This article will discuss how the Governing Body (GB) of Jehovah’s Witnesses (JW), just like the younger son in the parable of the “Prodigal Son”, squandered a precious inheritance. It will consider how the inheritance came about and the changes that lost it. Readers will be presented with data from “The Australian Royal Commission (ARC) into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse”[1] to examine and to draw conclusions. This data will be laid out on the basis of six different religious institutions. This case will exemplify how detrimental the changes have become to individuals. Finally, in the light of Christian love, the GB will be offered suggestions to encourage a more Christ-like approach to dealing with these matters.
Historical Context
Edmund Burke had grown disillusioned with the French Revolution and in 1790 wrote a pamphlet Reflections on the Revolution in France in which he defends constitutional monarchy, the traditional church (Anglican in that case) and the aristocracy.
In 1791, Thomas Paine wrote the book The Rights of Man. Europe and North America were in upheaval. The 13 colonies had gained their independence from Britain, and the aftereffects of the French Revolution were being felt. The old order was threatened by the revolution and the beginnings of the concept of democracy in Europe and North America. For those challenging the old order, the question arose of what this means for the rights of each individual.
Those who embraced the New World saw in Paine’s book and its ideas, the basis of a new world that they could create through a republican democratic system. Many of the rights of men were discussed but the concepts were not necessarily defined in law. At the same time, Mary Wollstonecraft wrote Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792, which complemented Paine’s work.
In the 20th century Jehovah’s Witnesses (JWs) played a major role in enshrining many of these rights in law. In the USA from the late 1930s to the 1940s, their fight to practice their faith according to their conscience led to many court cases with a considerable number decided at the Supreme Court level. Hayden Covington the lawyer for JWs presented 111 petitions and appeals to the Supreme Court. In total, there were 44 cases and these included door-to-door distribution of literature, compulsory flag salutes etc. Covington won more than 80% of these cases. There was a similar situation in Canada where JWs also won their cases.[2]
At the same time, in Nazi Germany, JWs took a stand for their faith and faced unprecedented levels of persecution from a totalitarian regime. JWs were unusual in the concentration camps by the fact that they could leave anytime if they chose to sign a document renouncing their faith. The vast majority did not compromise their faith, but the leadership at the German Branch was willing to compromise.[3] The stand of the majority is a testament of courage and faith under the most unimaginable horrors, and ultimately victory over a totalitarian regime. This stand was repeated against other totalitarian regimes such as the Soviet Union, Eastern Bloc countries, and others.
These victories, along with the tactics employed, were used by many other groups fighting for their liberties in the decades to come. JWs were helping define and play a significant role in establishing the rights of human beings. Their stand was always based on the rights of individuals to exercise their personal conscience in matters of worship and citizenship.
Human Rights were established and enshrined by law, and this can be seen in numerous cases brought before the Supreme Courts by JWs in many nations around the world. Though many found the proselytizing of JWs and the tone of their literature distasteful, there was a grudging respect for their stand and faith. The right of each person to fully exercise their conscience is a fundamental tenet of modern society. This was an endowment of immense value along with the heritage of many sound Bible teachings from the Bible Student Movement of the 1870s onwards. The individual and their relationship with their Creator and the use of a personal conscience was at the heart of each JW’s struggle.
The Rise of the Organisation
When the congregations were first formed in the 1880/90s, they were congregational in structure. All congregations (the Bible Students in Russell’s time called them ecclesia; a transliteration of the Greek word commonly translated “church” in most bibles) were provided with a guideline on structure, purpose, etc.[4] Each of these Bible Student congregations were stand-alone entities with elected elders and deacons. There was no central authority and each congregation functioned for the benefit of its members. Congregation discipline was administered at a meeting of the entire ecclesia as outlined in Studies in Scriptures, Volume Six.
From the early 1950s, the new leadership of the JWs decided to embed Rutherford’s concept of the Organisation[5] and moved to becoming a corporate entity. This involved creating rules and regulations that had to be followed—that would keep the Organisation “clean”—along with the new judicial committee arrangement to deal those who committed “serious” sins[6]. This involved meeting with three elders in a closed, secret meeting to judge whether the individual was repentant.
This significant change cannot be scripturally based as demonstrated in an article titled “Are You Also Excommunicated?”[7] There, the Catholic Church’s practice of excommunication was shown to have no scriptural basis, but to be based purely on “canon law”. Subsequent to and despite that article, the Organisation decided to create its own “canon law”[8].
In the years following, this has led to a very autocratic form of leadership with many decisions that have caused a great deal of pain and suffering to individuals. A most fascinating issue was on refusing military service. The Bible Students faced this challenge during the First World War. There were articles written by the WTBTS that gave guidance but importantly highlighted that each one must use their own conscience. Some served in the Medical Corps; others would not put on military uniform; some would undertake civilian service and so on. All were united in not taking up arms to kill their fellow man, but each exercised his own conscience on how to tackle the problem. An excellent book titled, Bible Student Conscientious Objectors in World War 1 – Britain by Gary Perkins, provides excellent examples of the stand.
In contrast, later during the presidency of Rutherford, very specific rules were issued where JWs could not accept civilian service. The impact of this can be seen in the book titled, I Wept by the Rivers of Babylon: A Prisoner of Conscience in a Time of War by Terry Edwin Walstrom, where as a JW, he outlines the challenges that he faced and the absurdity of not accepting civilian service in a local hospital. Here, he explains in detail how the Organisation’s position had to be supported, whilst his own conscience could not see a problem with civilian service. Interestingly, as of 1996, it has been deemed acceptable for JWs to undertake alternative civilian service. This means that the GB now allows the individual to exercise their conscience once again.
The teachings issued by the Governing Body, created in 1972 and fully functioning since 1976[9], must be accepted as “present truth” until “new light” is revealed by them. There has been a plethora of rules and regulations for the flock in every aspect of life, and those who do not comply are viewed as “not exemplary”. This often leads to a judicial hearing, as outlined earlier, and possible disfellowshipping. Many of these rules and regulations have undergone a 180-degree reversal, but those disfellowshipped under the former rule have not being reinstated.
This trampling on the personal conscience of individuals reaches the point where one must question if the GB really understands the human conscience at all. In the publication, Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will, published 2005 and 2015 in chapter 8, paragraph 28, states in full:
“Each publisher must follow his Bible-trained conscience when prayerfully determining what constitutes a witnessing period. Some publishers preach in densely populated areas, whereas others work territories where there are few inhabitants and considerable travel is required. Territories differ; publishers differ in the way they view their ministry. The Governing Body does not impose its conscience on the worldwide congregation as to how time spent in field service is to be counted, nor has anyone else been appointed to make a judgment in this matter.—Matt. 6:1; 7:1; 1 Tim. 1:5.”
To state that a collective body of men (GB) would have a single conscience makes no sense. The human conscience is one of the great gifts of God. Each one is unique and shaped according to a variety of factors. How can a group of men have the same conscience?
A disfellowshipped person will be shunned by individuals in the JW community and family members. Since 1980, this process has become much more hard-line with many videos showing the flock on how to reduce or avoid contact altogether. This instruction has been particularly focused on immediate family members. Those who do not comply are viewed as spiritually weak and association with them is kept to a minimum.
This clearly goes against the fight many individual JWs had with various judiciaries in establishing that the human conscience must be allowed to flourish. In effect, the Organisation was dictating on how an individual should use their conscience. Congregation members could have no details of the hearing, could not talk to the individual, and were kept in the dark. What was expected of them was complete trust in the process and the men responsible for the hearing.
With the advent of Social Media, many ex-JWs have come forward and demonstrated—in many cases with recordings and other evidence—the sheer injustice or unfair treatment they have received in these judicial hearings.
This rest of this article will highlight how this Governing Body, just like the younger son in the parable of the Prodigal Son, squandered an enormous inheritance, by considering some of the findings of The Australian Royal Commission (ARC) into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.
The Australian Royal Commission (ARC)
The ARC was set up in 2012 to gauge the extent and causes of institutional child abuse, and in the process to study the policies and procedures of various organisations. This article will focus on religious institutions. The ARC completed its function in December 2017 and produced an extensive report.
“The Letters Patent provided to the Royal Commission required that it ‘inquire into institutional responses to allegations and incidents of child sexual abuse and related matters’. In carrying out this task, the Royal Commission was directed to focus on systemic issues, be informed by an understanding of individual cases and make findings and recommendations to better protect children against sexual abuse and alleviate the impact of abuse on children when it occurs. The Royal Commission did this by conducting public hearings, private sessions and a policy and research program.[10] “
A Royal Commission is the highest level of inquiry in Commonwealth countries and has a vast range of powers to request for information and individuals to cooperate. Its recommendations are studied by the Government, and they will decide on legislation to enforce the recommendations. The Government does not have to accept the recommendations.
Methodology
There are three main methods used. These are as follows:
1. Policy and Research
Each religious institution provided the data that it held on reports and dealings of child abuse. This information was studied, and specific cases were chosen to conduct a public hearing.
In addition, the ARC consulted with government and non-government representatives, survivors, institutions, regulators, policy and other experts, academics, and survivor advocacy and support groups. The broader community had an opportunity to contribute to consideration of systemic issues and the responses through the public consultation processes.
2. Public hearings
I will provide the paragraphs from Final Report: Volume 16, page 3, sub-heading “Private hearings”:
“A Royal Commission commonly does its work through public hearings. We were aware that sexual abuse of children has occurred in many institutions, all of which could be investigated in a public hearing. However, if the Royal Commission was to attempt that task, a great many resources would need to be applied over an indeterminate, but lengthy, period of time. For this reason the Commissioners accepted criteria by which Senior Counsel Assisting would identify appropriate matters for a public hearing and bring them forward as individual ‘case studies’.
The decision to conduct a case study was informed by whether or not the hearing would advance an understanding of systemic issues and provide an opportunity to learn from previous mistakes so that any findings and recommendations for future change the Royal Commission made would have a secure foundation. In some cases the relevance of the lessons to be learned will be confined to the institution the subject of the hearing. In other cases they will have relevance to many similar institutions in different parts of Australia.
Public hearings were also held to assist in understanding the extent of abuse that may have occurred in particular institutions or types of institutions. This enabled the Royal Commission to understand the ways in which various institutions were managed and how they responded to allegations of child sexual abuse. Where our investigations identified a significant concentration of abuse in one institution, the matter could be brought forward to a public hearing.
Public hearings were also held to tell the stories of some individuals, which assisted in a public understanding of the nature of sexual abuse, the circumstances in which it may occur and, most importantly, the devastating impact that it can have on people’s lives. Public hearings were open to the media and the public, and were live streamed on the Royal Commission’s website.
The Commissioners’ findings from each hearing were generally set out in a case study report. Each report was submitted to the Governor-General and the governors and administrators of each state and territory and, where appropriate, tabled in the Australian Parliament and made publicly available. The Commissioners recommended some case study reports not be tabled at the me because of current or prospective criminal proceedings.”
3. Private sessions
These sessions were to provide victims an opportunity to tell their own personal story of child sex abuse in an institutional setting. The following is from Volume 16, page 4, sub-heading “Private sessions”:
“Each private session was conducted by one or two Commissioners and was an opportunity for a person to tell their story of abuse in a protected and supportive environment. Many accounts from these sessions are told in a de-identified form in this Final Report.
Written accounts allowed individuals who did not end private sessions to share their experiences with Commissioners. The experiences of survivors described to us in written accounts have informed this Final Report in the same manner as those shared with us in private sessions.
We also decided to publish, with their consent, as many individual survivors’ experiences as possible, as de-identified narratives drawn from private sessions and written accounts. These narratives are presented as accounts of events as told by survivors of child sexual abuse in institutions. We hope that by sharing them with the public they will contribute to a better understanding of the profound impact of child sexual abuse and may help to make our institutions as safe as possible for children in the future. The narratives are available as an online appendix to Volume 5, Private sessions. “
It is important to fully understand the methodology and sources of data. No religious institution can claim bias or false information, as all the data came from within the organisations and from the testimony of the victims. The ARC analysed the available information, checked with representatives of the various religious institutions, corroborated with victims, and presented its findings along with recommendations for specific institutions, and as a whole.
Findings
I have created a table showing the key information on six religious institutions the ARC investigated. I would recommend reading of the reports. They are in 4 parts:
- Final Report Recommendations
- Final Report Religious Institutions Volume 16: Book 1
- Final Report Religious Institutions Volume 16: Book 2
- Final Report Religious Institutions Volume 16: Book 3
| Religion & Adherents | Case Studies | Alleged Perpetrators & Positions Held | Total Complaints
|
Reporting to Authorities & Apology to Victims | Compensation, Support & National Redress Scheme |
| Catholic
5,291,800
|
15 Case studies in total. Numbers 4,6, 8, 9, 11,13,14, 16, 26, 28, 31, 35, 41, 43, 44
2849 interviewed |
1880
alleged perpetrators 693 Religious brothers (597) and sisters (96) (37%) 572 priests including 388 diocesan priests and 188 religious priests (30%) 543 lay people (29%) 72 with religious status unknown (4%) |
4444 | Some cases were reported to civil authorities. Apology given.
In 1992 first public statement acknowledging abuse had happened. From 1996 onwards, apologies were made and from Towards Healing (2000) provided a clear apology to all victims by clergy and religion. Also, in 2013 in” Issues paper …” a clear apology was given. |
2845 claims of child sex abuse to February 2015 resulted in $268,000,000 paid of which $250,000,000 was in monetary payment.
Average of $88,000. Set up a “Towards Healing” process to help victims. Will consider paying into National Redress Scheme.
|
| Anglican
3,130,000
|
7 Case studies in total. Numbers 3, 12, 20, 32, 34, 36, 42
594 interviewed
|
569
alleged perpetrators 50% Lay People 43% Ordained Clergy 7% Unknown |
1119 | Some cases were reported to civil authorities. Apology given.
In 2002 Standing Committee of the General Synod issues a National Apology. In 2004 General Synod apologised. |
472 complaints (42% of all complaints). To date of December 2015 $34,030,000 at average of $72,000). This includes monetary compensation, treatment, legal and other costs.
Set up a Child Protection Committee in 2001 2002-2003- Set up Sexual Abuse Working Group Various outcomes from these groups. Will consider paying into National Redress Scheme
|
| Salvation Army
8,500 plus officers
|
4 Case studies in total. Numbers 5, 10, 33, 49
294 interviewed |
Not possible to quantify alleged perpetrator numbers | Some cases were reported to civil authorities. Apology given.
|
Will consider paying into National Redress Scheme | |
| Jehovah’s Witnesses
68,000
|
2 Case studies in total. Numbers 29, 54
70 interviewed |
1006
alleged perpetrators 579 (57%) confessed 108 (11%)were Elders or Ministerial Servants 28 were appointed Elders or Ministerial Servants after first instance of alleged abuse |
1800
alleged victims 401 (40%)perpetrators were dis-fellowshipped. 230 reinstated 78 disfellowshipped more than once.
|
No cases were reported to civil authorities and no apology to any of the victims. | None.
New policy that informs victims and families that they have a right to report to authorities. No statement on National Redress Scheme. |
| Australian Christian Churches (ACC) and affiliated Pentecostal churches
350,000 + 260,600 = 610,600
|
2 in total. Numbers 18, 55
37 interviewed |
Not possible to quantify alleged perpetrator numbers | During the Australian Christian Churches public hearing Pastor Spinella apologised to the victims. | Will consider paying into National Redress Scheme | |
| Uniting Church in Australia (Congregational, Methodist and Presbyterian) 1,065,000 | 5 in total
Numbers 23, 24, 25, 45, 46 91 interviewed |
Not given | 430 | Some cases were reported to civil authorities. President of General Assembly Stuart McMillan made it on behalf of the Church. | 102 claims made against 430 allegations. 83 of thee 102 received a settlement. Total amount paid is $12.35 million. Highest payment is $2.43 million and lowest $110. Average payment is $151,000.
Will consider paying into National Redress Scheme |
Questions
At this point, I do not propose to give my personal conclusions or thoughts. It is more useful for each person to consider the following questions:
- Why did each institution fail?
- How and what redress has each institution provided for the victims?
- How can each institution improve its policy and procedures? To achieve this what must be the key objectives?
- Why did the JW Elders and Institution report no case to the secular authorities?
- Why do the JWs have such a large number of alleged perpetrators and complaints with respect to its population compared to the others?
- For a group that championed the right to exercise conscience, why did no elder step forward and speak out? Does this give an indication of the prevailing culture?
- With a history of resisting totalitarian authorities, why did individuals within the JW institution not speak out or break ranks and report to the authorities?
There are many more questions that could be considered. These will suffice for starters.
Way Forward
This article is written in a spirit of Christian love. It would be remiss to point out failings and not provide an opportunity to make amends. Throughout the Bible, men of faith sinned and needed forgiveness. There are many examples for our benefit (Romans 15:4).
The shepherd and poet, King David, was dear to Jehovah’s heart, but two great sins are recorded, along with his subsequent repentance and the consequences of his actions. In the last day of Jesus’ life, we can see the failings in Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, two members of the Sanhedrin, but we also see how they made amends at the end. There is the account of Peter, an intimate friend, whose courage failed him when he denied his friend and Lord three times. After his resurrection, Jesus helps restore Peter from his fallen state by giving him the opportunity to demonstrate his repentance by reaffirming his love and discipleship. All the apostles fled on the day of Jesus’ death, and they all were given the opportunity to lead the Christian congregation at Pentecost. Forgiveness and good will is provided in abundance by our Father for our sins and failings.
A way forward after the ARC report is to admit the sin of failing the victims of child abuse. This requires the following steps:
- Pray to our heavenly Father and ask for his forgiveness.
- Demonstrate the sincerity of the prayer through specific actions to gain his blessings.
- Unreservedly apologise to all the victims. Set up a spiritual and emotional healing programme for victims and their families.
- Immediately reinstate all the victims who have been disfellowshipped and shunned.
- Agree to financially compensate the victims and do not put them through court cases.
- Elders should not deal with these cases as they do not have the required expertise. Make it mandatory to report all allegations to the civil authorities. Be in subjection to ‘Caesar and his law”. A careful reading of Romans 13:1-7 shows that Jehovah has put them in place to deal with such matters.
- All known offenders should not be allowed to undertake any public ministry with the congregation.
- The welfare of children and victims should be at the centre of all policies and not the reputation of the organisation.
The above suggestions would make a good start and might initially disturb the flock, but by sincerely explaining the mistakes and demonstrating a humble attitude, a good Christian lead would be set. The flock would appreciate this and respond over time.
The younger son in the parable returned home repentant, but before he could say anything, the Father welcomed him with such a large heart. The older son was lost in a different way, because he did not really know his Father. The two sons can provide invaluable lessons for those taking the lead, but the most important one is what a marvelous Father we have in our God. Our wonderful King Jesus imitates his Father perfectly and is keenly interested in the well-being of each one of us. He is the only one with the authority to govern each and every one of us. (Matthew 23:6-9, 28:18, 20) Build up the flock through use of the scriptures and let each one exercise their conscience on how best to serve our Lord and King.
____________________________________________________________________
[1] https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au The entire scope and programme of investigation from November 2012 to December 2017 when the final reports were submitted to the Australian Government
[2] See James Penton’s Jehovah’s Witnesses in Canada: Champions of Freedom of Speech and Worship. (1976). James Penton is an ex-Jehovah’s Witness who has since written two books on Watchtower history.
[3] See Detlef Garbe’s Between Resistance and Martyrdom: Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Third Reich (2008) Translated by Dagmar G. Grimm. In addition, for a more biased account, please see the Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses, 1974 published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.
[4] See Studies in Scriptures: The New Creation Vol 6, Chapter 5, “The Organisation” By Pastor Charles Taze Russell in 1904. In earlier editions of Zion’s Watchtower, many of these suggestions and thoughts had also been covered.
[5] Interestingly, Rutherford’s use of the words ‘Organisation’ and ‘Church’ could be interchangeable. Since the Bible Student movement did not accept a centralised church structure, it apparently seemed more prudent to Rutherford to use the term ‘Organisation’ and ‘President’ with absolute powers. By 1938, the Organisation was fully in place and the Bible Students who disagreed had left. It is estimated that about 75% of Bible Students from Russell’s time left the Organisation from 1917 to 1938.
[6] This new method of dealing with congregation sins was first introduced in the March 1, 1952 Watchtower magazine pages 131-145, in a series of 3 weekly study articles. During the 1930s, there were two high profile cases with individuals prominent in the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society (WTBTS) organisation: Olin Moyle (Legal Counsel) and Walter F. Salter (Canada Branch Manager). Both left the respective headquarters and faced a trial by the entire congregation. These trials were supported by scriptures but were viewed as causing disunity within the ranks.
[7] See Awake 8, January 1947 pages 27-28.
[8] This might have been due to the removal of two high profile individuals, Olin Moyle (WTBTS Lawyer) and Walter F. Salter (Canadian Branch Manager) from the Organisation. The process used was of the whole local ecclesia meeting to make a decision. As in both cases, the issues arose with the President (Rutherford) and to have this discussed openly would have brought further questions from the flock
[9] The current claim is a major departure in teaching, whereby it is stated that the Governing Body has been in place since 1919, and is the same as the Faithful and Discreet Slave as outlined in Matthew 24:45-51. No evidence is offered for either of these claims, and the claim that this GB has been in place since 1919 can be easily refuted, but this is not within the scope of this article. Please see the ws17 February p. 23-24 “Who Is Leading God’s People Today?”
[10] Direct quote from Final Report: Volume 16 preface page 3
Thank you Eleasar for the work in this. I know that figures don’t always reveal the truth , and they can manipulated, but I was concerned that 78 were repeat offenders and still didn’t get reported, I wonder how many times must a person offend before it’s regarded as serious enough to report them? In previous postings we have talked about the similarities that JWorg has to the old Soviet regime, you may want to listen to a guy by the name of Yuri Breszenov, a former KGB agent whos job it was to spread lies and propaganda to destabilise… Read more »
“I should state that I’m not a total hypocrite. I haven’t turned in service time in a decade. I don’t give talks. I never comment. We do not donate money as a family to the organization. I convinced my wife that we would be guilty of supporting policies that lead to our children being sexually exploited by giving any money toward legal defenses of these horrific policies – she agreed with me. A small battle won in the bigger, looming war ahead. Instead I’m a spiritual scarecrow keeping the carrion birds away from my lovely wife and children. And it’s… Read more »
Thank you so much. Since keeping in contact with other spiritual brothers and sisters like yourself, Maria, online now I realize that I’m not so alone. No matter what I think the truth is many brothers and sisters at the Hall are genuinely loving and good people, and I constantly try to remind myself that my issue isn’t with them, it’s with the direction of the leadership and the totalitarian environment they’ve created. Many of my local brothers and sisters could be very much in the same boat as I am, but I wouldn’t know because it’s not like we… Read more »
The other thing that we must bear in mind is that a religion like Catholicism does not require its members to inform on each other, nor does it have judicial committees that involve themselves in every misdemeanor of the flock. So while there are possibly just as many pedophiles in the Catholic Church as there are in JW.org, they do not get brought to the attention of the Priests, and so the clergy is not accountable for how these cases are handled. The Church is only responsible for those in its employ, so priests and laypeople directly involved in Church… Read more »
Very good point to bring out Eric. Thank you.
Those statistics make JWs look terrible. But it may be somewhat misleading. Out of all the Catholics and Anglicans, I very much doubt whether the statistics are available for all the church members, outside the clergy, whereas it seems fairly certain that JWs (via the Judicial processes) have figures which might be quite close to complete.
It does worry me that it should be mandatory to report all allegations to the authorities as even a false accusation can wreck an individual’s life, but it is hard to see what alternative there is.
These are figures reported to each of the church authorities. This is the only basis that matters as it shows how the matter is dealt with when alleged. The issue the Catholics faced was a cover up and denial of what happened. This went on until the first apology and acknowledgement. Then they moved to address victims and looked at processes and procedures. Also, their figures also includes schools etc. With JWs, there is no acknowledgement, the victims still have no way for their voices to be heard or any form of healing or support. Redress is only available through… Read more »
Agreed Eleasar. The reality of the matter though, is that it will not happen.
I know personally of two false accusations that were made with clear alterior motives. How do we guard against hurting the innocent, while protecting real victims? From the viewpoint of the congregation, it may not be such an issue. After all, if someone is intent on making a false accusation to ruin the reputation of a brother, perhaps to ensure custody in a divorce, it is far more likely that such an accusation will be made directly to the police. They’ll get a lot more bang for their buck that way, then going to the elders who are far more… Read more »
Reporting anything to the authorities is not an automatic conviction of the accused. Sex crimes investigators weed through as many false accusations as they do legitimate ones. These specialists are the only people with the training and experience to determine guilt or innocence. They know which questions to ask. What behavior to look for in both victim and victimized. I think, unfortunately, it’s a common assumption that contacting the authorities immediately means a prison sentence for the accused, when it in fact just means a proper enquiry can be conducted by professionals. This kind of narrow thinking has unfortunately created… Read more »
I have to disagree with you on one point. The “judicial process” in the Org only happens if there are 2 witnesses. Therefore, figures of those victims who have come forward to the Elders won’t even be recognized unless there are at least 2 witnesses to the occurrence.
In other words, a Judicial Committee won’t even be formed in most cases because without 2 witnesses, they cannot proceed. So how do you figure JW’s are more likely to have better accuracy in their reports?
Yes, I had not taken into account cases which never make it to the JDC. However, the figures still make JWs position bad. Nothing would surprise me in the RC church, as there are some terrible stories about public schools run by monks/priests. It is all about opportunities available. I am just amazed there are so many of those predators around.
Thanks for your insight, Speedy.
Hi LJ,
Good to hear from you.
It gets even worse for the Org. For example, if there are 1006 cases that had some kind of paper trail in Australia, the number of potential victims could be significantly higher since most probably never had a Judicial Committee, therefore no paper trail.
The problem of child sex abuse happens in all organizations, whether secular or religious. It’s how they are dealt with by Watchtower is the disturbing issue……
Warp Speed,
Please note that it is 1006 alleged perpetrators NOT cases. There were 1800 cases as some of the alleged perpetrators offended more than once.
Thanks for that catch. Even worse then.
By the way E, really appreciated this article!
In the only two cases I ever came across, the parents of the victim went to court.
However, Eric, you raise valid points. Once, JWs stood for truth, some degree of freedom of conscience, and they fought for rights to exercise that freedom without restriction.
Which of those freedoms can we say JWs stand for today ?
Actually, it was Eleasar who raised the valid points. When I first published this research as editor-in-chief 🙂 I forgot to set the name of the author correctly. (It defaults to my name and has to be manually overridden.) I’ve corrected that oversight.
Excellent piece, Eleasar. Thank you for the extensive amount of research you did to distill all this down for us.
Hi Eleaser
When you say the GB will be offered suggestions, how do you anticipate that taking place? Are they changing their attitude and accepting suggestions at this point?
Psalmbee, We know that this site is being read from HQ. As Christians, we want to display the qualities of our Lord and our Heavenly Father. When preparing for the Memorial over the last 4 weeks, we see Jesus and how he displayed, dignity, mercy, forgiveness, love, etc. We need to rise above our fleshly tendencies and attitudes. Whether they are willing to listen or not is immaterial. None of us want anymore children being abused, people shunned and give all a chance to turn around. The GB have and are making major mistakes. In the Prodigal Son, the older… Read more »
That is interesting. How do we know the GB is reading this site ?
We have sources…bhua ha ha.
Eric, you made me laugh. I needed that.
The Org has brothers who monitor most “apostate” websites so that they can tell us what to avoid. For instance, Gary Breaux on the the November Broadcast. “This is what the apostates are putting forth…..”
Thank You Eleasar, I assumed that they were and don’t doubt that they are taking notice of this site along with some others.
I agree with giving people a second chance as long as they are not telling me this is my last chance. I also just want to say to those who are PIMO, that you have done the easy part now comes the hard part (Eze 13:22).
Hi Psalmbee,
Just curious, what year were you baptized and how long were you PIMO before doing the hard part?
Sharing your experience might help others here( including myself) to work up the courage to do the hard part.
Thanks,
WS
Warp Speed, as I have mentioned in prior comments, I have never been baptized a JW, the hard part for me has been staying out. Through the years I have been influenced with decades of false JW doctrine mostly by family and not just the immediate. My biggest struggle has been proving Christ’s redemptive powers are true and the doctrine of the JW’s are false. That struggle now is no more a handicap and has not been for a long time now. I do have a lot of experience in witnessing the witnesses over the last fifty years and if… Read more »
Hi Psalmbee,
Thanks for your response. I appreciate your thoughts. I guess what I’m wondering is, what is the “hard part” for a Witness who actually is baptized and then becomes PIMO?
Warp Speed, the way I see it is that the easy part is freeing your mind of things you know are not true and not being able to focus on the falsehood of their doctrine. The “hard part” would be freeing yourself physically from the physical hold of the indoctrination. It’s the you can check in but you can’t check out part that has you imprisoned, however you actually can check out if you do it yourself unless of course you are waiting on “new light” to perhaps change your mind back to the original doctrine. A simple example would… Read more »
Here’s what happens when you extricate yourself from the organization if you have a believing wife and children. Other men swoop in, white knighting your family with you not there unable to keep them at bay. They commend your wife for her strength during this considerable trial and burden she now must bear. In a bastardization of scripture she becomes a “widow” and your kids “fatherless children.” (I believe there was a series of videos at last year’s regional conventions illustrating this very thing) Instead of actually seeking out legitimate widows and orphans as they’re scriptually obliged to do these… Read more »
Amen Joseph Anton! My prayers are with you and your family.
I’m thankful for those prayers WS. 😉
It’s ok to disagree Joseph, we all have our own situation to live with. The situation you described sounds like a common one within the families of the Org. Being a spiritual scarecrow is not a comfortable position to be in (Ps 69:5). As long as you are making progress keep doing what you’re doing, and it sounds to me that you are making progress. Best wishes.
Thanks Psalmbee. I keep plugging away. Progressing for what feels like the first time in my life.
Whether I am a hypocrite is down to others to judge, although half of me does feel like one. I am still turning in field service reports – but they are getting smaller and what I say is definitely not the party line – I am seriously thinking about stopping money to the organisation. I do get comments in at meetings , always with a point that is worth making, and so far no one has queried me. My wife has come a long way round to my thinking, although she has her own misgivings as well. Protection starts here.… Read more »
My donations were the first thing I stopped. It is one thing you can stop doing that no one can question, or should even know about.
HI Meliti. There was an odd item on the meeting this week (under local needs) about supporting Assembly halls by direct contributions from those attending, and not by regular payments from the congregations. Goodness knows what that was all about, as there may be something the authorities object to , but nobody tells you what the reason is. There ALWAYS is a reason for change.
If the direct contributions at the assembly do not cover the budget, the congregations have “the privilege” of making up the shortfall. Maybe that is what they mean.
I have luxuries you don’t. I stated in another article that though I was born into the religion I’ve managed to live on the fringe of the congregation for most of my life – though there was indeed a time when I gave talks, and turned in time, and was involved in auxiliary pioneering. But once I started subconsciously “resisting” (for lack of a better term) the teachings in the literature, and holding those up to those I was learning just by reading my bible uninfluenced, and waking up to the fact that, for the most part, elders weren’t actually… Read more »
Thanks JA. That was encouraging. Hopefully no minefield today. No meeting.
Hi Psalmbee, I think you would agree that your situation is very different from those of us who were baptized and therefore held captive to the Org in a way you will never experience. That being said, it can sound very hollow and almost hypocritical when you are advising baptized JW’s to physically remove ourselves from the mix when there are a variety of factors we have to consider. Read Joseph Anton’s comment below to get the gist of what many of us are dealing with. I hope you don’t take this in a negative way, but to be able… Read more »
Nothing negative here Warp Speed, I respect your sentiments.
All positive here for sure. I hope in the future you will consider my comments from one that didn’t get caught in the trap and am looking at the ones that did and trying to help them out.
Thanks Psalmbee
Viewing sex crimes as sins and not crimes has created a hospitable habitat for predators who might be willing to risk a few years being shunned when faced with a compromising situation, but not twelve years of their lives in a penitentiary as the worst of the worst. (and pedophiles really are the worst of us) Since I believe most of these predators groom children whether they are conscious of it or not, they ultimately will find themselves at the moment of do or die. There is a point where they will finally get to the decision between risk vs… Read more »
IHB,
I think it is important for each of us to work through the numbers and this is what we should draw attention to with any jw. We need to show that this is the data submitted by the organisation. If they still wil not engage. We have to train ourselves on this info and then ask thought provoking questions.
In your way-forward conclusion, you say “All known offenders should not be allowed to undertake any public ministry with the congregation.” I feel you should explain and qualify the term “public ministry”. Child abuse is an enormous betrayal of trust, and because so much harm is done and so much trust destroyed, I feel the correct stance is that a known offender should be banned for life from ever holding any position of authority like elder or MS or ever viewed in any capacity that implies trust in them. They need more than a perfunctory slap on the hand. Yes,… Read more »
Robert, By the public ministry, I mean what jws call the first call (house to house) and trolley/Cart witnessing. These are arrangements made by the local congregation and normally supported by a few people and they have a short meeting. I concur with your sentiments but the challenge for a Christian is not to judge. King Mannasah was forgiven and he burnt his own sons. Jesus is the one who makes the judgement. I have to fight incredibly hard with every ounce of effort to get out of judgement mindset. My comment on public ministry is so that the congregation… Read more »
Yes, King Manasseh was forgiven, but not because he deserved it. The Law stipulated that deliberate murderers were to be put to death, such as in Numbers 35:16. God choose to pardon Manasseh due to the fact that he was the king, not because he was owed that. I have often struggled when people start talking about judging and forgiveness. Yes, Jesus said not to judge, but what did he mean? He is telling us that it is not our place to decide if some individual deserves God’s mercy or forgiveness or a resurrection. Fair enough. However, we are told… Read more »
Some people need to be restrained from damaging the lives of others – especially the most innocent, children – we all have to judge others to some degree – Jesus told us damaging the “little ones” was a very serious offense – there needs to be very serious consequences – you can still forgive a person who is locked up or put to death by the authorities
Not a large point, but the Anglican church is the church of England. France was a stronghold of the Catholic church. Unless I have misunderstood something (or you omitted some key point), your comments about Edmund Burke, France and the Anglican church do not seem correct. Perhaps you are suggesting Edmund Burke wanted the French to abandon the Catholic church and join the church of England? I am confused.
Robert, Edmund Burke initially supported the French Revolution. Once the executions etc. and violence escalated, he was very disillusioned and decided that traditions etc was the best way to maintain order. There was a danger that revolutionary fever might spread to Britain. His treatise was a defence of the institutions with all their ancient history. He was writing from an English perspective. He would have supported the French maintaining their traditional church. He is seen as the father of the Tory party (Conservative Party). The Revolution was over throwing the established order, and the new order needed a new set… Read more »
I take it then that he was only arguing that England should maintain ITS OWN traditions, not that France should adopt English traditions. If so, then yes, now it makes sense.