Impending collapse and sacramental 'permeability'?

There's a thoroughly uncompromising article here at Anglican Ink on the situation in the Church of England  as evidenced by the recent Pilling Report. Personalities apart (what we don't know, we won't speak of) his analysis of the fall-out from Pilling is hard to resist. But it's strong meat and (considerable understatement here) won't be to everyone's taste ....

Some contrasting interpretations of the Bishop of Chichester's recent eirenical (?)  statement in response to a Synod representative's  reported words in the ongoing debate about the decriminalisation of homosexual acts in Jamaica can be found here , here and here

Is 'the agenda' moving on - some might think so [here] *

No less controversial, if more subtle and, as we have come to expect, theologically erudite,  is Fr John Hunwicke (continuing his welcome resumption of blogging and in the process showing us all how it's done) who argues that there is potential - in certain instances - for an interpretation of existing Roman Catholic canon law in order to allow a degree of sacramental hospitality from the Ordinariate towards increasingly displaced, unchurched and unshepherded Anglo-Catholics. Now that would set the cat among the pigeons; I can already sense the feathers flying  ..... 
But in the present climate? I can't see it - although it would be practical ecumenism at its best.....

*Update: after being bombarded with criticism, the cleric concerned, the Rev. Danielle Tumminio, has issued this 'clarification' [here] :
"However, Ms. Tumminio told Anglican Ink that she was “not advocating for a change in The Episcopal Church's teaching on marriage to accommodate plural relationships.  'If, for instance, I was asked to perform a plural marriage, I would decline, explaining that it is not in line with the Doctrine and Discipline of The Episcopal Church.' 
[She said] Her support for polygamy was not theological, but based on libertarian principles and a belief in civil religious toleration.
“Like most Americans, however, I do place enormous value on religious freedom, and so I hope that other Americans will be afforded the same freedoms that I am given.  To that end, if plural marriage is a central part of another person's traditions, and if they want to practice plural marriage within the boundaries of their own faith and the limits of the law, then I have no opposition to that.”
So .... that's all right, then ... so there's no inconsistency whatsoever with her previous remarks:
“as a Christian, it makes sense to support healthy polygamous practices. It’s a natural extension for those Christians who support same-sex marriage on theological grounds. But even for those opposed to same-sex marriage, polygamy is documented in the Bible, thereby giving its existence warrant.”  

And that's probably more than enough on the subject:- it's unkind because it's too much like shooting fish in a barrel - not that that has ever stood in the way of the success of the liberal project ...