“Deborah” alleges that she and her children experienced domestic violence from her husband, a deacon in the ACNA’s International Diocese (iDio), as well as sexual harassment from another priest in the International Diocese. Deborah reports that her attempts to seek accountability were grossly mishandled by the International Diocese and the ACNA Province.

Reader content warning: this account contains descriptions of sexual harassment and domestic violence.

Who’s Who in the International Diocese

The parish clergy will be referred to by title and letter in alphabetical order of their appearance.

• Deacon A served as clergy from October 2014 until February 2018

• Rector B retired in May 2015

• Rector C served from July 2015 until February 2018

• Rector D served from March 2018 until August 2020

Diocesan and Provincial leaders:

• Archdeacon Phil Eberhart: International Diocese Archdeacon

• Bishop Bill Atwood: International Diocese Bishop, ACNA Dean for International Affairs, chair of the Episcopal Task Force and provides training for new bishops

• Chancellor Jeff Garrety: International Diocese Chancellor, ACNA Vice-Chancellor, member of the 2021-2022 Provincial Response Team addressing allegations of mishandling abuse disclosures in the Upper Midwest Diocese

• Bishop Alan Hawkins: ACNA Chief Operating Officer, 2021-2022 Provincial Response Team leader

My family began attending an Anglican church over 15 years ago, and I immediately felt at home in church. Coming from a Baptist church, I appreciated the structure, especially the limits on a pastor’s power. I knew how power could be misused within churches and felt safer with the guidelines of Anglican churches.

My children and I are also survivors of domestic violence, and this is the story of my journey within the International Diocese, disclosing domestic violence to church leaders, including the Bishop, and then seeking accountability for the abuse and the mishandled responses by leaders we experienced. My story is not unique; the missteps by the various leaders are tragically very common ones that survivors encounter when seeking help from their churches. Some of the missteps in responding to abuse outcries by church leaders can put survivors in dangerous situations. I include comments from an advocate to add perspective on my experience during domestic abuse and while seeking help.

While my husband, A, was still in the discernment process for holy orders in 2014, one of our children disclosed to a Sunday School teacher an incident in which A physically abused our child. The Sunday School teacher reported the disclosure to me as the director of children’s education, and I reported it to Rector B both verbally and in writing. There was no investigation, and the church did not report it to Child Protection until early 2017. Five months later, Bishop Atwood ordained A as a transitional deacon who would eventually become a priest. A continued to lead music, preach, and teach until he resigned from the church in 2018.

In early 2015, I disclosed now-Deacon A’s physical abuse toward me to Archdeacon Phil Eberhart; he offered a potential resource. I could not use the resource due to its distance from my home. When Bishop Atwood visited in July 2015, I also disclosed Deacon A’s abuse to him and the new Rector, C. They appeared concerned and said they were sorry to hear about it. I later discovered that Bishop Atwood talked with Deacon A about my abuse allegations during the same visit.

Rector C received a letter from Bishop Atwood in September 2015 stating that Deacon A’s transition to the priesthood would be on hold until Deacon A and I completed joint marriage counseling because of the abuse allegations. Deacon A could continue leading music, preaching, and teaching; I agreed to participate in marriage counseling with a licensed mental health professional.

In October 2015, Rector C told me I should worship somewhere else because I disagreed with his decision not to grant Deacon A time off to pursue joint marriage counseling. I began attending a different ACNA church and emailed Bishop Atwood about the change and Deacon A’s abuse toward me. I received no response.

Over the next year, I emailed Rector C and Bishop Atwood several times with updates about the continuing abuse my child and I experienced. Bishop Atwood briefly responded twice, saying he was praying for Deacon A and me. He did not mention any concern for my daughter’s or my well-being or inquire about our needs.

The parish had another rector change in February 2018 when Rector D came; Deacon A also resigned from his job at the parish. Immediately after his arrival, the new rector began texting me to encourage me to return to the parish. The texts were full of flattery and affirmations; they felt very inappropriate. Deacon A had moved out of our home and suggested that Rector D, a single man needing housing, could live with me and our minor daughter. I said no because it was highly inappropriate.

Over the next year or so, I attended the parish occasionally. Rector D continued to text me with flattering encouragement to return. I shared with him that Deacon A had physically abused me and my child, and he seemed concerned. In July 2019, the situation changed; Rector D’s messages became demanding.

I met with him, and he indicated that he wanted to live with me and my daughter now that Deacon A had moved out; he also asked very personal questions about my home, said domestic violence was understandable if the wife was not beautiful, and made me very uncomfortable with his gestures. Afterward, he sent me messages saying he wanted to meet with Deacon A and me to resolve our differences. He also called me “baby,” said, “I love you,” and indicated that I should return to my husband “in obedience to the Lord.” I said I wanted to meet with a licensed mental health professional to resolve whatever differences existed.

I followed up with Rector D in September 2019, and he became spiritually abusive and harassed me. I contacted a parish vestry member and Archdeacon Eberhart separately to share my experiences. I gave both the vestry member and Archdeacon Eberhart copies of the concerning messages and my memories of the meeting with Rector D. When I followed up with Archdeacon Eberhart in early November, he asked if I wanted to file formal charges and threatened such charges would be “nuclear” for me and the church.

A week later, a second victim of Rector D came forward to the vestry member, and by December, another victim disclosed very concerning behavior. The church internally investigated and took disciplinary action against Rector D in 2020. He subsequently reoffended. The church representatives met with Bishop Atwood and submitted their documentation and actions taken to his office, and the Bishop gave the church permission to remove Rector D.

In July 2021, the International Diocese sent an email to the diocese stating its commitment to safety and its child and youth safety policies. The email included five people in diocesan leadership who could receive reports regarding safety concerns. I had already disclosed abuse to three of the people on the list. I shared my story with a friend who was advocating for survivors.

In late September, we emailed a document with details of my experience to the Chancellor of the International Diocese, Jeff Garrety, who was also on the list of leaders who could receive reports. He responded, expressing concern and reassurance that he was taking my story seriously and was looking for someone who could hear it.

I received a text from Deacon A in early October saying that he had received notification that Bishop Atwood was going to investigate my abuse allegations. Chancellor Garrety had not told me there would be an investigation, yet he had sent my statement – with no redactions – to every individual I had named. I immediately took some precautions to ensure my family’s safety. Chancellor Garrety emailed a couple of weeks later to let us know that Deacon A and Rector D had been inhibited based on the details of my document; he did not include any details about the instructions given with the inhibition. Deacon A continued to text me, but I would find out later that this had been forbidden.

I asked Chancellor Garrety a couple of times for the contact information of the International Diocese Standing Committee. He did not respond to my request.

Another advocate contacted Alan Hawkins, ACNA COO, for assistance with my situation. Bishop Hawkins expressed concern for my safety because Deacon A was contacting me and potentially violating the inhibition instructions. I sent a signed document to Bishop Hawkins in November so the International Diocese could start an independent third-party investigation, as Bishop Hawkins had indicated they would. Deacon A continued to harass me.

The investigator reached out to me in January 2022. I discovered this person was a deacon in another ACNA diocese and not part of an investigative firm. I expressed concerns about engaging with the investigation because Deacon A was still harassing me, even though contact was prohibited. Although I had documented and communicated with leadership about the harassment, no changes had occurred. This month was when Bishop Atwood announced his retirement date of June 2024.

In March, I received a letter from the Standing Committee stating that the investigator requested I undergo a psych eval or submit a statement from my therapist regarding my ability to engage in the investigation. I submitted the statement; then, I requested to have a support person present during questioning.

In May, the investigator denied my request, and I agreed to proceed with the interview without the support person. I waited to hear when we could start… and waited and waited. During the fall, my representatives discovered that the investigation had concluded, and the diocese claimed I wasn’t willing to be interviewed. I had email communication refuting their claim.

Additionally, in May, Deacon A reached out to Bp. Atwood and another International Diocese leader and asked if he could attend a public event for our child. Deacon A proposed spending limited time with our child and our family. One of the leaders encouraged Deacon A to spend more time with our child and family. When Deacon A informed me that he had permission to attend, I expressed my desires and those of our child for not sitting together during the event and only a brief visit after the event. At the event, Deacon A followed family members to where I was sitting and sat near me. He remained with our family for an extended time after the event. I emailed Bp. Atwood, the diocesan leader, and the investigator to report what occurred. I received no response.

In November, a group of clergy and laypeople and I filed a presentment against Bishop Atwood with the Archbishop and his representative, alleging mishandling of my situation and demeaning statements about me. We received no response, so in February 2023, we filed copies of the presentment with the ACNA’s College of Bishops. No one from the CoB acknowledged receipt of this filing.

A representative from the canonically required Board of Inquiry (a body composed by the Archbishop of five clergy and five lay members in good standing to evaluate the contents of a presentment to determine if it warrants an ecclesiastical trial) contacted us in April. In response to our questions regarding their request for depositions, a BoI representative stated they were only evaluating our evidence and were not interviewing, investigating, or taking depositions. We submitted documentation to back up our claims in the presentment and offered contact information for witnesses. At the end of July, the Board of Inquiry indicated they had received evidence from both sides and decided there was not probable cause to hold an ecclesiastical trial of Bishop Atwood.

My representatives continued to ask for updates about the diocese’s disciplinary process regarding Rector D and Deacon A; they also asked for advance notice of a decision in Deacon A’s case. The diocese had no response. As far as we knew, they had been inhibited for over two years.

I received an email from Deacon A at the end of November that indicated Bishop Atwood had suspended A’s holy orders for life based on Deacon A’s admission of guilt to the investigator.

I am still waiting to receive an official notification of the decision. There has also been no word about the case against Rector D either.

For more information about domestic violence and the importance of educated support and advocacy, see Hidden in Plain Sight: Responding to Domestic Violence.