An article published by Beliefnet and no doubt countless others very soon if not already, reports that insurance companies that insure Protestant churches report numerous sex abuse cases every year.I am not sure why this would be "news" or even surprising. The Catholics have had all the press with this issue not only because it runs so deep but because it was revealed that they were fully aware of the sex abuse and pedophilia issues among priests for years, but decided to cover it up rather than expose it themselves and lance the boil that had been forming on the souls of countless parishioners over the years who would call their spiritual guide in life "father". To that end, there has still not been a constructive and consistent forum for people to talk through the issues with the church and it continues to get swept under the rug of ignorance. Rather than the issue being openly discussed in pastoral and theological terms, we continue to hear the issue in the hands of lawyers and lawsuits and litigation along with payoffs. It is as if a little cash from the Vatican coffers will heal the problem. Now we hear publicly that the Protestant churches have a similar or even the same issue in many of their congregations. About 7 years ago I went up for ordination trials in front of a very conservative presbytery in the Presbyterian Church (USA). After I was questioned with random doctrinal, pastoral, and governance issues repeatedly in an open forum of a standing behind a pulpit in front of pastors and delegates of all the churches in the region (I passed the trials by the way but decided the pulpit was not for me), a pastor then stood up in front of that same group but for a completely different purpose. He was a pastor in the midst of the Presbyterian judicial process due to his relationship with a member of the youth group in the church in which he was a pastor for many years. He also had a wife and kids during this relationship. As he stood before the Presbytery he said, "It is almost a shame that I stand before you now after we just heard one's passion for the ministry and intellect expressed." He then went on with profuse requisitions for forgiveness but seemingly without a direct apology. He was standing before the Presbytery to ask for reinstatement after his ordination had already been suspended by the Presbytery after the relationship he had with his parishioner had blown up against his family and against his church. The presbytery meeting included many members of his congregation. One of those members was visibly angry that this pastor would have the gall to come before them and ask to be reinstated just a year after he committed this misjudgment in relationship choice and made his petition to the presbytery to vote accordingly. The issue is that he was not contrite enough, and simply had not done a consistent and proficient enough job of making amends and seeking forgiveness. The presbytery voted almost unanimously not to reinstate him and that he needed to continue to seek forgiveness. This is clearly not a new issue, just approached differently in the bounds of church polity in this case at least. Now there can be no doubt that there are probably cases that are kept behind closed doors as with the Catholic church, but without the seemingly endless supply of cash from the Vatican, it becomes very difficult to pay hush money out to victims who come forward! But I submit that these are all symptomatic of a deeper theological problem in Christianity in general that is also intimately linked with the debates over homosexuality and its presence in the ministry. The problem is that Christians do not talk about sex - period! Christians only engage sex as a topic of what not to do rather than the nature of sex itself. Sure we celebrate babies all the time, but we do not celebrate the sexual union to produce them. If we cannot talk about sex on that most basic level, discussing it as a necessary and natural act between people who literally become one through that act never crosses our language and social taboo barriers. We simply do not have a sophisticated and deep enough understanding of sex as a natural human act as needed to propagate the species as food, and as needed an expression of erotic love as a hug and a peck on the cheek. So it remains hidden and taboo among parishioners as something "inappropriate" as if a good and deep discussion about sex would necessarily result in pornographic discussion. So it is as taboo in the churches as it is in our culture in general. The irony is that sexual behavior and desire is such a powerful message that the media uses to entice the desire of a viewer or listener to consume goods such as music, cars, food, alcohol, movies, perfume, softdrinks, and yes…video games. While this is more geared toward men, women must participate in the production of these messages in order to entice the men! If you are in a band doing cover songs at a bar, if you want to make money you need to play songs that women tend to like in order to keep the men around to buy them drinks - hence "ladies free" nights. You probably get the point even though we could all come up with 10 ways sexual behavior is a public means of enticing people for different consumerist purposes. So we act out our sexual inclinations on a regular basis, but when we try to discuss them, we are embarrassed or it is too shameful. It is such an odd paradox in our culture that it is baffling. So I will say it again: We consistently act out our sexual desires as our culture permits, but we are not permitted to discuss these desires for reasons of taboo and arbitrarily demarcated private boundaries. Any desire we have must have a vent of discussion to bring that desire under rational understanding and thus proper direction to a proper end or it will run out of control to improper ends. Freud called this the id and the superego that form a synthesis called the ego or self. Our innate desires (food and sex) come under the control of the rationality (the superego) and from this synthesis we get the ego or self. For the psychoanalyst the technique is to tap the unconscious mind of the ego (to reach the dialectic battle between id and superego) in order to bring these desires in a proper framework. And this is all done through articulation. While Freud continually comes under fire from counselors (my wife included) due to his over zealous attention on sex, there is some basic truth about how articulation leads to disclosing our desire and from that we gain a more rational and less intimidating view of ourselves. Not talking through these desires leaves them unchecked and so, improperly guided and directed. We know that there are a lot of gay pastors and priests who are simply not allowed to have the forum to discuss the desires that cause them pain daily because they cannot express them and so, these desires find poor direction and release where it is convenient and quiet. Heterosexual pastors like the one I discussed above have the same issue although they are allowed to be public with their relationships. Many more parishioners have the same set of problems due to the consistent strictures of our culture that do not allow us to articulate our sexual desires in concert with our theology and our relationship with God. This seems to be the very definition of dysfunction - when people have problems and keep them hidden until moments of stress tap them causing brief and sometimes permanent upheavals in relationships. Pastors and theologians need to do a much better job of not being afraid to discuss openly and honestly with adults and especially youth about desire and its role in our relationships. This is not in order to discuss the limits of sex - there is enough material that tell us what not to do. What we need are better open and honest discussions of our deep seated desires we probably have never discussed in order to bring them under the guidance and purview of the Kingdom of God as lived in the midst of our brothers and sisters in the church. Hinduism has a far more nuanced and spiritual view of sexual union as that which can bring one closer to moksha or release and thus closer to God. After all yoga means union! yet we use the same language in Christian sprirituality with regard to Christ through food in the Eucharist. So our desires of food are brought to use in spiritual terms regularly and we are reminded of gluttony and the poor regularly. Yet that other desire of sex remains hidden from view and remains unconditioned by our spiritual union with God. Bringing sexual desire under these conditions on a consistent basis is bound to have a profound effect on the health of marriage and this cycle of abuse we have given over to litigation rather than as a sacrifice to God. If we cannot name and express what makes us sexually aroused and even attracted to different people and different objects of desire, then the cycle of abuse will just continue and the Body of Christ will continue to bear the scars of our culture and its socially mandated limitations that continue to constrict the love of God that ought to exist in the very midst of our sexual union with another.