This is a most disappointing address. There are a great number of words, but what they ssem to add to to me is that I'm a bad guy because other people are poor in places I've never heard of and if I was just friendly all of this crisis would go away.
I'd call it fatuous, but that would be disrespectful of the Archbishop. I think I'll settle for patronizing. This is an address that patronizes anyone who does not agree that the Church really SHOULD be an agency. I know that the text seems to condemn this, but the drift of the argument takes the position that to hold to a Biblical understanding of Romans in general and sinful behaviors like homosexual practice in particular is to succumb to that succession of causes alleged to be so typical of agency-type church behavior.
I'd say ++Rowan has most definitely taken sides. I'm not on his side here.
In Christ,
Deacon Paul+
My, but he do run on...