This book is the posthumous publication of the author's 1986 Phd thesis that was edited for publication by the renowned church-historian David Bebbington. It is therefore fitting that the book begins with an appreciation of Michael Walker by David S Russell the principal of the theological college at which Walker trained. This appreciation for one demonstrates that as a Baptist minister for over 20 year before beginning the research for this book he is clearly invested in its subject (by no means a bad thing).
As the subtitle indicates this is a work of historical theology that focuses in the theological controversies over the theory and practice of communion within Baptist life. In particular three controversies are surveyed.
i) The first area of focus is the one for which i bought this book, this being a discussion of the open communion debate. The key issue at here was what are the essential requirements for admittance to the Lord's Supper. Focusing on the argument of Robert Hall who urged Baptists to open the table to all sincere Christians and his principle detractor Joseph Kinghorn analyses the arguments at stake in the debate and interestingly states that by far the strongest theological argument was with those such as Kinghorn who limited communion to those baptised. The reason being that Hall was dismissing baptism as a prerequisite for approaching the Lord's table something Christianity has always insisted on (it's just that Baptists did not acknowledge the reality of these other denomination's paedobaptisms). However, the rise of industry and its dispersal of local communions as well as the rise of the para-church organisation as one of the principle vehicles of Christian commitment meant the argument was won before it began and Baptists began advocating open communion, even if this could be seen to devalue the baptism that was the raison d’être of Baptist identity. In any case, the result was literally one of excommunication. Even open communion Baptists could in many instances be prohibited from taking Communion in closed churches.
ii) As soon as the open communion debate had subsided the rise of the Tractarian movement and its then leader Edward Pusey (after Newman's conversion to catholicism) forced Baptists to again focus on the theology of the Lord's Supper. In this case, like most nineteenth century evangelicalism, Baptists were dominated by this liturgical renaissance and did endeavoured to differentiate itself from catholic sacerdotalism. This led to a strong tendency towards a radical Zwinglianism in theology to an exclusively memorialist theology (Walker refers to this as an "anabaptist radicalism" - more on that later!). In short, in the endeavour to disassociate from itself 'catholic' tendencies it avoids any discussion of the Lord's Supper being a means of grace; such ideas being labelled 'Puseyite'.
iii) The third controversy is a more generic one that revolved around a number of issues related to the practice of communion. Nineteenth century Baptists debated whether an ordained minister must preside (administer) communion (with all the -alleged- sarcerdotal implications) and related to this whether ordination must be at the (laying on of) hands of other ordained ministers, whether the Lord's Supper could take place in ministerial fraternals or taken to the sick and whether this ordinance should be a weekly fixture in the Church calendar. Finally, the issue of the heated debate over the use of unfermented wine is surveyed (it appears contemporary Southern Baptists are just the first in a line of coercing teetotallers!).
In the next chapter Walker changes tack from an issue focused approach to one focused on personalities. He does this by briefly analysing the eucharistic thought of two Baptist preachers: Charles Haddon Spurgeon (Particular Baptists) and John Clifford (General Baptist) who he argues are representative of the two trends in Baptist thought on the Lord's Supper. In this (along with his concluding chapter) Walker expresses regret that the approach of Clifford was to gain the ascendancy.
This has been quite a long synopsis so i will make my comments very brief. This is a valuable book that will be of great interest to Baptist readers. However, speaking as someone who is not a Baptist I can vouch that it is still interesting reading for outsiders. I have already alluded to the irritation of always reading Anabaptist theology as having no place for any idea of the real presence (see Rempel
Comments