I loved this (HT T1:9).

“Anglicanism is not a doctrine, creed or confession—it is a Book of Common Prayer and a remarkable dose of “common sense”…There is no way that having the Eucharist be “divisive” is part of the Anglican ethos!…I’m the Anglican here. I’m the “big tent” guy. I’m willing to be in communion with anyone who will come to the Table. I am waiting patiently, compassionately, lovingly, ready to break the bread and pass the wine. Join me if you can.”

I thought Andrew Linzey spoke much sense as well (here) “Not all truth is given in the past; the Spirit has something to teach us in the present. It is untrinitarian consistently to oppose God’s work in the past to what we may learn here and now. All innovations should be tested, but it is a mistake to assume that all development is infidelity.”

The right way forward is not clear to me – my opinions haven’t really changed much – but one element of my thinking is hardening, and was expressed by Bradley (first link above). I don’t believe in a communion of the pure and sinless – I believe in a communion of the sinful, for that is the only place where I might hope to receive. That’s what I think Anglicanism asserts, and asserts strongly, and I think it is one of the ways in which it is most true to Christ’s own example and teaching.

The pure church doctrine is a heresy, it always has been. We need to be robust about saying that.