Hard times for single pastors

Halden Doerge has flagged a New York Times article about the discrimination that single pastors face in seeking a call to conservative, Evangelical congregations. Halden calls out Albert Mohler in particular for making an idol of the family. The reporter quotes Mohler saying, "Both the logic of Scripture and the centrality of marriage in society (justify) the strong inclination of congregations to hire a man who is not only married but faithfully married."

It's a minimalist "logic of scripture" that would look askance at single clergy. I think where it comes from is limiting one's thinking on the matter to 1 Corinthians 7:9 and 1 Thessalonians 4:4 (AV). Those two texts in isolation yield a sexual ethic that begins and ends with finding a suitable receptacle for semen.

Within these parameters single clergy, especially single male clergy, are hopelessly compromised. Why? Because men ejaculate periodically. Our bodies churn out sperm and seminal fluid; there's no helping it, and sooner or later, they'll find their way out in one of three ways: intercourse, masturbation or nocturnal emissions. The first is fornication for the single, while the second and the third inevitably involve some kind of lust (erotic dreams accompanying the sadly involuntary third exit). And if we expand our proof texts for sexual ethics to include Matthew 5:28, then by definition, single men are implicated in sexual sin and thus are unfit for ordained ministry.

Thus the only solution, as Mohler sees it, is to get thee to the church on time, or else you won't be preaching in any church anytime. I guess that Mohler's not going to want to get into any kind of casuistic analysis of when masturbation might be a permissible concession to what biology and providence have wrought concerning the lack of an available and suitable "vessel."

Boy, I'd hate to be a pastor's wife in Mohler's worldview. Your role in life is to be a sperm bank for your godly head of household and maybe the piano player and/or CE director. How depressing.

In a sense, the church puts single clergy in the same bind as it does gay and lesbian clergy. Biology fates both groups to sin and disapprobation because when the Church isn't thinking beyond a few proof texts, it's simply refusing to incorporate what we've learned about the human body and human sexuality.

This is not a Barmen Declaration moment. This is not the Church standing courageously against the onslaught of decadent neo-paganism. This is the Church requiring not faith but what Tillich calls "intellectual good works" as the price of salvation and belonging. Not that I think that Tillich's own sexual ethics should be any guide to clergy ethics. But seriously, can't we get beyond any of this?

Comments

[Beloved Spear]

I don't think we'll get past it until we've articulated a clear ethical alternative, one that has integrity beyond just acceding to cultural norms and expectations.