"Put in another way, it is one thing for African bishops to oppose the homosexual agenda for they are consistent in reading Scripture as generally not allowing either the marriage of divorcees in church or the ordination of women; yet it is a very different thing for the Network to do so for it has generally allowed the marriage of divorcees and the ordination of women and thus does not appear to read Scripture consistently. In order to be taken seriously, what the Network states about homosexuality and same-sex relations has to be matched by a recovery of the pre-1960s Evangelical & Catholic approach to marriage and ordination and by a clear statement of how Scripture is to be read and interpreted with regard to the formation of doctrine and moral practice!"
I hate to admit it, in light of my usual reaction to Fr. Toon's writing, but he makes an excellent point here, one that would concern me had I a dog in this fight.
Well, I happen to think the ECUSA has a lot more problems to solve than shoving wimmin back to the kitchen to handle the 'dinner on the grounds' and let the men be the bosses again.
When they can get a handle on the idea that divorce is a sin and the divorced ought not to be permitted back in the churches, thus either making their churches extinct or making the men take charge in their own homes again rather than running off with cocktail waitresses, au pairs and choir members, then perhaps the men will be fit to assume headship of the church.
As it stands now, I can't see why I ought to consider a divorced man with a trophy wife, who has left two wives and five children, to be superior to a fine, upstanding, celibate, devout woman, simply because the man has a penis. Which in the end is all that this argument amounts to.