Ordination - a wider debate

Following the election over the weekend of a second homosexual bishop in the USA - Canon Mary Glasspool to the post of suffragan bishop in Los Angeles - the whole issue of homosexuals in ordained ministry has been escalated yet again.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has responded by suggesting that

"The election of Mary Glasspool by the Diocese of Los Angeles as suffragan bishop-elect raises very serious questions not just for the Episcopal Church and its place in the Anglican Communion but for the Communion as a whole. The process of selection, however, is only part complete. The election has to be confirmed, or could be rejected, by diocesan bishops and diocesan standing committees. That decision will have very important implications. “The bishops of the Communion have collectively acknowledged that a period of gracious restraint in respect of actions which are contrary to the mind of the Communion is necessary if our bonds of mutual affection are to hold."

whilst Canon Glasspool has said - as quoted in an article in today's Independent -

"I am very excited about the future of the whole Episcopal Church, and I see the Diocese of Los Angeles leading the way into that future, ... . Any group of people who have been oppressed because of any one, isolated aspect of their persons yearns for justice and equal rights."

In view of the latest research into sexuality which, whilst not clarifying what triggers sexuality, makes it clear that there is no genetic link to homosexuality as opposed to heterosexuality - perhaps the argument against allowing homosexuals into the ordained ministry is weakened. However, I still believe that the Biblical references to relational complimentarity is an important one in the issue.

However, what with the joint bissues of the ordination of women and homosexuals, I wonder whether there is a dase for a renewed debate on the nature and Biblical validity of the ordained ministry - at least as far as we have understood it for the past centuries?