{"id":147714,"date":"2026-10-02T14:58:00","date_gmt":"2026-10-02T18:58:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=147714"},"modified":"2026-10-02T18:02:03","modified_gmt":"2026-10-02T22:02:03","slug":"a-major-tlc-article-on-the-recent-conluded-acna-college-of-bishops-meeting","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=147714","title":{"rendered":"A major TLC article on the recent conluded ACNA College of Bishops meeting"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The communiqu\u00e9 also announced the failure of negotiations between the church\u2019s Court for the Trial of a Bishop, Edgar\u2019s diocese, and the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic<\/a>. The two dioceses were attempting to conduct a panel inquiry into the court\u2019s troubled<\/a> private proceedings during the trial of the Rt. Rev. Stewart Ruch, who was acquitted<\/a> of episcopal negligence last year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cDespite good-faith efforts on all sides, the parties were unable to agree on protocols for the panel\u2019s work that would both address the questions raised by the two dioceses and satisfy the Court\u2019s interest in protecting its independence. This effort has therefore concluded,\u201d the communiqu\u00e9 said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On October 1, the standing committee of Edgar\u2019s diocese called<\/a> the communiqu\u00e9\u2019s explanation \u201cinsufficient\u201d and published documents detailing correspondence between the panel, the court, and the denomination\u2019s Executive Committee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to those documents, negotiations broke down between the court and the six-lawyer panel\u2014including chancellors from the dioceses of the Living Word, Canada, South Carolina, the Gulf Atlantic, and the Mid-Atlantic, and the Rev. Canon Andrew Rowell, chair of the province\u2019s governance committee\u2014when the court declined to provide access to the record of the Ruch trial after failing<\/a> to gain the consent of Bishop Ruch and both sides\u2019 counsel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe are ready to complete the task requested of us, but we are unable to do so without access to the Record of the Trial Court in the Ruch matter. We express deep concern about the practice of closing trials to the public without clearly articulated reasons,\u201d the panel wrote in an August 21 letter<\/a> to the Executive Committee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

South Carolina and the Mid-Atlantic had been prepared to challenge the court\u2019s view of its independence earlier this year by bringing resolutions<\/a> to the Provincial Council\u2019s June meeting that aimed to compel the public release of the trial\u2019s transcripts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Edgar withdrew<\/a> the resolutions before they came to the floor in favor of attempting the negotiated inquiry, but noted the diocese might reintroduce them to the Council in the event of failure. The Council\u2019s next meeting is scheduled for June of 2027, though special meetings may be called by the archbishop, a majority of the Executive Committee, or by any fifteen Council delegates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read it all<\/a>.<\/p>

ICYMI on the ACNA Ruch trial review: the chancellor panel, which was drawn from a variety of dioceses, was denied access to the transcripts and trial record and could not move forward without that access. https:\/\/t.co\/JU5UtpAaGU<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/GjsTslmtPm<\/a><\/p>— Arlie Coles (@ArlieColes) October 2, 2026<\/a><\/blockquote>