Church misogynists
Sir: I agree with everything said by Lord Lauderdale and others (Letters, 29 September) except for their objection to women priests. Since neither they nor any other opponents have, to my knowledge, expressed a convincing theological argu- ment against female ordination, I can only conclude that their objections are based on a desire not to extend the opportunities available to women any further. Presum- ably people objected similarly to women becoming doctors, lawyers, politicians, government ministers — but luckily their objections did not prevail. Many of the people objecting to women becoming priests (though not, to my knowledge, any of the signatories of the letter) are, quite simply, misogynists.
If and when women are ordained, the Anglican Church will be reunified. The regrettable departure of many clergy and lay people, because of their ordination, will be far more than compensated for by the new members of the priesthood. I repeat that I agree with almost all the rest of the letter (I have some reservations over abortion). Especially, I support the signa- tories' desire to see the Church of England `as the church of the land available to all', aiming to minister to all who do not specifically 'opt out' by belonging to another Christian denomination or a diffe- rent religion.
Why cannot Lord Lauderdale and his colleagues separate completely the ques- tion of the ordination of women from all the other considerations set out in their letter? Many, like me, would then wholeheartedly support them over these other matters, while wishing to see wwien ordained into the priesthood.
David W. Lloyd 17 Fore Street, Harlow, Essex
Previous page
