"“The strength of the Anglican Church is in its unity in diversity."
You know, Orthodoxy is very diverse in the sense that the culture of, say, Egypt or Syria, is very different from that of Russia and that cultural diversity has had some manifestation in Liturgical practices, though very limited, and in Orthodox folkways, but never, ever in theology or ecclesiology. This diversity of which so many Anglicans speak is clearly quite different from that found in Orthodoxy and I assume have to do with the compromises the Anglican Church has made through the centuries in the interests of the English crown. Yes? No?
Oh, YES, have they (the Episcopals) ever compromised. Their diversity is not Orthodox.
Well... yes and no. (You did ask a "yes or no" question of an Anglican! *\;-)
There was the original Elizabethan Compromise which joined two groups, Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic, who really wanted to have nothing to do with each other. (Somebody described the two by "what's more important": to the Evangelical it's the preaching, to the Anglo-Catholic it's the worship.) As has been noted, this has been the source of continual tension within Anglicanism and in at least one sense not a strength, given the departures of such as the REC when the Anglo-Catholic wing ascended.
The phrase you quote is one I never heard in the Episcopal church, from Sunday school to age 31. I only started hearing it when a new kind of "diversity" gained the ascendancy in the Episcopal church -- and it's really funny how that "diversity" mirrors the liberals' use of the word in the secular world.