In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in the place of apologetics as a theological enterprise in response to the challenge of atheism and secularism in Western cultures. To this end, Siniscalchi focuses his work on the “urgent need to discuss the possibility of reasoned defences of Christianity in the light of the challenges posed by relativists” (8). Retrieving Apologetics by Siniscalchi is a solid contribution to this renewal of theological apologetical engagement. Siniscalchi's interest is grounded in a classical approach to apologetics, which has more in common with neo-Scholastic methodologies than contemporary “experiential” approaches (12). Given this approach, this work occasionally reads as a “manual” for “apologists,” with the text interspersed with various exhortations to “the apologist” to develop particular apologetical styles, methods, or postures.

Siniscalchi argues that the dialogical approach, which has become the dominant mode of engagement with other traditions, other religions, and “the world” in general since Vatican II, needs to be balanced with a greater focus on apologetical methods. Indeed, Siniscalchi argues, “The Council Fathers were concerned to endorse the validity of apologetics” (18). Further, Siniscalchi analyzes the apologetical contributions of recent popes. This is one of the weaker chapters of the book, and highlights a concern with the work as a whole. With such a strong emphasis on the task of apologetics itself, which is developed with greater confidence in the second half of the book, there can be a lack of nuance about the dynamics of apologetics in a contemporary world. For example, Siniscalchi does not address seminal speeches by Benedict XVI at Regensburg (2006), Westminster (2010), and Berlin (2011), or the “style” of Pope Francis, which generates its own apologetic curiosity. In Siniscalchi's discussion of papal apologetics, and within his overall theme of the “urgent need to discuss the possibility of reasoned defences of Christianity,” these broader themes of Popes Benedict XVI and Francis provide key examples and insights, both in content and method. An extended treatment of Lumen Fidei would have added to the scholarly weight of this chapter, and broadened the vision of ecclesial apologetics.

Siniscalchi is much more at home exploring philosophical and metaphysical dynamics of apologetics. Here he provides a structured and methodological approach to answering modern scientific, philosophical, and anthropological arguments against Christian faith. It must also be pointed out that Siniscalchi uses terms such as “Christian faith” and “Catholic Christian faith” interchangeably, and a greater ecumenical sensitivity to the usage of this terminology would bring greater clarity to the text.

In developing his apologetical method, Siniscalchi draws upon a contemporary form of the via notarum, defined as the via empirica argument, which seeks to highlight the personal strengths, collective benefits, and historical contribution of the Christian faith, and by which the apologist “is justified in claiming that Catholicism has worked as a leaven to improve any society that embraces it” (198). While Siniscalchi is careful not to entertain a triumphalist tone, there perhaps lurks underneath the text a yearning to return to unquestioned ecclesiastical authority and superiority, with observations such as “All other things being equal, ecclesial vitality and institutional integrity can be found in greater measure in the Catholic Church” (199).

Siniscalchi demonstrates an obvious passion for a reinvigorated Catholic apologetics. This is commendable, as is the work itself. Some of the book's argumentation might be too specialized for a general audience, but nevertheless, there are sections that will serve to pique the interest of a reader with basic theological knowledge. The accessibility of the work would be greatly enhanced by the inclusion of subject and author indexes. Overall, Siniscalchi offers a comprehensive approach to classical apologetics in the modern age, even if at times, this approach appears to be too theologically self-referential and fails to incorporate more nuanced and complex forms of scientific and anthropological augmentation. Siniscalchi's work deserves recognition for its contribution to the ongoing task of the church rediscovering its apologetical voice in the noisy world of intellectual and philosophical debate.