I was amused to read the anecdote by Tim Oakley. The one about the Cardinals' wives or husbands waiting for the "white smoke". Cardinals? White smoke? How old-fashioned Tim Oakley sounds! The last conclave was exactly that - the last. The next pope will be elected via the Internet, with all the 4,000+ Catholic bishops taking part - as they should, considering that they are all linear descendants of the original Twelve. This would mean, of course, that the Sacred College of Cardinals would become surplus to requirements and disbanded. A pity, really, but there you are. Even religious life moves on. Geoffrey Smith, Manchester

What would you expect to be important qualities fitting someone for high religious office? Spirituality? Management capability? No, the overriding quality a candidate must possess is a few inches of flesh. It is obvious that this is right and proper. This is nothing like the argument about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. The Vatican has an exact chart of what combinations of accident and surgery mean that a person is qualified. Any suggestion that persons lacking the right bits might still be "children of God" in anything like the same sense as men is heresy. Jane Jeremy, Birmingham

May I just add a further comment? The Church of England has always been of two minds on whether it is a Protestant Church or a natural continuity of the Catholic Church in England after the Reformation. This has been reflected in this correspondence on women bishops. Representatives of neither position, for different reasons, really wish for union with the Catholic Church. The continuity theory receives a decisive blow from the head of the Church of England, Queen Elizabeth I, when she describes the last Catholic bishop nominated to the See of Oxford, Thomas Goldwell in the following terms. "We think it may be that one Goldwell, a very simple and fond man, having in our late sister's time been named to a small bishopric in Wales called St Asaph, though never thereto admitted, flying out of the realm upon our sister's death, is gone to Rome as a renegade, and there using the name of a bishop, without order or title, is perhaps gone in the train of some Cardinal to Trent [she refers to the Council of Trent], and so it is likely the speech hath arisen of a bishop of England being there." I would also add that Cardinal Kasper has even proposed a form of adoptive Apostolic Succession (novel in itself) in his now almost certainly doomed efforts to find unity with the Anglican Church. Christopher Gillibrand, Brussels, Belgium

While I appreciate Walter Kasper as a theologian, and his usually respectful attitude toward the Anglican tradition as genuinely Catholic (in the steps of the late Paul VI), I am dismayed by his lack of historical consciousness, and his naive presentation of the evolution of ministry in the Christian community. It is generally agreed by the majority of Roman Catholic and other theolgians today that Jesus did not "establish" the Church in the sense of foreseeing its structures and ministries. Rather, Jesus is the "source" the Church, as the fruit born from the experience of his resurrection. Scripture scholars have discovered a great diversity in Church life in the first centuries, with a variety of forms of leadership and structure. It is simply anachronistic to read present structures back in time as the "will" of Jesus. As other readers have pointed out, there is also historical evidence for the leadership roles of women in the earliest churches, even though the New Testament tends to severely blunt the evidence. In the 1970s, Pope Paul VI asked the Pontifical Biblical Commission to study the question of the admissibility of women to ordained ministry. The conclusion, from the papal commission, was that there was nothing in the New Testament which would preclude or prevent the ordination of women. Regrettably, Paul VI rejected their findings, as did John Paul II even more strongly. Finally, it seems somewhat disingenuous of Cardinal Kasper to ask the Anglican Communion to refrain from ordaining women as bishops without the support of the Roman and Orthodox Communions. Since this support is unlikely, it amounts to giving to these communions a veto power over the decisions of the Church of England. Here in the United States, women are serving their dioceses in the Episcopal Church as bishops (as well as priests and deacons) with great pastoral skill, and as servants of the Church's unity. It seems to me that they stand as a call of the Spirit to other Churches (like the Roman and Orthodox) whose leadership will not openly discuss the question, based on solid theology and historical evidence. Philip Fronckiewicz, Weston, USA

Whenever I go to England I'm always struck by the good-naturedness of the people. I do not see, though, a religious people. Or people of obvious sanctity. The bishops of the COE ought to desist from socio-religious innovation and hearken back to the necessity of holiness for its members. Woman bishops will not change this situation. Woman themselves ought to be more concerned with the necessity of sanctity. This will surely please Holy God more. Then let us see where we go. J. J. Cleary, Tralee, Eire

The Vatican official has merely stated the obvious. Frankly, even if the Church of England maintained an all male priesthood/episcopacy, there are many more serious differences to guarantee a continuation of this separation. We are two different religions, each claiming rights to Truth. I for one have examined the various claims and made my decision - I am a Roman Catholic. Jonathan Sussman, Brighton, USA

This discussion is beyond belief! The Anglian Communion HAS women bishops! Here in New Zealand, Canada, USA. Or is it yet another illustration of the patronising stance of the good old Cof E towards the "colonials" - ie, if it doesn't happen in England it dosen't happen! Wayne Bunny, Marton, New Zealand

As the Catholic Church is against having women priests and bishops and the Anglican Church seems to be agnostic about women clergy; why don't the women clergy break away and form a new church? Religion is all about personal belief. If the vatican ceases to exist and the Archbishop of Canterbury's position is removed, people will still believe in Jesus Christ. Religion should not rely on a hierarchical structure. The new Church should be all embracing and have views which are above the narrow Anglican and Catholic differences. There should be equality of sexes. The new Church will attract converts from the Anglican and the Catholic Church and may even convert some agnostics and atheists. Vinay Mehra, Purley

Is it any wonder that religion is an ever-fading force in the modern world when prominent religious leaders still insist on keeping women out? Surely the key to religion which appeals to so many is the virtue of the message, not the gender of the messenger. David Tedbury, Newark

I agree with Ernest Luther and David Leslie [below] - the ordination of women as bishops will put back reunion with Rome, or for that matter with most Protestant churches which profess that God has made a revelation to man which everyone must believe. Statistically, a female clergy are more likely than men to be theologically liberal and heterodox. Michael Petek, Brighton

If Jesus had wanted women in leadership he was sufficiently radical to have selected some of them as his apostles. Those that use the Pauline quote "there is neither male nor female..." to justify women's priesthood miss the point. This actually refers to the salvation of Christ being available for all people regardless of their status, making them equal in the sight of God as his children. This is not a justification for women being priests. Paul also states that we all have "gifts of the spirit" with which we serve the Christian community, but also that women should be silent in the churches. Strangely, this quote is frequently ignored. We all have roles to play in spreading the Christian gospel, but women as priests has never been and is not one of them. When the CofE women made their case for priesthood it was on false premises, and they also stated at the time that they would not seek to become bishops. In my view there is no justification now to consider this as an option. Susan Brooker, Bexley

If a woman cannot become a priest, and therefore a bishop, because none of the original messengers were women, then why not restrict the priesthood only to those people who share exactly the same characteristics as the 12 original apostles, and allow only 12 men to be priests at any one time? To exclude human beings from taking holy orders on one basis but not others that apply is clearly wrong. I think the statement between the churches should be put the other way. If the Catholic Church cannot accept women priests or bishops, then there cannot be any hope of unity. Alan Higgs, London

I have been a member of the Church of England all my life. I have never felt that my church is in any way excluded from the One Holy Catholic Church - Christ himself being the cornerstone. And of course there are other churches that preach wholesome Christian doctrine that do not worry about unity in any kind of organisational form. Christian unity is a much deeper and more mysterious thing, and will manifest itself, quite likely, in relations between individuals or small groups. A Catholic and an Anglican, for instance, might meet regularly to pray together, without caring to ask permission of their respective authorities. So - if the Roman Church tells us that consecration of women bishops will place an insuperable barrier to unity (unity which would in any case destroy the church I love), I have to say, I am completely unmoved. John Small, Harrow