by Elaine Radmer
For information on sources referenced in this article, see the “Sources and Further Reading” section below the article.
A situation is playing out repeatedly in churches across the country and in many denominations: male church leaders are revealed to have had sexual contact with an adult female congregant, employee, or volunteer. According to Garland and Argueta in “How Clergy Sexual Misconduct Happens: A Qualitative Study of First-hand Accounts,” this dynamic primarily involves a male leader and a female in his care. Thus, in this article we’ll examine two important aspects of consent between a woman and a man: the woman’s autonomy and the man’s trustworthiness. The criteria for sexual consent will be applied in a vignette that shows how a male church leader can misuse his religious, spiritual, and social power to create an environment where a woman engages in sexual interactions she doesn’t want.
Criteria for Consent
The core issue in consent is an individual’s autonomy, or “ability to freely make decisions” (Israel, 2), and use their own agency in their actions. Simply avoiding physical force is not sufficient to ensure consent; each person must be able to make up their mind about what they want. Specifically, a woman’s autonomy must not be substantially compromised. Three autonomy-compromising circumstances must be avoided:
- When a person does not have sufficient capacity to understand the options presented and to make a choice (for example, a child or intellectually disabled adult)
- When a person cannot use their capacity from the previous bullet (for example, because they are asleep, deceived, or too impaired by drugs or alcohol)
- When a person is not freely able to give or revoke consent (for example, being forced or coerced)
The above criteria draw attention to the possibility of deceit or unrelenting pressure in addition to physical force or intimidation. When autonomy has been compromised, consent is invalid, “and any acts deriving from it are de facto non-consensual and impermissible” (Israel, 2).
However, consent involves more than simply avoiding autonomy-compromising circumstances. An additional criterion, the Trust Condition, states that “in order to justifiably (and thus, validly) consent, one must trust the partner’s compliance with the consent” (Israel, 11). That is, a woman consenting to a man’s request must trust that she can say “no” and that her “no” will be accepted. In other words, “the partner also has a role and a duty in demonstrating their trustworthiness and warranting trust” (Israel, 11).
As per these criteria, consensual sex unfolds in back-and-forth iterations as both the man and woman choose to engage in what their partner wants. Because the partners are trustworthy, reluctance is not overlooked or ignored. Neither person pressures the other. Both people honor directly or indirectly communicated wishes. Each person is free to choose, confident that the other person is attuned to their wishes, even if signaled without words. Consensual sex is about reciprocal care and trust in that care.
The criteria for consent are, by definition, violated in sexual encounters between a male church leader and a female congregant, employee, or volunteer. For this reason, these encounters are called Adult Clergy Sexual Abuse (ACSA).
Adult Clergy Sex Abuse
ACSA typically progresses over a long period of time with complex interactions, so violations of consent occur incrementally. To illustrate how ACSA dynamics unfold, a vignette is presented that is intended to resonate with survivors’ stories while not intended to describe any actual event precisely. After the story, the details will be analyzed to show how the exchange was non-consensual because the woman’s autonomy was compromised.
Vignette
A church-based counselor invites a woman’s family to join his family on vacation. During the trip, the counselor begins to drink alone with the woman with increasing frequency and suggests to her that marriage vows are not to be taken literally. Eventually, on a day when they are alone and have consumed several drinks, the counselor tells the woman that he can help her marriage more if she has intercourse with him. She gives in.
- Does the woman have the capacity to understand and make a choice? Yes, she has no intellectual disability. She is legally “of age” to consent.
- Is the woman incapacitated for any reason? Probably not. However, the woman’s inhibitions are likely diminished by the alcohol consumption.
- Is the woman presented with a choice that she is freely able to respond to? Is she under any undue influence to give or revoke consent?
Has the counselor misused his authority to pressure the woman into complying with his sexually motivated pursuit? Yes, he used his standing as an expert in spirituality and morality to influence the woman to be less committed to monogamy with her husband. He was manipulative, implying that a good outcome was at stake if she refused him. His prolonged and gradually increasing pressure tactics made opposition less likely. In effect, his actions invalidated the woman’s ability to freely consent.
Licensed counselors have to abide by professional ethical standards restricting them from pursuing personal interests with clients (those they are attempting to help). Violating the standards can result in loss of credentials and thus the ability to practice legally. But when pastors act as counselors without licensing, there is a lack of oversight, and there are no systems set up to hold them accountable for any exploitation.
Misuse of power
To understand the application of the second criteria of consent, the Trust Condition, requires a realistic assessment of the scope of clergy power. The Trust Condition is much more relevant when one of the participants is a male church leader, as he holds an office of unparalleled trust. When any person is not trustworthy, their actions invalidate their partner’s ability to consent.
Throughout “civic government and civic leadership” (Doyle, 213), widespread deference results from “the mistaken belief that the members of the clergy are a spiritual elite, superior to the average lay person and in closer touch with the Almighty” (Doyle, 209). This means a woman, in considering the suitability of a sexual partner, is more likely to trust a male church leader than she is another man.
Additionally, the other people in her life are also likely to trust the male church leader more than they would trust someone differently situated. It is very difficult for most people to accuse clergy of any wrongdoing; they are more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt. In this mistaken assumption, the clergy “cannot and would not do anything considered to be evil or wrong” (Doyle, 213). In an unsettling example, Ravi Zacharias was celebrated at the time of his death. But an investigation later revealed that he had secretly used donations to fund opportunities for abuse, leading his ministry to regret their “misplaced trust” in him (Silliman and Shellnutt). Zacharias exemplified the harm that can be spread by a trusted church leader: “… the man so long admired by Christians around the world abused numerous women and manipulated those around him to turn a blind eye” (Sillman and Shellnutt).
Too often, in church communities that enable clergy abuse, clergy members behaved inappropriately in public, but observers did not respond to the unacceptable behavior, trusting the clergy more than their own perceptions. When bystanders don’t react to the church leader’s inappropriate behavior, the victim’s “alarm system [is] silenced” (Sillman and Shellnutt). The absence of concern by bystanders tacitly endorses the predatory behavior.
Thus, the Trust Condition involves a much higher standard for clergy and is violated by men who, while holding a clergy position, take steps to sexualize their interactions with women congregants, employees, or volunteers. Furthermore, the extraordinary trust people in church systems place in clergy members serves to increase the pressure on women to accept their sexual advances. When trusting a male church leader is the only thinkable option, the exploitation of women’s bodies becomes so much more likely.
Once a sexualized relationship starts, the man can further manipulate trust by creating a narrative that explains the ongoing sexual contact. For example, he might suggest that a valued ministry’s success relies on her secrecy, or he might use his authority to suggest that the situation is “an affair” in spite of the woman’s lack of autonomy and his violation of trust. On average, women spend four years involved in this type of situation (Pooler and Barros-Lane, 123–133). During that span of time, the clergy member continually violates the Trust Condition so that a woman feels confused about whether or not she is being exploited.
Conclusion
In healthy relationships, both partners have the autonomy to choose wanted sexual interactions, and both are trustworthy enough to accept the other’s preferences. These criteria are not met when male church leaders use their social and religious power to undermine a woman’s will. In addition to compromising autonomy, these men violate trust when they use a woman’s body for their own benefit.
Sources and Further Reading
Doyle, Thomas P. “Roman Catholic Clericalism, Religious Duress, and Clergy Sexual Abuse.” Pastoral Psychology 51, (2003): 189-231.
Garland, Diana R., and Christen Argueta. “How Clergy Sexual Misconduct Happens: A Qualitative Study of First-hand Accounts.” Social Work & Christianity 37, no. 1 (2010): 1-27.
Israel, Eli Benjamin. “Caring for Valid Sexual Consent.” Hypatia, 2024, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/hyp.2024.42.
Pooler, David Kenneth and Liza Barros-Lane. “A National Study of Adult Women Sexually Abused by Clergy: Insights for Social Workers.” Social Work 67, (2022): 123-133.
Silliman, Daniel and Kate Shellnutt. “Ravi Zacharias Hid Hundreds of Pictures of Women, Abuse During Massages, and a Rape Allegation.” Christianity Today, Feb. 11, 2021.
© 2025 by Elaine Radmer and Christian Feminism Today
Please contact us for permission before reprinting any portion of this article.
