Simon Goncharenko identifies two purposes for this book: (1.) to demonstrate that church discipline is the key theological idea of sixteenth-century radical reformer Balthasar Hubmaier's theology; and (2.) to stimulate discussion about church discipline among contemporary Churches. He pursues the first purpose in detail, but leaves the second essentially to his readers. Goncharenko's exploration of Hubmaier's theology of church discipline faithfully describes this unifying element in Hubmaier's theology, and carefully demonstrates its interrelatedness to Hubmaier's anthropology, soteriology and ecclesiology. Hubmaier's church discipline is shown to contain elements from his nominalist training, such as his tripartite anthropology, the distinction between the revealed and ordained will of God, and the idea that according to the covenant that God has unilaterally established with people for their salvation, people must do that which is in them to be saved. What distinguishes Hubmaier from his Roman Catholic contemporaries is his evangelical devotion to the Scriptures as the foundational authority against which all theology is tested. While church discipline is certainly related to the three aspects of Hubmaier's theology that Goncharenko explores, it claims too much to argue that it is the unifying theme from which all else derives. For the contemporary Churches Goncharenko presents Hubmaier's church discipline as theologically consistent for those whose ecclesiology is based on a gathered Church of regenerate believers. The role of the community of believers in the practice of church discipline can be seen as a corrective to contemporary Churches where individualism dominates. While not explicitly stated, Goncharenko offers Hubmaier's model of church discipline to the contemporary Church as a theology that understands the process of salvation to mean the lifelong pursuit of disciples seeking to be transformed into the likeness of Jesus that occurs within a community of regenerate believers who have mutually agreed on joining the Church to practice church discipline. Salvation is therefore not about a forensic declaration of righteousness, but a demonstrably transformed life. Goncharenko's experiences in Russia and the United States of America have led him to see the urgent need for Baptist Churches to once again engage in discussions about church discipline. My experience of Baptist Churches in Australia and the United Kingdom supports Goncharenko's view that church discipline is not on their agenda, and I share the hope that this academic exploration of Hubmaier's understanding of this theme will inspire the contemporary Church carefully to review its theology and practice of this critical theological issue. However, a more nuanced approach will need to be undertaken than Goncharenko provides in this work. To simply transfer something from sixteenth-century Moravia to twenty-first century Moscow, Dallas, Sydney or London is to ignore the significant issue of context that shapes theology. Contemporary Churches would also want to test the nominalist assumptions in Hubmaier's theology. In light of current debates in Baptist Churches about the nature of leadership and congregational authority, it would be prudent further to explore Hubmaier's understanding of congregational authority and leadership.