I don't mean that post title in terms of influence or sheer literary brilliance, but how Lewis attested and Wright attests, by virtue of their Anglican membership, to a flawed ecclesiastical view. The Anglican Communion was still relatively intact during C.S. Lewis's time and yet still many wonder why he didn't swim the Tiber given that he accepted just about every Catholic doctrine. (His brother converted.)
I think similar thoughts about scholar/Anglican bishop N.T. Wright given the problems. Perhaps it's far harder for a bishop than a layman to convert, given the obligation and sense of themselves. Or simply that Wright has a different understanding of church. As one former Anglican wrote:
I think many Anglicans (especially of the Evangelical persuasion) have a very congregational understanding of the church. They know the rot is there, but they look to their friends in their own branch of Anglicanism and see real faith and devotion to the historic faith and believe that they are still snug where they are. It's kind of like the group of people on the Titanic who refused to quit playing poker in the bar with their whiskey and cigars.Some people have more a greater facility to ignore crisis. Adam Gopnik, in Paris to the Moon, attributes this to the French:
...the French attitude toward any crisis is not to soldier through it but just to pretend that it isn't happening. (It was in Paris, after all, that Picasso and Sartre sat in a cafe for four years pretending the Germans weren't there.)The obligatory disclaimer is that I should probably worry about my own soul and mind my own bidness..