Addressing questions on clerical continence requires attention to Holy Orders as well as to Matrimony
Four options regarding continence and married clergy in the West (the longer version)
Of course there are those Vox Novatians who have their own understanding of his arguments and his main points. Strawman, anyone? Then there are their guesses about his motivations (and character). They could get a better idea of what he is arguing from "Four Options" ("I think it very important, both for the operation of law and for the stability of the faith community, that such a complete change in clerical practice be formally recognized in law if it is genuine, or be reasonably but firmly removed from practice if it is not. . . .") and his blog posts, and by re-reading his original paper.
Kudos to Dr. Peters for attempting to discuss this civilly over at that website. What they need is not arguments but grace. Equating attention to canon law and advocacy for its coherence is not "legalism."
As for there being different theological anthropologies, which in turn give rise to different clerical disciplines...