(RNS) — Bishop Stewart Ruch, an Anglican bishop accused of mishandling abuse allegations and failing to safeguard parishioners in his care, was found not guilty on all counts after a tumultuous trial that spanned more than four months, a church court announced Tuesday (Dec. 16).
The decision comes more than six years after a 9-year-old child in the Upper Midwest Diocese, which is led by Ruch, first came forward with sexual abuse allegations against a lay minister, who has since been convicted of felony sexual assault and felony child sexual assault. More than 10 clergy and other lay leaders in Ruch’s diocese have been accused of misconduct, a pattern that abuse advocates say resulted from Ruch’s leadership failures.
Ruch’s trial came amid a broader crisis over sexual misconduct charges in the denomination. The denomination’s leader, Archbishop Steve Wood, was temporarily suspended from ministry in November in the wake of allegations of sexual harassment, bullying and plagiarism against him. On Friday, the denomination announced Wood will face his own church trial.
Ruch was the second bishop tried in the Anglican Church in North America, which was formed in 2009 by congregations that withdrew from the Anglican Canadian and the Episcopal Church over various disagreements, primarily acceptance of women priests, LGBTQ+ affirmation and a new version of the Book of Common Prayer, a key unifying text of the Anglican Communion.
In two different sets of charges, Ruch had been accused of mishandling misconduct allegations in his diocese or knowingly welcoming individuals with histories of predatory behavior into diocesan churches without alerting church members.
The seven-member court, which included bishops, priests and lay members, set out to address four charges: that Ruch habitually neglected the duties of the bishop’s office; that he engaged in conduct “giving just cause for scandal or offense,” including abuse of church power; that he violated his ordination vows; and that he disobeyed or willingly violated church bylaws.
The court members determined that none of the evidence presented by the provincial prosecutor met the “clear and convincing evidence” standard and that Ruch did not violate church bylaws.
“Across the entire timeline, from 2019 through 2023, no evidence demonstrated that Bishop Ruch willfully contravened canonical authority or habitually neglected episcopal responsibilities,” the order says. “The evidence further showed that many of the failures identified in this narrative arose from deficiencies in provincial systems, ambiguous safeguarding expectations, the hybrid and decentralized Greenhouse structure, and the Province’s own investigatory practices. These are institutional, not personal, failings.”
The court’s final order characterized the two presentments — the church term for lists of charges — brought against Ruch as “entirely unsupported by evidence,” attributing the accusations against him as based largely on hearsay.
“Rumor, online advocacy, and social media narratives profoundly shaped perceptions of events, expectations of episcopal wrongdoing, and pressure on the Province to act. Yet none of these influences produced evidence or were grounded in firsthand knowledge,” the court members wrote.
The court did not deny that Ruch’s trial exposed flaws in the denomination’s protocols about abuse. “A verdict of not guilty under our Canons does not erase the harm endured, nor does it excuse systemic deficiencies, failures of perception, or areas in which the Church must grow,” the court members wrote. “The evidence presented revealed circumstances in which mistakes occurred, in which systems proved inadequate, and in which assumptions and miscommunications caused additional pain.”
Ahead of the trial’s start, an author of one of the presentments voiced concerns about the court proceeding, telling Religion News Service that several abuse survivors were not contacted to be witnesses.
ACNAtoo, a group that began advocating for abuse survivors within the ACNA in 2021, also noted that many abuse survivors were not invited to testify. “Our focus has always been on the survivors; we hope that if people have learned anything over the past 4 years, they’ve learned to prioritize survivors,” the group said in a statement to RNS. “This verdict confirms survivors’ fears that the ACNA will give bishops a free pass. It tells countless survivors across all 28 dioceses that the ACNA is not a safe place for them.”
The Rev. William Barto, a canon lawyer who is a priest in the Reformed Episcopal Church, a subjurisdiction of ACNA, said the decision was “sorely lacking” from a legal standpoint. He said it “reads more like a journal of the trial process” rather than a considered judicial decision, noting that half the document is focused on critiquing ACNA’s response to the allegations.
Barto told RNS in an email that the document and the process that led to it “demonstrates unequivocally that the ACNA can no longer leave ecclesial disciplinary matters on the back shelf.” He said the denomination must determine what role tribunals should play in the disciplinary process: “Are they judges or juries? investigations or trials?” he asked. He called for court members to receive further training in canon law.
ACNA is currently considering a proposed overhaul of its clergy misconduct and abuse protocols. The rewrite aims to clarify the process, making it easier to submit complaints against bishops while also introducing “off-ramps” so that not every complaint becomes an investigation. After several cycles of public feedback, the proposed changes are intended to be voted on next year. If adopted, the revisions would go into effect in January 2027.
In 2022, a third-party report found that Ruch was slow to act on allegations against the lay minister who was eventually convicted of felony child sexual assault, Mark Rivera, and that Ruch allowed another volunteer to have contact with teenagers after he had lost his teaching job for inappropriate behavior with students. The church court in Ruch’s trial said the third-party report did not convince them that Rich was guilty of canonical wrongdoing.
That same year, Ruch attempted to block an investigation into allegations against him, but after two presentments were brought against him his case went to trial in July 2025. When the long-awaited trial began, it was rocked by its own slew of controversies. On July 18, five days into the trial, church prosecutor C. Alan Runyan resigned, saying a member of the court had “irreparably tainted” the proceedings by engaging in a line of questioning based on evidence the court had previously decided was inadmissible.
Days later, Runyan’s assistant counsel, Rachel Thebeau, also resigned. She echoed Runyan’s concerns and accused members of the archbishop’s staff of giving the court member access to the inadmissible evidence. The court itself issued a rare public statement contradicting Thebeau and Runyan, saying all questions posed by court members were “appropriate.”
On July 22, the Rev. Job Serebrov was appointed to represent the denomination as prosecutor, only to resign on July 31 after advocates for abuse survivors in the denomination raised concerns about Serebrov’s potential ties to the Greenhouse Movement, a church-planting program that Ruch at one time oversaw. At least seven cases of alleged abuse or misconduct that reportedly took place under Ruch’s purview involved Greenhouse Movement leaders.
After a pause, the trial concluded in mid-October, the same month that allegations against Wood came to light.
On Tuesday, the denomination announced that another bishop, Derek Jones, will face a church trial on charges including disobeying church bylaws and promoting schism. Jones oversaw a jurisdiction that endorsed ACNA’s chaplains and announced his departure from the denomination in September after the archbishop moved to investigate misconduct allegations against him.
A spokesperson for the denomination confirmed that there is a planned audit of the Ruch trial proceedings.