AP

Review of Peter Barnes and Brett Lee-Price, Abolition and Abolitionism: William Wilberforce, Christian Political Action, and the Abortion Debate, Tulip Publishing, 2026.

Two years ago, I asked Peter Barnes what his perspective was on the abolition movement. I had to clarify that I wasn’t talking about the work of William Wilberforce, but the new appropriation of the term which had recently come into my line of sight. A few months prior to asking that question, my husband and I had blithely introduced two (separate) visitors at our church to each other. One had been active in the pro-life movement for many years, and the other person was zealous to abolish abortion. Three of us began what we thought could be a fruitful conversation. Three of us had never heard of abortion abolitionism before. We soon found ourselves in the middle of a rather fierce battle that three out of the four of us didn’t know existed. Yet because we didn’t know what abolitionism was, we were counted as opponents of it. It was a bewildering experience. Many months followed where we tried to understand what abolitionism is and how it is different from the pro-life movement. From the first conversation, William Wilberforce was a central feature of the hasty rhetoric.

Abolition and Abolitionism: William Wilberforce, Christian Political Action, and the Abortion Debate by Peter Barnes and Brett Lee-Price is a short publication which neither of them would have written two years ago. It is a response to this particular and recent dynamic. It does not enter into the range of disputes between the pro-life and abolitionist positions, but is constrained to clarifying what we need to know about William Wilberforce. Barnes and Lee-Price’s booklet is written for people who want to understand more about the disputes between pro-lifers and the abolitionists. It offers both parties an opportunity to engage with more accuracy and understanding than has hitherto been the case.

Both the pro-life and abolitionist sides have adopted Wilberforce as their own mascot, not in trying to persuade the unbelieving world to stop killing babies, but in their own factional disputes. The intended effect is to borrow moral authority: ‘If Wilberforce were alive today, fighting this fight, he would be doing it the way we do.” There is also the inference (or sometimes direct accusation) that the opposing side is the moral equivalent of folks who opposed Wilberforce. Those who claim to be in his provenance anticipate that history will remember them as the Wilberforces of abortion abolition. There is a waft of self-aggrandisement in the claims, from whomever they come. This background helps explain the reason for the booklet. It is part of a response to a specific cluster of issues.

In response to the attempts by both sides to borrow the authority of Wilberforce, Barnes and Lee-Price have each written an essay examining the things Wilberforce did and said across his decades of abolitionist work. These essays have been published in one short volume, with a unifying introduction. History is examined to reveal that neither the pro-lifers nor the abolitionists in the current abortion debates can lay claim in a simplistic way to Wilberforce as their own champion. Wilberforce said and did things that can be disconnected from their historical, social, political and religious context. In showing how this is the case, Barnes and Lee-Price have politely exposed the fact that both sides have taken intellectual shortcuts. As we read the narrative of how Wilberforce did his work for the abolition of the slave trade (and later slavery itself), it becomes clear that there is wisdom for everyone to learn. 

Understanding the depth, breadth and texture of Wilberforce’s work is instructive. His example isn’t a blueprint for how to bring about the abolition of every legally, economically and socially embedded moral evil, but it does give us a lived picture of a particular Christian (and the people he worked with) striving to give the good he had at hand to give, using the means and within the constraints that God had ordained for him in his own time^[1]. An examination of Wilberforce’s work doesn’t give us a recipe, but it does position us to better understand our own situation and ask fruitful questions about what we are doing, as well as why, when, how and with whom. When we slow down to understand Wilberforce, rather than merely use him, we all have an opportunity to become more effective in our work.

This book is brief and modest. The stated goal is only to clarify whether it is reasonable to claim that Wilberforce was an incrementalist (which pro-lifers are identified with) or an immediatist (the abolitionist standard). I daresay that today’s abolitionists might assert that they are happy with increments as long as those increments are righteous according to biblical law. Lee-Price does highlight the work of Elizabeth Heyrick, an immediatist who was critical of the approach of Wilberforce (and his co-labourers). She was active in the time between the abolition of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade (1807) and the abolition of slavery in the British colonies (1833). Heyrick’s opposition exposes some contours of Wilberforce’s incrementalism (an incrementalism that pro-lifers want to exaggerate and abolitionists want to ignore). It is interesting that an immediatist in Wilberforce’s own context did not count him enough of one. If there are relevant sources from the Wilberforce material, I would be interested to see if the current abolitionists’ point about righteous increments could be addressed at greater length, although as Barnes and Lee-Price show, it is possible that Wilberforce didn’t express himself in the same categories we do.

Barnes and Lee-Price offer a measured consideration of Wilberforce’s work, and how it does and does not correspond to our current challenge to end abortion. They are not trying to nudge their argument to one side or the other. The booklet is conspicuously patient and calm while the authors seek to untangle some rogue knots in the rigging. It is a reminder to slow down and desist from quick cut and paste opinions. Indirectly, it is a rebuke to those who have hastily adopted a few quotes and dates and massaged them to suit the needs of their argument. More care is needed from those making the arguments and those listening. It takes more time and effort to form sound opinions than our digital lives have trained us to take. This booklet helps us combat our own haste, in order to take that effort, but the authors have made it very easy for us to know and do better. A lot of history is distilled into relatively few words.

If both pro-lifers and abolitionists were to take time to understand Wilberforce better, the interactions might mature; some of our idiosyncrasies and sin might be exposed (and by God’s grace, confessed, repented from and forgiven); we might be able to forgive as the Lord forgives us. And we might forge ahead with eyes better trained to see our “moral duty and practical responsibility”.^[2] Man-centred lobbying and complacency might be reoriented to a holy fear of God and confidence in his word. Biblical convictions might be set toward achieving particular (though incomplete) good, rather than mere denunciation. I’m hopeful that this booklet might help us toward more mature debate, less wasteful discord, and increasingly fruitful work to end abortion.  

– Cathy McKay

^[1] Proverbs 3:27 says: Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to do it.

^[2] Abolition and Abolitionism, p.42