So today's continuing preliminary skirmish on ecumenicity, preliminary to some, hopefully, more meaty thoughts about what makes up the ecumenical sandwich in the 21st century, is a Warning to follow yesterday's Preface.
The warning comes via Damian Thompson, arguably the youngest looking curmudgeon in the Roman blogosphere. In this post and comments below it, we have a neat view of how division among Christians breaks out, even in the otherwise monolithic Roman church. One thinks one thing, another thinks differently, a third challenges the authority of the leadership, either because it supports one thing or it fails to support that thing, then threats are made that a new church may need to be schismatically formed in order that one thing (or another thing) is fostered, with the bonus of being free of the supporters of the other thing which is so disagreeable.
Occasionally (as in the comments to Damian's post) someone steps out of the battle to observe that (e.g.) this is all about a relatively few remarried divorcees receiving communion. No one is proposing to increase the Trinity to four or deny that Jesus was fully human.
Meanwhile, in the battlefield now littered with metaphorical corpses, a few people plaintively, if not foolishly, ask whether we might not do better at unity. The sight of the corpses is a warning about how hard the road to
All is not unwell. Bosco Peters reminds us of an item recently circulating in the news: friendly relations between Old Catholics and Roman Catholics. Given the full communion existing between Anglicans and Old Catholics, this has to be good ecumenical news!