No, I just "can't". The Episcopal "church" here in America went of the rails and fell headlong into the abyss long ago. The "church" of England has now made it clear that it is no different. In case you had not heard, it appointed ("assigned"? "hired"? "inflicted"?) a woman as the "archbishop" of Canterbury recently. Even Pope Leo (who appears to seek diplomacy in his dealings with outsiders) kindly said that this was a serious problem that divided Anglicans even further from the historic faith of Christianity.
It is sad enough that they are not a true church (in any sense), but by this action they have made it clear that they do not have holy orders either. No one (regardless of theological gerrymandering) can ordain a woman to holy orders. So, truly speaking, the "church" of England did not have an actual "Archbishop" even when there was a man in that role. Yet, while they tried to deny this problem in the past, they can no longer do so.
Someone asked recently what I thought of the Holy Father meeting with the "archbishopette". At this point it is not much different than him meeting with a buddhist or a muslim. The "church" of England is no longer even superficially christian. In that way, I am glad for their choice; now it is clear, and anyone who seeks to deny it has no grounds to assert that there is even a semblance of christian truth left there. The problem exists when actual Catholic clergymen gives signs of clerical respect to a woman pretending to be a clergyman. That is wrong in every way. Be respectful of her as a human, yes. Yet, she is not an archbishop in any way at all. She is the CEO of a pagan organization; nothing more.
As a wise clergyman said recently, there are virtually no more Anglicans left to convert and join the Ordinariate, because anyone who remains in the "church" of England or the Episcopal "church" is so far from the truth that they are not likely ever going to come around. Sadly, this is probably true. Pray for their lost souls.