Exclusiveness and Tolerance: Studies in Jewish-Gentile Relations in Medieval and Modern Times (Scripta Judaica, 3) [Paperback]

Jacob Katz (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0874413656 | ISBN-13: 978-0874413656 | Publication Date: June 1, 1961

The author discusses the changes of attitude on the part of the Jews toward their non-Jewish environment from the middle ages to the Enlightenment. Most of the material has been drawn from the province of Ashkenazi Jewry-- the Jews of Germany and eastern Europe.

--This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Product Details

• Paperback: 200 pages
• Publisher: Behrman House (June 1, 1961)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0874413656
• ISBN-13: 978-0874413656
• Product Dimensions: 8.1 x 5.3 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 6.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #857,299 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

13 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Engaging and illuminating, September 2, 2005

By 

A. J. Sutter (Tokyo, Japan) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Exclusiveness and Tolerance: Studies in Jewish-Gentile Relations in Medieval and Modern Times (Scripta Judaica, 3) (Paperback)

Before reading this book, I'd had a much more black-and-white (sc., mostly black) impression of Jewish life in medieval and early modern Europe. This cogently-writtten volume presents a much more nuanced picture. Ghetto walls were an injustice, but also a refuge for many Jews from the tense environment around them. Oddly enough, this circumstance contributed to the relatively large number of conversions to Christianity in the liberal West after the Napoleonic liberations (in contrast to the shtetl Jews in Poland and Russia, who lived side-by-side with Gentile neighbors). Katz's discussions of of Jewish martyrs during the First Crusade and the flexibility of rabbinic responsa, among other topics, are also quite fascinating.

8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars How Jews came to tolerate Christians, March 6, 2008

By 

Yaakov Ben Shalom - See all my reviews

This review is from: Exclusiveness and Tolerance: Studies in Jewish-Gentile Relations in Medieval and Modern Times (Scripta Judaica, 3) (Paperback)

When thinking about interfaith relations in Europe in the Middle Ages, we almost always think about Christians not tolerating Jews. There is no doubt that medieval Christians didn't like Jews much and persecuted them. What's not often discussed is that medieval Jews didn't like Christians either. However, by the early 1800s, Jews tolerated Christians, and in some cases, they really liked them and emulated them.

In this slender but dense book, Jacob Katz explains why.

He begins by sketching out what Jewish law has to say about relations with non-Jews. (It was against such relations.) Not having anything to do with idolaters was fine in ancient Babylonia or ancient Palestine, where there were so many Jews, but it wasn't practical in medieval Europe, where the Jews were a small minority. So, Jewish legal scholars had to completely reinterpret the law on this point. Plus, when Christians confronted Jews with their anti-Christian theology (at disputations), the Jews had to come up with explanations for why many Talmudic concepts did not apply in medieval Europe. (I won't give away what they said.) Soon, the Jews began to believe their own rationalizations and actually did become more tolerant of Christians. Early modern ghettoization was accepted or even embraced by Jews, as it gave them their own space and reduced overt competition with Christian neighbors. Eventually, universalistic Enlightenment ideas influenced Jewish thinkers and Jewish thought on who would be "saved." The end result: more toleration and even overt acceptance of Christians and Christianity.

This book is an intellectual tour-de-force, but I give it 4 stars rather than 5 because it is not an easy read for someone unfamiliar with Jewish theology and history of religion. Most readers will find themselves looking up a lot of terms, from Aggadah to Zohar.

4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Fascinating Analysis of Past Jewish Attitudes Towards Christians, November 10, 2009

By 

Jan Peczkis "Scholar and Thinker" (Chicago IL, USA) - See all my reviews
(TOP 1000 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: Exclusiveness and Tolerance: Studies in Jewish-Gentile Relations in Medieval and Modern Times (Scripta Judaica, 3) (Paperback)

Jews and Christians each had stereotypical views of each other (p. xiv), and Jewish views of Christianity were just as unflattering as the reverse. Katz comments: "The biblical name of Edom was, in Talmudic times, applied to Rome. In medieval poetry, however, it is synonymous with Christianity." (p. 16).

Throughout history, Jews had tended to see Christians as idolaters. (e. g., p. 27, 53, 100). Following Talmudic law, this would've forbidden Jews from having business dealings with Christians. Consequently: "Practical considerations required the dissociation of Christianity from idolatry, and this was rationalized by means of halakhic casuistry. But this rationalization cannot be assumed to imply that, from a theological point of view, Christianity was no longer regarded as a `pagan' religion." (p. 162; see also p. 108). [Nowhere does Katz, or anyone he cites, correct the mistaken equation of the Trinity with polytheism or the mistaken equation of the veneration of relics and images with idolatry]. In recent centuries, according to Katz, some Jewish thinkers did genuinely reject the Christians-are-idolaters premise--in part because Christians believed in creatio ex nihilo. (pp. 163-166, 191).

Put in broader context, Jewish goodwill towards gentiles, according to Katz (p. 58, 101-102), was motivated in part by expediency (e. g., avoid giving all Jews a bad name), and in part by genuine adherence to moral principles. Commensurate with both tendencies, the Talmud teaches loving-kindness to all human beings, helping the poor and sick, etc. (pp. 59-60).

But what of the Talmudic verses that allow Jews to cheat gentiles, etc.? (p. 107). Katz replies: "The disputants claimed that all disparaging references to Gentiles in Talmudic sources applied only to those `seven nations' which are mentioned in the Bible as the aboriginal inhabitants of the Land of Israel, and remnants of which survived as late as Talmudic times. But this statement is no more than an ad hoc device used in the course of controversy. There is no indication in the Talmud or in the later halakhic sources that such a view was ever held, or even proposed, by any individual halakhist. In fact, evidence to the contrary exists." (p. 110). [Modern claims that the offending verses had been "mistranslated", etc., are equally ad hoc and unconvincing.]

The 16th-century seminal Jewish thinker Maharal (Rabbi Judah Loeb of Prague), according to Katz, thought that: "However, his criticism [of Jews] did not affect his basic conception that Jews were, essentially, of a superior religious and moral caliber to others. Their inadequacies were incidental only, and attributable to the trials of the Exile; at a different level, Jewish deficiencies had a direct relationship to the Jews' superior spiritual nature." (p. 141).

Until the 11th century, and sometimes later, Jews could own slaves. (p. 41). As for usury, both Christians and Jews employed a double standard. Christianity forbade usury among Christians, but regarded Jewish conduct as outside its jurisdiction. For its part, Judaism forbade Jew-on-Jew usury, but allowed Jew-on-gentile usury. (p. 57).

Since time immemorial, Jews had preferred to live among their own kind. Compulsory ghettoization came much later. Katz comments: "But contrary to what might be expected, the institution of the closed Jewish quarter was not in itself resented by Jews. It was accepted as a provision appropriate to a group of their status, and as corresponding to their social and religious needs; moreover, it provided a measure of security. Jews were content to be recognized as a socio-religious unit, distinct from the general population." (pp. 132-133).