Tolerance, a (Sometimes) Dirty Word

I am a Quality Professional in my vocation. It's not something I love, but it has its curiosities. While it's of little interest to people in the consumer world, except at the warranty level, it has a great deal to do with how they live their lives and the reliability of the accouterments they employ. 

Engineers and designers often establish manufacturing tolerances (acceptable deviations from nominal values) to dictate how much slop they can accept and still have the construct work as intended. They are generally divided into Minor, Major, and Critical categories. The higher one escalates, the greater the chance of failure being catastrophic. Keep that in mind the next time your mechanic says that your brakes need replacing. 

Tolerance has also been used to express the acceptance of alternative lifestyles, religious views, political positions, ad infinitum. This is generally considered an admirable quality and paints people who are 'tolerant' as amenable to circumstances in which they would rather not participate. Whatever context is falls into, it encompasses the quality of knowing that there is a finite and accepted value for something, that it has not been met, and is still acceptable. Keep this thought in mind for the following.

A new story is emerging from the UK about Harry Holt. This grandfatherly looking chap to the right was an elder for many years. It has recently come to public attention (I emphasize 'public' because Watchtower was quite aware for many years) that Mr. Holt had sexually molested young women from his congregation throughout his life. He appeared before a judicial committee to face the accusation from one of his victims. He admitted to his dealings and was removed as an elder. Sometime later, it appears that he was reappointed to the position.

As the years progressed, he molested more girls, but it is only recently that he has been found out and is facing secular prosecution for his actions. The charges include crimes that span four decades.

Accusations have become almost commonplace among Jehovah's Witnesses. Predictable stories of child abusers facing only the lightest of punishments are punctuated by the rather comical assertion from Watchtower that it abhors the crime and sin of child abuse and does not cover it up.

Okay, I'll play along. Let's say that Watchtower doesn't cover up child abuse. I their October, 2012 Letter to Elders, Watchtower directed all elders learning of child abuse accusations to contact the Watchtower Legal Department for advice. This advice would expressly include information on mandatory reporting requirements for their locality. It should be noted that this letter has been removed from most public sources after Watchtower cited copyright infringement. However, it is not hard to find and it is troubling. 

Additionally, congregational audits that were to be conducted by December 31, 2015 included instructions on the destruction of Elders' personal notes about 'particular individuals', except those added to the congregation file. To their marginal credit, the Elders' manual (Shepherd the Flock of God, 2010 (abbreviated ks10)) does instruct in Chapter 2, p16 that reports of child abuse, proved or not, "should be placed in congregation's confidential file and marked "Do Not Destroy" and kept indefinitely". This unfortunately loses all credibility when you reach Chapter 5, p39 where they are instructed that if the accused denies allegations (even in the presence of the accuser), or the accused or accuser declines to meet with elders and there are no other witnesses to the alleged crime, the matter is dismissed and left to Jehovah. 

I temper the following paragraph by citing ks10 Chapter 12, p19 which says that reporting child abuse to authorities is the victim's "absolute right" and it should not be suggested otherwise. However, there is sufficient anecdotal evidence to establish that this advice is not always followed. 

Child abuse, however, in every measurable way, is a felony and deserving of a proper investigation by trained and legal authorities. By not reporting it to authorities, or by suggesting that "personal disputes" not be placed in front of secular authorities (ks10 12:22), they are implicitly tolerant of it. They know, without doubt, that it is a behavior that does not meet the established criteria (i.e. criminally offensive) and have explicit instructions on how to accept it.

Inasmuch as Elders are completely intolerant of multitudes of other non-criminal behaviors, their continued tolerance of crimes against children is genuinely baffling. As entire government entities begin to investigate mishandling of child abuse by Watchtower, we will begin to see more defensive behaviors. Time will tell how great the lengths they will go to to defend their corporation will be. I imagine it will be extensive and insufficiently humble. 

Previously I mentioned tolerance as necessitating and understanding of the finite and accepted value for something. There are few who would deviate from the finite and accepted value for child abuse being absolute zero. It is despicable to think that there is any community leader, religious or otherwise, who would not seek prosecution of crime against a child to its fullest extent.

This meets every conceivable definition of a "critical failure". The exceptional reach and scope of damage that child abuse does is staggering. It is destructive to individuals abused, their families, their relationships, and often their own children. When any single victim is protected with every measure afforded to those in a position to help (Elders), the protection encompasses a multitude of people. 

Jesus said that "to the extent you did it to least of these my brothers, you did it to me". Every time Watchtower fails a child, they fail their Savior. 

Every time...

I wonder how long they would tolerate that?