Well, I do really respect your takes so will think about this further. That it was sexual harassment is clear. And a religious crime. Christian men were preaching sexual austerity—then putting women in the position of realizing the seminary was actually a harem.

That Michael Bird calls him a sex predator, and Victoria Gaile Laidler identified Tillich as abusive, seemed to establish that by the standards of the profession it was 'sex predation'.

That this was taking place in a Christian seminary seems to make the violation more extreme, because this was a clerical setting in which sex was taboo, and male rights were being theologically enforced.

The one story seemed telling: Tillich started to grab a female student who had entered his office—who then complained, and only the grudge against Tillich carried by the man she had complained to is what makes the story notable (the further details of the Reinhold Niebuhr story)—I see a Tillich who was not being seductive and asking permission. This was a "grab and go" guy.

Rollo May writes: “I have rarely met a woman who knew him who did not prize and treasure the experience" of doing S&M with Tillich.

That word "rarely" pops out for me. May knew more than he was letting on.