In a post or two below I follow some aspects, slighty bizarre, of the present course of the Pope's offer for Anglicans to join the Roman Catholic church via a kind of adjunct entity being known as the Anglican Ordinariate (though strictly it is a 'Personal Ordinariate'). Beyond any 'smoke and mirrors' aspects of the Ordinariate, the following seems to be an accurate description of the Ordinariate: it offers no concession to the normal terms for Anglicans becoming Roman Catholics (sign up to RC doctrine, leave your 'Anglican orders' at the door, some may, once through the door, be accepted for ordination) but it does offer some space for a few aspects of being Anglican to be maintained, along with the quirk that former Anglican bishops can dress up as bishops while not being bishops of their new church ... you see, we quickly get back to 'smoke and mirrors'!)
The Ordinariate expresses a strategy for global Christian unity. (Other parts of that strategy include ongoing conversations with the Eastern Orthodox). At this stage the Ordinariate part of the strategy doesn't look much. It is absorbing the Traditional Anglican Communion (which seems eccentric in certain ways, and is not part of the Anglican Communion), and now looks like receiving a congregation or two in the northern hemisphere, along with a bishop or two from England (and at least one of those looks like the kind of shoot-from-the-hip-while-shoving-his-foot-in-his-mouth opinionator that will cause a little media embarrassment!). But it could be a door through which more go. Within a few months the Anglican Communion may be finally declared broken and unfixable, and within a year the Church of England may be much messier than it currently is, for by then it will have more clearly decided the terms by which opponents of women bishops must abide. Can we tell now what the full attractiveness of the Ordinariate looks like when the situation really turns to custard?
By contrast, if we Anglicans ask the question, 'What is our strategy for global Christian unity?', the answer looks very thin. As I understand that strategy, it is for representatives of the Anglican Communion to engage in dialogue with the great churches, federations, and communions of the world and to work on agreements - where possible - between them and us (e.g. the Roman Catholic church, the Lutheran churches, the Eastern Orthodox churches). But our own Communion is now so divided that it is becoming meaningless to say that we have 'representatives'. Representatives of what view of what it means to be Anglican? And it is even less meaningful to suggest that we understand how global Christian unity might work, since we seem to have no understanding of what Anglican global unity might mean. Unless we think this works: "This is what being Anglican means, you can like it or lump it, and if you lump it you can leave us."