Barth and Bonhoeffer as Contributors to a Post‐Liberal Ecclesiology: Essays of Hope for a Fallen and Complex World, TomGreggs, edited with Robert W.Heimburger, New York: T&T Clark. 2023. (ISBN 0567701573), xi + 227 pp., Hb $115, Pb 39.95

Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer were important voices in twentieth-century theology.Their insights and influences have been significant and enduring.In the eleven chapters of this book, veteran interpreter Tom Greggs seeks 'not only to think towards and about the theologies of Barth and Bonhoeffer but to think with, from and-even at times in relation to the different contexts in which we now find ourselvesbeyond their theologies ' (pp.3-4).The results are penetrating insights about both theologians but also consideration of each in his own right as well as ways in which their insights relate to each other.The essays are gathered in four parts: (1) Reading Barth and Bonhoeffer Together-with pieces on the influence of Barth on Bonhoeffer; and Bonhoeffer on Barth; (2) Engagements with Barth's views on salvation, eternity, Jesus is Victor!, religion and providence; (3) Engagements with Bonhoeffer, featuring two pieces on religionless Christianity, bearing sin in the church and priestly mediation in the church; (4) Reading Barth and Bonhoeffer Together in a Fallen Pluralist World-'Pessimistic Universalism' and a Conclusion.Greggs's approach is to be honest about the differences between Barth and Bonhoeffer; but he acknowledges that 'commonalities exist as well ' (p.11).He suggests that 'rather than conceiving of them as members of rival or competing theological camps it is surely more historically apt to view them as dialogue partners-who have enough agreement to enable them to converse together amidst commonality and difference-rather than considering them as an elephant and a whale who could never speak to each other ' (pp.11-12).Greggs here invokes the famous image Barth used for his relationship with Emil Brunner: elephant and whale!On mutual influences, Greggs continually notes that throughout theological areas where Barth 'is not uncritical' of Bonhoeffer, 'there is nevertheless a sense of a shared discourse around certain themes, particularly relating to the Christian life.Therefore, rather than speaking in terms of