The Devil Reads the Daily Mail

Shock and horror from the Daily Mail.

Turns out that a female member of the clergy is young and attractive.

I mean, how the heck did that happen? I'm pretty sure that, when the Church of England passed the vote for the ordination of women back in the 90s, the three concessions were as follows:

(a) Parishes would be allowed to opt out of women, and have flying bishops
(b) Any female clergy would have to look like they graduated from Girton** in the thirties
(c) To double the chances of them being frumpy, any female clergy would have to dress in paisley clerical shirts and flat heels*.

Nobody at the time mentioned the possibility of a Sally Hitchiner. If they had, there's no way the vote would have been passed. After all, one of the reasons that are raised against female clergy from time to time is that men, being weak and stupid, would be liable to fall in love with attractive female vicars. Because, obviously, that's never happened the other way round. Or even between those of the same chromosomal arrangement. So how dare Sally Hitchiner look sexy? That's not her job - she's supposed to make people long for heaven, by making this earthly realm appear mundane. Not be more attractive than the Z-list celebrities with which the Mail adorns the side bar of its website.

I think, at the end of the day, the following question from the Mail is the most important one:

"After all, would a ‘traditionalist’ wear Louboutin leopard print heels?

To which the only answer I can find is, "only on his day off."

---

*Not that there's anything wrong with female clergy in paisley shirts and flat heels, I hasten to add.
** Or those that graduated from Girton in the 30s.