Papal Claims to Authority over Judaism 205
Indeed at ‘official’ levels—both ecclesiastical and secular—the impact of the
Talmud’s trial appears limited, affecting only minimally the Jews of medieval
western Christendom in their relations with Church and State.282 never theless, it
probably reinforced negative popular perceptions of Jews.283 Although the trial of
the Talmud was largely an ecclesiastical initiative, when faced with the allegations
that it contained offensive material, the papal court could do nothing significant
on its own, but rather invoked the help of secular authorities—citing the problem
and enlisting aid to execute a solution.284 By 1247 there was a rift between the
papacy and the ecclesiastical leadership in Paris, the former softening its position,
the latter insisting on harshness.285
Fortunately for the continuing welfare of Jewish communities, their leaders had
stepped in and urged on Innocent that outlawing the Talmud—entailing in effect
the prohibition of Judaism altogether—contravened fundamental Church ‘policy’.
Innocent was convinced, altered the findings of the jury in Paris, and ordered cen-
sorship instead of outright prohibition.286 Prohibition would have meant a break
with a Church stance, which had existed since antiquity. Hence the impact of the
trial and condemnation of the Talmud was significantly mitigated and by the late
1240s the worst of the immediate danger to Jewish communities in Europe had
passed.287
nevertheless, Innocent’s correspondence as a whole clearly shows his claim to
authority over Jewish communities. As we saw in Chapter Two, he utterly refuted
charges of blood libel, declaring that allegations that Jews had eaten the heart of
a murdered child were false because Jews kept the precepts of the old Testament
and observed that Scripture prohibited Jews, while solemnizing the Passover, to
have any contact with the dead.288 That was a reference to numbers 9: 6–14 and
Psalms 63: 7 , and Innocent urged louis IX of France to treat the Jews humanely as
befitting a just king.289 His successors upheld the same position. Yet, in 1258
Alexander Iv reminded the duke of Burgundy that he must confiscate books gen-
erally known as Talmud which contained errors against the Catholic faith as well
as horrible and intolerable blasphemies against our lord, Jesus Christ, and the
Blessed virgin, his mother, and that by obeying this command the duke would
earn God’s mercy for his sins.290
We have seen how in 1244 Innocent Iv complained to the king of France that
the Talmud contained blasphemies against God and Christ, murky stories about
the virgin Mary, abusive errors, and unheard of follies.291 later in the century, in
282 The Trial of the Talmud: Paris 1240, ed. Chazan, p.84.
283 The Trial of the Talmud: Paris 1240, ed. Chazan, p.86.
284 The Trial of the Talmud: Paris 1240, ed. Chazan, p.88.
285 The Trial of the Talmud: Paris 1240, ed. Chazan, pp.88–9.
286 The Trial of the Talmud: Paris 1240, ed. Chazan, p.vii.
287 The Trial of the Talmud: Paris 1240, ed. Chazan, p.2.
288 Innocent Iv, ‘lachrymabilem Judeorum Alemannie’ (5 July 1247), Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.268–70;
Simonsohn, pp.194–5.
289 Innocent Iv, ‘Ex parte Judeorum’ (6 July 1247), Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.272; Simonsohn, pp.195–6.
290 Alexander Iv, ‘In sacro generali’ (3 September 1258), Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.64–6; Simonsohn,
pp.215–16.
291 Innocent Iv ‘Impia Judeorum perfidia’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.250–2; Simonsohn, pp.180–2.