Brides and Bridegrooms

Thanks to Rob for posting Levada's comments.  This "bridegroom" argument is also one that is often deployed against the ordination of women.  I personally find it perplexing.  Levada says:

“I think we must ask, ‘Does such a priest recognize how this act places an obstacle to his ability to represent Christ the bridegroom to his bride, the people of God? Does he not see how his declaration places him at odds with the spousal character of love as revealed by God and imaged in humanity?’” Levada added that this provides “a good example of the wisdom of the new Vatican instruction.”

This suggests that he views the bridegroom language in a very literal (and somewhat sexualized) way.  But that makes little sense, whether the priest is gay, straight, male or female.  Certainly the people of God, the "bride of Christ," is not (and simply cannot be) explicitly and essentially female (and heterosexual) in the way that Levada thinks the priest must be male and heterosexual in order to properly display the "spousal character of love."  After all, the people of God includes both men and women, gay and straight.  Indeed, it essentially includes these people. I suppose the answer would be that the femininity of the Church is metaphorical in a very loose sense and totally unrelated to the actual identity (and sexual identity) of its individual members.  And if the metaphor is truly metaphorical on the side of the bride, does it need to be so literal on the side of the bridegroom?  How would a straight priest properly relate to the diverse community of the Church in a "spousal character" except in a way that is highly abtract and metaphorical, divorced from straightforwardly physicalist sexual analogies?