10 Friday, July 5, 1985
THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS
PURELY COMMENTARY
PHILIP SLOMOVITZ
Blood Libel
Continued from Page 2
death of the Cardinal Lorenzo Ganganelli who, just be-
fore he became Pope Clement XIV, presented an
encyclical in which the ritual murder rite against the
Jews was branded infamous and false. Dr. Roth, refer-
ring to the ancient libel of ritual murder made against
the Jews, makes the following significant statement:
To its lasting credit, the Catholic Church (even
when the night of medievalism was at its darkest)
never gave the slightest countenance to the calumny.
Immediately the Holy See first became cognizant of
it, in the thirteenth century, its remonstrances began:
and they continued afterward in unbroken sequence.
It is noteworthy that some of the most vehement
protests emanated from the Pontiffs who otherwise
shewed themselves least sympathetic toward the Jews,
their objectivity thus being all the more obvious.
Never was the libel raised under official auspices in
the States of the Church—a statement applicable to
few other parts of Europe. On almost every occa-
sion, the Papacy resolutely refused to set the seal of
official approval upon the beatification of suppositious
victims demanded by the ignorant. In no respect does
the policy of the Holy See toward the Jew, essen-
tially humane according to the standard of the age
even when it mild not be benevolent, appear in a
nobler light.
The mass of evidence accumulated in this very impor-
tant volume fully justifies Dr. Roth's contention. The
only serious objection that can possibly be taken to it by
Jewish readers is the regrettable fact that the Catholic
Church itself and that Catholic lay and clerical leaders
failed to produce this evidence and to make it a matter
of record and public knowledge during the centuries that
intervened from the time when Pope Innocent IV, in the
13th century, established a precedent for Catholic con-
demnation of this atrocious lie. Even the least informed
person can readily see what horrors and tragedies could
have been avoided had the Catholic Church come to the
front as the defender of truth by publishing the various
documents on record and by making its condemnation of
the calumny a matter of general knowledge.
The report of Cardinal Lorenzo Ganganelli which pro-
vides the basic contents for Dr. Roth's book is published
in English for the first time in this volume. But there is
a tragic note in Dr. Roth's volume which proves the irony
of attempts by Jews to disprove this libel when it should
be done by non-Jews who are responsible for spreading it.
Dr. Roth reproduces in his book part of the record of
the Mendel Beilis Case which was tried in Kiev, Russia,
in 1913. The defense presented documents to show that
various Popes, including Cardinal Ganganelli, issued en-
cyclicals showing how baseless the charge is. The prose-
cution denied the authenticity of these encyclicals and
even chose to call them forgeries. Lord Rothschild of
London thereupon, on October 7, 1913, wrote to His
Eminence Raphael, Cardinal Palatine Merry del Val,
Pontifical Secretary of State, who replied on October
18, 1913, stating that these encyclicals are "substantially
authentic." Two illustrations in this book reproduce Car-
dinal Merry del Val's letter to Lord Rothschild and the
envelope in which it was mailed. A third photograph is
of Cardinal Lorenzo Ganganelli (Pope Clement )'IV).
.
,
"The Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew," although
containing a total of only too pages, is packed full of
very important data dealing with the ritual murder
charge. It dates back to the first libel made against the
Jews in 1144 when William of Norwich, who died of
a cateleptic fit, was later martyrized as a victim of the
Jews and his name repeatedly invoked thereafter or the
revival of the ritual murder libel. Dr. Roth reviews the
various instances of ritual murder lies against the Jews
leading up to the latest demonstrations of imbecility in
the spread of this calumny by Julius Streicher in the offi-
cial Nazi organ of Nuremburg, Der Stueriner. He shows
how this charge was made against the early Christians and
not so long ago against Catholic missionaries in China.
Japan, and the monks of Mt. Sinai, leading up to a resume
of sad experiences of the Jews of Poland. Dr. Roth de-
scribes the circumstances under which in 1758 the Jewish
communities of Poland took steps to defend themselves
by sending Jacob Selig (Selik) as an emissary to Rome
to solicit protection. Pope Benedict XIV referred the
application to the Holy Office of the Inquisition and Car-
dinal Ganganelli was selected to report on the truth or
falsehood of the charges made against the Jewish people.
Ganganelli's encyclical is a most effective piece of writing.
Dr. Roth rightfully states that "underlying the docu-
ment there is a gentle humor; and the demolition of cer-
tain arguments brought forward to bolster up the libel is a
model of ecclesiastical sarcasm."
What makes Ganganelli's report of extreme significance
is that it quotes at length from the earlier encyclicals from
Pope Innocent IV as well as from other Pontiffs and
gives the decision such decisive weight that no doubt can
possibly remain relative to the falsehoods leveled against
the Jews. Also he refuses to accept the testimony of
converted Jews against their former co-religionists. Quot-
ing from Ganganelli's report: "In these neophytes from
There is a tragic note in Dr. Roth's
volume which proves the irony of
attempts by Jews to disprove this
libel when it should be done by
non-Jews who are responsible for
spreading it.
Judaism there is wont to occur a certain transport against
their own nation, by reason of which they not seldom go
beyond the limits of truth."
Ganganelli emphasizes in fact that conversion of Jews
to Catholicism will become a most difficult matter if
Catholics will continue to spread libels against them. In
the concluding paragraph to his statement he declares:
"I therefore hope that the Holy See will take some mea-
sure to protect the Jews of Poland, as Saint Bernard,
Gregory IX and Innocent IV did for the Jews of Ger-
many and of France, 'that the name of Christ be not
blasphemed' by the Jews and, moreover, that their con-
version may not become more difficult."
The Cardinal maintains, in the instance of the libel that
was spread by Monk Rudolph : "It may be concluded,
then, that from the action and conduct of Brother Rudolph
it is impossible to deduce any fault of the Jews against
Christians, but rather of Christians, led astray by a her-
mit, against the Jews."
Dr. Roth deserves an expression 'of gratitude from
Jewish and Catholic communities throughout the world
for this excellent volume which, in addition to the central
theme dealing with Cardinal Ganganelli's report, includes
the following important appendices: the encyclical of
Pope Innocent IV; the protests against the Kiev ritual
murder accusations in 1912 that came from dignitaries
in Great Britain, France, Germany, and Russia; and the
more recent protests sounded in 1934 in England against
the charges in Julius Streicher's Der Stucrmer, containing
the statements by Chief Rabbi Hertz, the Archbishop
of Canterbury and others.
The emphatic refutation of the libel as it is presented
in Dr. Roth's book makes this volume one of great his-
toric significance particularly in view of the constant
grievance repeated by Catholics that Jews failed to recog-
nize the friendship of the Catholic Church toward them.
The reviewer has before him a copy of the April 19, 1936,
issue of Our Sunday Visitor which is published in Hunt-
ington, Indiana. Under a streaming headline entitled
"The Popes and The Jews" and "Catholic Church Has
Been Their Best Friend," this newspaper makes the fol-
lowing declaration:
The Jew should be the Catholic Church's truest
friend, while as a matter of fact, he has been trained
in prejudice against her. He has been taught that
the Catholic Church persecuted the Jew in the past
as Hitler is persecuting him in Germany today. He
sees in our Good Friday observance, when storekeep-
ers in many cities are requested to close their doors
for three hours, a studied effort to call the world's
attention to the crucifixion of Jesus by the Jews.
In retaliation he has joined forces with the avowed
enemies of the Catholic Church (I speak not of the
rank and file of the Jews, which seems to be very
friendly, but of many influential leaders) ; he is a
declared enemy of the parochial school.
Now, as a matter of fact, the Catholic Church, as
such, never persecuted the Jews, although they have
been persecuted in so-called Catholic countries by
elements which were almost equally antagonistic to
the Catholic Church herself. This has been true
during the last decade in Vienna and Munich.
Then no instructed Catholic holds that the. Jews,
as such, were responsible for the crucifixion of Christ.
The Bible is very clear on this score. It represents
Christ having been tried at night lest the people
might interfere. There were certain self-appointed
leaders of the Jews, such as the scribes and the phari-
sees, who are represented as having plotted to take
Christ's life much earlier, but they were fearful of
the people who actually loved Him.
Since Christ Himself, the most beautiful character
in history, was a Jew; since His Mother, who is
universally loved by all Catholics, was a Jew; since
all His Apostles were Jews; since the first converts
to the Catholic Church were Jews; since Christ came
"not to destroy the Old Law but to fulfil it," one ,
would think that the Jew would be actually proud of
Him and not only be friendly to the Catholic Church,
but be more susceptible than any other race of people
to conversion to Christianity.
But against the so-called Middle Ages "historical
charge," lye would like to call the attention of /our
Jewish friends to the following rabbinical pronounce-
ment made at a celebrated assembly in Paris in 1807,
and subscribed to by all the assembled delegates:
"It is in consequence of the sacred principles of
morality that at different times the Roman Pontiffs
have protected and received into their states the Jews
persecuted and expatriated from different parts of
Europe. About the middle of the seventh century
Saint Gregory defended the Jews and protected them
in the whole Christian world. In the tenth century
the bishops of Spain opposed with the greatest energy
the people who wished to massacre them. The Pontiff
Alexander II wrote to those bishops praising their
course. Saint Bernard defended them in the twelfth
century from the fury of the Crusades. Innocent II
and Alexander III also protected them.
In the thirteenth century Gregory IX preserved
them from the great evils which menaced them in
England as well as in France and Spain; he forbade,
under pain of excommunication, anyone to force
their festivals. Clement V did more than protect
them; he encouraged their means of instruction.
Clement VI gave them an asylum at Avignon when
they were persecuted in all the rest of. Europe. In
the following centuries Nicholas II wrote to the In-
quisition to prevent the forcing of Jews to embrace
Christianity. Clement XIII calmed the anxiety of
parents alarmed at the fate of their children, who were
frequently torn from the breasts of their mothers.
It would be easy to give an infinity of other chari-
table actions of which the Israelites bad been at dif-
ferent times the object on the part of ecclesiastics in-
structed in the duties of ] men and in those of their
religion. The people of Israel, always unfortunate
and almost always oppressed, have never had the
means or the occasion to manifest their recognition
for so many benefactions. Since the eighteenth cen-
tury this great and happy occasion, which we owe to