Jewish Blood "Libel" True?

[Deusdonat]

Since I’m still officially new here, I don’t know if this topic has come up already, but I wanted to get some dialogue going on this topic. For anyone who doesn’t know, the “Blood Libel” was a term to describe the charge which began in Medieval Europe that Jews have been sacrificing Christian children to use their blood in rituals. These charges have long been utilized by critics of Catholicism to “prove” the inherrent anti-semtism rampant within the church.

But now, a prominint rabinical Jewish scholar Elio Toaff has concluded that these claims are actually based on fact.

Any comments?

 

[Valke2]

First, the author is not a rabbi. His father was. From what I read of the article, he has no new evidence, and relies on confessions of Jews that were given under torture.

 

[lukewarm]

It couldn’t possibly be true a jew has never done anything wrong ever, only Christians have commited horrible acts throughout history.

 

[Deusdonat]

First, the author is not a rabbi. His father was. From what I read of the article, he has no new evidence, and relies on confessions of Jews that were given under torture.

I said he is a rabinical scholar, which he is. And yes, his father was a rabbi, and he was not.

If you read the book, the confessions were the giveaway, whether or not they were done under torture. This was the key to the evidence, as the testimony contained words and prayers which were known only to certain Jewish communities and would not have been known by Christians (i.e. they could not have been simply made up).

 

[ralphinal]

It may be because of exposure to Protestant thought, but I always read that verse differently. I do not see it as calling down the wrath of God. I always saw it as an unintentional pleading for salvation. They were covered by the blood of the Lamb and therefore they could be saved. Just my take.

What troubles me are the modern Christians who still feel that the Jews are evil and cursed. I mean come on guys. Let the whole “Christ Killer” stuff die.

 

[Deusdonat]

Ralphinal, you really should read the article. It is not saying that Jews are murderers. It is saying that in one, and maybe several cases, these crimes actually did occur by a sect of Jews (very much like followers of Christian sects, such as the Branch Davidians). It does not say this was a part of mainstream Judaism. But the hypothesis is sound, if you follow the logic of the author (who is Jewish and a professor at an Israeli University).

It’s sad that true accademic scholarship has to be stiffled here.

 

[Kaninchen]

It’s sad that true accademic scholarship has to be stiffled here.

Toaff has not the slightest evidence whatsoever that any Christian was killed - it’s at the level of ‘there’s a vague possibility that some crazy person might have done something.’

The opportunities for Jew-hater feeding frenzies will mushroom, of course. I expect it will come up here every couple of months - these ‘Jews Eat Babies’ threads perhaps alternating with ‘Talmud Revealed’.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

I think the rumor originated from conversion of Christians to Judaism – “killing a Christian to make a Jew” – and took a life of its own. I also don’t see what can be accomplished by discussing it now.

 

[Valke2]

Ralphinal, you really should read the article. It is not saying that Jews are murderers. It is saying that in one, and maybe several cases, these crimes actually did occur by a sect of Jews (very much like followers of Christian sects, such as the Branch Davidians). It does not say this was a part of mainstream Judaism. But the hypothesis is sound, if you follow the logic of the author (who is Jewish and a professor at an Israeli University).

It’s sad that true accademic scholarship has to be stiffled here.

I don’t see how you can conclude that the author’s hypothesis is sound from that article. There’s no evidence to support his claims, other than documentation that has been known for quite some time, according to the article, and is based on confession under torture.

 

[Valke2]

I said he is a rabinical scholar, which he is. And yes, his father was a rabbi, and he was not.

I don’t know what a rabbincal scholar can mean, other than a rabbi.

"Monsignor Iginio Rogger, a church historian who in the 1960s led the investigation into the murder of a 2-year-old Simon of Trento, for which 16 Jews were hanged, said many scholars have concurred that the confessions were completely unreliable.

“I wouldn’t want to be in [Toaff’s] shoes, answering for this to historians who have seriously documented this case,” he said. “The judges used horrible tortures, to the point where the accused pleaded: ‘Tell us what you want us to say.’” ’

Do you read Italian or has the book been published in English yet? Your posts imply that you have read this book. But I found this quote:

On February 14, 2007, Ariel Toaff said in a statement that he ordered the Italian publisher of his book to freeze distribution of his book so that he can “re-edit the passages which comprised the basis of the distortions and falsehoods that have been published in the media.” jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359860024&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Regarding the author’s reaction to how the media has represented his book (and I think we can agree that all your information as well as mine on this book comes from the press and not actually reading the book):

“I was astounded by the sheer force of these misrepresentations, which turned what is a research book into a vehicle used to harm Judaism and the Jewish people and, God forbid, as a justification for blood libel.”

“I extend my sincerest apologies to all those who were offended by the articles and twisted facts that were attributed to me and to my book.” "

I haven’t seen any serious scholar (or anyone else for that matter) to come out in favor of the book, other than a blanket statement from the university in which he teaches, saying they are confident of his scientific method (whatever that means).

 

[Valke2]

Oh, and I seem to be wrong about Bar Ilan’s reaction. They are not supporting in any way the book, from what I read in the article (link posted in prior post):

"Bar-Ilan University strongly condemns and repudiates what is seemingly implied by Toaff’s book and by reports in the media concerning its contents, as if there is a basis for the blood libels that led to the murder of millions of innocent Jews.

 

[Valke2]

It’s sad that true accademic scholarship has to be stiffled here.

“To disparage this book is not, as some have suggested, to challenge academic freedom. It is to decry bad historiographical method. The question is not whether historians have the right to assess the veracity of ritual murder charges, but whether their arguments must adhere to generally agreed rules of historical reasoning. Here, the rules were plainly ignored.”

Toaff… chose to put his uncritical trust in the literal words of Christian chroniclers, court notaries, and tendentious modern polemicists. In particularly in its final chapters, his book glides from images of martyrdom found in Hebrew Crusade chronicles, alongside maledictions of Christianity in the mouths of exhausted and many times massacred Ashkenazic Jews, to the supposed reality of ritual murder, framed as vendetta. And he does so on the sole basis of the appearance of these images and maledictions in the depictions of Simone’s death elicited by torture from the accused. More likely, as I see it, the accused were recasting older imagery as a real event in order to satisfy their tormentors. Jews, no doubt, had also imbibed what Christians were saying, which they may well have regurgitated when “put to the question.” Under duress, their mentality may have come to gibe with that of their prosecutors."

hnn.us/articles/35496.html

 

[Kaninchen]

I can’t see why you’re bothering, any self-respecting Jew-hater is going to just respond with words to the effect of: “well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?”

 

[Reuben_J]

Well, what about the present day Jews of the state of Israel? Are they really the descendants of Judah?

How is that they lay this claim to the land of Palestine? How about the Christians and the Muslims, don’t they have equal right to the land of Jesus and Abraham?

 

[Kaninchen]

Well, what about the present day Jews of the state of Israel? Are they really the descendants of Judah?

How is that they lay this claim to the land of Palestine? How about the Christians and the Muslims, don’t they have equal right to the land of Jesus and Abraham?

Heaven forfend that Jews be actually allowed to own any land whatsoever anywhere - great old Christian tradition that, of course.

What do you think should be done about the Jewish problem? Have you any creative suggestions?

 

[ralphinal]

Well, what about the present day Jews of the state of Israel? Are they really the descendants of Judah?

How is that they lay this claim to the land of Palestine? How about the Christians and the Muslims, don’t they have equal right to the land of Jesus and Abraham?

I would say yes and no to this. They are descendants of Judah. The modern state of isreal. however, is a secular state partially created to give the Jewish people a place where they could be free from anti-semitisem. After the horrors of Nazi Germany and when the Stalinist treatments began to be known, the Zionest movement gained some support, if only in the creation of the state, in people who saw that if the Jewish people, especially in Eastern Europe, were not given a homeland, they would eventually be irradicated from the earth.

Yes, Christians and Muslims in that land do have rights to it. They should be granted these rights. However, I feel that it is better to have Isreal than to watch a people obliterated from the earth. Trust me on this: at some point in the next 20 years, anti-semitism in Europe will approach Nazi levels, just without the death camps and governmental restrictions.

 

[Kaninchen]

Trust me on this: at some point in the next 20 years, anti-semitism in Europe will approach Nazi levels, just without the death camps and governmental restrictions.

Really? Goodness, I’ve only lived in Western Europe most of my life and have never noticed. Of course, there’s all those Eastern Europeans flooding in and, well, the history of antisemitism in places like Catholic Poland being what it is . . .

So, you think we Jews are in danger from the Poles then?

 

[ralphinal]

Really? Goodness, I’ve only lived in Western Europe most of my life and have never noticed. Of course, there’s all those Eastern Europeans flooding in and, well, the history of antisemitism in places like Catholic Poland being what it is . . .

So, you think we Jews are in danger from the Poles then?

Nope. Not the Poles. Western Europe is different than Northern and eastern, but I feel that the increase in Islam in Europe is the problem. You already see it in France.

 

[Kaninchen]

Nope. Not the Poles. Western Europe is different than Northern and eastern, but I feel that the increase in Islam in Europe is the problem. You already see it in France.

Oh, is that all, you had me worried for a moment.

 

[Deusdonat]

Do you read Italian or has the book been published in English yet? Your posts imply that you have read this book.

Yes, Italian and Spanish are my “first” languages. English a distant third.

I haven’t seen any serious scholar (or anyone else for that matter) to come out in favor of the book, other than a blanket statement from the university in which he teaches, saying they are confident of his scientific method (whatever that means).

That’s the point. At first the University not only FUNDED some of Toaff’s researched but championed the release of the book. Then when the controversy began, they did a complete 180 refusing to use scientific method of any sort. The subject is apparently “off limits”.

After Vatican II the Vatican quashed the story of Simone in light of what had happened to the Jews in Europe during WW II for the greater good. But does that also mean that we must quash reality along with it? Or at least debate?