Please do not return to PA">Rector to Bishop Bennison:
Please do not return to PA

The Rector of Christ Church, Philadelphia, the Rev. Timothy Safford, writes to ask newly restored Bishop Charles Bennison to resign:


To the Friends and Member of Christ Church:

This past week, the Court of Review for the Trial of a Bishop effectively restored Charles Bennison as Bishop of Pennsylvania. Their new ruling allows Bishop Bennison to return to his office, which he intends to do on August 16. I have written a letter urging him not to, which is below. …

The Rt. Rev. Charles Bennison, Bishop of Pennsylvania

240 S. 4th Street

Philadelphia, PA 19106

Dear Charles:

Now that the Court of Review for the Trial of a Bishop has overturned your sentence of deposition, and you may continue to be a Bishop in the Episcopal Church, you have the right to return as Bishop of Pennsylvania. But is it right to do so?

I urge you to give this question the deepest consideration with your best advisers before making your final decision on returning August 16.

Let me tell you my advice, so you know.

To be Bishop is to unify the Church, but your return would further divide our diocese. To be Bishop is to build up the Church, but your return would tear down the fragile foundations of trust and hope that have been built these past two years. My strong belief is that your return will do more harm than good, create more anger and less reconciliation, and hinder, not advance, the Church’s mission in our diocese. These realities may be unfair and unjust, but I believe them to be true.

Further, to be Bishop is to be a pastor, and for you to be a pastor, there must be enough trust and sense of security so that “the sheep may safely graze.”

As the opinion of the Court of Review said forcefully, accurately and rightly, you committed no acts of sexual abuse or exploitation of a minor. But that just doesn’t matter at this point. Then and now, the Church is guilty of sexual abuse and exploitation of the young and the vulnerable. Then and now, the Church, promises to be the guardian of a gated, protected sheepfold of pastoral safety for its members. But, the shepherds charged with protecting the fold have yet been able to keep sexual abusers out. Then and now, those abusers have not climbed into the sheepfold, like the robber and the thief, “some other way,” but have been let in by the very shepherds who promise that the sheep may safely graze. Consequently, the Church does not appear safe to those who might consider coming into our sheepfold, and it does not feel safe to those in the fold who have experienced the failure of the Church to protect our own.

It may not be right or fair, but you embody that failure. You were a shepherd then, and to those who have suffered abuse, or care about the safety of our Church, it will not matter that these crimes happened decades ago. If you return as our Bishop, many in your flock will not feel safe, and you will not be able to be our pastor. It doesn’t matter that so many others were part of the failure, or that others have viciously used the abuse the woman suffered so long ago to accomplish their own ecclesiastical ends. Truly, I believe the most pastoral act would be, as a sacrifice for the creation of pastoral safety, not to return as our Diocesan bishop. Now that your ministry is restored, serve the Church to rebuild the shattered trust and safety we need to serve the sheep entrusted to us.

You said after the ruling, “I think I have shared in Christ’s crucifixion.” First, a visceral comment: Trust me, the woman so abused and exploited in the Episcopal Church while a member of St. Mark’s, Upland has shared far more of the terror, shame, degradation, pain and humiliation of what Jesus experienced at Calvary. By His wounds, not by yours, will she be healed. We are obligated to her and the countless others who have suffered the reality of crucifixion at the hands, not of Pilate, but of our Church, to create a place of true safety within our sheepfold. Your return hinders, if not prevents, progress.

Second, Jesus willingly made the sacrifice of his life for the benefit of others. What Christ did for the world, we are called to do. To share in Christ’s crucifixion is to die to self and selfish needs so that Christ will be raised in us. I ask you to prayerfully consider making the sacrifice of not returning as Bishop of the Diocese of Pennsylvania for the benefit of many who want to believe that the Episcopal Church can be safe.

Your brother in Christ,

The Rev. Timothy B. Safford, Rector

Christ Church, Philadelphia

UPDATE: Story from Episcopal Life

Posted by
Category : The Lead
Tags :

Comment Policy
Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted. We also ask that you limit your comments to no more than four comments per story per day.

  1. “You said after the ruling, “I think I have shared in Christ’s crucifixion.”

    Unbelievable —unless he counts pounding in the nails as sharing. — just another example of his incredible lack of understanding of the horror he has inflicted on others.

  2. Elizabeth Kaeton

    This is a bold, intelligent, articulate, prayerful and respectful request from a good and faithful diocesan priest.

    Well done, Tim. I fear, however, that this will fall on deaf ears.

    Please know that you and everyone in the diocese of PA is being held in prayer.

  3. John B. Chilton

    1. Ditto Ann.

    2. Ditto Elizabeth.

    3. “or that others have viciously used the abuse the woman suffered so long ago to accomplish their own ecclesiastical ends.” If that’s the primary reason charges were brought, shame on us.

    4. It’s times like these I wish our brand of Christianity didn’t come with the baggage tenure for bishops. Is the downside risk worth the good reasons for? Bishops are already glorified administrators.

  4. Eliminate the statute of limitations for sexual abusers and their enablers. Whatever Bennison decides, prevent this from happening in the future!

  5. polysloguy

    Bennison’s ministry is over and he should recognize it. But, abusers and enablers never recognize the enormous damage they’ve done. Bennison did exactly what the RC bishops did – protect the abusers.


  6. Dean Farrar

    Go and do thou likewise.

    I have always appreciated it when others have told me to sacrifice.

  7. Peter Pearson

    We should not be so quick to judge anything in this situation as it is far more complex than it seems on the surface and that is not to condemn or to defend Bishop Bennison. Tim knows that and so do many of the folks in the Diocese of PA. Talk to people from this diocese and find out for yourselves what’s going on here.

  8. John Iliff

    TEC has to date avoided the withering media scrutiny visited upon RC archdioceses. Yet many of the same justifications for arbitrary Statues of Limitations exist here, as in the Roman communion.

    ‘Reasserter’ criticism of this sordid mess has been withering, and justly so. Episcopalians, here is a golden opportunity to do the right thing.

    As Josh says, get rid of enabling Statues of Limitations now, entirely, … and be more vigilant in protecting kids and vulnerable adults. Gen. Convention deputies, go for it!


    parent-member of SNAP

    parishioner, Dio. of Springfield, IL

  9. John Iliff


    that would be Statutes of Limitations, rather than ‘Statues of Limitations’.

  10. Michael Russell

    It is a shame this was dealt with through a technicality. Bp Bennison can hardly claim any vindication in the result. But it seems to me that one could argue the committee of Bishops read the Statute of Limitations too closely. Would it not have been reasonable to date it from when the complaints of abuse, long hidden, were filed? Is it not also the case that his offense was not only in not reporting it way back when, but in each subsequent day and year when he did not report it? Was there not conduct unbecoming in maintaining a coverup?

  11. Tom Gibson

    It is helpful to differentiate between imputed authority and earned authority. The imputed authority of Bishop Bennison was reinstated by the Court of Review. However, the authority he may have earned as bishop during his tenure has been irretrievably lost during this sad affair. Fr. Tim’s letter is right on and courageous in writing this letter.

    Tom Gibson

Comments are closed.