Preface

by G. E. Duffield

from Why Not?
Priesthood and the Ministry of Women

edited by Michael Bruce & G. E.Duffield
Published by The Marcham Manor Press, 1972

WHEN C. S. LEWIS HEARD that Anglicans were considering the possibility of ordaining women, he wrote:

At first sight all the rationality . . . is on the side of the innovators. We are short of priests. We have discovered in one profession after another that women can do very well all sorts of things which were once supposed to be in the power of men alone. No one among those who dislike the proposal is maintaining that women are less capable than men of piety, zeal, learning, and whatever else seems necessary for the pastoral office. What, then, except prejudice begotten by tradition, forbids us to draw on the huge reserves which could pour into the priesthood if women were here as in so many other professions, put on the same footing as men? And against this flood of common-sense, the opposers (many of them women) can produce at first nothing but an inarticulate distaste, a sense of discomfort which they themselves find it hard to analyse. (Undeceptions, p.l92)

This book represents a cooperative attempt by Christians from very diverse denominational and theological traditions and different countries to set out the theological objections to ordination of women to the presbyterate. We believe Lewis was right. A great many people feel instinctively that there is something wrong about this possibility even though some other churches have ordained women (never on a large scale and rarely to any but the most obscure positions), and this symposium aims to give some theological reasons why such a course is not desirable, and at the end to suggest some better ways forward.

We have not sought to work out alternatives in detail, for such details would vary from church to church and from country to country. Our aim has rather been to consider the underlying theological issues, to give our reasons why the ordination of women to the priesthood is a mistaken solution to the question of the right place of women in the ministry of the Church, and then to offer outline alternatives.

The work had its origin some years back with the late Michael Bruce, and as far as the English contributors were concerned it was then planned as a largely catholic book. But when Michael discovered that evangelicals too felt doubts about ordaining women, he readily agreed to alter the project to include their contributions. Michael and I planned to edit the work jointly when death struck with unexpected suddenness, and I was left to replan on my own. I believed it right to keep to Michael's plan for a joint evangelical-catholic venture, and I wish to thank Roger Beckwith for his considerable help in reconstituting the work. It is only fair to add that some of the original contributions were written a few years back, but I trust that others of more recent origin have done any updating necessary. Some may comment cynically on the fact that all the contributors are men. To that I" reply that both Michael and I worked on the basis that the quality of the contribution was what mattered, the expertise not the sex of its author, I can assure any doubting feminists that we have consulted women widely in the course of preparing the volume.

For myself, and no one amongst our contributors is committed to anything except what appears over his own name, I want to add a word of explanation about this joint catholic-evangelical venture. I rejoice greatly that evangelicals and catholics within the Church of England are able to work happily together. Of course there remain theological differences, but I believe some of them are diminishing, and there is certainly an increasing desire to discuss them freely and amicably, and not withstanding the differences there is a common and growing realisation of theological agreement on many basic essentials of our faith. It grieves me somewhat that some churchmen who a few years ago were lamenting the continuing controversy between catholics and evangelicals today seem to disparage their newly discovered friendship. I believe that such fellowship and friendship will grow, and hope that cynical critics will cease attributing that cooperation to base motives and believe fellow Christians capable of theological integrity. When as I trust will soon be the case such cooperation extends to pastoral matters, I hope accusations such as unholy alliances and expediency will be dropped. It will be seen in this book] that catholics and evangelicals have worked together harmoniously and each has been free to work on his own presuppositions.

Finally I should like to pay a tribute to Michael Bruce himself. As a very young member of Church Assembly and half Michael's age, and though we were from very diverse Anglican traditions, I warmed greatly to Michael He was courtesy itself in trying to understand other viewpoints: he always took theology seriously and it was| characteristic of him that he readily agreed to alter previously planned book to meet another viewpoint.

Note: one word about the style of the book. There are few slight inconsistencies of style due to parts of this work being set up in type much earlier. Acknowledgment is due to the Church Union for permission to reproduce with slight revisions Dr. Mascall's chapter, and also to E. J. Brill of Leyden for Dr. Blum's article which first appeared in German in one of their publications.

Copyright (c) 2007: All of the texts and techniques (pedagogical and relational)
displayed in this site are copyrighted materials.