It all depends:

What does Mommy mean when she says "naughty pictures"? If she is thinking swimsuit, it's one thing, if she's thinking stiletto heels, blood-red nail polish and very long hair billowing around her nude torso while her tongue moves languidly along her lower lip.............. it's a very different thing. Judging from Mommy's use of the word "naughty", I would guess, spectacular bod notwithstanding, she is thinking rather the former. But then, she didn't write the letter.

What is the triangle set up here vis-a-vis LW and her mother in law? Why should LW give a damn about "competing" with her mother-in-law, and what is that about anyway, and why, oh why, would that be particularly exacerbated by some pics of a scantily clad bride?

And, what is the triangle set up here vis-a-vis hubby and mummy dearest? What, exactly, is the son's relationship with Mommy, and what is his intent in taking pics? What is the history behind this? Is there a subtext of an unresolved, but smouldering Oedipal thing going on here, or is hubby just remarkably obtuse, obtuse even as to his own motives and his own internal thoughts? (The latter sounds entirely plausible, frankly.)

Were I hubby, I'd locate a trusted professional colleague and hand off this portion of the assignment to him (or her), even if it is just Mommy in an Esther Williams swimsuit, just to quell LW's jealousy. That done, then I would hope that LW could take a clear and objective look at her own motives, her own fears of aging, and deal with them straight on, rather than sandbagging her mother-in-law, who, "naughty pics" aside, sounds hotter than a three-dollar pistol.

And, in the interests of equal opportunity, I would wonder why pics of scantily clad grooms couldn't be part of the "package" as well? Brides in thongs, grooms in Speedos...... Latent sexism operating here? No doubt....... That said, there is something rather touching about a person so comfortable in their own body that they would like to have some memorialization of it for their significant other......

On the accuracy of the rumor. Easy enough to confirm by LW's accessing the registry. Time to stop relying on the local rumor mill and find out for herself. Enough of the public opinion bs.

On what the pastor did, assuming that the allegations are correct. Did he commit statuatory rape at the age of 19 by groping the disrobed breasts of a 16 year old in a car at a local park, or is he a confirmed pedophile with a computer littered with compromising photographs of his victims? Was he captured by the police mooning a sorority whilst drunk out of his mind at the age of 19, or is he responsible for serial rapes?

On how LW feels about the spefics of the crime. Personally, I would have little difficulty listening to a minister who sustained either of the former examples of sexually offensive behavior, but would have massive difficulty with either of the latter two examples that I note. There is, of course, a massive grey area inbetween.

On where the minister is now. Was his sexual crime the turning point in his life? Is that when he decided to "turn things around?" Or was the crime committed whilst performing his duties? (One does tend to think of Haggard, poor chap, seeking out illicit and functionally, illegal sex with another sexual offender, a man willing to sell sex for money to a man willing to pay for it.)

The term "sexual offender" has compelling, even visceral impact, for it causes one to think, to pause, to associate the behavior of countless priests being shuttled around the parish landscape like so many chesspieces with devastating impact, or Ted Bundy, or Gacy, or any one of the magnetically malignant sexual offendors who capture public attention. The truth, while not wishing to be an apologist for any form of sexually offensive/illegal behavior, may well not be so gripping or so commanding, and may, when understood an interpreted, explain and provide depth to this man.

And, once armed with the information as to the minister's true transgressions, it really depends on LW's own code of ethics. Certainly, if this man is a confirmed pedophile or serial rapist, both sexual behaviors that tend to be unresponsive to pressures for change, the actions in terms of disseminating information to the congregation takes on a very compelling nature. However, if this man's crime was one of youthful indiscretion, then LW may well wish to think clearly about her actions.

And - I would guess that the minister, registered sex offender that he is, undoubtely has been asked the question and provided the answer repeatedly, including to the various control boards that manage the ministerial assignments in whatever denomination he ministers in with the obvious exception, of course, of most Catholic parishes.