When reading through Shepherd the Flock of God and specifically looking for how the elders should handle the matter of rape and sexual abuse what I found was quite interesting. Please, note in this article that, not only have I quoted material from this book, but I have also uploaded copies of these quotes directly from the book and attached them below so you can see this for yourself.

To give you a little background: each congregation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is led by a group of men with authority to teach their members and discipline or counsel those who commit a “sin,” or are “spiritually weak,” meaning they do not attend regular services or meetings and/or do not participate in the door-to-door preaching activity; basically the elders ensure that their congregation or “flock” is running smoothly and meeting the requirements that the WBTS sets out for them. When a sin or wrong-doing is brought to the elder’s attention they form a “judicial committee” a group of maybe three or four elders to meet with this person who committed the sin and find out the details of said sin and determine whether or not this person is contrite. When anything like this takes place, often times the headquarters of the WBTS (the “branch office” is notified). Therefore, there are records of every member of this religious group and those who have committed “sins” have details of these sins in files in the congregation and in the branch office.

All of this being said, in Shepherd the Flock of God, chapter 5 which is entitled Determining Whether a Judicial Committee Should Be Formed, a list is presented of what should be considered “brazen conduct” or “loose conduct” which is defined as “filth[iness], lasciviousness, wantonness, unbridled lust,...outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence." What are some actions that would fall under this category? Below is a quote from Shepherd the Flock of God:

"10. Though this is not an exhaustive list, brazen conduct may be involved in the following if the wrongdoer has an insolent, contemptuous attitude

made evident by a practice of these things:

Willful, continued, unnecessary association with disfellowshipped nonrelatives despite repeated counsel.



Child sexual abuse: This would include fondling of breasts, an explicitly immoral proposal, showing pornography to a child, voyeurism, indecent exposure, and so forth.

Continuing to date or pursue a romantic relationship with a person though not legally or Scripturally free to marry, despite repeated counsel and generally after a warning talk to the congregation."

Child sexual abuse is thrown into the same category as association with a disfellowshipped (excommunicated) person and adultery??? The “practice” of this is considered “loose conduct” or “brazen conduct?”

What is an elder to do when he learns of an accusation of child abuse? Here is a quote from the same book:

“18. You should immediately call the branch office for direction if you learn of an accusation of child abuse, regardless of the age of the victim now or at the time of the alleged abuse, even if it occurred before the alleged perpetrator's baptism. The branch office will then give direction based on the circumstances involved in each situation.”

The next paragraph does say that child abuse is a crime and that the elders should “never suggest to anyone that they should not report an allegation of child abuse to the police or other authorities.” Also, “elders will not criticize anyone who reports such an allegation to the authorities.” However, why are the elders not protecting their “flock” and informing the authorities themselves? Why should the branch office of the WBTS be contacted immediately rather than the authorities if this is a crime?

There is also instruction given as to what should be done is a known molester moves into a congregation:

“20. When a known child molester moves to another congregation, the Congregation Service Committee should send a letter of introduction with full and complete information about his background and current situation. Any letter from the branch office concerning the child molester should not be photocopied or sent to the new congregation. However, the new congregation should be clearly informed of any restrictions imposed by the branch office. A copy of the letter of introduction should be sent to the branch office.”

Maybe it’s just me, but I am seeing some conflicting statements in this paragraph.

In regards to the person being accused of child molestation, this letter regarding the accused should include information such as:

“(1) What is his interaction with children?

(2) Does he admit to any activity with the accuser that could have been misinterpreted by the accuser as sexual abuse, or does he claim to have a poor memory of the accusation?

(3) What is his response to why the accuser has made the allegation?

(4) Has he had to be counseled for any other matters of a sexual nature, such as inappropriate conduct with adult sisters or pornography?

(5) What is the level of his spirituality?

(6) Do all the elders on the body believe that he can be trusted with children?”

What does the accused’s conduct with adult sisters (female members of the Witnesses) have to do with child sexual abuse? Notice that paragraph is assuming a predator is a man. If there are accusations of child sexual abuse taking place, why is anyone concerning themselves with his/her spirituality? I think the person’s spirituality is last the thing with which anyone should be concerned.

Here are questions that should be answered in regards to the accuser, in other words, the child:

(1) What is the level of maturity of the child or youth?

(2) Is he (or she) describing conduct that one his age would not normally know about?

(3) Is the child or his parents known to be serious, mature?

(4) Is his memory consistent, or is it intermittent, or does it involve repressed memories?

(5) What is the reputation of the parents?

(6) Are they spiritually and emotionally mature?

After carefully considering the matter, the branch office will then give you direction as to what information about the allegation should be shared, if any, with the elders of the new congregation.”

Why are these questions being asked about a child who is the victim of sexual abuse? Why is the parent’s maturity and spirituality, or lack thereof, coming into question? Most importantly in both sets of questions regarding the accused and accuser; why are the authorities not involved??? Why is the branch office or headquarters (use whatever terminology you want) of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society making decisions on how to handle this crime?

Also, what are the chances that there would be witnesses of a child being sexually abused by someone? There may be rare occasions when this happens, but what are the chances? The closest thing coming to it would be other children coming forward after a case has been made public. Here is another excerpt:

“38. If wrongdoing has not been established but serious questions have been raised, the body of elders should appoint two elders to investigate the matter promptly. For example, there may be just one witness. If so, it would be loving for the witness first to confront the accused and encourage him to take the initiative to approach the elders….

39. If the accused denies the accusation, the investigating elders should try to arrange a meeting with him and the accuser together. (Note: If the accusation involves child sexual abuse and the victim is currently a minor, the elders should contact the branch office before arranging a meeting with the child and the alleged abuser.) If the accuser or the accused is unwilling to meet with the elders or if the accused continues to deny the accusation of a single witness and the wrongdoing is not established, the elders will leave matters in Jehovah's hands….The investigating elders should compose a record, sign it, put it in a sealed envelope, and place it in the congregation's confidential file. Additional evidence may later come to light to establish matters.”

Again, no mention of involving the authorities. They are recommending that the accused confront the accuser and tell them to go the elders. Further in paragraph 38 they do recommend that the accuser not approach the accused by himself/herself, but why would you put the accuser/victim through such an ordeal?