BishopAccountability.org
 
 

Newcastle Anglican Diocese Worse Than Adelaide or Tasmania for Abuse

By Ian Kirkwood
Newcastle Herald
November 18, 2016

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4301701/assistant-bishop-says-newcastle-worse-than-other-dioceses/

NEWCASTLE’S assistant Anglican Bishop Peter Stuart has told the Royal Commission that Newcastle had more of a problem with clerical child sexual abuse than either Adelaide or Tasmania, where he had also worked.

Concluding his evidence to the Royal Commission, Bishop Stuart said Tasmania had developed a “culture of awareness and an arena of safety” and he did not think such a set-up had been in place in Newcastle.

Resuming after the morning adjournment, Bishop Stuart was asked about the congregation at St Stephens, Adamstown, where the defrocked former dean of Newcastle, Graeme Lawrence, has been worshipping in the congregation of Reverend Chris Bird.

Bishop Stuart said he had concerns about Mr Lawrence worshipping there.

He said the best way to protect children in the church was to have a national framework for professional standards, administered by the national church, rather than having 23 child safety statutes, along with 23 sets of canon law as decided by the church’s 23 Australian synods.

Asked about retired bishop Brian Farran’s suggestion of a new outside body to handle disciplinary issues of this nature, Bishop Stuart agreed with the principle but disagreed with Mr Farran’s suggested model, saying instead that it would be best handled through the NSW Ombudsman.

Questioned by counsel for various other witnesses, Bishop Stuart defended the decisions he had taken, and the way he had carried them out.

He disputed assertions by Pauline David, counsel for former Wallsend parish cleric Roger Dyer, that he ignored Reverend Dyer’s concerns about his predecessor, Peter Rushton.

Ms David insisted there was much more “than a whiff” of concern about Rushton in 2009 but Bishop Stuart disagreed, saying Reverend Dyer had raised only “nebulous concerns about his predecessors”.

Questioned by Lachlan Gyles for Bishop Greg Thompson, he said he suffered the same sort of hostility from the Christ Church Cathedral crowd as Bishop Thompson had.

He said it was “entirely unpleasant” dealing with these people.

But he denied an assertion from counsel for lay figure and former diocesan solicitor Robert Caddies that his decision to sack the cathedral’s parish council was more vindictive than it was caring or Christian.

Mr Caddies’s counsel described his attitude as “your way or the highway”, saying he wanted those people to leave the church.

Bishop Stuart disputed this, saying he had wanted them to “stay and reflect”.

He said he had moved quickly to dismiss them from their positions in the church because of pressing time constraints. He did not invite them to raise their issues at that time but he said he had done so previously.

Lizzie McLaughlin, counsel for Bishop Thompson, asked Bishop Stuart if any of the five signatories to a now infamous letter of complaint to the Royal Commission had apologised.

He said two people he was aware of had apologised – Mr Caddies was not one of them.

He said one person had appealed against his decision and the diocesan council had upheld his verdict unanimously.

Asked about a statement by the diocesan business manager, John Cleary – which has not been admitted into evidence – describing Bishop Stuart as “pro-respondent” or “respondent driven”, he said it was “a completely unfair term”.

He said he found it “hurtful” if Mr Cleary thought he was siding with perpetrators.

 

 

 

 

 




.

 
 

Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.