APPENDIX II.
Ps. 101, 7: "He that worketh deceit shall not
dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not
tally in my sight." We make no apology for selecting this portion of a
Psalm of David in preparing this appendix. In the Contemporary
Jewish Record for July-August, 1939. Ben Zion Bokser
has an article, entitled: "Talmudic Forgeries, A
Case Study in Anti-Jewish Propaganda." From that we take the
following: "Czarist Russia
made its contribution to this gallery of literary swindlers in the person of
the notorious Justin Pranaitis, a Catholic clergyman. * * * It was in 1912 during
the trial of Beilis on the ritual murder libel that Pranaitis drew world
notoriety upon himself by offering his services as an expert to the prosecution.
* * * Beilis was, of course, acquitted, but the prosecution remunerated the
star ‘expert’ with 500 rubles."
The American Jewish Year Books, in the Jewish Section of the New York Public
Library, for the years 1913-1914, and
1914-1915, contain a number of references to this famous trial in which Beilis
was the defendant. These will be condensed as much as possible for lack of
space. "At the request of Mackevitch, Committee
appointed to examine all books in library of St.
Petersburg Ecclesiastical Academy
for reference to the use of Christian blood by Jewish sects. * * * The Kolocol, organ of the Holy Synod, urges ecclesiastical
committee to confirm belief in ritual murder theory and guilt of Beilis. * * * Ministry of Justice orders bringing of new indictment against
Beilis at approaching session of court. Public prosecutor assures Beilis
that trial will take place in May. Professor Troitsky,
Christian authority on Jewish law and customs, declares it an unfounded myth. *
* * Mackevitch completes report on Yuchinsky case, comprising 8 volumes of 500 pages. Minister
of Justice orders further inquiry. * * * Second indictment
against Beilis confirmed by Kieff Judicial Chamber.
Indictment mentions ritual character of crime. The Retch fined 500 rubles for
criticizing indictment of Beilis. * * * Prompted by Beilis trial, the Holy
Synod requests Missionary Council to study life of religious Jews and of those
who no longer adhere to principles of the Talmud. * * * A. Stolypin, brother of the late Premier, appeals to Jews to
buy peace by confessing the existence of a sect practicing ritual murder.
* * * At Irkutsk,
preacher at the cathedral in special sermon, eulogizes prosecution of Beilis
and attacks defense. * * * Minister of justice concurs in desirability of tracing
real accusers of Yuchinsky but opposed steps against Cheberick as this would be interpreted as 'abandonment of
the 'ritual' theory of the murder,' which he regarded as proven. * * * At St.
Petersburg, anti-Jewish press charge that Jews bribed officials to destroy all
documents against Beilis, and are about to burn secret books concerning code of
ritual murders. * * * The Russkoe Znomya
states that Jews have destroyed the Zohar which
contained blood libel code. The Novoe Vremya continues to publish threats that acquittal of
Beilis will not be accepted as Jews are masters of the court and Christian
witnesses are all terrorized. * * * The Novoe Vremya, in article on Yuchinsky
case, in reply to British protest, states that Jews ought to welcome arrest of
Beilis as an opportunity of arriving at the truth. * * * The Novoe Vremya hints that experts
in the Beilis case were bribed by the Jews, adding that 'after the part played
by the banking House of Rothschild, nobody will be surprised at the Kieff mobilization of all savants and judicial
authorities.' The Zemstchina charges that Papal
Secretary of State, Cardinal Merry del Val, was also
bribed into authenticating Papal bulls against blood accusations. * * * In a
letter to Lord Rothschild, Cardinal Merry del Val, Secretary of State of the
Vatican, certifies to the authenticity of Bulls of Popes Innocent IV, Paul III,
Gregory X, and Clement XIV, which declare ritual murder a baseless accusation
and wicked invention."
From the last page, 376, of
Albert Monniot's "Le Crime Ritual chez les Juifs," 1914 edition, which book is in the Jewish
section of the New York Public Library, we obtain a brief resume of this famous
Beilis case: "By virtue of all that precedes, Menachile
Mendel Teview Beylis,
bourgeois of Kiev, 29 years of age, is accused of having killed, in company
with other persons unknown to the law, Andre Ioutchinski,
age 12 years, with fanatical religious intent. The foregoing boy was seized March 12, 1911, while he was
playing in the brickyard at Zaitzew and dragged into
the yard, where by the consent of Beylis, tied the
hands of the boy, closed his mouth and killed him; the head, neck and trunk
showing 48 wounds * * * causing the body to become bloodless."
In this Beilis case there were two points to be considered by the jury,
first was a ritual murder committed; second, was Beilis guilty of the crime. On
the first charge, the jury voted unanimously that Yuchinsky
had been the victim of a ritual murder, but on the second, the jury voted six to six, which was a verdict for Beilis.
Returning to the American Jewish Year Book, we find an interesting item:
"Appeals on behalf of Professor Troitzky to
permit him to return to his post at the Theological
Academy, St.
Petersburg, unavailing." Mr. Bokser
did not tell his readers that Father Pranaitis after the trial continued to
occupy his chair at said Academy. Again, Mr. Bokser,
for obvious reasons, failed to mention that the government, in the Beilis case,
put into the record the celebrated Saratov
case.
1853. Saratov.
Two ritual murders are involved this time: one, a 10-year-old boy in Dec.,
1852; the other an 11-year-old, in January, 1853. After a flood, both bodies
were found on the bank of the Volga, pierced with many
wounds. Eight years afterwards, two Jews, Schiffermann
and Zourloff, were duly tried for these murders and
convicted. They were sentenced to 28 years labour in
the mines and they died during their imprisonment. This being a juridically decided case, the sentence [in] which [was]
passed for "killing two Christian boys and having them endure
martyrdom" by the Senate and submitted to the Russian Empire Council, is,
of course, not mentioned in Strack's book. Authority:
Monniot's Le Crime Ritual chez les Juifs, 1914, p. 157 [sic; p. 257] (From Mr. Leese's book: Jewish Ritual Murder, p. 28).
Arnold S. Leese, London, England,
has written a booklet of 57 pages
on the subject of Ritual Murder. In the effort which Mr. Bokser makes to ridicule Father Pranaitis, also that he
quotes two Popes, Innocent IV and Clement XIV, we
quote from Mr. Leese [JRM, p. 44 –JR],
who in turn quotes from the Catholic Bulletin which shows that the Bull
is in two parts. The first sums up the case as presented by the Jews
themselves. * * * The second part, which alone expresses the Pope's
mind, is as follows: "* * * not wishing, therefore, that the said Jews be
unjustly harassed, whose conversion God Expects in his mercy * * * we wish that
you would show yourselves benign and favorable towards them. Restore to their
proper state those of the mentioned matters that you find to have been rashly
attempted by the said Nobles against the Jews, and do not permit that in the
future they should be for those or similar pretexts unjustly molested by
anyone!" Says Leese: "Jews must consider Christians to be very [un]critical and gullible if they think they can be induced
to accept this document as a papal declaration that ritual crime does not
exist. It is obvious that the Sovereign Pontiff merely gives instructions
according to general principles, ordering that the Jews should not be unjustly
oppressed or molested. He makes no pronouncement whatever regarding the truth
or falsehood of the specific charges. * * * None could know better than he that
it was not the teaching of the Scriptures, but the infamous teachings of the Talmud
that caused people to look upon Jews as a grave danger to society. Only three
years before the appearance of his letter, namely in 1244, he showed plainly
what he thought of the Talmud by pressing Louis IX to collect from his subjects
all the copies he could obtain and consign them to the flames." Continuing
with Leese: "Before leaving Innocent IV, I ask the reader to realize the
typical Jewish cunning exhibited by Rothschild in exploiting the answer of
Cardinal Merry del Val regarding the authenticity of
the letter as confirming an interpretation of that letter's contents by
Rothschild—How Jewish. Gregory X in a Bull of 7th October, 1272, is a little more explicit than
Innocent IV; the same exhortation is made for legal trial of all cases, but he
says that they should 'not be arrested again on such groundless charge unless
(which we think impossible) they are captured in flagrant crime.' Gregory thus
does not deny that the crime exists; he says he THINKS it is impossible. * * *
Then we come to Clement XIV (named by Mr. Bokser.—E.N.S.).
Before he became Pope, he was Cardinal Ganganelli. He
was dispatched by the Inquisition in 1759 to investigate Ritual Murder charges
in Poland
against the Jews, and he wrote a long report about it. * * * From the beginning
to the end of Ganganelli's report, there is nothing
that a scientific investigator would require as evidence that Ritual Murder was
not practiced by the Jews. * * * Definitely, and far from being able to refute
the charge of Ritual Murder against Jews, Ganganelli
admits the Ritual Murders of St. Simon of Trent and St. Andreas of Rinn in these words: 'I admit, then, as true, the fact of
the Blessed Simon, a boy three years old, killed by the Jews in Trent in the
year 1475 in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ'; and 'I also admit the truth
of another fact, which happened in the year 1462 in the village of Rinn, in the Diocese of Brixen,
in the person of the Blessed Andreas, a boy barbarously murdered by the Jews in
hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ.' "
Says Leese, page 46: "And what of the Popes who have supported the
Ritual Murder accusation by their acts? There are many. Sixtus
IX approved in his Bull XII, Kal., July, 1478, of the conduct of the Bishop who dealt with
the Jews in the St. Simon case at Trent.
The Jews endeavored to enlist Sixtus IV on their side
by pointing out that he had suspended the cult of St. Simon of Trent; this was
done by Sixtus IV solely as a disciplinary measure,
for Simon had not yet been beatified by papal authority, but was being made the
center of a local cult.1
Gregory XIII recognized Simon as a martyr and himself
visited the shrine. Sixtus V ratified the cult of St.
Simon in 1588, allowing the celebration of mass in his name. This is confirmed
as a fact by Benedict XIV, who in a Bull Beatus
Andreas (1788, Venice, IV, p. 101 seq.) beatified both Simon and Andreas, two
boys murdered by the Jews 'in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ'; 'the Jews,'
he said, 'used every means to escape the just punishment that they had merited
and to escape the just anger of the Christians.' How significant of the methods
of the advocate for the Jew, to note that in Strack's
book, no mention whatever is made of Benedict XIV's
Bull, although the actions of Sixtus IV are wilfully misinterpreted.
"Pius VII, 24th November, 1805, confirmed a decree of the
Congregation of Rites of 31st of August according to the Church at Saragossa
the right to honor Dominiculus, killed by the Jews in
hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ. He also authorized for the Church at Toledo
the same privileges in respect to St. Christopher, the boy crucified by the
Jews near that place in 1490.
"In 1867, the Congregation of Rites authorized the
cult of Lorenzino, at Vicenza, Padua,
ritually murdered by the Jews.
"Gregory XVI, also, gave his support to the anti-Jewish accusers when
he honored Gougenot des Mousseaux
by making him a Chevalier of the Order of St. Gregory the Great in reward for
writing his book, Le Juif, le Judaisme
at la Judaisation des Peuples
Chretiens, in which Gougenot
des Mousseaux devoted a chapter charging the Jews
with Ritual Murder of Christians for the sake of their blood.
"Pius IX refused to see the Jew Montefiore
when the latter was returning from his visits to Egypt and Constantinople,
where he had bribed the Khedive and the Sultan so that the Jews at Damascus
could escape the consequences of their guilt of the Ritual Murder of Father Tomasi and his servant; this in spite of the shameless
Jewish persistence which has been fully described in Sir Moses Montefiore's biography. That showed what Pius IX thought
about it, and he himself was of Jewish blood.
"POPE LEO XIII BESTOWED DISTINCTIONS ON EDOUARD DRUMONT, AUTHOR OF LA
FRANCE
JUIVE, WHO ACCUSED THE JEWS OF RITUAL MURDER THEREIN. AUTHORITY: JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA,
1905, VOL. X., P. 127.
"To sum up: The Popes who have appeared to disbelieve the existence of
the Ritual Murder crime have, with the exception of Clement XIII, been those
who lived in the least enlightened times; many later Popes have given very
clear evidence that they hold the opposite opinion. * * * Remember that
although other murdered boys, victims of Jewish Ritual Murder, have been
regarded in many places as saints without papal authority, there is no record
of papal disapproval of these cults except in the case of Sixtus
IV, already mentioned, whose action was purely disciplinary, and who himself
specifically approved of the conduct of the Ritual Murder Case to which the
matter referred. Such locally beatified 'saints' or martyrs were St. William of
Norwich (1144), St. Werner of Oberwessel (1286), St.
Rudolph of Berne (1287), St. Richard of Pontoise
(1179), and St. Hugh of Lincoln.2 In every such case it is quite
obvious that the cult had the full approval at least of the episcopal
authorities over the places mentioned.
"Those who condemn the Blood Accusation as a wicked invention for the
purpose of persecuting Jews and robbing them, must at the same time condemn
wholesale some of the highest dignitaries of the Catholic Church, men against whom
nothing is known beyond that they had excellent characters, like William Turbe, Bishop of Norwich, to give an English example.
"Many of the earliest records we have of these Ritual Murders come from
the pens of Catholic historians, such as the Bollandists,
a body of Belgian Jesuits; a list of the principal works will be found at the
end of the book.3
"Father Creagh, Redemptorist,
publicly accused Jews of the practice of Ritual Murder, on 11th January, 1904, in a speech at Limerick.
Authority: Jewish Encyclopedia (1904), Vol. VIII, p. 89.
Perhaps I may best wind up this chapter by giving the names of the twelve
members of juries who investigated, considered and condemned the Jews in the
Ritual Murder case of La Guardia in Toledo, together with their qualifications;
(1) Maestre Fray Juan de S'antaspiratus,
Professor of Hebrew, Salamanca University; (2) Maestre
Fray Diego de Bretonia, Professor of Scripture; (3)
Fray Antonio de la Pena, Prior; (4) Dr. Anton Rodiguez
Carnejo, Professor of Canon Law; (5) Dr. Diego de
Burgos, Professor of Civil Law; (6) Dr. Juan de Covillas,
Professor of Canon Law; (7) Fray Sebastian de Huerta; (8) Licentiate Alvaro de Sant Estevan, Queen Isabel's corregidor for Avila; (9) Ruy
Garcia Mansio, Bishop Talevera's
provisor; (10) Fray Rodrigo Vela, head of the
Franciscan Monastery, Avila; (11) Dr. Tristan, Canon of Avila; (12) Juna de Saint Estevan. On the
findings of such men of standing we surely have every right to reply [sic; rely].
ON PAGE 100 IT WAS NOTED THAT POPE LEO
XIII BESTOWED DISTINCTIONS ON EDOUARD DRUMONT, AUTHOR OF LA FRANCE
JUIVE, WHO ACCUSED THE JEWS OF RITUAL MURDER THEREIN. DRUMONT WROTE THE PREFACE
TO A MONNIOT'S LE CRIME RITUAL CHEZ
LES JUIFS, 1914. Monniot reproduces long extracts
written from a book written in the Moldavian language by a converted ex-Rabbi
in 1803 which was published in the Greek in 1834 by Giovanni de Georgio under the title Ruin of the Hebraic Religion. This
converted Rabbi called himself by the name of Neophyte. Extracts from his book
were quoted in Achille Laurent's Relation Historique des Affairs de Syrie depuis 1840-1842. "This extract gives very full information, confirms the
murder, crucifixion and bleeding of Christians by Jews for Ritual purposes, and
the use of the blood for mixing with Passover bread; and says that the practice
is handed down by oral tradition and that nothing appears about it in writing
in the Jewish religious books."
Returning now to Monniot's book, especially to the
Beilis trial: "Professor Troitzky, the expert
for the defence, was asked how then are to be
understood the two following texts: 'Every Goim
(anyone who is not a Jew) studying the law must die' and 'even though he be
the best of Goim.' Mr. Troitzy declared that he admitted unconditionally the
existence of these two texts in the writings of the Jews, but was at a loss to
determine their influence in the life of the Jews or on their relations with
gentiles. Although always denying the use of the blood of Christians by the
Jews for ritualistic purposes, Professor Troitzky
declared that he never considered this question other than a point of view held
by Jews-Talmudists. When it came to expressing himself unequivocally on this
question, as envisaged by the Jewish mystics, the professor declared himself to
be incapable to do so, having but a very vague idea of the subject. (Cf. 191, 231, Vol. VI).
"IV. The expert Pranaitis differed emphatically with Professors Glagoleff and Troitzky. Having
studied the religion of the Jews in every form, he discovered the existence of
the so-called 'blood tenet' among the Jews. The Catholic priest Pranaitis based
this conclusion on the following facts: All the rabbinical schools, in spite of
their divergence in many questions, meet on common ground in their hatred of
non-Jews, who, according to the Talmud, are to be regarded as 'beasts in human
form.' This feeling of hatred and malice which the Jews harbor towards all men
belonging to other nationalities and religions reaches its apex when Christians
are concerned. This feeling prompts the command to kill the non-Jews given
in Talmud. The celebrated rule 'thou shalt not kill'
pertains to Jews alone.
"However the feeling of hatred is not the sole motive that conditions
the relations of the Jews with the gentiles in the indicated sense. The
extermination of non-Jews is identified with religious heroism, prescribed by
the Law. According to the mystic law especially, every death of a non-Jew
hastens the advent of Messiah, to which every Jew should aspire. The death of a
non-Jew also has the value of a sacrificial rite, a rite which was the most
important one in the cult of the Jew. The blood sacrifices could not be performed
after the destruction of the Temple
of Jerusalem and the altar. To
replace these sacrifices the extermination of the non-Jews and Christians,
these latter in particular, was inaugurated. In killing all non-Jews a certain
method indicated in the Kabalah was
recommended. They were to be killed 'with their lips compressed, as beasts that
die voiceless and without a cry,' and 'twelve knife wounds and a final blow
which makes thirteen, are to be inflicted.' Now in citing this text from the 'Zohar,' the
mystic book in which this method of death is given, expert Pranaitis repeatedly
brought the attention of the presiding judge to the fact that the mouth of Youtchinsky was compressed and that there were thirteen
wounds on his right temple. * * * Pranaitis, after considering the ritual
murders known throughout the history of mankind, arrived at the following
conclusion: Murders of Christians by Jews for religious purposes do take place
as a perverted cumulative effect of the entire Jewish religion. As for the
murder of Youtchinsky, the circumstances under which
it took place, the method by which the wounds were inflicted, their
disposition, the draining of the blood from the body, the
time of committing the crime, all these give to it the characteristic traits of
a typical ritualistic murder (Cf. 243, Vol. VI).
On page 102 we referred to a converted Rabbi who called himself by the name
of Neophyte. A copy [of] his book was found in the Library of the Theological
Academy of St. Petersburg. Leese then tells us: "This work was translated
from the Greek at a Court Session by one of the experts, Professor Troitzky, who held a professorship in the same Academy. The
Neophyte affirms in his work that Judaism holds an awesome mystery which is not
revealed in its books and which consists in the fact that Jews murder
Christians to obtain their blood for different purposes. If a Jew is in need of
blood, he must not cut, but 'prick and pinch.' The opinion that the use of
blood as food is forbidden to the Jews is quite erroneous, since there are in
the Talmud indications to the contrary. * * * According to Neophyte, these
murders have three purposes: first, the excessive hatred which they feel toward
Christians and which makes them believe that in committing such crimes they
offer a sacrifice to God; the second reason is the superstition which they
harbor about the blood, attributing to its magic potentialities; finally, the
rabbis who hesitate to affirm that Jesus Christ was not the real Messiah, think
that they will be saved if they spill the blood of Christians. Having obtained
the blood of Christians, they use it for different purposes. The rabbis
consider it to be an excellent medicament for eye and skin diseases which
afflict the Jews so often. Blood is also used in the ceremonies of marriage,
circumcision, and burial, but first of all in making of unleavened bread. For
this last purpose they kidnap children before the Passover, lock them up and
then kill them to obtain their blood. The murder is always preceded by
tortures. The Jews prick the children, believing that they are torturing Jesus
Christ.4
Resuming the translation of Monniot's
book: "The supreme mystery known only to rabbis, savants and Pharisees,
and carefully concealed from the people, is this use of the blood of
Christians. A father on his death-bed transmits this mystery under an
extreme oath of secrecy to one of his sons. Neophyte says that this mystery was
transmitted to him by his father, who exacted from him an oath never to reveal
it, not even to his brothers. But having been baptized, Neophyte held it
impossible to remain silent on this point." (Cf. 170, Vol. VI).
Quoting from p. 48 of Leese's book: "Martin
Luther seems to have had an inkling of the true nature of the Jew when he said:
'How the Jews love the Book of Esther, which is so suitable to their
bloodthirsty, revengeful, murderous appetite and hopes. The sun has never shone
on such a bloodthirsty and revengeful people, who fancy themselves
to be the chosen people so that they can murder and strangle the heathen.' (From the Erlangen edition of Luther's Table Talks, Vol. XXXII, p. 120). This seems plain speaking enough;
but we find the Jew, C. Roth (Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew) citing
Martin Luther as having condemned the 'libel' of Ritual Murder 'in unqualified
terms.' However, the Jewish Encyclopedia, (1904), Vol. VIII, p. 213,
definitely states that Luther charged the Jews with Ritual Murders."
"At Madgeburg, in 1562, a Protestant history
of the Christian Church was compiled, called the Madgeburg
Centuries; it was compiled by a number of Lutheran theologians headed by M.
Flacius, and was first published as the Historia Ecclesiae Christi. This book records
the ritual murders of Blois,
Pontoise (Paris), Braisne, Fulda, Berne
and Oberwesel."5
SIR RICHARD BURTON.
Page 28 of Leese's book, supra: "Sir Richard
Burton, the great explorer and orientalist, who was
English Consul at Damascus 30 years after the Ritual Murder (of Padre Tomasi,—E.N.S.) studied the whole question of the Blood
Accusation, and eventually wrote The Jew, the Gypsy and El Islam, of which this author has the edition
edited by W. H. Wilkins and published by Hutchinson in 1898. (I have a copy of
this book which was bought in London
in 1937.—E.N.S.). This work contains a damning indictment of the Talmud, and a
list of Jewish Ritual Murders, but Wilkins, in his preface (p. x) says: 'In the
exercise of the discretion given to me, I have thought it better to hold over
for the present the Appendix on the alleged rite of Human Sacrifice among the Sephardim
and the murder of Father Thomas; the only alternative was to publish it in
mutilated form.' "
Continuing, Leese writes: "Let us therefore follow (1) the Book, (2)
the Appendix on Ritual Murder.
(1) The Book. This is easy; it is well nigh
impossible to obtain. [sic;
"…it is well nigh unobtainable." –JR]
(2) The Appendix on Ritual Murder. What happened to
it? This is what happened to it:--
" 'See D.
L. Alexander versus Manners Sutton, King's Bench Division, 27th March, 1911, reported in the Times
the following day. Herein, D. L. Alexander a Jew and President of the
Jewish Board of Deputies was able to show that he had obtained an assignment of
the manuscript from the surviving executors of Sir Richard Burton. The
executors had sold them to a bookseller, who, in turn, sold them to Manners
Sutton; and he (Sutton), not knowing of any assignment, made arrangements for
the publication of the Appendix. D. L. Alexander brought the action to stop
this publication from taking place, claiming copyright and delivery to him of
the manuscript. The Jew won his case.'
From the Preface [p. vii-viii of Burton's The Jew ed. by
Wilkins –JR] which is before us, we copy the following: 'The Jew, Burton,
[sic!; the preface actually reads,
"The first part—The Jew—has a
somewhat curious history. Burton..."
–JR] collected most of the materials for writing it from 1869 to 1871, when he
was Consul at Damascus. * * *
Disguised as a native, and unknown to any living soul but his wife, the British
Consul mingled freely with the motley populations of Damascus, and inspected
every quarter of the city—Moslem, Christian and Jewish. His inquiries bore
fruit in material, not only for this general essay on the Jew, but for an
Appendix dealing with the alleged rite of Human Sacrifice among the Sephardim
or Eastern Jews, and more especially the mysterious murder of Padre Tomaso at Damascus
in 1840. There is little doubt that his inquiry into these subjects was one of
the reasons which aroused the hostility of the Damascus Jews against him; and
that hostility was a powerful factor, though by no means the only one, in his recall by
Lord Granville in 1871.'6
With this introduction, we now cite some parts of Burton's
chapter dealing with "The Jew and the Talmud" (p. 77). According to the Talmud (chap.
IV., Sanhedrin, of the fourth Mischnis
section, or order Seder Nezikin), the Gentile sanctifying the
Sabbath must be put to death without asking questions, even as the Lord said to
him, "Thou shalt not rest day or night. The Oral
Law is superior to all others."
P. 81. In the books of Moses we find that blood is
used as a purifier. * * * Human blood is not used by us in its pure state; nor
can we7 call it human for the Gentiles are mere vermin, and of their
daughters it is said, "Cursed be he that lieth
with any beast." It must also mostly undergo through manipulation a change
in essence. Nor is it administered indiscriminately, but only to the most
zealous. On the eve of the Passover the chief Scribe attends the oven, and
mixes what he pleases with the cakes, which are then sent around to the
congregation.
P. 98 of Burton's Jew, See the Mischnah,
fifth part, tract Edonyoth, i. art. 5 et seq.
This is a fair answer to the host of contradictions and the general charge
of inconsistency leveled by anti-Talmud writers against the Oral Law, and it
enables the modern rabbi to make almost any assertion that he pleases
concerning disputed points. Thus, one will find in the Talmud that Christians
should be put to death, the other that they should be treated like brothers.
This is certainly very convenient.
P. 104. The large space given * * * to the
unhallowed practices of magic and necromancy, the summoning and conversion with
devils and spirits, the advocacy of astrology, charms, and philters served as a
pretext for Pope and Inquisition to attack it. In A.D. 553, Justinian
proscribed it (Talmud) by Novella 146 as a "tissue of puerilities, of
fables, of iniquities, of insults, of imprecations, or heresies, and of
blasphemies." It was destroyed by Gregory IX, in A.D. 1230; it was burnt
in Paris by Innocent IV, 1244; and
it was proscribed by Clement IV, by Honorius IV,8 and by John XXII.
P. 115. Obviously such cruel and vindictive
teaching as that recounted in the previous chapter must bear fruit in crime and
atrocities. * * * From earliest ages to these modern days, and not in one
place, but all the world over, the hatred of the Jew
against the non-Jew has been the fiercest. Those who are so ready to admit and
deplore the mighty provocations which aroused a spirit of retaliation in the Rabbinical mind should equally make allowance for the
natural feelings of the unfortunate Gentiles and heathens when the "People
of the Synagogue" had their wicked will. * * * In A.D. 614, the Hebrews of
Galilee, according to Eutychius, joining the Persian
army under Chosroes II, caused a great slaughter of
the Nazarenes. When the Holy City
was captured, they bought at a cheap rate those taken by the Persians,
especially from the Monastery of Mar Saba, for the sole
purpose of butchering them. Burton
then continues, giving thirty-eight other cases of ritual murder, ending with
page 127. On page 122, he says: "According to the Cronica
Serafica (della
vita di S. Francesco d' Assisi, Opera del Padre Damiano Cornejo, 1721, lib. i, chap. 1) the Jews superstitiously used the blood of
Christians in childbirth, and sent it in a dried state to China and other
places, where they had synagogues, but where worshippers of Christ are not to
be found. Hence the Jews were eventually expelled from Spain
and Portugal."
"TALMUDIC FORGERIES"
In closing our reply to the accusations of Ben Zion Bokser,
the reader is directed to that Christian classic: The History of the
Christian Church, by Dr. Philip Schaff. In Vol. I, p. 59, he writes: "The Talmud (i.e.
Doctrine) represents the traditional, post exilian,
and anti-Christian Judaism" and then says on page 156 of the same book:
"Such was the Jewish religion at the time of Christ. He was the only
teacher in Israel
who saw through the hypocritical mask to the rotten heart. None of the great
Rabbis, no Hillel, no Shammai, no Gamaliel,
attempted or even conceived of a reformation; on the contrary, they heaped
tradition upon tradition and accumulated the Talmud rubbish of twelve large
folios and 2947 leaves, which represents the anti-Christian petrification
of Judaism; while the four Gospels have regenerated humanity and are the life
and light of the civilized world to this day."
In Vol. I, p. 110, of George Foote Moore's Judaism,
Harvard University Press, 1932 he says: "Down to the rise of Karaites in the eighth century and their revolt against the
Talmud, there was nothing that deserved the name of schism." Again on p.
91 of the same volume, quoting Justin Martyr, who was a native of Palestine (Schechem) and a contemporary, he says: "Bar Cocheba took dire vengeance upon them (Nazarenes, or
followers of Jesus Christ) if they refused to deny Jesus their Messiah."
About one thousand years later, 1759, Leese tells us, p. 40 of the book we
have cited: "A converted Jew, J. J. Frank, formed a sect called the Frankists, at Lemberg. These
people were all Jews who had become Christians in revolt against the evils
taught in the Talmud. They said it was the Talmud which was the root of all
troubles between the Jews and Gentiles. Prince Etienne de Mikoulissky, administrator of the archdiocese of Lemberg, instituted public debates between the Frankists and the Talmudic Jews. A debate held in July took
place in which various matters were dealt with point by point until six points
had been settled; the seventh one was the Frankists'
declaration that 'the Talmud teaches the employment of Christian blood and he
believes in the Talmud ought to make use of this blood.' The Frankists said they had learned this in their youth as
Jews. Under the heading Baruch Yavan, the Jewish
Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. II, p. 563, admits that the Frankists
brought the blood accusation against the Talmudists; also in Vol. VII
p. 579, under Judah Lob ben Nathan Krysa. There is a large bibliography with reference to the Frankist community, of which the following two works may
receive mention here: La Malfaisance juive, by Pikulski, Lvov,
1760; and Materiaux sue la question
relative aux accusations portees
contre les Juifs apropos
des crimes rituels, by J. O. Kouzmine,
St. Petersburg, 1914."
Paslms 106, 36-38: "And they served their
idols: which were a snare unto them. Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their
daughters unto devils, and shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons
and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan:
and the land was polluted with blood."
With reference to the death of Father Pranaitis, Mr. Leese, replying to this
author's question on this, wrote me as follows: "The statement that
Pranaitis was shot by the Cheka comes from the same
eye-witness (who was a witness in the Beilis case). Eye-witness seen by me
(Leese) personally; cannot give his name."
With the concerted persecution of this editor, especially by those whom he
expected would be his friends on the record of his life and service, we now
dare affirm in our effort to present the truth that we are not apprehensive of
the final result and base our statement on Romans 8, 36-37: "For
thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the
slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him
that loved us."
E.N.S., Nov. 20, 1939.
FROM INDEX OF ASIA
MAGAZINE,
ISSUE OF OCTOBER, 1937.
(Henry Field, writer of the article below, is curator of physical
anthropology at Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. He was recently
awarded the degree of Doctor of Science by Oxford
University. He has been with the
museum since 1926.)
JEWS OF SANDUR,
IRAQ
"* * * members of the Field Museum anthropological expedition to the
Near East in 1934 * * * According to their tradition the Jews of Iraq have
lived in Mesopotamia since Sargon of Assyria brought their ancestors from
Samaria in the eighth century B.C. * * * They mixed with other racial groups,
absorbing their physical characters. What is popularly termed the 'Jewish' nose
was thus acquired from the Hittites * * * To the protected southern slopes of
the mountains of Kurdistan cling many villages where the struggle for existence
combined with a constant dread of attack has engrained in the inhabitants a tenacity
of purpose and religious zeal which has few modern parallels. Jew, Kurd,
Armenian and Nestorian remain bitterly aloof, the Jews suffering much at the
hands of the Kurds from a constant intertribal warfare. Moreover, belief that
the Jews use Christian blood at the Passover sustained between Jew and
Sephardim Jews who observe the Mosaic law * * * Seventy-two items of ritual are
observed."—Asia Magazine.
1 In the Book Review of the New York
Times—Rare Books—Dec. 19, 1937: "There is an amazing collection of works on the
inquisition, beginning with a long manuscript of 614 pages written about 1478. 'Prozess gegen die Juden von Trent, 1476-1478.'
This account of the 'Ritual Murder' of Simon of Trent in 1475 is one of three
contemporary records of which the other two, in Latin, are in the Vatican and the National Library of Vienna. This is the only
example known in German and it was [p. 100] made for Eberhardt
I, the Bearded, first Duke of Wuerttemberg. The codex
is a record of one of the cruelest examples of the persecution of the Jews in
the Middle Ages, and it is almost the only detailed authority of a great
medieval criminal case. * * * The notorious case had its origin when a
2˝-year-old child, Simon, the son of a cobbler, was found dead in the river
near the house of Samuel, a Jew of Trent. Immediately all the members of the
Jewish community, including women and children, were arrested and accused of
having murdered the child in order to use his blood for the Passover ritual.
Persuaded via the torture chamber into a 'confession,' the Jews were executed
and all the women and children were forcibly baptized or otherwise punished.
Various 'people interceded for the accused, but after hearings before a Papal
court of juriconsults the case was finally declared,
in a Bull of Sixtus IV of June 20, 1478, to be 'rite et recte factum.' "
2 With reference to these ritual murders at Norwich and Lincoln, we have
corroborative evidence from John Foxe in his Acts
and Monuments of the Church (1563), quoting from Mr. Leese, page 49, where Foxe says: "For every year commonly their (the Jews')
custom was to set some Christian man's child from his parents and on Good
Friday to crucify him indespite of our
religion." He described the ritual crucifixion of British children by Jews
at Norwich and Lincoln, before the expulsion.
3 Acte Sanctorum * * * historical record between 1643 and 1883.
The volumes in which they recorded various ritual murders by Jews are mainly
those written in the seventeenth century.
4 Leese tells the reader, p. 53 of his book:
"Colonel Lindbergh's son was missed on 1st March, 1932. The Jewish feast of Purim was on 22nd March.
A child's body was found on 12th May, dead at least two months, according to
the experts, with the skull fractured in two places. I cannot see that it has
ever been proved that the body found was that of Colonel Lindbergh's son."
(We divert here to mention that in Emile Gauvreau's
book, What So Proudly We Hailed, the last picture in that book is
supposed to be that of the Lindbergh boy lying on a slab. Any observer will
note that the body is very badly decomposed, that one leg is missing from the
knee and that the height of the body, we are told, was four inches longer than
that of the missing boy.--E.N.S.)
5 The McMillan Company, New York, 1906, published in four volumes, A History of the
Inquisition of Spain, by Henry Charles Lea. In Vol. II, p. 42, we
read: "In 1490, Davila went to Rome in his eightieth year. Since 1461 he had been Bishop
of Segovia and, in spite of Jewish descent, his family was one of the most
influential in Castile, intermarried with its noblest blood. He had given
ample proof of pitiless orthodoxy, in 1468, when, at Sepulveda, the rabbi,
Solomon Picco, and the leader of the synagogue were
accused of crucifying a Christian boy during Holy Week. Bishop Davila promptly
arrested sixteen of those most deeply implicated, of wham seven were burnt and
the rest hanged, except a boy who begged to be baptized—although this did not
satisfy the pious Sepulvedans, who slew some of the
remaining Jews and drove the rest away."
6 On page 5 of the New York Times Book
Review, April 11, 1937,
there was a cut of Sir Richard Burton, and an article titled: "That
Homeric Character, Burton of Arabia." That review stated, in part: "Burton was very much a man of earth, reveling in subjects
not discussed in Victorian drawing-rooms. * * * He was broken on the wheel of
official intrigue in India at the beginning of his career, lost the consulate of
Damascus almost at the end for somewhat the same reasons. * *
* He was both impetuous and honest, the two blackest vices in the consular
service." The following week, April 18, 1937,
in the Herald Tribune, reviewing the same book, Clare G. Stillman wrote: "Burton was a man of invincible moral courage and integrity,
of wide enlightenment, the out-spoken enemy of stupidity and hypocrisy, too
outspoken for his own good. * * * His encyclopedic Oriental erudition included
an unsurpassed knowledge of erotic philosophies and practices which he loved to
discuss in detail."
7 Sic Burton. The Hebrew scribe is supposed to be speaking. [a
Wilkins footnote -- JR]
8 This Pope in 1286 wrote to the Archbishop
of Canterbury, directing him to have a care lest any one read a book from, which
all evils flow. Pope Pius IV, when authorizing a new edition, expressly
stipulated that it should not be published without the title of Talmud, which
appears to have been a kind of Shibboleth, Si
tamen prodierit sine nomine Talmud, tolerari deberet. Such was the terror which it inspired in the
ecclesiastical mind.
A. is the father of B. B. told this author
that A. started his education in Europe with the idea of becoming a rabbi but
that when he had started his studies of the unexpurgated edition of the Talmud
and found what it taught concerning Christ and Christians, he not only
discontinued his studies but later was a convert to Christianity and out of
this experience told B. never to read an unexpurgated copy of the Talmud.