Bishop Marc Andrus, who retired from leading the Diocese of California in July 2024, has been restricted in his ordained ministry “due to a credible allegation of an inappropriate relationship with an adult,” The Episcopal Church’s Office of Public Affairs said in an Oct. 15 news release revealing the pending disciplinary case against Andrus.
The restriction on Andrus’ ministry, as authorized by the church’s Title IV disciplinary canons, was imposed by the Rt. Rev. Mary Gray-Reeves, former bishop of the Diocese of El Camino Real. Gray-Reeves, has been involved in reviewing several disciplinary cases against bishops as the designate of Presiding Bishop Michael Curry.
The church’s release provides no further details about the allegations against Andrus. It does not quote Gray Reeves directly, but it says she “and others involved in our Title IV process have been working to solidify a network of pastoral care and mental health support for the parties involved in this Title IV matter.”
The Title IV canons outline disciplinary processes for all Episcopal clergy. Cases against bishops have drawn increased scrutiny across the church in recent years as some Episcopalians, including some bishops, have warned of a perception that bishops are not held to the same standards as other clergy.
Most steps in the Title IV disciplinary process remain confidential, though the presiding bishop or his designate has broad discretion under the canons to make some information public if it is deemed “pastorally appropriate” to do so.
Your tax-deductible gift helps our journalists report the truth and hold Christian leaders and organizations accountable. Give a gift of $50 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you can elect to receive a copy of “Safe Church: How to Guard Against Sexism and Abuse in Christian Communities’ by Dr. Andrew Bauman, click here.
In February 2024, on Curry’s direction and to improve transparency, the church updated its website to create a designated page for information about certain cases involving bishops. Curry indicated then that he and bishops acting on his behalf would release timelines and status updates in select cases when the “matter becomes public.” Church leaders have continued to protect the identities of complainants and withhold other details about the allegations.

The case involving Andrus is now listed among the “current cases” against bishops. The church website specifies that the initial information against Andrus was provided to the intake officer on Oct. 2, and Gray-Reeves restricted his ministry on Oct. 9.
Andrus, one of The Episcopal Church’s most prominent voices on issues of the environment and climate change, led his San Francisco-based diocese for 18 years before retiring from the diocesan post. His successor, the Rt. Rev. Austin Rios, was consecrated bishop coadjutor in May 2024 and succeeded Andrus two months later.
Rios addressed the matter involving Andrus in an Oct. 15 message to the diocese. He said Andrus “will not be able to be in contact with anyone in our diocese” while the case is pending.
“This was difficult news for me to learn, and I know it will be hard for many people in our gathered community to hear,” Rios said. He said he and other diocesan leaders will be available to provide pastoral care to diocesan members and clergy as needed.
“When I became your pastor, I wrote to you about the work we have to do, the trust we have to build, and the wounds we need to entrust to Christ’s healing power,” Rios said. “I did not anticipate that this kind of painful situation would be among our first challenges together. But I believe that by loving God and one another and following the wisdom of Jesus, we will emerge from this difficulty more connected and more committed to the mission of God in our context.”
This article originally appeared at Episcopal News Service.
David Paulsen is a senior reporter and editor for Episcopal News Service.
5 Responses
Anyone tempted to evacuate from conservative, evangelical Christianity for a more progressive type church needs more of these reports.
The liberal, mainline denominations are full of corruption, clergy misconduct, financial shenanigans, and everything else. Like, overflowing with it.
I appreciate that TRR does cover stories that run across the religious spectrum.
“The liberal, mainline denominations are full of corruption, clergy misconduct, financial shenanigans, and everything else. Like, overflowing with it.”
I agree Steve that that The Roys Report is very fair in describing corruption and abuse, wherever it’s discoverable. But in my 3 years of faithfully reading the Roys Report, I would guess that about 80% of the exposés of clergy abuse and financial malfeasance that I’ve seen, have involved conservative, fundamentalist, rigidly calvinistic or evangelical branches of Christendom. I think there is a good reason for that, and it’s not Julie Roys’ selective attention to one particular faction of Christianity.
Nobody could convince me that a certain theology or church tradition is more or less prone to clergy abuse and financial malfeasance.
Why? Because I never seen any evidence to the contrary. Impressions of how the coverage is spread around is not evidence.
Why else? Because if we start to go down that road: that some theologies or traditions are more prone to X, then we run the temptation of sounding like “God, I thank thee, that I am not like ____”. And that is a spiritual danger. In the ’90s and early ’00s, evangelicals loved looking at the abuse stories and thinking “that’s because they’re Roman Catholic.” But then the Houston Chronicle reveals that Southern Baptist abuse rates were comparable. And thank God they did.
There are better and worse communities and theologies for misconduct to fester in. But they do not fall along party lines like we’d want them to.
Roman Catholic abuse. TRR almost never mentions any. Almost zero coverage. That’s totally fine. Not the TRR’s self-imposed mandate. But we ought never assume that means that evangelicals are worse. Just doesn’t work like that.
My point was just that I am thankful that TRR at least once in a while covers misconduct in the liberal mainline world. There’s lots there and it helps to puncture the impression that most bad stuff involves “conservative, fundamentalist, rigidly calvinistic or evangelical branches of Christendom.”
I agree with everything you said, except this:
“Roman Catholic abuse. TRR almost never mentions any. Almost zero coverage. That’s totally fine. Not the TRR’s self-imposed mandate. But we ought never assume that means that evangelicals are worse. Just doesn’t work like that.:
Roys does not get an easy out for failing to deal with certain Christian religious organizations. Her own stated mandate is to expose corruption and abuse in the church. And if she does not deal with corruption/abuse in the RCC, than she is, in fact, violating her own mandate. Some of Roys work is good, but it’s not exactly as fair and balanced as she claims it to be. And to be blunt, the abuse in charismatic circles is just as bad, if not worse, than in the morally and doctrinally-lax denominations.
We have stated often that our focus is abuse and corruption in the Protestant/evangelical church. We can’t cover anything. And from the beginning, it was my conviction that Christian/evangelical media was failing to hold its own accountable that led me to launch The Roys Report. There are plenty of secular and Catholic outlets covering abuse in the Catholic Church. TRR covers abuse/corruption in the Protestant/evangelical church. We can only do so much. And honestly, with our limited resources, we are still not able to cover all the abuse/corruption in just this niche group.