Customer Reviews

James of Jerusalem: Heir to Jesus of Nazareth (Interfaces)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Hartin selects a proper title for the book and then resorts to Catholic apologism for why Jesus and James weren't really even related at all, when James is in control of the movement after Jesus, the reason is best found in the title for this book! The genalogies in Matthew and Luke that show Jesus as legitimate King of Israel, must be carried to the next step. After Jesus dies with no offspring, and Jesus next brother, James, is given honor by all Jews who hoped for a Messiah, (including Pharisees), sense is made of James being in charge, and how the thought of being observed by envoys from James cause even Peter to end behavior that may not be found lawful, (as in Galatians).

This book explores the role - often overlooked - of James "the brother of Jesus" in the formative days of what would eventually become the Christian religion. Patrick Hartin proceeds methodically from a discussion of basic scholarly methodology, on to the question of James' relation to Jesus (brother? step-brother? cousin?), and finally to the question of James' role in the early church and the implications for today.

Although his scholarship is generally sound, Hartin fails to ask the crucial question about James and the early Jewish Christians: what are the implications for Christian theology of the existence of a Jewish Christian community which remained true to its Jewish roots for many decades after the death of Jesus? Since Christians generally have adopted "replacement" theology, i.e., the idea that the Christian church supplanted the Jewish religion and the Jewish people as God's chosen vehicle for the salvation of mankind, the existence of Christians who remained Jews raises fundamental questions. If early Jewish Christians rejected replacement theology, what are the implications for Christian doctrine as a whole, particularly in the area of Christology (the nature and role of Jesus?

The best Hartin can do is draw a false contrast between the "theological" emphasis of Paul and the "ethical" emphasis of James. But Paul would be surprised to learn that he was unconcerned with ethics, and James would be perhaps even more surprised to see his legacy invoked to support modern notions of "diversity" and moral relativism. Hartin correctly points out James' concern for the poor, but neglects his warnings about "the tug and lure of . . . passion," the waywardness of the tongue, and the evils of anger and "all that is filthy."

Hartin is - I think - too eager to pander to modern, liberal sensibilities. Hence his annoying (to me) prefacing of each chapter with quotations from "Alice in Wonderland," quotations whose relevance to the text is often strained, at best. And when Hartin suggests that James would oppose "discriminating against anyone for whatever reason," he has gone too far. That is a modern notion incompatible with the strict morality of the Torah, a morality which James never abandoned.