Madam, – I have been following with bemusement the recent letters against women priests in the Roman Catholic Church – some, shamefully, from women. It seems there is no end to the inventiveness with which the writers will justify their misogyny. On September 28th, one of your correspondents suggested that women priests would only compound the problem of clericalism! On September 29th, we had a priest hanging it on an arbitrary papal prescription – as if such prescription could never be changed or reversed. A woman writer fastened on the gender-maleness of Christ without explaining why priests should therefore not also need to be Jewish, bearded (probably) inhabitants of the Roman empire – and sons of carpenters, of course.
The Anglican and nonconformist Christian churches, thank God, are much more grown up, recognising that “mankind” does not necessarily mean “man” alone. If Jesus has any relevance to the whole human condition, he must encapsulate the former, not the latter. Inherent in western Christianity, developed through the centuries and leavened by humanism, is a tradition of the inclusiveness of love, and a recognition that all are equal in the sight of God. I was privileged to be present at an Anglican wedding ceremony recently. I felt no diminution of the power of the spirit just because the celebrant was female. She was, in that sense, “mankind”, representing me as well as her own gender.
Time and tide are against those who cannot accept womenkind as deserving of the call to priesthood. I think we can be quite confident that, sooner, or later, a pope will be elected who will act on this revelation (though he may have had to dissemble somewhat to get elected). But the next pope after that will not have to keep her opinions to herself. – Yours, etc,