- Bp. Stewart Ruch has not been given due process. Rules, procedures, documents, people, and processes have all been changed and altered along the way.
- Bp. Stewart Ruch has not been afforded a timely, speedy trial. We are years away from any of the events that are being considered.
- The ACNA has not been transparent, open, and forthcoming regarding all the pertinent details of the accusations against Bp. Stewart Ruch and the trial. They still have not released all the third-party investigations and documents as promised. The trial is being held in private.
- The ACNA has not prosecuted or disciplined those who have broken Jesus' and NT teachings on resolving church conflicts, and have used worldly practices and platforms to slander and gossip Bp. Stewart Ruch in public and on social media. Where is their prosecution, and when do those trials and/or church discipline begin? This is pure hypocrisy, which is a sin.
If I were in leadership at the ACNA, I would lead in public institutional repentance for the ungodly and worldly nature of the charges being brought and the trial. I would issue a directed verdict of "Not Guilty"! Immediately following, I would issue a public statement of apology to Bp. Stewart Ruch and his family, to the Diocese of the Upper Midwest, and humbly ask for their forgiveness.
I am guessing I will never be asked to serve in any ACNA leadership role (ha-ha)!
However, nothing less than what I have described is acceptable to me, and I will continue to perceive this mess as defaming the name of Christ and the cause of the Gospel. It is a dark spot on a tradition I have come to love and appreciate in my later years. Shame on us!
Do you know if Bishop Ruch wanted this trial in public or not? (Honest question as I do not know.)
Mark, I do not know, but I will ask others in the diocese. Regardless of his personal preferences, I think the ACNA was unwise to make it 100% private.
Why is ACNAtoo not a legitimate source?
Apparently they were formed due to ACNA’s lack of transparency in the past. Is there anything more demonic than child sexual abuse in the House of God! Yet ACNA appears timid and weak in the face of evil.
Because, like Julie Roys, they are apostates who weaponize abuse accusations against the orthodox. One can be appalled at that and at child sexual abuse.
Understood on ACNAtoo situation.
But a letter was sent over a year ago from ACNA clergy demanding the suspension of Ruch until his level of culpability could be determined in this horrible crime against a child. Why did the Archbishop fail to follow Canon rules? Once again feeble weakness in the face of evil.
To be clear, there has never been any hint or accusation that Bp. Ruch participated in any kind of abuse against a child. The perpetrator of the abuse was reported immediately upon discovery, arrested, tried, and convicted. There have been no allegations of anything illegal against Bp. Ruch. He acted 100% according to the law.
All of this trial has to do with others - outside his diocese, and who do not know Bp. Ruch - making accusations because they do not like his strong theological positions on human identity, sexuality, marriage, divorce, and women's ordination to the priesthood.
ACNAtoo has been a copy of the worldly MeToo movement, devoid of due process, the presumption of innocence, and ignoring the rule of Christ in Matthew 18. They have disregarded the charge to not listen to charges against an "elder" except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. The three "elders" (bishops) who brought the charges to the ACNA, do not know Bp. Ruch. They may as well be total strangers. Hard to understand how they meet the scriptural requirements of a "witness."
Just because there are "victims" who claim abuse, does not automatically make them meet the biblical requirements for a "witness" against an elder/bishop. ACNAtoo has committed the worldly fallacy of asserting that we must believe all victims, just like the MeToo movement told us we had to believe all women. It's a lie from the pit of Hell.
There were three outside, independent investigations (by credible legal investigative firms) costing tons of $$ with no allegations of wrongdoing against Bp. Ruch. One of those investigations, the ACNA has never released. Why?
So, I'm sorry to disagree with you very strongly. If there is "feeble witness in the face of evil", it is committed by other leaders in the ACNA against Bp. Ruch. They need to be held accountable and vigorously pursued for church discipline in accordance with Matthew 18. Nothing less will bring glory to God and regain the ACNA's claimed witness to the Gospel.
I especially thought Todd Hunter being one of the three bishops was rich.