Joelle Casteix of Newport Beach, CA, the Southwest Regional Director of SNAP (Survivors' Network of those Abused by Priests) accused the Episcopal Diocese of California of a cover up in the Episcopal Church in California and wrote VOL.

In letters from two SNAP leaders sent to the California law enforcement, school officials and Episcopal Church leaders, they charged that Bennison, is a "potential threat to your community." They also included a copy of a 1993 letter from then Los Angeles Episcopal bishop Frederick Borsch that confirmed Bennison molested the teen in Upland. Click here for the full story. http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=4015

Bennison did not deny the charges or sexual acts, but argued that they were "consensual" (the girl was 14 years old) and now were subject to the (legal) statute of limitations. Undeterred, a television company KGO-TV later reported the story which you can read here. http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=4120

In his letter (see below) Bishop Swing says that for the past 25 years Bennison has lead an exemplary life, and does not believe that he is a sexual threat to anyone in the Diocese of California. Nonetheless both public and private pressure demanded the bishop act.

Swing wrote: "Therefore, I request privately and publicly that it is time for Father Bennison to bring an end to his tenure in Clayton. At this point, I do not know how he will respond to my inquiry. But I want his tenure at St. John's to end now."

"As sure as are the statistical predictions that he would forever be sexually obsessed, I am just as sure that there is a strong hint of the presence of the Risen Jesus Christ in the unfolding life of John Bennison," concluded Swing.

There is no word on whether Bennison will resign or not. His vestry continues to stand behind him.

VOL feels a deep sense of personal satisfaction that this priest's sexual predatory behavior has been brought to light, and we hope that real justice will now be done.

END

A Letter to the People of the Diocese of California From the Rt. Rev. William E. Swing

May 31, 2006

Many of you are wondering what is going on in the news coverage about the Rev. John Bennison, who is the Rector of St. John's Episcopal Church in Clayton. Since the issues raised are of such an important nature, I want to give you my perspective.

I. Clergy Sexual Misconduct

Historically the policies around clergy sexual misconduct have been, until this generation, noticeably lax. In the old days, complaints went to the bishop's office, and the bishop handled them. Many complaints never reached the bishop's office, and in some cases when the complaints surfaced, the bishop's decision was questionable. Some say there were cover-ups. Some say that mercy was shown for the clergy while there was indifference toward the plight of the laity.

In this generation most all procedures have changed. These changes were needed and have resulted in a far more healthy Church. In short, the process of addressing grievances has been democratized with the inclusion of laity, clergy, and experts. Now all of our clergy must take a course on sexual abuse prevention or they cannot serve here. Now the diocese has a Clergy Sexual Ethics Procedure Coordinator. Now the National Canons call for the involvement of the Standing Committee (four laity, four clergy) in all complaints. This is a far superior system and offers a more immediate challenge to a sexual predator among the clergy ranks.

In our own diocese we live close to our own people who are pursuing ordination, and after years of scrutiny and discernment we are pretty sure of the sexual health of our postulants and candidates.

The greatest danger to our diocese comes from clergy who enter our diocese from other dioceses. Yes, we now demand a background check that covers deviant sexual behavior, and this has radically slowed down the traffic of sexual problems. And yes, we now demand that clergy visiting our diocese for a while must also take the sexual abuse prevention course before they are granted a license. The result is that out of approximately four hundred clergy and fifty visiting clergy, the diocese has had less than five sexual complaints in the past ten years. The overall health is much improved. Yet there are a couple of difficult issues that we will be facing, issues that we inherited from other dioceses before open disclosure was demanded by Canon Law and by diocesan safeguards. The situation of the Rev. John Bennison is an example.

II. Protecting Parishioners

One of the first responsibilities of a bishop is to protect the men, women, and children of his/her diocese from harm: spiritual harm, psychological harm, physical harm. Since 1993 I have had to wrestle with myself to ascertain whether or not Father Bennison was a threat to any of the people in our diocese.

I have had to piece together the facts of what unfolded in Los Angeles in the mid-1970's, e.g., what Canon Law at that time applied, who told what to the Bishop of Los Angeles, how much of the entire story was presented, etc.

The bottom line: John Bennison was deposed from the priesthood. That would have been the end of the story. But Canon Law at that time required that only three years must pass with no "evil report, for error in religion or for viciousness of life." Then the deposed person's Sentence of Deposition could be remitted and terminated. Thus, Father Bennison's priesthood was restored by the Bishop of Los Angeles, and the Bishop of Los Angeles immediately transferred him to Bishop Myers, my predecessor, and to the Diocese of California.

Was that a cover-up? John's father was a bishop and a colleague of the Bishop of Los Angeles. John's brother was the rector of the parish where John started having sex with a teenager. Or did the Bishop of Los Angeles see a deep repentance and a restored life in John, and therefore he wanted to give this emerging priestliness an opportunity to express itself? That Bishop of Los Angeles died a long time ago, so we will never know his thinking.

Bottom line: no file from Los Angeles arrived in our diocese giving us the background and putting us on alert that perhaps some of our teenagers and young women were at risk in his presence. Several people in Los Angeles who knew the story did not contact us at that crucial time, 1980.

Since then, everything has changed in terms of safety features to protect our people from sexual exploiters. And, truth be told and honored, Father Bennison himself changed. He and his wife raised two wonderful daughters; he was chosen to be vicar, and later rector, by the vestry of St. John's, Clayton. He did an outstanding job as a priest, and there wasn't a hint of sexual impropriety. Thirteen years came and went.

Then in 1993 I was invited by a priest from another diocese, not Los Angeles, to fly to that diocese and begin a process of examining allegations about Father Bennison. Of course, I went and listened. What I learned were details about why he was in trouble in the Diocese of Los Angeles. Then I was invited to fly there again, this time with Father Bennison, to meet the former teenager whom he had sexually abused and her mother. Again I went. The dignity, deep pain, the lingering hurt, and the solid Christian faith of these two women were evident. They wanted closure and offered a list of actions which would make that possible. The list, on the whole, seemed reasonable and doable to me. Father Bennison was willing to respond to some but not all. Everyone left frustrated.

When the list called for me to dismiss him from St. John's and to depose him, that brought other frustrations. What had he done wrong at St. John's that would cause that vestry to seek his removal? As for deposing him, how could the Diocese of California depose someone who had carried out an exemplary priesthood? His offenses had happened in the Diocese of Los Angeles. He had been deposed there. He had been reinstated there. If Father Bennison is to be deposed again for sexual offenses that happened in the Diocese of Los Angeles in the 1970's, shouldn't the Diocese of Los Angeles bring charges and start the ecclesiastical proceedings?1

Also at the meeting was another woman, someone who has had close-up, strong disagreements with Father Bennison over many years. She presented a document that alleged to give a profile of his sexual activities in the 1970's. A deeply, deeply disturbing document. He immediately began to refute some of the points. If half of the allegations were true, this man had been sexually unhealthy and a danger. No wonder he had been deposed. But the veracity of the accusations had not been dealt with and tested at the time except that this woman mentioned that she had gotten in touch with the Bishop of Los Angeles in the 1970's and told him what was going on. So I figured that in 1993 I was looking at the basic information that the Bishop of Los Angeles looked at in the mid-1970's. Since that bishop is dead and there have been two bishops of Los Angeles since then and since the file in the Diocese of Los Angeles on this case is thin, it is difficult to get a completely accurate picture. What is clear is the pain of the former teenager who was victimized and whose grief is beyond dispute.

1 Canon IV.3.3(h): A Charge may be made: by the Ecclesiastical Authority [Bishop or Standing Committee] of the Diocese in which the Respondent is alleged to have committed the Offense, if different from the Diocese of canonical residence.

In a quarter of a century in the Diocese of California, Father Bennison has done nothing that I can see to warrant being deposed. But it is no longer up to the bishop. The process has been democratized, and now the path is open for any three clergy of the Diocese of California or any seven laity to bring a presentment (charge) against Father Bennison if they note any behavior in the Diocese of California which puts teenage girls and young women at risk. If such a presentment were to be made, the Standing Committee of the diocese would immediately be brought in to administer the proceedings. But there have been no presentments.

Bottom line: when I look at the health of his daughters, at the health of his parish, his unblemished record of conduct here, at the report from the psychotherapist, and at my personal observations of Father Bennison for twenty-five years, I do not believe that he is a sexual threat to anyone in the Diocese of California. If others disagree, there is an open process for them to move to have him deposed from the priesthood.

III. Being Rector of St. John's, Clayton

After the revelations of 1993-94, I met with the congregation of St. John's Clayton, and the sexual abuse with a teenager in his past in Los Angeles was made privy to the congregation. It was a brutal night and excruciating for his wife and family to sit through. When it was over, the vestry gave a vote of confidence for their rector. (They could have asked the Diocese of California to intervene and begin the process of Dissolution of the Pastoral Relation, but that vestry chose not to.)

An Episcopal bishop, by Canon Law, is not free to enter a parish and simply fire a rector. In the first place, the vestry hires the rector, and the vestry could vote to begin the process to have the diocese remove a rector. In this case, both in 1994 and now in 2006, the vestry of St. John's voted unanimously to keep their rector.

On Monday, May 29, 2006, I telephoned Father Bennison and asked him to resign. In terms of St. John's, Clayton and the Diocese of California, he committed no offence. But a group of mostly Roman Catholics who have been abused by priests and dismissed by bishops a group which offers support to survivors of clergy sexual abuse and justice for survivors is carrying out a national campaign focused on driving Father Bennison out of St. John's and out of the priesthood. Their well-funded tactics are working, and the exponential damage to the Episcopal Church nationwide and worldwide is taking a heavy toll. It is time to stop. Father Bennison has had an honorable career as a priest at St. John's for twenty-five years. Nothing is to be gained by feeding the media and giving new opportunities for intimidating coercion by his opponents. Therefore, I request privately and publicly that it is time for Father Bennison to bring an end to his tenure in Clayton. At this point, I do not know how he will respond to my inquiry. But I want his tenure at St. John's to end now.

I realize that his vestry is ready and willing to fight on. The congregation is willing and ready. But the cost to the Episcopal Church would multiply with each confrontation. To saddle our next bishop with this upon his arrival would be a heavy burden.

Furthermore, I think it is time to cross the barriers and form a coalition to get at the highest degree of truth possible. I call for a committee of people from the Diocese of California to meet with a committee from the Diocese of Los Angeles. Get all of the facts and accusations and timelines and canonical issues out on the table. Listen to people who want to be heard. Don't coerce anyone who wants to retain his/her privacy. If SNAP has information, if an aggrieved person has information, if a diocesan file has information, let's get it on the table and test it for credibility. When all has been weighed, then and only then should recommendations for action or non-action follow. Our work can make the Church of the future a more human and holy servant of the mission of God's love for the world manifest in the sacrificial embrace of Jesus Christ.

Jesus' resurrection encourages us to look for signs of the power of a radically remade life. In the Bible there are only a few glimpses of the resurrected life. Few, but each one critically important! Let me say without hesitation that I have glimpsed something of the power of Jesus' resurrection in the ministry of Father Bennison in the Diocese of California. Statistics emphatically predict that he would never change. But he has. I've witnessed it. I cannot lie and say that he has not participated in confession, repentance, counseling, penance, amendment of life. As sure as are the statistical predictions that he would forever be sexually obsessed, I am just as sure that there is a strong hint of the presence of the Risen Jesus Christ in the unfolding life of John Bennison.

I believe in his priesthood and have laid my name on the line for him. I have made the good name of the Diocese of California vulnerable because I trusted him. And . . . he has not disappointed. Not once in a quarter of a century.

I don't fault the reformers and our adversaries for being zealous in making the Church a safer and healthier place sexually. Their contribution is enormous. I don't doubt the legion of young people who have cynically, pathetically been sexually entrapped and permanently damaged by predatory priests. In my time I have hounded and deposed a good number of them. All of this is the big picture, the one that needs to change. All I am saying is that in the big, predictable picture, every once in a while there is more to the story. Once in a blue moon there is a story of resurrection. It doesn't trump everything else. But I, for one, feel obliged to honor any hint of Jesus' transformation when I see it. Resurrection rumors didn't change anything at the time of Jesus, but in the long run they will herald a new heaven and a new earth.

In conclusion, the Seventh Bishop has had to do battle with the shadowy clergy sexual predators that appear from time to time. The Eighth Bishop will have to do the same. Fortunately, there will be more and more built-in safeguards. And in the end the bishops and the reformers will not win eternal life except through the tender mercies of God. Our ultimate hope is in the mercy and power of resurrection in Jesus Christ, who transforms death into life.

The Rt. Rev. William E. Swing
Bishop of California

-----

SNAP RIPS BISHOP SWING'S STATEMENT ON BENNISON

SNAP Statement Regarding Episcopal Bishop Swing's Letter Demanding John Bennison's Resignation

We are troubled that a leader of the Episcopal Church denies his responsibility or obligations to protect the young, and points the finger at anyone but himself for allowing a predator to continue working with children.

He further attempts to blame Clergy Abuse Survivors for the media attention associated with the Reverend John Bennison and his rape of a young girl.

That sends the wrong message to silent victims and rubs the salt into the wounds of advocates attempting to correct a terrible injustice.

Swing's letter is long, but it leaves out important facts:

* Since at least 1993 Swing knew of Bennison's sexual deviancy. He did nothing.

* It doesn't talk about Swing's outreach to other victims. There has been none.

* It doesn't talk about the bishop's contact with the police. There has been none.

* It doesn't explain why an abuser could be moved from one diocese to another, without punishment addressed to the shuffling bishop.

* It doesn't meaningfully address a possible cover up. Bennison's father was a Bishop. His brother was the reverend in charge at the Los Angeles diocese where John Bennison raped at least one victim. What do they have to say?

Swing says SNAP is "well funded" and blames a volunteer group for this scandal. Swing, once again, is wrong. 10 people, holding hand-made signs, outed Bennison. Not one person associated with the demonstrations at St. John's receives any money from anyone in connection with advocating for sexual abuse survivors.

Swing, in his letter and actions, functions not as a Shepherd but as a sheep: he puts it on the laity to solve this problem, to fire this man. Or, he leaves it to Bennison himself, an admitted predator, to resign. In fact, he defends Bennison by claiming he has witnessed Bennision's transformation.

How can he know? How many men who act upon fantasies of threesomes with teenagers will admit transgressions to their bosses?

Swing, in his overt denial of the danger Bennison poses, himself is a terribly dangerous man. Kids are not safe with leaders like him.

We fear there are other predators and victims hidden among the Episcopalian congregations across this country.

SNAP Bay Area Coordinator Joey Piscitelli 925-262-3699
SNAP Bay Area Leader Dan McNevin 415-341-6417 http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&id=4230508