[HarleyD]

I think the author is absolutely right but is living in a "dream world" if he thinks this could be all refocused now. If the leadership approved a gay man does the author really think they wouldn't approve a divorce man? Given how much the leadership supports this "man" I doubt if you could ever have got them behind focusing solely on marriage issue. Maybe twenty years ago this would have worked but not now.

And even if the conservatives started to succeed the liberals would have brought up the homosexual issue. The liberals would have painted the conservatives as homophobics just as they're doing. It would have made the conservatives look like they're trying to hide their agenda.

These people are worst than non-believers. Their goal is to destroy. That should say very clearly who they're working for. I'd be looking for an exit if I hadn't already found one.

[ahadams2]

the author is operating from a rather idealized perspective here, no doubt. He does, however, accurately reflect the views of much of the Continuum, and as such his views need to be considered. One of my primary concerns in posting this was that the article demonstrates fairly clearly that even should the Network, AAC,FIF, and AMIA all manage to come together to constitute *The* new Anglican province here in North America, we will still have a ways to go before we can reconnect with some of our brethren in the Continuing Churches.