I feel impelled to address the illogic of Mr. Vanderstar's article [TLC, April 8], and to contrast it with the remarks of Archbishop Carey in the same issue.

First, if indeed the faithful have a "right" to female clergy, they equally have a "right" to male clergy. In any given church (and I have supplied in many) this issue is and will continue to be divisive. Someone will feel disenfranchised, violated or offended no matter who is called, male or female. Those who cry "tolerance" on sexual issues seem to have little for those who disagree with them, as the archbishop impliedly notes.

Second, the analogy to the U.S. Constitution is apt, but wrongly applied. As Archbishop Carey points out (again...) it is the "sexual ethics" of the American Episcopal Church that are out of step with the rest of the Anglican Communion, to say nothing of the Roman and Eastern Churches.

Third, a "committee" to "assist" the "recalcitrant" bishops is not a pastoral act. No matter how benignly phrased, the message is clearly "my way or the highway."

Ultimately this is not just about gender ethics. It is about real community, real respect and genuine ecumenism, things that are seemingly lacking in the Episcopal Church just now.

(The Rev.) Bob Woods

St. Peter's Church

Kernville, Calif.