Can a lay minister counsel a vulnerable woman and then start dating her? If sex acts occur, can he be charged if he exploits her dependency on him, thus negating her consent?

get ready to make some new law.

you might rely on cases interpreting the clergy privilege as that might be what courts have to fall back on to answer your question, and it's defined broadly enough to encompass a lay minister. also other states may have looked at similar situations(talbert v. state, 2006 WL 2699903) and that could help as well.

There are a multiplicity of questions in your brief query that do not lend themselves to a succinct response.

First, on the issue of whether a lay person performing counseling services in a church is a �clergyperson� for purposes of 22.011, I would strongly suspect that no Episcopal Diocese would regard a person who was not ordained to Holy Orders as being a �clergyman.� There is a plethora of caselaw on the 1st Amendment ministerial exception, e.g. Rayburn v. General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 772 F.2d 1164 (4th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, wherein � in civil ADA and Title VII matters -- the courts would not apply such to ordained clergy but would entertain such suits for lay employees of churches. The issue is distinguishing between clergy and lay and the exception would not apply to lay employees while working in or for a church.

Secondly, however, if the actor misused the position of the office and engaged in activities which are secular in nature, i.e. counseling, then he might well be considered as functioning as a mental health provider and still covered by Tex. Penal Code �22.011. Certainly in a civil case in Colorado, Destefano v. Grabrian, 763 P.2d 275, 1988, the clergyperson was held to a stricter civil standard in just such a circumstance. In a similar Texas case, Hawkins v. Trinity Valley Baptist Church, 30 SW3d 446, (Tex. App. � Tyler 2000) liability was found under Tex. Civ. Pract. & Rem. Code Chapter 81. Thus, if in the eye of the victim, the person was providing mental health services, even sans license, there is an abuse of a fiduciary relationship, clergy or no. Whether this is to be pursued civilly or criminally is another matter.

on whether the point of the statute is to punish clergy or to protect folks who are assaulted by someone trading on a spiritual advisor relationship. the issue only comes up as a question of whether or not the victim consented. however, the term "professional" at the end of 22.011(b)(10) would seem to exclude lay ministers.

[This message was edited by David Newell on 10-08-07 at .]