What is the problem?

In this article, it is reported that former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, is conditionally upset. He is upset if it is the case that the Vatican only put the Archbishop of Canterbury on two weeks' notice of an invitation to Anglo-Catholic clergy to join the Roman Catholic Church in light of any discontentment they might have with the ordination of female bishops, and so forth.

My question is why would George Carey be "disturbed" by this?

Roman Catholics and Anglicans have always welcomed movement from one to the other. The Roman Catholics have always had their 'Councils' in which they reckon salvation is associated with membership with the Roman Catholic Church (or dispensed by the Roman Catholic Church). Historically, they have persecuted protestants. Articled Anglicanism has always asserted Rome's distinctive doctrines are 'fond things, vainly invented'. It is not as though the two are or have ever been friendly traditions. Why the pretense?

For my part, and although I am neither ordained nor an Anglo-Catholic (to objects of the invitation), I would never join the Roman Catholic Church. I see it as a glittering sarcophagus on the outside. Worms and putrifaction on the inside. Its doctrines are unbiblical, its doctrine of salvation does not give all the glory to God, it does not take sin as seriously as it deserves and its doctrine of prayer is absurd. Although he typed it quickly and so there are typos, Steve Hays, quoting G. Twelftree, People of the Spirit: Exploring Luke’s View of the Church (Baker 2009) does a great job showing from the Gospel of Luke that Roman Catholic distinctives are bunk: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/10/lukan-ecclesiology.html

But the invitation is to Anglo-Catholics. They are basically Roman Catholics, anyway. What is more, different 'Anglicans' find themselves in different contexts. For example, I don't find myself in the context of a deviant Anglican diocese who promotes a sexual morality that the Bible abhors. My local framework is strongly Bible-believing (God's word is the ULTIMATE authority) Christian. The same is not necessarily true for the objects of the Roman invitation. They might find themselves in Dioceses who overtly exchange the truth of God for a lie, Dioceses who love and promote sexual sin and worship an idolatrous concept of the true God. They might find themselves in a completely untenable situation in the context of their surroundings. While I would encourage them to adopt a Reformed faith and adapt their practices so they promote the spread of the gospel in the modern world (and I believe they are morally culpable if they do not do this), from their perspective, why would they not find an invitation enticing in a context where their immediate context is saying evil is good? Why get upset about the invitation? These people may (subjectively) believe it is the best of bad options.