To Better Understand The Episcopal Church's Suspension, We Offer This:

Ignore much of the "official" commentary, as this is more informative:

Over time, mainstream journalists around the world have gradually come to realize that the Archbishop of Canterbury is not the "Anglican pope." In most news coverage these days, he is referred to as the "symbolic" leader of the global Anglican Communion or as the "first among equals" when the Anglican archbishops are doing business.

Let's focus on that second image for a moment, as I point out one or two elements of the flood of news coverage of the "special," as opposed to normal, gathering of the Anglican primates in Canterbury the last few days.

If Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby is the first among equals, then it is important for journalists to realize that the other archbishops really do see themselves as, well, equal among the equals. Thus, when you are working through the tsunami of global coverage of the vote by the Anglican primates to "suspend" the U.S. Episcopal Church from many official roles in the Anglican Communion, it helps to focus on the previous actions taken by the primates on issues linked to the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex unions.

Yes, we are back to that complicated Anglican timeline thing. There is no way to avoid it.

As is consistent with The Episcopal Church's world view for the past decade or so, the suspension [which we are now being told through official channels isn't really a suspension suspension, it's more like a non-suspension suspension] is represented in public statements by clergy as intolerance towards our policy concerning "same-sex marriages".  That is accurate, certainly.  However, the Church pretty much sees the world through one issue at a time, and as the author of the article above identifies in his timeline, this is a venerable disagreement and more complicated than that.

There are a couple of things that I have yet to see mentioned in other public statements.  The first is that the "split" or division in the Anglican Communion is inevitable.  The Communion is the last vestige of the British Empire and exists within that tension.  All of the member churches were founded by the missionary activity of the Empire.  Historically, the membership of The Episcopal Church of the United States is special as we are the only ones to have broken away from the Church of England through the process of armed rebellion.  That has always made our status somewhat estranged. 

The Anglican Communion's lack of influence over the common work of our parish will be noticed by those in the pews when those in the pews notice no difference.  I challenged those present at our late morning liturgy to name the Archbishop of Canterbury and none could.  As parishes seem less and less involved in their own dioceses, it's no surprise that the greater church is less interested in global Anglicanism save for underwriting ministries in the developing world and providing  mission opportunities for those who wish to visit those countries.  [Just to note the difference in perspective, some African, British, and Canadian Anglicans describe the former as virtue-signalling and the latter as the American tendency "to vacation in the misery of others".]

The second is the relative distaste with which The Episcopal Church is regarded by other members within the Communion.  In part, this is because we are Americans and are seen to blame for the chaos in the Middle East and Europe that permits the gross persecution of Christians, about which we say little and do nothing, and the other is the use of secular courts to sue congregations into compliance with diocesan ideology.

[Don't get mad at me for simply relaying what is freely discussed among international clergy when the U.S. bishops and seminary/divinity school professors aren't around.]

Update:  Looks like I'm not the only one noticing the complications.

Unless something gives, it’s unlikely that the American Episcopalians will be able to hold on to a place in the emerging Anglican Communion. The two sides see the current dispute very differently. American Episcopalians see the church’s embrace of gay marriage and new kinds of theology as a matter of conscience and Christian witness. Their critics in Africa and elsewhere see Episcopalians as having lost touch with the faith’s historical sources of authority. Neither Scripture, Tradition, nor Reason, they claim, support the Episcopal positions within the Anglican world. Besides that, many of the conservative Anglicans are from the developing world, where the Episcopalian decision to chart its own course regardless of the views of other member of the Communion looks less like conscience and more like neo-colonial arrogance and racial pride.

The business about "neo-colonial arrogance" has been common in discussions of The Episcopal Church for some time, especially among the African and Latin American churches.   Since the American church is shrinking and the African and Latin American churches are growing, we are in a moment of global reappraisal.  I mentioned this once at a clergy meeting about ten years ago and, before I even got to the end of my statement, was shouted down by my colleagues.  Maybe they'll be willing to consider this an issue now.