This is just a bit of tactical triangulation from the Archdruid of Canterbury, whom I wouldn't trust from here to there. Methinks Christopher Johnson is being a tad naive here in accepting what Rowan says at face value.
"This is just a bit of tactical triangulation from the Archdruid of Canterbury, whom I wouldn't trust from here to there."
I would strongly agree with your assessment here. William's position seems to be that homosexual abominations will be OK once the majority has swung round to this position. All is relativism and there are no absolute rights or wrongs in themselves - morality and doctrine are simply passing fads which are subject to majority voting.
How can people trust someone who has no firm convictions about what is right or true?