This collection, first published by the United Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry in 1992, contains eleven articles on the extensive effects of ecumenism on theological education. Given that perspectives are included from historians, theologians, missiologists, Christian educators, and ecumenists, the scope of the articles is unsurprisingly broad and ranges from critical engagement with definitions of ecumenism, the nature of global inclusiveness, and the question of what cultural assumptions can be said to be implicit in interreligious dialogue.The essays were the fruit of a consultation held in 1990 in Yahara, Wisconsin, under the auspices of a number of different connectional boards and agencies of The United Methodist Church (UMC), and their republication raises the question of continued relevance twenty-eight years later. However, the volume's preface (x) underlines the continuing significance of the challenges of plurality both in society and in the Church: Another test of neighborliness is division within the church, particularly between the evangelical and liberal wings of the denomination. Volatile issues like abortion and sexuality surface quite deep fissures. And beyond the religious family are neighbors in need, the claims put by poverty, injustice, hunger, war … We face diversity. What unity and/or comity can we establish amid diversity? How will we structure our relationship to the world? That said, the addition of an addendum revisiting some of the issues raised by the articles would have been helpful in a number of areas. For example, Russell E. Richey's use of the family meal, Holy Communion, and love feast as three metaphors for holding a fractured Methodism together is creative and still resonant, but it would be even more so if the contemporary situation was reviewed in its light. Have the divisions between liberals and evangelicals worsened or lessened in the time elapsed since the original article was penned, and can Richey's approach still bear the weight it needs to? With regard to sexuality, a key fault line in Methodism on both sides of the Atlantic, some commentators in the UMC such as David N. Field in Our Purpose Is Love (2018) have argued for the continuing unity that Richey contends for, whereas others like Rob Renfroe and Walter Fenton, authors of Are We Really Better Together? (2018), believe that this may no longer be possible. Similarly, John Deschner's article on United Methodism's ecumenical policy would have benefited from a review of the ecumenical scene in the United States within which that policy has operated since his original paper was written. What impact, for example, has the emerging church movement had on UMC ecumenism?Although the primary focus is on the UMC and on American ecumenism, readers in other cultural contexts will find much of interest and stimulation in the volume. Some of that interest and stimulation comes from discerning the ways in which changes in ecumenism, globalization, and especially internal church politics shine favourable or unfavourable light on the writers' judgements over two decades later, and where continuities point to a lack of progress and development in ways hoped for at the beginning of the 1990s. Few in the mainline Christian denominations would dare to argue now against the desire of the late Jane Cary Peck in her personal reflection on pedagogy, ‘Teaching for Ecumenism’, to create in theological education an environment where ‘we can intentionally work on developing and practicing the values of an ecumenical community’(77), but the question of in what ways such a priority for ecumenism is shared more widely throughout the sponsoring denominations of such institutions is an open one. These issues are crystalized in Ridgeway F. Shinn Jr and Norman E. Dewire's article ‘Implications of the Yahara Papers for Seminaries and for Theological Education’. The challenge they offer continues to resonate today: ‘Have United Methodists outgrown ecumenism? Do United Methodists worry more about denominational survival and declining membership than they do about the dividedness of the church?’ (130) Sadly, within the UMC and elsewhere, the dividedness of the Church as an issue has ceased since 1992 to be purely an ecumenical matter, whilst its relatedness to denominational survival and declining membership has grown ever stronger.