Willi Stewart trial correspondence between Dialogue Ireland and Archdeacon David Pierrepoint who reported on the results of the trial to Archbishop Neill.
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:27:02 +0000
To: David Pierpoint
From: Dialogue Ireland <dialogueireland@esatclear.ie>
Subject: Willi Stewart
Attachments: C:\Mike Desktop\Dialogue Ireland Trust\Introducing Dialogue Ireland Trust.doc;C:\Mike Desktop\Evangelical\CORE\CORE.doc;C:\Mike Desktop\Evangelical\CORE\Gordon Linney.doc; C:\Mike Desktop\Evangelical\CORE\core CORRESPONDENCEl.doc; C:\Mike Desktop\Evangelical\CORE\Statement on Willi Stewart.doc; C:\Mike Desktop\Evangelical\CORE\Letter to AB Neill Final version.doc;
Dear David,
It was good to meet you yesterday and I am grateful for the manner in which you responded to xxxxxxxx and myself.
I plan to have a full conversation with you on Tuesday in regard to this issue but before that want to brief you on my understanding of the situation.
I plan to write up a full report of the Court proceedings with a view to seeing if it should be published as a warning to people concerning WS’s behaviour. First of all I will consult widely before doing this, but I want to have a record in case there are questions raised in the future as to what happened.
As someone who was involved with Core from its inception in August 1993 till my family left in 1998, I have detailed insider knowledge of its early years.- emails attached with this info. Also I have formed the opinion that the issues connected to Core are not only those of sexual assault, but of a cultist nature. See Intro to DI above. Similar to what happened in Sheffield with the 9 O’ Clock Service. As the Field worker with DI I feel that no account of this has yet taken into account. I know you might disagree with this analysis, but this is my firm belief.
As I told the Archbishop when he cut off communication with me in March of last year, I would see it as my responsibility to retain a watching brief in regard to this issue.
I am also very concerned that Gordon Linney influenced the course of justice yesterday by implying that this was a once off act of madness, when he knew in detail from me that there was at least another case- see attached correspondence. The judge very much framed his sentence through this lens. This is very serious issue when dealing with such a serious criminal issue.
Now as you also noticed the sentence was pretty tame, and though the xxxxxx family were only concerned with WS admitting he was guilty as charged and did not want him to receive a custodial sentence, the effect of not deferring the case due to the problems connected to dates and renunciation of the Victim impact statement all led to dilution of the true horror of what had happened. The judge interpreted the fact that xxxxxx had survived and was doing his finals as evidence that he was basically ok. His sentencing policy was unduly influenced by the witnesses W.S. brought forward, e.g. Gordon Linney and Andrea Wigglesworth who was involved in counselling him for an earlier incident. The distinct impression was given that he had a terrible once off lapse, nothing could be further from the truth and that she was only dealing with this incident.
You will see that I went to see Archbishop Empey about Core, I think in 1999, but there is no record of this. I was getting reports of control; abuse of power for years long before this issue of abuse* arose.
* In Ireland there is tendency to use the term abuse in reference to minors only. It can happen to vulnerable youth, people in youth groups and it can become elder abuse!
DI also changed its approach of being under the churches, and became an independent Trust supported by the churches- a move supported by Archbishop Neill.
I actually became aware of the most recent case around a year ago when a member of the Church I attend xxxxxxx xxxxx made me aware of it.
I was contacted by the xxxxxx ‘ and suggested they go and see the AB, and saw them myself about a week later. They felt they were being viewed as the problem around Core, and all the talk was about poor Willi.
It would be true to say that xxxxxx took sometime to come to terms with this issue and his mother took the early lead and confronted WS. Then xxxxxx took charge and he himself decided he was morally bound to report W.S. to the Gardai. He is no longer a victim but a survivor. I only heard like the family late on Wednesday night last week that the case was on Friday. I was asked to support xxxxxx as xxxxxx was doing his final exams and to be an independent witness.
Last March I was trying to bring to the AB’s attention that this was not just a solitary lapse, but a deep-seated problem and that there were other victims, when he told me to not contact him. You will see the correspondence attached. This was at the suggestion of Gordon Linney who I phoned. I would hope you might be able to facilitate the restoration of relationships with the AB. I have no desire to involve myself in the internal affairs of the C of I, but I must be independent in my ministry. I am also out of fellowship with Bishop Harold Miller – you will see from the correspondence.
I am also concerned that the leadership in Core has not taken responsibility for covering up the other cases of affairs involving WS.
These would be my recommendations following the guilty verdict yesterday:
1. I would recommend xxxxxx attend The Wellspring Centre in Ohio which would give him extensive support. This would not so much be for the sexual abuse issue, but for the surrounding issues around the abuse of Christianity by WS. He would really benefit from this I believe.
2. Arrange for the xxxxxx family to speak to the whole Core community, allowing them tell their story.
3. Ask the Trustees of Core to submit to a full audit of recent events
4. Prior to the installation of a new minister the establishment of a select vestry to make sure power is properly dispersed in this Trust Church.
5. There is a need for independent counselling to be given to the members of Core. I believe that instead of opening themselves to such a response the approach in Core is all aboard and full steam ahead- batten down the hatches.
These are only ideas to be discussed and I am open to meeting with you and the xxxxxx if that is of any help. I am purposely copying the xxxxxx to keep them abreast of my thinking, also xxxxx a Church of Ireland member of my executive committee. You are at liberty to share this with the AB.
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:57:48 +0000
To: David Pierpoint
From: Dialogue Ireland <dialogueireland@esatclear.ie>
Subject: Our meeting
Cc: xxxxxxx, xxxxxxx
Dear David,
Thanks for lunch and it was again good to seek clarification on the issues, the give and take of communication is important in reaching a common understanding or agreeing to differ.
Due to the fact that I gave blood while in town I have not completed my writing up of the court case. As I said, I will do so and send it on for you and xxxxxxx to comment on, so that we have as accurate a record as possible.
I talked to xxxxxxx this evening and got lot clearer perspective on his views including the fact that he will look for counselling help in this jurisdiction. By the way you were way out in your computation of the fees at Wellspring. They are $2500 a week and usually the length you stay there is two weeks, which works out at €3788 for two weeks at the current dollar price. Do not reject this facility out of hand as I believe it is extremely useful in regard to helping people recover from cultist experiences.
I am glad you mentioned that your reading of my email left you feeling that I was calling core a cult. I hope my clarifications were helpful. I am going to quote a section of our mission statement to give you a sense of how we view things:
Dialogue Ireland is not an “anti-cult” organisation, nor do we attach a “cult” label to any movement or group. We acknowledge that “cultist” tendencies, i.e., psychological and spiritual abuses, can creep into any organisation, whether religious or non-religious, including movements associated with our own churches. We do receive calls from people who perceive themselves or a family member as being victims of “cultist” activity on the part of a wide variety of sources. These people turn to Dialogue Ireland for guidance and support. Such situations can be unbelievably painful for the people involved. Some have compared it to the death of a loved one without the funeral. Fortunately, the experiences of most people joining new movements are much less dramatic than this. As its name implies, the starting point of Dialogue Ireland’s mission is to seek relationships of dialogue with New Religious Movements. This will necessitate the study both of the movements themselves and where relevant the world religions that may have given rise to them. We recognise that the vast majority of these movements were set up with good intentions and acknowledge that in many instances the Christian Church has much to learn from them. Also it is clear that the “seekers” who join these groups are genuine in their spiritual search. However, in the case of a small number of movements dialogue has proven difficult to achieve. On occasion we have had to engage in dialogue-in-confrontation, or public debate with representatives of a group. Our reason for taking such a step arises from the conviction that the public has a right to know how people can be affected by the activities of a particular organisation. When we do reluctantly find it necessary to go public with a group, it is always the aim of Dialogue Ireland to speak the truth in a spirit of genuine Christian love for the members and leaders of the movement in question, as well as for the families of everyone involved. However difficult things may be, every group has the potential to change the direction of its policies and activities for the better.
So I am glad you understood better that I saw that Core had become cultist in the first place because Willi had too much power, that there were no checks and balances. The Trust had inadequate safeguards, and all power including the selection of leadership of the Trust and the leadership were in his hands. I believe his fall from grace as xxxxxxx explained it to me was not about sexual gratification primarily, but power.
With his exit we still have that structure in place with a leadership that was involved in not informing those who had covenanted with them all that had happened before the xxxxxxx incident. Also the tendency was for the victim to be seen as the problem rather than the perpetrator. So as I quote above we are not calling Core a cult, but recognising traits, which can appear in any group.
It is interesting to note that you yourself called Core a cult at the synod a few years ago!
xxxxxxx who was a fervent supporter of Core at the time defended it. She had gained a new spirituality from her experiences there, but because she had a long history of involvement in the C of I began to challenge Willi about the lack of transparency and the lack of conformity to canon law. She was running a ministry to homeless people around Christchurch every Sunday supported by a number of people from Core and from other churches. Willi just closed this down without consulting her, but took the glory for this ministry which the judge referred to.
She has two xxxxxxx in Core who totally disagreed with her and she has since moved to xxxxxxx. I am glad to hear these issues exercise you and I am sure they will be addressed.
I have already alerted you to my views on Gordon Linney, though we may differ as to his influence on the judge’s verdict.
I also take note of the fact that Willi has lost his license to minister within the Anglican Communion. I will fully consult with a number of people before making my decision as to whether to give this story to say Would You Believe, who had done a story on this in the early ’90′s or to a reputable newspaper. Presently I would feel that his disgrace is such that this would have little benefit, though the fact as a senior churchman in the C of I you knew nothing about this till last Wednesday makes me wonder if his story is widely known?
My current position is that if he maintains the discipline of the Anglican Communion and does not attempt to enter into youth ministry I feel he should be allowed to continue his rehabilitation without interference. If he on the other hand secedes from the Anglican Communion, and begins another ministry you would have no control over him. This would be for me a warning sign that information about the case must be communicated.*
* No one could believe that Willi would be allowed to move from the explicit commitment of the Archbishop of Dublin, hence I had to nuance my position as you will see in 2008 with Bishop Michael Burrows.
Also because he got the benefit of the probation act and though found guilty he technically does not have a criminal record. Partly this is due to the manner in which the judge heard xxxxxxx and as I wrote before quoted Gordon Linney on two occasions about this being a moment of madness he could take this to be a green light to start operating in ministry. (Also xxxx spoke before Gordon and with hindsight would have strengthened her case if she had spoken after what he had said.) That again would necessitate me having to consider reporting the evidence in my possession. Again if he acts in the spirit of the grace communicated to him by xxxx and the judge this would not be necessary. I understand the loyalty that Gordon Linney feels for his former curate and also because he was the Proposer of Core originally. Dealing with that is not my chief preoccupation, but the safety of men around Willi is.
I will await your response in relationship to meeting Archbishop Neill and will send you a completed court report in due course for editing.
Best Wishes as you follow through with this difficult task
IN Christ
Mike
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:58:06 +0000
>To: David Pierpoint
>From: Dialogue Ireland <dialogueireland@esatclear.ie>
>Subject: Court Record
>Cc: xxxxxxvictim, DI member
>X-Attachments: C:\Mike Desktop\Evangelical\CORE\Report of the trial of Willi Stewart at the Bridewell.doc;
>Dear David,
>As promised I am sending you my report of the proceedings, feel free to add or point out missing elements. I am also copying xxxxx for him to give to xxxx to add her comments concerning the record. I will us the comments from my earlier emails to you as my commentary on the case.
I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
>Regards
>Mike
From: “David Pierpoint” <dpier@iol.ie>
To: “Dialogue Ireland” <dialogueireland@esatclear.ie>
Subject: From David Pierpoint
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:53:39 -0000
Dear Mike,
Thanks for sending on the original and the edited version of the court case.
I attach my version of events and also your original with my queries in capitals.
I am off to conference in the morning.
Regards
David
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 12:32:14 +0000
>To: David Pierpoint
>From: Dialogue Ireland <dialogueireland@esatclear.ie>
>Subject: Core
>Bcc: xxxVictim
Dear David,
Following our meeting on Jan 18 we had an exchange of emails to edit the court proceeding, so as to have an accurate record of events in the event of having to produce them in the future. My last communication from you was Jan 30.
Taking into account your diary and the fact that this whole issue was totally new to you I suggested you might contact me to discuss the case in the middle of February.
The issues on my agenda were: 1. to make sure that xxxxxx received adequate pastoral care following his assault, ( I think you met them the day before me and agreed to be back to them in about two weeks?) 2. The issue of the restoration of my personal relationship with the Archbishop, and consequently that of DI support by the Church of Ireland. This is not clear at the moment.
Also in relation to the evidence given by Gordon Linney, though I did not agree with it, the only person who could raise issues about it would be xxxx. He would not agree with what was said, however, feels that the verdict has conspired to produce the result he wanted – a plea of guilty.
3. It was my professional opinion that considering the verdict and your confirmation that WS had lost his license within the Church of Ireland and the Anglican Communion. That a. I would recommend to my committee that no further action should be taken unless WS seceded from the Anglican Communion and had no proper supervision. b. I discussed this with the new chair of DI xxxxxxxx who knew WS very well and he was very much of the same opinion. In those circumstances we would feel duty bound to pass on what will remain till then sequestered material.
We are having our annual meeting next week at the Milltown Institute where I will report to my committee on developments since the trial. They were fully informed of last years developments.
So I would like to report closure as by now you must have concluded your report?
—– Original Message —–
From: “Dialogue Ireland” <dialogueireland@esatclear.ie>
To: <dpier@iol.ie>
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 12:32 PM
Subject: Core
Dear David,
Many thanks for this reply. I appreciate it was written in haste for my meeting, so will not treat it as the final statement. However, certain points are clear.
I have taken the liberty to contact xxxxx, who in turn contacted xxxxx to clarify their understanding of things. I will reply to you capitals below:
Thanks for the reply
Mike
From: “David Pierpoint” <dpier@iol.ie>
To: “Dialogue Ireland” <dialogueireland@esatclear.ie>
Subject: Re: Core
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:35:33 -0000
Dear Mike,
Apologies for not getting back sooner.
I will attempt to answer your questions as laid out below.
1. I did make contact with xxxxx mother (in fact she phoned me).
xxxxx had received a communication form the archbishop. I asked that when
xxxxx had time to digest this he might let me know his feeling. AS yet I
have not heard from him and while I realise the onus is not on him, I will
endeavour to rectify this situation in the course of the coming weeks.
2. The restoration of your personal relationship with the archbishop was
put to him and he advised that at the present time, he would prefer to let
things stand the way they are at present. As for the support of the C of I
for DI, I understand that this has been withdrawn. You may wish to clarify
this with a letter to the archbishop.
3. The matter of evidence given by Gordon Linney: I agree that xxxxx has
been satisfied with the end result.
4. I can confirm that Willi Stewart has lost his licence in the church of
Ireland. For any other church in the Anglican Communion to take him on as a
priest, they would normally require clearance from the archbishop and under
the circumstances he is not prepared to give this.
5. I was not aware that there was a new chairman of DI. I do not know
xxxxxxxxx except by reputation however, I understand that he is a very
conciensious priest.
Hope all this helps
David
At 11:35 15/03/05 -0000, you wrote:
Dear Mike,
>Apologies for not getting back sooner.
WE ALL GET BUSY.
>I will attempt to answer your questions as laid out below.
>1. I did make contact with xxxxxxx mother (in fact she phoned me).
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AFTER THE WEEK IN WHICH YOU WERE GOING AWAY. YOU MET THEM ON MON 17 Jan, AND MYSELF FOR LUNCH THE NEXT DAY. SHE DID PHONE YOU BUT UNDERSTANDS LIKE I DID THAT YOU WOULD BE BACK TO US AROUND THE MIDDLE OF FEB.
Editor: It is now March 15.
xxxxxxx had received a communication from the archbishop.
YES YOU GAVE HIM THE ORIGINAL LETTER THAT HE NEVER GOT IN 2004.
THEY WERE HAPPY WITH THAT.
Editor: We post this letter here without comment to allow the public to ponder the concept of discipline and secular law which is heavily confused in it.
Pdf of AB’s letter.
I asked that when xxxxxxx had time to digest this he might let me know his feeling.
HE ACCORDING TO HIS MOTHER HAS NO RECOLLECTION OF THIS.
As yet I have not heard from him and while I realise the onus is not on him, I will
endeavour to rectify this situation in the course of the coming weeks.
HOPEFULY NOW THAT YOU KNOW HE WAS NOT EXPECTING TO CONTACT YOU YOUR PLAN MAKES THE MOST SENSE.
2. The restoration of your personal relationship with the archbishop was
put to him and he advised that at the present time, he would prefer to let
things stand the way they are at present.
I HAD ALREADY TOLD HIM I WAS AVAILABLE TO COME TO SEE HIM TO BE RECONCILED LAST YEAR. I RESPECT HIS DECISION TO NOT ENGAGE.
As for the support of the C of I for DI, I understand that this has been withdrawn.
I WILL BRING THIS POINT TO MY COMMITTEE. WE WERE FORMERLY A PATRON ORGANISATION AND THE CURRENT ARCHBISHOP OF THAT TIME USUALLY GAVE US AN ENDORSEMENT. NOW WE ARE AN INDEPENDENT TRUST IT MIGHT BE TIME TO REMOVE THE LINE ABOUT BEING SUPPORTED BY ANY CHURCH FROM OUR WEB SITE. WE WOULD THEN WE SEEN TO BE TOTALLY INDEPENDENT OF ANY CHURCH.
You may wish to clarify this with a letter to the archbishop.
I WILL BE ADVISED ON THIS BY MY COMMITTEE. THANK YOU FOR ATLEAST RAISING THESE TWO ISSUES WITH HIM
3. The matter of evidence given by Gordon Linney: I agree that xxxxxxx has
been satisfied with the end result.
Editor: Point made in report on trial. Victim wanted Willi to plead guilty and Willi wanted to go into exile. The victim was not to know that the sentence would never reach the light of day. We have already alluded to the effect Linney’s evidence had on the trial judge in an earlier post.
>4. I can confirm that Willi Stewart has lost his licence in the church of
>Ireland. For any other church in the Anglican Communion to take him on as a
>priest, they would normally require clearance from the archbishop and under
>the circumstances he is not prepared to give this.
>5. I was not aware that there was a new chairman of DI . I do not know
>xxxxxxx except by reputation however, I understand that he is a very
>conscientious priest.
HE HAS ONLY AGREED TO THIS ROLE IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS AND WILL BE AT HIS FIRST MEETING TODAY.
>Hope all this helps
IT DOES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPLY AND BEST WISHES WITH YOUR NEW MINISTRY. I WILL NO LONGER CONTACT YOU IN REGARD TO THIS ISSUE, BUT WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE xxxxx FAMILY. xxxxx IS DEEPLY INVOLVED WITH HIS STUDIES, BUT HOPEFULLY YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GET TOGETHER TO WORK ON A PASTORAL RESPONSE TO HIS SITUATION
REGARDS
MIKE
David
Filed under: Abuse
