[J]ust about all the former Church of England clergy (and most of the laity) who comprise the English Ordinariate all came from the Forward-in-Faith/UK organization, which was formed early in 1993 in the aftermath of the unexpectedly successful November 1992 vote for woman priests ("unexpectedly successful," because proponents and opponents alike reckoned that it would not achieve the requisite two-thirds majority in favor in the House of Laity, but Archbishop Carey['s] rhapsodical discourse about how woman priests would transform the CofE and give it "power to evangelize" convinced - perhaps the better word is "moved" - a handful of dopey Evangelical synodsmen who had intended to oppose it to vote in favor of it). Its purpose from the beginning was to oppose WO, provide "a safe sacramental refuge with secure Holy Orders" for opponents, to secure a supply of like-minded bishops to serve their constituency ("Provincial Episcopal Visitors" or PEVs, popularly "flying bishops:" one, the Bishop of Beverly, in the Province of York; two, the bishops of Ebbsfleet and Richborough, in the Province of Canterbury; and the Bishop of Fulham, one of the assistant bishops [the English term is "suffragan bishops'] in the London diocese, acting in the same capacity within that diocese) & last (and mostly unstated) but not least to form a sufficiently cohesive and united constituency that when the secular pressure for woman bishops became irresistible, they could either obtain ironclad guarantees of their position within the Church of England, or could secure a group departure, perhaps even with property.My own overall impressions remain the same: there was discontent at various levels of intensity toward women's ordination in many Anglican denominations, but only in the US were there any significant defections into a "continuing" movement or, before 2009, any concrete provision for "corporate reunion" with Rome. However, I like the Frederick Kinsman perspective: Anglicanism is a Protestant denomination that has allowed a faction to maintain an illusion that they're Catholic. The issue of women's ordination was cause for disillusionment, but the response among the disillusioned faction in the Church of England was uncertain and feckless.It didn't work out that way, of course, probably because about 25% of the active clerical and lay members of FiF did not agree with the leadership that "Rome is the answer:" a few were perhaps interested in a Continuing Anglican solution, a larger few in a "Western-Rite Orthodox" solution, and many more in somehow walling off themselves and their parishioners from any "taint" of women clergy. Even among the 75% who at FiF meetings were willing to applaud whenever speakers made pro-papal remarks, or roar out the "fight song" of "A Code of Practice WILL NOT DO!" (meaning they would not accept merely written guarantees of their position within the Church of England, but demanded a semi-separate church-within-the-Church-of-England with its own bishops), when push came to shove, and they were offered rather less than a code of practice, around half of them remained, or have remained to date, within the Church of England (some no doubt because of their same-sex-partnered status). Another reason, perhaps, was that FiF claimed to be an organization open to all sorts of anti-WO people in the Church of England, it never had more than a very few Evangelical/Protestant members: its whole tone and ethos was "spikey" through and through; and conservative English Anglican Evangelicals regard Anglo-Catholicism (whether "papalist" or not) with theological aversion, and have their own, rather small, anti-WO organization, "Reform."
"Continuing Anglicanism" was an almost exclusively American phenomenon, and the Anglican Use Pastoral Provision was aimed exclusively until 2007 at laity and clergy of the US Episcopal Church. The discussion in the 1993 meeting between Clarence Pope, Jeffrey Steenson, and Cardinal Ratzinger, initiated by the US Cardinal Law, appears to have focused again on the US Episcopal Church, a faction of which Pope and Steenson specifically represented.
An unanswered question is when and under what circumstances the 1993 Law-Pope-Steenson proposal was specifically extended to cover Canada, the UK, and Australia under Anglicanorum coetibus.
