The Guardian
Letters
119 Farringdon Road
London  EC1R 3ER

Dear editor,

I noted with frustration that the discussion of the ordination of
women in today's (10/11/92) Guardian 2 considered ecumenicism
only in the context of the Anglican and Catholic churches.  It's true
that the ordination of women by the Anglican church would harm
relations between Canterbury and Rome much more than they would help
relations between the Anglican and Protestant churches.  But that's
just because current relations between the Church of England and {\em
other} Protestant churches are already very good. It seems most
Protestant denominations are open-minded enough to tolerate (for a
short while more) the current sexism in the Church of England; if only
Rome could be open-minded enough to tolerate equality.

It is my view, however, that opposition to women priests will die down
as soon as people become used to seeing women at the altar in robes,
etc. Then they will no longer worry, say, how ``ridiculous" pregnant
women will look under priestly garments (should we refrain from
ordaining the obese?  should we consult Rome on this issue too?).  My
mother and sister (oh yes, and my father) are ordained in the United
Methodist church; my sister's black bishop spoke at my univerity
graduation ceremony (and *her* sermon was most inspiring). Such
familiarity with women clergy and their valuable capacity to perform
*any* aspect of God's work has the effect that I am saddened by the
thought that people might leave the church simply because it starts
ordaining women, saddened in the same way one might be by the thought
of people who left the church because it started ordaining blacks.

Yours Sincerely,

Ronald L. Chrisley
Lecturer in Philosophy
University of Sussex, Brighton