THE MINISTRY OF WOMEN
(To the Editor.) Sir,—l read the report of Miss Eng* land’s address on the ministry of women with much interest. Broadly speaking, I agree with her conclusions, but I cannot agree with the arguments by which she thinks she reaches them. In order 14 prove that women should be admitted to the ministry she had no need to cari* nature the Anglo-Catholic position. Neither Anglo-Gatholics npr any othe# sane people hold that "the Church is an! institution whose constitution can never vary ” Miss England seems to have muddled up the faith of the Church and its constitution. The constitution of tha Church of the Province of New Zealand varies very materially from that of the Church of England or that of the Church! of South Africa. The "feudalistic con. stitution” varied from the primitive coni stitution, and the constitution of the Now Zealand Church is not feudalistic. Miss England says: “The Life and Lib. erty Movement” is the organisation ■of the modernists. This is quite a mistake The object of the movement is "to win for the Church the liberty essential to fullness of life.” Its main endeavour ha-i been to loosen the grip of the State on the Church of England, and the passing of the Enabling Act represented a’ bid step in that direction. The movement? is supported by churchmen of all schools —High, Low, and Broad. As a matted of fact, a considerable number of distinguished Modernists are strong believers in State control of the Church, and have no sympathy with the Life and Liberty Movement. Miss England blames the Lambeth Conference for basing its decision regarding the ministry of women upon the jxist action of the Church and what authority can bo got from the New Testament. A leading Modernist tells us that, the Church is a divine society contimious with the Church of the Apostles, and possessing an ethic derived froirl Christ. If that is so, it must give weight to the authority of the New testament, and it cannot ignore its past becausa itj past is its history. The present? contains the past, and is itself contained in tU4 future. Progress is continuity niut change. It is just about ns easy for ait institution to escape from its past as fed a man to escape from his own shadow. Rational reform cannot be separated the origin and history of the Church if the Church is to have a continuous liffX Personally, I belieye in the ministry oy. women, just because I think there much to justify it. both in the history of the Church and the circumstances of Olif/ own age.—l am, etc., NORMAN E. BURTON. Auckland, August 12.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19210817.2.52
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 277, 17 August 1921, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
449THE MINISTRY OF WOMEN Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 277, 17 August 1921, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.