I don't know why he says that the weald isolated Sussex and the Isle of Wight. If you imagine that the christian belief came to Kent across the channel, as a result of the kentish-frankish relationship under Ethelberth, than we had to ask the question why not to Sussex? If you look to the greater english kingdoms, those of the heptarchy, then you can see that Kent (597) and east Anglia (around 629, and again 630) became the first anglosaxon kingdoms with christian rulers. As bretwaldas they used their influence, so that the Roman christianity could spread into Bernicia and Deira too. But the pagan (or non-roman christian) neighbours, especially Mercia, were important enemies. Under the Northumbrian bretwaldas christianity spread into Essex under Sigeberht in 653.
The South was under the influence of the pagan Wessex and Mercia The christian belief came to wessex under Cynegils and again under Cenwalh about the 670th. The kingdom of Wight under Atwald was conquered in 686 by Caedwalla of Wessex and Sussex was conquered in that year, too. But the first episcopat was founded in 709 in Chichester. Mercia became christian in the years after the death of Penda in 655.
So if we look at this developement, it is perhaps possible to speak of an isolation of Wight and Sussex. But I think it was more the political situation between Kent, Anglia and Bernicia/deira and between Wessex, Mercia and Northumbria that was responsible for it. Christianisation was not the main interrest. It was the power. Wight and Sussx weren't important enough, not because of the weald but because they laid at the borders.