Episcopal Church leaders have asked for the resignation of a Pennsylvania bishop accused of covering up sexual abuse by his brother more than 30 years ago.
The House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church said in a resolution late Tuesday, issued after a meeting in Arizona, that it was asking the Rev. Charles Bennison Jr. to step down as Bishop of the Diocese of Pennsylvania.
"We have come to the conclusion that Bishop Bennison's capacity to exercise the ministry of pastoral oversight is irretrievably damaged," the statement said. "Therefore, we exhort Charles, our brother in Christ, in the strongest possible terms, to tender his immediate and unconditional resignation as the Bishop of the Diocese of Pennsylvania."
Spokeswoman Anne Rudig said the church had not gotten a response from Bennison, who released a statement to The Associated Press on Wednesday.
"Resigning my position as Bishop of Pennsylvania will not ease (the victim's) pain or remove the sting of the abusive relationship," he said in the statement. "Instead, I hope that the suffering I have endured during the past three years has strengthened me and will enable me to work for reconciliation within the Diocese." (My emphasis)
The suffering that Bishop Bennison has endured is as nothing compared to the suffering of the person whose abuse by the bishop's brother was covered up by the bishop. The president of the Standing Committee of the diocese, the Rev. Glenn Matis, expressed his wish that the bishop resign. How will Bennison's hanging on in the face of the request by his fellow bishops and members of the diocese for him to step down lead to reconcilation within the diocese?
Charles Bennison has said he was being railroaded by other church officials who were trying to cover up their own involvement in his brother's case, and that some had been trying to oust him due to differences in theology and the handling of church finances.
Oh, please, spare us the martyr, Bishop Bennison.
Oh, please! Indeed. Why doesn't he get it?
ReplyDelete"Poor me" doesn't play well here, does it?
ReplyDeleteI think it doesn't play well anywhere.
ReplyDeleteSounds more like the response coming from someone with a narcissistic disorder who cannot begin to relate to other people's pain and can only think of his/her own and cannot take responsibility for what s/he has done in the past but instead it is everyone else's fault.
ReplyDelete...it is everyone else's fault.
ReplyDeleteYes. Exactly.
Is there any way the diocese can do the equivalent of a general strike with respect to +Chuck? (I knew him when he was Chuck+). Could diocesan convention defund the bishop's office, for instance? I'm talking hardball here because he clearly needs more than a 2x4 upside the head.
ReplyDelete"someone with a narcissistic disorder"
ReplyDeleteYup, sounds about right.
In Montana, the previous bishop was found to have had an affair several years before it went public. The bishop didn't back down--old news, statute of limitations, etc. They had to pay him off and I believe pay off his mortgage to get him to step down. Bennison is probably holding out for the same thing.
ReplyDeleteI know there is precedent for paying off undesirable bishops, but I think it is a bad idea. I wish we would find some other way of getting rid of them. Meanwhile, can't we simply ignore them? Well, I guess not. There is the problem of certain sacramental and administrative actions.
ReplyDeleteI wish we would find some other way of getting rid of them.
ReplyDeleteOrmonde, I don't like the payoffs, either. HOD President Bonnie Anderson states the following in her letter of response to the witnesses at the trial of Bp. Bennison:
In the wake of this decision, it seems essential to address a deficiency in the structures of our Church, namely that there is no means of dissolving the relationship between a bishop and a diocese that find themselves in untenable
circumstances. I am also considering the calls coming from many Episcopalians to amend our canons to include clergy and laity on the Court of Review.
In preparation for General Convention, a review of the canons relevant to these concerns is in order. I am presently in consultation with members of my council of advice, deputies and others with particular interest and knowledge in these matters to determine the most expedient and efficient way to proceed in this review.
I agree. I hope the next GC addresses the deficiency.
They never, ever get it. That is why we need some kind of mechanism to get it on their behalf--relieve them of their duties without their consent.
ReplyDeletewv: deocide: A decision in keeping with God, perhaps.
"Deocide - a condition in keeping with God." Yes, perhaps it should be included in the lexicon.
ReplyDeleteStops us feeling to sanctimonious about Don Armstrong, doesn't it?
ReplyDeleteI note my related comment under Mimi's Clerihew post.
ReplyDeleteThank you for nothing, Paul (A.). Your naughty language caused me nearly faint.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the Standing Committee is exactly helpless in this situation. What if they just reduce the bishop's salary and eliminate any benefits? I wonder how long it'd take for him to type his letter of resignation saying that he desires to pursue other opportunities and spend more time with his family. Standing Committees have a lot of power. There are other ways they could make his life miserable, none of which I'd have any objection to.
ReplyDeleteLindy, I have no idea what the SC can do in a situation like this, but they should do whatever they can to push Bennison to resign, short of paying him off.
ReplyDeleteI question whether Pennsylvania's Diocesan Convention might declare Bp. Bennison "disabled" and then have the Standing Committee become the Ecclesiastical Authority. "Disability" does not appear to be defined in their diocesan canons, so I don't see why Convention can't determine this.
ReplyDeleteIf the term is somehow decided to be synonymous with "incapacity" as used in Canon III.12.8(p), then one would need two doctors' certificates and the consent of five neighboring bishops and send them to the Presiding Bishop. And they might even get that.
Paul (A.), you know a lot more about what a SC can or cannot do, so I defer to you.
ReplyDeleteI'm not talking about the Standing Committee, but rather Diocesan Convention.
ReplyDeleteMy mistake, Paul (A.) I stand corrected.
ReplyDelete