Volume 4 No 1 - Journal for the Study of Antisemitism

2012] MAYBE, MAYBE NOT 299
more difficult for Catholic scholars to scrutinize the over-all record of a
pope already declared a saint. Certainly Lawler has every right to analyze
the text of this letter. But rather than solid analysis, he simply rejects it out
of hand, as though it were penned by a group of amateurs. It is interesting to
note that this letter received some support in Vatican circles and may be one
reason Pope Benedict XVI has never acted on the positive recommendation
for beatification/canonization presented to him by the curial office in charge
of sainthood investigations.
My final example of superficial scholarship in Lawler’s book is found
on page 238. He has a footnote in which he asserts that much of what has
been undertaken in the name of Christian-Jewish dialogue has little to do
with authentic theological exchange. The “dialogue,” he maintains, focuses
on “support of Israeli policy toward Palestinians and support of critics of
the wartime church.” He praises the work of Jacob Neusner and Bruce
Chilton as an exception to his critique. As one who has engaged in such
dialogue for some four decades, I can only describe this statement as nonsensical.
If Lawler had merely read the book catalogue from his own publisher,
he would have noted the recent publication of a volume from a fouryear
scholarly colloquium whose patron was Cardinal Walter Kasper (who
also contributed a thoughtful essay). This volume, titled Christ and the Jewish
People Today, with essays by American and European Christian scholars
with Jewish respondents, is a solidly theological work. Another volume,
soon to be published by Eerdmans and that is edited by Robert Jensen and
Eugene Korn, falls into the same category. There have also been the theological
writings of Monika Hellwig, Peter Phan, Paul van Buren, Clemens
Thoma, and Michael Signer, to name just a few. The substantial new material
on the Jewishness of Jesus, the Jewish-Christian relationship in the first
several centuries, and Paul’s continued links to Judaism add to the theological
foundation of the dialogue. In making such an unfounded assertion
Lawler is exposing the shallowness of his scholarship in many areas. In
sum, this could have been a very valuable book. Sadly, it falls far short of
acceptable scholarly standards.
*John T. Pawlikowski, OSM, PhD, is a Servite priest and professor of social ethics
at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago and a Board member of the Journal
for the Study of Antisemitism.