Steinmetz is wrong about when Anglican problems began - 1974, when the unlawful ordination of women took place might better be described as a starting point as far as the Episcopal Church is concerned. Anglican theological disputes began with the Reformation continued under Bloody Mary and Elizabeth. These disputes were at the root of Cromwell's rule, and have continued to this day.
Steinmetz has missed the crucial point: Mrs. Jefferts-Schori does not believe the same creed as other Anglicans do. She made that clear in her first address to the assembled General Convention, citing God our mother and Jesus our sister. In the midst of this battle, homosexuality will probably prove to be only a skirmish.
Steinmetz is hardly qualified to lecture Anglicans on how they ought to behave. He is a Professor, someone who studies the Church life as an academic discipline. He does not appear to identify himself as a believer - Anglican, or even Christian. The learned professor who studies the earthworm has absolutely no idea what it means to actually be one.
The key underpinning of Anglican Theology is found in Article 6 of the 39 Articles of Religion:
Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.
The problems of the Episcopal and Canadian Anglican churches today stem from the simple fact that three generations of clergy, beginning in the 1950's have been taught about Scripture rather than to read, mark, learn, and digest Scripture. This has been the academic approach. It is no wonder the Anglican Communion has problems. Anglicans can survive squabbling. What the communion may not be able to survive is substituting academic perceptions for the Faith once delivered to the Saints.
