[sionnsar]

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?

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.

[Kolokotronis]

Well, it seems to me to be an odd thing for a Church to say. One would think that a Church might say that its strength was Christ, or its orthodoxy or its monasticism, but diversity? Odd.