Another day, another sex abuse crisis in an authoritarian flavor of Christianity. This time, it’s the Jehovah’s Witnesses facing the music. Authoritarian Christians keep thinking it won’t happen in their church, right up until it does. And when—not if—it does, they act completely shocked. They shouldn’t. Any really authoritarian religious group will sprout all forms of abuse in time. There’s no way to prevent any of it, nor to safeguard its most vulnerable members.
Today, we explore the newest sex abuse crisis in Christianity, then explore the commonalities between so many of them.
(This post first went live on Patreon on 9/23/2025. It’s available there as well!)
SITUATION REPORT: Jehovah’s Witnesses leaders face a huge sex abuse crisis
On July 6, 2025, news emerged of a sex abuse crisis in the Jehovah’s Witnesses group. In 2019, Pennsylvania state investigators began probing the religious group for information about sex abuse. They’ve found numerous internal reports of sex abuse, most of it involving children. Church and denominational leaders who found out about abuse reported almost none of it to state authorities.
As one survivor put it:
[I]t’s not just a seed, and it’s not just a little personal thing — it’s rooted all the way up to the headquarters.
That source claimed 16 arrests and 11 convictions, but a 17th occurred just days later.
Lawyers have begun advertising their willingness to take on lawsuits against the denomination. They smell money in the water. It wouldn’t be the first time they did, either. In 2020, the BBC reported on a similar big lawsuit in the UK, but it quickly disappeared—likely settled as the denomination has done with so many others: with gobs of cash and airtight non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). They like to settle these things, and they don’t seem to mind the huge payments involved.
Why this abuse crisis isn’t a surprise: Authoritarianism again
None of this should surprise anyone once they know that the Jehovah’s Witnesses denomination is extremely authoritarian in structure.
First and foremost, the denomination features a central control hub called the Governing Body. This all-male group consists of 11 members. They hold utter and absolute authority over everything about the Jehovah’s Witnesses. They appoint sub-leaders throughout the denomination without elections or member input of any kind. Congregations must follow their orders to the letter. And if a leader decides to interrogate a follower over their “sins,” the follower must cooperate and accept that leader’s judgment no matter what.
As we see in so many other authoritarian organizations, members may not ever so much as question the orders their leaders give. As their main publication has noted:
From the very outset of his rebellion Satan called into question God’s way of doing things. He promoted independent thinking. [. . .] How is such independent thinking manifested? A common way is by questioning the counsel that is provided by God’s visible organization. [Source: “Exposing the Devil’s Subtle Designs,” 1983 Watchtower; Wayback Machine archive; local image archive.]
All of us face temptation to sin. [. . .] Still another may be struggling with fear of man, independent thinking, a quick temper, or something else. As James states, “each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire.” [“Keep on Guard Against Temptation,” September 2024 Watchtower; Wayback archive; local image archive.]
One can find this phrase “independent thinking” condemned everywhere in the denomination—and discussed frequently in the ranks of its apostates. Followers are so completely indoctrinated to reject “independent thinking” that it can be very difficult for them to pick up the habit after deconversion!
As one might expect in a group that despises “independent thinking” so much, church leaders hold unilateral and complete power over their followers. Followers cannot refuse any demands made upon them by leaders. As one former member revealed, followers consult their leaders about any and all situations in their lives. Though they recently seemingly relaxed some evangelism-reporting rules, local leaders still determine whether or not each follower is doing enough evangelism overall. If leaders decide they’re not, they can make life very difficult for that follower.
Once someone dissents enough or (heavens forfend!) leaves the denomination, the rest must shun that person forevermore. Even if the apostate is a family member, nobody is allowed to talk to them or interact in any way until they return to the fold. After years of extremely tight-knit belonging, this treatment can hit apostates hard.
I’ve talked numerous times about the authoritarian nature of modern American evangelicalism. But even the most powerful evangelical leaders can only wish they had this level of control over their followers.
The authoritarian religious groups we’ll be drawing from today
For today’s topic, I’ll be drawing from not only Jehovah’s Witnesses, but also other similarly-structured religious groups in America such as:
- Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)
- Roman Catholic Church (RCC)
- United Pentecostal Church, International (UPCI, and the one I deconverted from)
- Scientology (not Christian, but a good test group as they share all of those common traits)
Some of these groups are small, others huge. Some are fairly new, while others have been around for millennia. But they share the same structural weaknesses found in almost all authoritarian groups. My point today is that the structure is the issue here, not the specific ideology of the group in question. Any specific ideology is just a window-dressing for the structure. It always has been.
Abuse commonality #1: No accountability for group leaders
As mentioned above, authoritarianism wouldn’t exist without leaders having a whole lot of authority over followers. If the leaders are truly accountable for any bad judgment calls they make or wrongdoing they commit, then we have a functional authoritarian system. Functional authoritarianism isn’t always bad. The modern American military tries hard to have that kind of accountability in leaders. Most businesses are run this way too.
Not every group wants a lot of input from non-leaders about every aspect of its operations. As long as its leaders are accountable for their actions, the group is fine. It can accomplish its own stated goals. Nobody abuses anybody.
But when a group lacks real accountability for its leaders, there’s absolutely no preventing it from becoming dysfunctional authoritarian in nature. Such groups cannot accomplish their own stated goals. They are only paths to power for their leaders. Leaders no longer look for qualifications and suitability in their lieutenants. Instead, they seek only unquestioning loyalty—particularly in keeping secrets.
If even one bad-faith actor makes it into a powerful role and cannot be ejected, then the group is doomed. It’s really that simple, and it’s really that devastating.
We can see this lack of accountability all throughout the more authoritarian flavors of Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church shielded pedophile priests for centuries—and, just as depicted in the brilliant 2015 movie Spotlight, its leaders actively silenced sex abuse victims to keep their wrongdoing out of sight.
In Christianity, followers trust their leaders far more than they should. Often, they perceive religious leaders as being much more righteous and morally upright than regular pew-warmers. In dysfunctional authoritarian groups, leaders dial this perception up to 11. Again, leaders in dysfunctional groups appoint lieutenants based on loyalty, not suitability or virtue. The last thing a hypocritical leader really wants is a truly righteous lieutenant!
In other groups, we see this same lack of accountability. The SBC famously has zero accountability for any high-ranking pastors or denominational leaders. In the UPCI, high-ranking pastors have repeatedly helped abusive ministers stay out of trouble—or at least, out of the news. Scientologist leaders teach followers that it is a “high crime” to report any other Scientologist to police. Without any fears of legal repercussions, hypocrisy can run rampant and be easily hidden.
When a high-ranking authoritarian leader gets outed as an abuser, watch what happens next. If that leader hops right back into leadership again somewhere else, that organization does not hold its leaders accountable. That means it is dysfunctional. It should be avoided at all costs.
Abuse commonality #2: Leaders not only aware of abuse but shielding abusers
To keep their power safe, dysfunctional authoritarian leaders maintain a very strict hold on what news gets to flocks and what gets blocked. They know all, but reveal little. As just one example of how well this system works to prevent unwanted news leaking, a major sex abuse case unfolded while I attended my first UPCI church. It centered on a youth minister at a nearby UPCI church. My first pastor was instrumental in its cover-up. My Evil Ex Biff was a youth minister for that pastor at the time, so we frequently hobnobbed with him and his family. I didn’t know anything happened for decades, and I feel confident in saying Biff never found out.
Authoritarian leaders in general tend to know a lot about what their lieutenants and followers are doing. But when we drift into dysfunctional authoritarian groups, that’s when that knowledge becomes dangerous to leaders’ power. They’re there because they’ve convinced the flocks that they deserve to be there. If they’re found to be abusive or shielding abusers, that will be a serious dent in their reputations and credibility.
So we get three weird outgrowths of this principle:
- Leaders maintain secret databases of abusers and abuse cases
- Only internal processes deal with any abuse cases
- Abusers get shuffled around to other churches—without alerting their congregations, of course
How this common thread plays out in real life
I was still new enough at SBC politics to be a little surprised about their secret abuse database when news of it first came out. They also used only internal processes to deal with abuse, and they also shielded abusers and shuffled them to other, unsuspecting churches. (Darrell Gilyard’s career is a great example of all of these responses.) But then I found out about all the other similar abuse databases and cover-ups operating within dysfunctional authoritarian groups:
- Roman Catholic dioceses had been keeping tabs of abusive priests for years on at least a local level, and of course covered up all information about those priests for many years and shuffled priests around constantly
- Scientologist leaders allegedly knew that their lieutenants and co-leaders were abusing and raping minors—and did everything they could to keep those abusers out of the news and their victims quiet
- UPCI leaders knew of abusive ministers, but still kept appointing them to leadership roles at new churches and giving them new leadership roles within the UPCI denomination; alleged abusers with powerful family connections or a lot of popularity tend to be untouchable
Today’s guest stars, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, are no different. Their leaders are so dedicated to keeping their internal abuse database from reaching public awareness that they’re happy to pay millions of dollars in court-ordered fines to avoid it.
If the group’s leaders absolutely must do something, often all that happens is an internal review of some sort. That review frequently concludes with finding no wrongdoing at all or having completely resolved any minor issues named. The flocks accept this finding because of their intense indoctrination, and that is the end of it.
The real surprise about the SBC’s sex abuse crisis was that the flocks didn’t accept an internal review and demanded an external one with full transparency to the public!
Abuse commonality #3: Group culture demands silence from abuse victims
In dysfunctional authoritarian groups, abuse victims tend to stay quiet about what they’ve experienced. Their entire indoctrination silences them. Often, their abusers are leaders at least on a local level. Thus, their group will likely side against victims. All too often, the group will blame victims for having encouraged their own abuse somehow.
We see this dynamic in the 2020 defamation lawsuit filed by UPCI pastor Stephen Barker against former church member Emily Calderon and 20 Jane Does. Calderon raised awareness of sex abuse allegedly perpetrated by Barker’s brother-in-law Raul Rodriguez. When he was 23, Rodriguez allegedly groomed and molested a 13-year-old girl, the daughter of a preacher. The pastor of the church at the time, Harvey Cantrell, claimed in turn that the girl dressed in tight clothing and behaved promiscuously.
We saw a similar attempt at deflection and victim-blaming when an evangelical megachurch leader, “Pastor G,” got tried for similar crimes. The 2019 bombshell “Abuse of Faith” report described similar deflection and retaliation against SBC ministers’ victims.
Of course, Scientologist leaders’ harassment and retaliation against former members has been common knowledge for years. Former members speak of an isolation program called “the Hole,” where members languished at leaders’ command. So one can only imagine how difficult it is for any group member to speak up in any situation, much less in abuse situations.
In the Jehovah’s Witnesses denomination, abuse reports get dismissed unless two eyewitnesses corroborate the abuse claim. If anyone reports abuse but doesn’t have two other eyewitnesses to help, the person reporting gets punished for making a false accusation. So abusers can do whatever they want—as long as they avoid doing it in front of two or more other people! The denomination also requires accusers to face the person being accused, which must be very daunting indeed for authoritarian followers.
Abuse commonality #4: Patriarchal systems disempower women while men protect each other
All of the religious groups discussed today, most especially including the Jehovah’s Witnesses, feature deeply male-dominated, patriarchal structures that deny women leadership and input.
Those who are powerless and voiceless in dysfunctional authoritarian systems are sitting ducks for abuse. It’s only a matter of time and opportunity. Nothing—not family connections, not wealth, not length of volunteer service, nothing—will stop it from happening. Most of the cases linked today involve victims who had one or more of those links to power, but it did nothing to save them.
Abusers seek powerless and voiceless victims. That’s why these cases tend to center only on women and children. When adult men get victimized, often it’s in situations where the power dynamic vastly favors the abuser—like Roman Catholic seminary leaders abusing students. (Also, have a 2002 roundup of similar stories and a 2024 case writeup.)
(It’s noteworthy that Scientology allows both men and women to seek high-level positions within the organization. Most of the highest-level leaders seem to be male, however.)
Among Jehovah’s Witnesses, of course, women can not only never hold positions of power over men, but must cover their heads in a variety of situations including public prayer!
Often, these groups will promise safety to their more vulnerable members if they follow behavioral and dress rules. That’s why UPCI leaders victim-blamed that one teen for her tight clothing and so-called “promiscuous” behavior. It’s also why evangelicalism embraced “purity culture” in the 2000s-2010s. But these rules don’t stop abusers. All they do is reveal the most vulnerable, obedient victims in the flock.
Once victims get hurt, the group often demands they forgive their abusers and never talk about it again. Dysfunctional authoritarian leaders insist that “God’s justice” is far more punitive and serious than anything mere humans could do.
Abuse commonality #5: Group culture isolates members from those who could call attention to the abuse and help victims
Obviously, a lot of what we’ve discussed today depends heavily on victims never hearing any input from people outside their group. The moment someone pushes back against an ideology that enables abuse, the flocks start getting all kinds of wild ideas about resisting and rejecting it. So leaders keep their followers well away from such influences.
In the pre-internet age, leaders had an easier time doing that. Nowadays, it’s harder—but hardly impossible.
As one might guess, Jehovah’s Witnesses leaders discourage friendships and relationships with outsiders. When I was UPCI, my leaders did the same. I hear they’re even worse these days. Nowadays, leaders push a modern emphasis on homeschooling. They hope to keep kids away from secular influences. Similarly, Scientologist leaders can demand that followers “disconnect” from any friend or loved one the leaders think may become a negative influence.
Within these insular groups, potential victims learn nothing about setting healthy boundaries or the essential need for consent in sexual matters. Instead, they learn about obedience and fake safety protocols.
However, such insularity doesn’t just prevent secular influence.
It also prevents abuse victims from accessing help or pursuing justice against their abusers.
The ideology doesn’t matter, only the structure
When I say a group’s ideology doesn’t matter, this is what I’m talking about. We’ve checked out a number of groups today that all share common signs of dysfunctionality. They all keep sprouting abuse stories. They all share the same responses to criticism and whistleblowing. Their leaders all share the same emphases on loyalty and self-interest above all other considerations.
None of this should surprise anyone familiar with what undergirds these groups’ ideology.
It doesn’t matter which authoritarian group one joins. If vigilant care is not taken to avoid it falling into dysfunctionality, then that’s what will happen. Once it does, the only way to protect oneself from abuse in these groups is never to be part of them at all. (That’s why I mocked Russell Moore for leaving the SBC, only to join a nondenominational evangelical church with a very similar power structure. He seriously thinks he’s figured this thing out!)
Leaving these groups is far easier said than done, granted. Hopefully, though, as more of these cases come out, more followers in these groups will question their indoctrination—and dare to do exactly that.
NEXT UP: We tackle the next Alpha Course video, which completely fails to answer its own title’s question. See you soon! <3
Please support my work!
Thanks for reading, and thanks for being part of our community! Here are some ways you can support my work:
0 Comments