> Each feels very strongly about their position and can't, in good conscience, compromise.
>

Why not?

I mean, don't most churches teach the concept of unity on the essentials (i.e. things like God exists, Christ's sacrifice on the cross being the only way of salvation, etc.) but allowing different opinions on the non-essentials (what you mentioned)? Every church I've ever attended has done so (and they include both denominations you listed above). That's what creates any kind of unity within Christianity as a whole, and what stops it from being just a bunch of distantly related splintery sects. It's also why your average Episcopalian doesn't go preaching doom and hellfire at the Baptist church down the road. (Denominations picked at random.) Because most churches and people DO recognize that unity on the essentials.

I can't see how that wouldn't influence relationships on a deeply personal level as well. Mixed-denomination relationships might be comparable to, say, mixed-culture ones... more difficult, maybe, because of differing traditions, but at the heart - all human. At the heart, all believing in the same God.

Maybe more difficult, yes. But I don't believe difficulty equals prohibition. Nor do I believe that the difficulty it produces is in any way insurmountable.

Sosi"two cents"qui