Jewish Ideas about the Papacy 51
So all three protagonists (Blanche, Donin, Yehi’el) appeal in turn to the pope to
justify their actions: the queen assuring Yehi’el that the pope had commanded him
to speak, Donin reiterating that the trial was taking place with the pope’s blessing,
Yehi’el appealing to papal protection.
in his address Yehi’el deliberately reminded the French monarchy that in the
past popes had ensured a degree of protection to Jewish communities at times
of crisis and voiced confidence that, even though the talmud was now under
scrutiny, papal protection would continue. That suggests that he was much more
worried by royal, than by papal, reaction to the Disputation. official’s version of
events may show that he and other Jews were nonplussed by the papacy’s stance
which seemed to lack consistency, and this is then conveyed in the text.123 or that
the papal position offered protection, but also threatened that those disrespectful
of canon law would lose their privileges. rabbi Yehi’el’s ambiguity towards the
pope was therefore deliberate.124 Another interpretation is that Yehi’el was so wor-
ried that in future papal protection might be withdrawn that during the trial he
deliberately tried to flatter gregory ix. Yet this is also unsatisfactory since the
pope was not present and could only have heard Yehi’el’s speech second-hand. A
more likely explanation is that official was deliberately attempting to distinguish
between the long history of papal protection to which Yehi’el referred and gregory
ix’s new and particular concern about the talmud.125 Like Jacob bar Elie, he was
showing appreciation of how important papal authority and its protective power
was for Jewish communities but registering dismay that the talmud trial might
jeopardize that protection.126
JEwiSH poLEMiC AND CHriStiAN tHEoLogY
Yet it is not just from such accounts of public, formal disputations as that about the
talmud that we learn more about Jewish perceptions of the nature of papacy.
During the High Middle Ages informal contacts between Christians and Jews
influenced biblical exegesis and recent scholars have shown convincingly that the
reading of Scripture, as well as confirming personal views, enabled both Christians
and Jews to debate more effectively with each other.127 Although in parts of western
Europe intellectual contact between the three monotheistic faiths—islam, Judaism,
and Christianity—thrived, it was the particular renewal of interest in biblical
123 Stow, The ‘1007 Anonymous’ and Papal Sovereignty, p.42.
124 Stow, The ‘1007 Anonymous’ and Papal Sovereignty, p.42.
125 For the pope’s letters expressing concern about the ‘books of the Jews’, see gregory ix,
‘Fraternitati tue presentium’ (9 June 1239), Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.238–40; Simonsohn, pp.171–2; ‘Si vera
sunt’ (9 June 1239), Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.240–2; Simonsohn, pp.172–3; ‘Si vera sunt’ (20 June
1239), Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.242; Simonsohn, p.173; ‘Si vera sunt’ (20 June 1239), Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.242;
Simonsohn, p.174.
126 Jacob ben Elie, ‘Vikuah r. Ya’acov mivinisya’, in Osar wikuhim, ed. Eisenstein, p.192.
127 robert Moore, Jews and Christians in the Life and Thought of Hugh of St Victor (Atlanta, georgia,
1998), pp.62–3; Chazan, Fashioning Jewish Identity in Medieval Western Christendom, pp.122–40;
george Coats, ‘Abraham’s Sacrifice of Faith. A Form-Critical Study of genesis 22’, in The Sacrifice of
Isaac. Studies in the Development of a Literary Tradition, ed. E. Yassif (Jerusalem, 1978), pp.1–12.