Randy rectors

We were told that if we’d be rational about sex, get rid of moralistic hang-ups, and accept individual differences, then joy, health and freedom would reign. Apparently, that hasn’t happened: New Anglican Sex Scandal. A number of women are claiming that they were terribly damaged by sexual contact with Anglican clergymen who were either their pastors or colleagues, and got no sympathy from church authorities. It appears that there was something wrong with each of the women. The reporter says “vulnerable,” but that’s another way of saying “psychologically not-too-solid,” and the stories they tell bear that out. I can’t imagine what it would be like to try to figure out who did what and who behaved how badly to whom in such cases. With that in mind, here’s one possibility the Anglicans might want to consider: sex always involves vulnerabilities, and there’s no way for third parties to understand what goes on let alone keep it abuse-free. So rather than take on the hopeless task of policing sexual conduct while accepting consensual private conduct as legitimate, would it make sense for the Anglicans to decide that there’s no good place for sex outside of marriage and adopt ordinary Christian sexual morality as the standard?

Leave a Comment