Updated Wednesday
The Scottish Episcopal Church has announced today that the disciplinary proceedings against the Bishop of Aberdeen & Orkney have been dropped. The Rt Revd Anne Dyer was suspended in August 2022 following complaints of bullying which she has always denied. This brings to an end the suspension of Bishop Dyer, who will resume duties in the Diocese in due course.
Update: The Church Times has a report here.
The full announcement is copied below.
Canon 54 process concludes after review by independent Procurator
October 8, 2024
During the Canon 54 process enacted following complaints made against the Rt Rev Anne Dyer, Bishop of Aberdeen and Orkney, the independent Procurator to the Scottish Episcopal Church has kept under continuous review his decision of May this year to take charges to the Clergy Disciplinary Tribunal.
Having maintained that review throughout discussions with involved parties over the past five months, the Procurator, Paul Reid KC, has now decided that it would no longer be in the public interest to pursue the charges, and the Clergy Discipline Tribunal has granted his application to dismiss the proceedings.
In his Note of Reasons explaining his decision not to lead evidence, Mr Reid says: “As with the initial decision to refer allegations to the Tribunal for trial, I have approached each allegation in two stages: (a) is there sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction in respect of the allegation; and (b) whether a prosecution, or the continuation of a prosecution, in respect of each charge is in the ‘public interest’.”
He continues: “I have approached ‘public interest’ in these circumstances by considering the wider Church community and general confidence in the Church.”
The Procurator remains of the view “that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction in respect of each allegation” but highlights: “Given the already difficult situation in the Diocese [of Aberdeen and Orkney], a public trial very materially risks, whatever its outcome, making an already difficult situation worse. That, taken with the concerns expressed by a number of complainers/witnesses about the prospect of giving evidence, causes very real concern about continuing with this prosecution.”
In conclusion, he says: “It is ultimately a matter for me to weigh those differing factors and to reach a view on whether it remains in the ‘public interest’ to continue with this prosecution. I am not satisfied that it is, having particular regard to the continuing effect upon the complainers, the length of time before the accusations would go to trial and the likely outcome of the proceedings (both for the Bishop and also the Diocese more generally).”
Mr Reid’s full Note of Reasons is available here: https://www.scotland.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/Note-of-Reasons-8-October-2024.pdf
All parties involved are being informed today of the Procurator’s decision.
The Canon 54 process has now come to an end, which also brings to an end the suspension of Bishop Dyer, who will resume duties in the Diocese in due course. At that point, Bishop Ian Paton will stand down as Acting Bishop of the Diocese.
Bishop Mark Strange, Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, said: “This has been a long and difficult process for everyone involved, and I recognise that the outcome will be welcomed by some but will disappoint others. The College of Bishops calls on all in the Diocese of Aberdeen & Orkney, and the wider Church, to work together to achieve reconciliation and healing as we look to the future.”
Ms Bridget Campbell, Convener of the Provincial Standing Committee, said: “To reach today’s position, the Church’s official complaints process has been followed as determined by the Code of Canons, and it has come to a conclusion. I would like to thank the independent Procurator, Paul Reid KC, and all those who been part of what has been a thorough and exhaustive process to investigate the original complaints. I echo the call by the College of Bishops for all parties to seek healing and reconciliation.”
Bishop Dyer was suspended in August 2022, after formal complaints alleging misconduct were lodged under the Church’s clergy disciplinary canon. The complaints were then considered by the Preliminary Proceedings Committee, which referred a number of the complaints to the Procurator to determine whether they should be pursued at a Clergy Discipline Tribunal.
So that’s all right then? People who made a complaint about bullying in a workplace environment do not want to give evidence in a legal process where they can be cross examined and their reputations trashed? What a surprise! The church closes ranks around its own – again.
A friend of mine has a relative who was part of the shenanigans in Aberdeen as she has been voluble about the lack of care for those affected by the Bishop’s manner and actions. She will be incensed by the news.
An episcopal friend of mine went through pure hell having been suspended for what would seem to have been a technicality and was then reinstated 18 months later.
The Church can also be wickedly cruel to its own and its best in the way its procedures work. Pastoral care of him was stunningly absent.
I note the concern about “public interest”, but surely this is a safeguarding issue. It does not seem that SEC is a safe place.
After this decision (following imposition of +Anne without consultation and dismissal of highly regarded Very Rev Iain Torrance’s report), the College must now be weeping. Perhaps +Anne might show humility?
I don’t think that Iain Torrance’s report of a couple of years ago was a good piece of work at all. As I said on TA at the time it came across to me as rather amateur. That is still my opinion.
TA readers may judge the Torrance report for themselves, see https://www.scotland.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/Torrance-Review-of-the-Diocese-of-Aberdeen-and-Orkney.pdf
I came across this woman before. The same issues appear to have dogged her ministry in various locations, even before she arrived in the NE. The unfortunate decision of the bishops not to appoint a safe pair of hands when the Diocese could not agree to appoint her or anyone else was a very bad mistake for which they must take full responsibility. But this looks worryingly like closing ranks (again). I’m not sure closing ranks around +Dyer is a smart move for the SEC and I hope the same bishops are now doing their proper duty and due penance… Read more »
““I have approached ‘public interest’ in these circumstances by considering the wider Church community and general confidence in the Church.”
” general confidence in the Church” is surely holed by this? And victims (we might need to say “alleged”) rubbished. For the general confidence of the church and public would a voluntary resignation be more helpful?
Bishop Dyer’s statement, quoted in the CT, shows why healing and reconciliation are unlikely. To quote another Caledonian, ‘they make a wilderness and call it peace’.
“We think that there is sufficient evidence that she would probably be found guilty. However, holding a trial would be embarrassing; therefore we have decided not to have a trial.”
Is that what is being saying? Or have I misunderstood?
If she had already resigned then I could understand it, but instead she is going back into post. This is very odd.
That is how I read it too. However, it has crossed my mind that the cost of a trial might be a factor in all this – I understand that this whole process has already been very costly for the not-very-wealthy SEC.
I think it’s more subtle than that, Paul. How I read what’s being said is: On the face of the evidence that’s been presented, the version of events it narrates would, if accepted by those judging as being the true one, provide sufficient reason to convict (that’s the reasonable prospect of conviction bit) However, because that version of events is contested by the one provided by the Bishop, for a genuinely realistic prospect of conviction, the evidence from both sides would have to be subject to cross-examination, which would be done live in Court (this is all to do with… Read more »
This whole situation is a mess, and it’s going to continue to wreak havoc in that diocese until Bishop Anne moves on to a different position and the Diocese of Aberdeen and Orkney is able to receive a bishop of its own choosing. I blame the Scottish House of Bishops.
Something of a head scratcher. If Bishop Anne has done many or all of the things of which she has been accused then how can it be in the public interest to ignore them?
And if she hasn’t, but has instead been the target of an unrelenting smear campaign from those who opposed her appointment, how can it be in the public interest to leave matters unresolved and not exonerate her fully?
I can’t see how anyone is served by this, unless there has been some sort of deal done and +Anne will shortly stand down.
It reminds me of the situation with Bishop Bennison in Philadelphia a few years back – a mess indeed. With the small size of the Diocese, I really can’t see how there can be any realistic expectation of cordial, or even professional, working relationships. So like you, Jo, I wonder if there is likely to be a face-saving Episcopal return to work and then a managed exit shortly thereafter.
Realist, if she has a scintilla of smartness she will realise the only honourable option is to retire/resign, preferably pronto.
For your second point it is worth reading the report by the Rev Dr Torrance (link above kindly provided by Simon Sarmiento) which the Bishops commissioned when some allegations were first raised.
The absence of concern about the two year timescale for this saga shocks me. Do people really expect nothing better from the church? As a lay outsider I find that it endorses the common belief that priest & bishops (regardless of denomination) inhabit a parallel universe in which the normal rules & conventions do not apply. Was the bishop a bully, or was she falsely accused? Who knows & seemingly nobody cares.
Knowing everyone involved with this, and knowing the Bishop herself very well, there is much to be said. +Anne was invited to be bishop by the college of bishops in a totally canonically correct way. She was then subjected to relentless abuse and misogynistic bullying from a small group of men, beginning from before she started. This has never stopped, they are determined to rid the diocese of a good woman, full of vision and integrity. The diocese has been missing a full-time bishop for two years, and everyone involved, including the other bishops, have become scared of backlash from… Read more »
It is not helpful to call people pursuing a legitimate complaint vexatious or evil. It is this type of hyperbole which has so damaged the diocese. The legal process must be allowed to continue. I think there are very few members of the church who will be able to welcome a leader who’s reputation will remain compromised until publicly cleared through independent legal process.
Fran This is obviously a strong view which you hold onto. However there are other views. If you have not already done so may I suggest you read the report of the eminent Very Rev Dr Iain Torrance for which Simon Sarmiento has provided a link above. In his investigation Professor Torrance did not find misogyny an issue, but was very specific about +Anne’s behaviour. His quotes are most illuminating.
I felt when I read the Torrance report at the time of publication that it told half a story and raised more questions than it answers. Both versions of events (the “bullying bishop” or the “misogynist malcontents” if you will forgive an alliterative over-simplification) seem to me to adequately account for the situation that has arisen, but I don’t see that we’re any closer to determining which is the truth (if either of them).
I understand from The Times that four of the other five Scottish Bishops, including the Primus, have issued a statement asking Bishop Anne to consider whether she is still the right person to lead the Diocese. Sadly it seems they did not reflect on this deeply enough when they received the report from Professor Torrance.
This development certainly leads me to wonder whether the Procurator’s decision left the college somewhat confounded. I’d assumed that either there had been a deal done or the Procurator had been leant on with a view (however misguided) that this could be quietly put to bed. For the bishops (excepting Ian Paton who presumably feels he must remain neutral having been directly involved) to be united in this response, and the clear implication that they’re not even in direct contact with +Anne, suggests that the Procurator’s decision has come as an unpleasant shock to them as they’d thought it was… Read more »
Another update in the CT today, Thursday 17 Oct, with four SEC bishops inviting +Anne to consider her position. Their College of Bishops meetings are going to be fun.
As +Anne keeps saying, this nasty episode is clearly driven by men who want to bully the SEC’s first female bishop and hate gay marriage.
+Anne has been clear – the charges were dropped, she’s been vindicated.
These disgusting, lying complainants need a reality check. We need their names and addresses so that we can put a stop to them. We need to fight for our bishop.
Please note the subsequent developments as recorded in a later TA posting.
I suggest you read the report which the Bishops commissioned and undertaken by the Very Rev Iain Torrance, link provided in an earlier post. He found no evidence of your two assertions. While the charges were dropped, if you read Paul Reid’s report you will learn that Bishop Anne has not been vindicated.
Well, there’s a tone that will help bring about reconciliation and harmony in the diocese. Well done, that person, well done.
I am absolutely appalled that this contributor shows no respect for the alleged victims in this case, prejudging them as “lying”. But I am more concerned that they want the “names and addresses so we can put a stop to them”!!!!! This threatening language is unhelpful and perhaps even illegal. Bishop Anne is in deep trouble if these are the type of bullies she has as supporters.
The problem was made much worse when the College of Bishops chose to ignore the clear recommendation of the Torrance Report – the independent report which they had asked for. That never made any sense and the Bishop’s return to her duties puts both members of the Church at risk, and the Church itself at risk of future legal action.
I am a workplace representative with the Faithworkers branch of the Unite. I have recently moved to England after 17 years in Scotland with the SEC. I am concerned that someone can initiate a grievance and not be able to have that grievance determined. The length of time that the process has taken is excessive – as is the cost. I do not know whether the procedure under canon 54 can be appealed to the secular courts for judicial review or whether the employment tribunal can be involved as at least one of the cases involves disability which is a… Read more »