While the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been overwhelmingly condemned by the churches of the world, the support of the Russian Orthodox Church for the war poses difficult questions to the ecumenical community: in particular, whether that church’s support for the war and the extreme nationalist policies of President Putin constitute grounds for suspending it from the World Council of Churches (WCC) and other ecumenical bodies. The current ecumenical emphasis upon ‘dialogue’ acts as a deterrent to such action, but the WCC describes itself as a fellowship of churches that confess Christ as God and Saviour and therefore supreme over all other authorities. There are parallels with previous challenges in ecumenical history, most particularly 1930s Germany and the stand of the Confessing Church. While dialogue has its own importance the prime ecumenical commitment in conflict situations is to confess Christ, whatever the risks of division that this incurs.

At the 2008 Lambeth Conference, The Principles of Canon Law Common to the Churches of the Anglican Communion were launched. For the first time, detailed principles of Anglican canon law were made manifest, the fruit of earlier research by the legal academic Norman Doe. As early as 2002, the Primates of the Communion had recognised that ‘the unwritten law common to the Churches of the Communion and expressed as shared principles of canon law may be understood to constitute a fifth “instrument of unity”’. The Principles project proved to be a wellspring of legal scholarship and ecumenical activity both before and after the 2008 publication.

In May 2019 ARCIC III, the current phase of the Anglican–Roman Catholic International Commission met at St George's Cathedral, Jerusalem. The commission members (and staff) were entertained to lunch in the Latin Patriarchate by the Apostolic Administrator (now the Latin Patriarch), Archbishop Pierbattista Pizzaballa OFM. On the wall was a photograph which, it was explained, was a picture of the dozen or so bishops in Jerusalem who were in communion with the See of Rome. There were among them Latins or Roman Catholics, Greek Melkite Catholics, Maronites, Syrian Catholics and Armenian Catholics. All were present in Jerusalem and its environs and exercising episcopal ministry and jurisdiction. And all were in communion with each other.

“How has the ecumenical movement changed in the twenty-five years since Ut Unum Sint was written?”

Drawing on the theological method of one of Anglicanism’s foremost theologians, this article defends key proposals of the recent Church of England-Methodist report, Mission and Ministry in Covenant. Some Anglicans have argued that it would be inconsistent with Anglican order to accept the proposed temporary period where Methodist ministers who had not been ordained by a bishop could serve in presbyteral Church of England roles. It finds clear theological rationale for the move in Hooker’s understanding of the episcopate which is matched in Anglicanism’s official formularies and its recent ecumenical dialogues. Highlighting clear historic and recent precedents for such a move, it demonstrates that bishops have never been considered so essential for Anglican order that they could never be dispensed with. Proposals like those in MMC can therefore be conscientiously accepted as consistent with Anglican self-understanding by the Church of England and other provinces considering such steps.

The experience of war of the common people in the medieval East Roman Empire is a topic related to hotly debated issues such as collective identification and attachments, or imperialism and ecumenical ideology. This paper attempts a bottom-up approach to the way warfare was perceived and experienced by provincial populations based on the analysis of selected evidence from the period between the seventh and the twelfth centuries. It goes without saying that the treatment of the topic here could not be exhaustive. My main goal was to problematize the relationship between the objectives of imperial military policies and the pragmatic needs of common provincials for protection of their well-being.

This article seeks to explore the thinking of Edward Bouverie Pusey on the doctrine of transubstantiation. It begins by looking at the conflicted way Pusey is considered and goes on to examine Pusey's writings on transubstantiation. The article points out that Pusey's early writing on transubstantiation wrongly believed that the doctrine implied a carnal view of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, but that in his mature thinking this caricature was abandoned and he came to understand that transubstantiation is a form of moderate realism. Some detailed examination of Pusey's mature thinking is undertaken, including a very important set of correspondence between Edward Pusey and John Newman in 1867 which addressed the doctrine of transubstantiation. Pusey's thinking reveals that he is prepared to accept the word transubstantiation as long as it does not imply a change in the substance of the bread and wine of the Eucharist. The article concludes with discussion on the term transubstantiation itself and controversially cites evidence from both Anglican and Roman Catholic sources which suggest that the dependence on a particular scholastic philosophical analysis which attempts to explain the ‘how’ of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist may be less useful than an approach of ‘what’. Pusey's mature thinking on transubstantiation is seen as useful for ecumenical dialogue between the Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches.

In face of uncertainty about the Anglican Communion’s future, this article attempts to rearticulate a vision of Anglicanism’s vocation in terms of its incompleteness and provisionality. Drawing from the thought of Michael Ramsey, Ephraim Radner and Paul Avis, I suggest that Anglicanism’s vocation, like that of any church, is to disappear. At the same time, it is a vocation tempered by the knowledge that, even in its incompleteness and provisionality, Anglicanism has a pastoral responsibility to provide care for the Christians within the Communion. Finally, this is a penitent vocation, and one which is held out as an invitation to all Christian churches.

This theological roundtable discussion on shared communion, presented at the 2018 CTS Convention, reflects twenty-plus years of conversations among theologians: some Catholic, members of the College Theology Society; and some Baptist, members of the National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion, region-at-large. They gather at the annual convention of the College Theology Society not only for intellectual exchange but also for common prayer. Over the decades, the Baptist theologians have always participated in Mass. Their fidelity informed Sandra Yocum's presidential address at the convention, which began with a lament over our Christian disunity reflected in the faces of my dear friends in Christ, these Baptist theologians who with all humility process with the other communicants, but with arms crossed over their chests to signal that they cannot receive Christ, whom they too believe to be present in the sacrament.1 The lament sparked a desire in Curtis Freeman to respond with this careful study of the rules among Baptists and Catholics for intercommunion. The subsequent thoughtful responses from Catholics and Baptists bring to the foreground the painful reality of Christ's wounded Body that neither refraining from nor participating in the Eucharist will fully resolve. Yet, each respondent affirms hope in the Eucharist's healing power and echoes Christ's own prayer “that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you” (John 17:21).

An ecumenical group of experts in church law produced a Statement of Principles of Christian Law based on a comparative examination of the internal regulations of their respective churches. This article examines the detail of the Statement from the point of view of the regulations and practice of Quakers in Britain and concludes that, based as it is on a Trinitarian, sacramental view of ‘the Church’, while there is much in it with which Friends – and members of other non-sacramental, non-hierarchical denominations – would agree, there is also much which has little resonance for them.

This article uses the early thought and career of the Indian Mar Thoma Christian and Marxian theologian M. M. Thomas to investigate the connections between ecumenism’s theology of communism and its engagements with anti-colonial politics and decolonization in the 1940s and 1950s. The article situates Thomas’ efforts to reconcile Marxian doctrine with Christian faith within the movement’s institutional practices for combating the entropic effects of modern secular civilization and Cold War polarization. Tracing Thomas’ ascent from Christian Marxist youth circles in south India to leadership positions in the World Student Christian Federation and the World Council of Churches, the article highlights the central role of his theology in establishing ‘revolutionary’ postcolonial social transformation as the object of Christian global governance in the post-war era.