DISQUIET over the best way wherein a disciplinary case against the Bishop of Aberdeen & Orkney, the Rt Revd Anne Dyer, was dropped last 12 months has been aired in an exchange of letters between concerned individuals and the Primus.
A letter from a Licensed Lay Minister at St Olaf’s, Kirkwall, in Orkney, Peter Ferguson-Smyth, was circulated to clergy within the Scottish Episcopal Church (SEC) last month. In it, he argued that the SEC’s safeguarding policy hadn’t been properly followed with regard to allegations of bullying made against Bishop Dyer.
The policy sets out a requirement that, when allegations are made, an “impartial determination of allegations of abuse against clergy and other church staff, and assessment of their suitability for future ministry” should happen.
The SEC’s policy is explicitly based on the Anglican Communion Safe Charter, which the Church adopted in 2016. Guidelines that accompany the Charter say that provinces must have a “formal process for an impartial person or group of individuals to analyze the allegations and determine their truth or otherwise”.
It is that this requirement that Mr Ferguson-Smyth suggests has not been satisfied within the handling of allegations against Bishop Dyer.
A disciplinary tribunal at which allegations of bullying against Bishop Dyer would have been heard was as a result of happen last summer, after a lengthy suspension while the claims were investigated, however the tribunal was delayed when she requested more time to arrange (News, 23 August).
The Procurator, Paul Reid KC, who’s formally independent of the SEC, subsequently decided to drop the case (News, 11 October 2024), clearing the best way for Bishop Dyer to return to work.
In his ruling, Mr Reid wrote: “I remain of the view that there may be sufficient evidence to supply a practical prospect of conviction in respect of every allegation.” However, he opted to not proceed with the case, citing the harm it’d cause to the alleged victims.
Mr Ferguson-Smyth said that this decision meant that the SEC had “not responded effectively to allegations of significant abuse, neither in practice nor by the measure of its own rules”.
He wrote: “It cannot conduct a correct risk assessment to find out whether Bishop Anne or her conduct pose a risk since it has not determined the reality or otherwise of what happened, nor can it offer alleged victims appropriate support.”
In response, the Primus of the SEC, the Most Revd Mark Strange, wrote to clergy and church secretaries on 8 May.
“The email from Mr Ferguson-Smyth makes allegations of a scarcity of due process over safeguarding matters. These allegations can have caused doubt and uncertainty in some places, and for that reason it’s crucial to handle suggestions of a scarcity of due process and to supply reassurance,” the Primus wrote.
Bishop Strange, who can also be the Bishop of Moray, Ross & Caithness, wrote that Mr Reid’s decision was an “impartial determination, no matter any individual’s personal view of the matter. All parties should respect the Procurator’s decision.”
After the publication of Mr Reid’s judgment, Bishop Strange and three other bishops within the SEC publicly called on Bishop Dyer to “consider whether she continues to be the fitting person to guide the diocese” — an intervention which she described as “unprofessional and un-Christian” (News, 18 October 2024).
On 10 May, Dr Stephen Goodyear and Richard Murray, who’re each members of the SEC in Aberdeen, wrote an extra letter in response to Bishop Strange wherein they reiterate the argument that Mr Reid’s decision didn’t amount to the required “impartial determination”.
“In fact, he indicated that he didn’t have powers to make such a determination and that such powers lay as an alternative with the Clergy Discipline Tribunal,” they wrote.
As a result, the SEC had “didn’t take care of allegations of significant abuse within the terms required by the Safeguarding Policy”.
The letter from Dr Goodyear and Mr Murray also suggested that Bishop Strange had “cynically ignored” their previous correspondence, and challenged his assertion that support had been offered to people affected by the method.
“Multiple alleged victims and complainers first learnt of the SEC’s decision to dismiss the allegations of abuse against Mrs Dyer through the press or from individuals who had read online coverage of the choice,” they wrote.
A spokesperson for the SEC said on Thursday: “Complaints were made and investigated under a longtime legal process, and through that process the Church’s independent procurator, an advocate, decided not to guide evidence at a Clergy Discipline Tribunal. His decision was accepted by the tribunal.
“As was stated within the letter issued last week, the procurator provided a note of reasons to clarify intimately why he decided not to guide any evidence on charges, all of which had been denied by the bishop. The consequence of that call, set out within the published note of reasons, led on to the lifting of the bishop’s suspension.
“This is a manifestation of due process and independent decision-making. The process ended at that time. The procurator’s decision was an impartial determination, no matter any individual’s personal view of the matter.
“Support was made available throughout and direct offers of support were also made. Those offers is not going to necessarily have been taken up. If any parties require support, it stays available and may be requested.”
