During Geoffrey Jackson’s testimony in the Australian Royal Commission, Angus Stewart tried to determine whether or not Jehovah’s Witnesses would consider changing their policy toward reporting allegations of child sexual abuse to the authorities.
Let’s analyze this exchange:
Stewart. Mr Jackson, let’s make it a little more concrete, then, in a very specific example. You will know that one of the things that has emerged in the last couple of weeks is that in Australia at least, in the Jehovah’s Witness organisation, there is a practice of not reporting child sexual abuse allegations to the authorities unless required by law to do so. Do you accept that?
Jackson. I am not familiar with the statistics or the general practice, but I can tell you why there is a spiritual dilemma because of this question.
Stewart. Well, that’s what I’m driving at. Perhaps you can address that question specifically, which is this: is there a scriptural basis to that policy or practice, being not to report child sexual abuse allegations to the authorities unless required by law to do so?
Jackson. Thank you for the opportunity to explain this. I think very clearly Mr Toole pointed out that if the Australian Government, in all the States, was to make mandatory reporting, it would make it so much easier for us. But, let’s say, the spiritual dilemma that an elder has is to consider how did he get the information that he has been told? Now, there is a scriptural principle in the book of Proverbs, chapter 25 ‐ and I’m not saying, Mr Stewart, that any one of these principles takes precedence, but it is something that the elder would need to take into consideration. So Proverbs 25 verses 8 through 10. That’s on page 905:
Do not rush into a legal dispute, for what will you do later if your neighbour humiliates you? Plead your case with your neighbour, but do not reveal what you were told confidentially, so that the one listening will not put you to shame and you spread a bad report that cannot be recalled.
Now, I’m not saying, Mr Stewart, this is the only factor, but it is one factor that all ministers of religion have grappled with when it comes to an issue such as this.
If this is such an important principle that elders have to grapple with in handling reports of alleged child abuse that come to them, why is this not mentioned in Shepherd the Flock of God? Instead elders are instructed in that manual to immediately call the branch office for direction if they learn of an accusation of child abuse. Apparently Proverbs 25:8-10 does not apply when it comes to notifying the branch. A search of the WT CD Library reveals that this scripture is only discussed in connection with Jesus instruction in Matthew 18:15-17 for how an adult Christian should handle a matter when he feels he has been sinned against by another adult Christian. This is not the same as rape or child abuse which the very same manual in the next paragraph admits is a crime.
“Child abuse is a crime. Never suggest to anyone that they should not report an allegation of child abuse to the police or other authorities.” (2010 Shepherd the Flock of God chapter 12)
Jackson continues with his next Bible principle:
The second issue is that elders are told, as is mentioned in 1 Peter, chapter 5, page 1625, verses 2 and 3 ‐ do you have that, Mr Stewart?
Stewart. I do?
Jackson. Yes: Shepherd the flock of God under your care, serving as overseers, not under compulsion, but willingly before God; not for love of dishonest gain, but eagerly ‐‐
and then this is the point ‐‐
not lording it over those who are God’s inheritance, but becoming examples to the flock.
The point being, here, another aspect that an elder needs to consider is he does not have the authority to lord it over or take over control of a family arrangement, where a person ‐ let’s say it is a victim who is 24 or 25 years of age ‐ has a right to decide whether or not they will report that incident. They also respect the family arrangement that the appointed guardian, who is not the perpetrator, has a certain right, too. So this is the spiritual dilemma that we have, because at the same time, we want to make sure that children are cared for.
So if the government does happen to make mandatory reporting, that will make this dilemma so much easier for us, because we all want the same goal, that children will be cared for properly.
If Jackson is so concerned that children are cared for, it is indeed puzzling why his example uses a victim who is 24 or 25 years of age. As difficult as it is for an adult victim to come forward it is much worse for a confused child who may have been emotionally groomed and or threatened into silence by his/her abuser. A child in that mental state needs an advocate and help to report to proper authorities instead of merely being told that he has the right to do so. In reality, however, many victims report having been discouraged by the elders from reporting because it might bring reproach on Jehovah’s name.
In his use of 1 Peter 5:2,3 Jackson reasons that it would be wrong and considered “lording it over God’s inheritance”, for elders to require members to report a crime to the authorities. What he does not mention is, when it comes to wrongdoing in the congregation, there is mandatory reporting in place. All members are expected to report sins to the elders.
In an article entitled: “Why Report What Is Bad?” the Watchtower states the following:
But what if you are not an elder and you come to know about some serious wrongdoing on the part of another Christian? Guidelines are found in the Law that Jehovah gave to the nation of Israel. The Law stated that if a person was a witness to apostate acts, sedition, murder, or certain other serious crimes, it was his responsibility to report it and to testify to what he knew. Leviticus 5:1 states: “Now in case a soul sins in that he has heard public cursing and he is a witness or he has seen it or has come to know of it, if he does not report it, then he must answer for his error.”—Compare Deuteronomy 13:6-8; Esther 6:2; Proverbs 29:24. (The Watchtower August 15, 1997 pg. 27)
Apparently, Jackson believes that God requires wrongdoing to be reported to the congregation elders but not to the secular authorities.
Stewart. Let’s take the situation in a family where one of the children, let’s say the eldest, reports having been abused by her father.
Jackson. Yes, sorry, sir, a question?
Stewart. Yes, if that report is accepted as having validity, you would accept that the potential is that the other children in the family remain at risk?
Jackson. That is correct.
Stewart. And by not reporting to the authorities, is the case not that the confidentiality of the one who reported is regarded as being more important than to protect those who are still at risk?
Jackson. No, Mr Stewart, if I could just ‐ what I’m trying to highlight is there are several factors that make it hard for a minister of religion to make a clear‐cut or quick decision on this matter. Obviously, I think, again, what has been highlighted to the Commission, the elders should encourage the guardian of the child, or whoever is in that family arrangement that is not the perpetrator, to notify the authorities.
The fact that the Australian branch had on record 1,006 cases of child abuse and none were reported to authorities would indicate that elders had not been very enthusiastic or convincing in encouraging non abusing parents and guardians to notify the authorities.
Stewart. Leaving aside the question of overriding mandatory law from the civil authorities, do you see the possibility within the scriptures as you have identified them for a change in the practice of Jehovah’s Witnesses? In other words, would it be within the scriptures for the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation to adopt a policy which says that in cases where there are others at risk, a report must be made to the authorities?
Jackson. That is a possible thing for us to consider, and I think, already, the assumption is there, that if any elder was to see that there was some definite risk, that their conscience should move them to do that. But the point I was trying to make, Mr Stewart, is there are other scriptural factors that maybe make that a little complicated, and it would certainly be a lot easier if we had mandatory laws on that.
It would now appear that Geoffrey Jackson has his wish. According to a news article in “The Age” beginning on Monday February 24, 2020 in Australia, laws requiring clergy to report child abuse to authorities, even if it’s heard as part of a confession to a priest or religious minister, will come into effect, thus ending the “special treatment” for Victoria’s religious institutions. Surely, now Geoffrey Jackson, along with the other members of the governing body must be relieved to see the introduction of this new law and are hoping that this will become the standard followed by other countries around the world.
What do you think?