What can the word "community" still mean today? Processes of globalization could be taken to show that this term has definitively become obsolete, except as referring to the global community of mankind. Other developments however indicate that a less universalistic understanding of belonging has not lost all appeal or legitimacy. This suggests that the term "community" has not become outdated but that renewed reflection on the complex nature of this concept is required: how to account for the simultaneous transience and persistence of belonging? My project takes on this topical question in four consecutive steps. I start by analyzing a discussion in contemporary continental philosophy: thinkers like Jean-Luc Nancy have recently proposed to think community in unreservedly open terms, which has lead critics to argue that this cannot fully account for the continued importance of belonging. I then turn to Stanley Cavell, a thinker from a somewhat different tradition who may be said to combine an emphasis on the transience of belonging with a clearer recognition of its persistence. After tracing the thoughts on coexistence that are scattered throughout Cavells oeuvre, I bring him into explicit conversation with Nancy. By focusing on the topic of national identity, I examine whether Cavells more substantial interpretation of terms like "common" does not end up jeopardizing the porousness of community so resolutely defended by Nancy. Lastly, I return to the debate of part one to consider under what conditions the two-fold demand on a contemporary theory of community can be met. Is there a way of reconciling the transience and persistence of belonging, or is it rather a matter of keeping the tension between them intact, and what can we learn from both Cavell and Nancy in that respect? My project thus develops conceptual tools for making sense of human coexistence today.