Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Acknowledgments to the Second Edition
- Contents
- Introduction to the Second Edition
- I Introduction
- II The Sources
- III The Use of Reason in Religious Debates
- IV Trinity
- V Incarnation
- VI Transubstantiation
- VII Virgin Birth
- VIII Conclusions
- List of Abbreviations
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index of Citations
- General Index
VI - Transubstantiation
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Acknowledgments to the Second Edition
- Contents
- Introduction to the Second Edition
- I Introduction
- II The Sources
- III The Use of Reason in Religious Debates
- IV Trinity
- V Incarnation
- VI Transubstantiation
- VII Virgin Birth
- VIII Conclusions
- List of Abbreviations
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index of Citations
- General Index
Summary
One topic of discussion that arose frequently in the Jewish-Christian debates of the Middle Ages was the relative value of two ceremonial rituals, the Jewish animal sacrifices and the Christian Eucharist. Some of the arguments centered around both the appropriateness and the efficacy of the two modes of worship. Thus, a Christian was quoted as saying:
Your modes of worship are polluted with the burning of meat and fats, and the sprinkling of blood. But our worship is clean, using bread and wine, and completely atones for all our sins when we eat the bread of our God, for we become holy. And he, whose God is in him, will not fear any evil thing.
The Jewish polemicists usually answered the claim of the efficacy of the mass by citing the true usefulness of animal sacrifices, as recorded in the Bible, contrasted to the unverifiable Christian belief concerning the Eucharist. The sacrifices had resulted in the miraculous descent of fire from heaven, the resting of God's presence on Israel, and the priest's oracular ability with the Urim and Thummim.
Nothing like this can be cited in all the offerings of the Christians. They cannot show a single continuous and public sign, well known to all, as in the sacrifices. Their statement that their offerings benefit the soul, is one which is not testified to by the senses nor proved by the intellect. The rabbis say in reference to such a statement, if one desires to lie let him cite witnesses which are far away.
After giving a similar answer, Shem Tov ibn Shaprut responded to the charge that the Jewish sacrifices were “polluted” and Christian sacrifices were clean.
Something that shows no such properties attached to it cannot be compared to that which has the wonderful properties. Should we say that silver is more fitting to be a nutrient because it is cleaner than meat?
The Jewish polemicists were not content simply to compare the efficacy of the animal sacrifices to the uselessness of the mass, whose results were not apparent. They went further and disputed the very foundation of the Christian reenactment of the Lord's Supper.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Jewish Philosophical Polemics Against Christianity in the Middle Ages: With a New Introduction , pp. 135 - 152Publisher: Liverpool University PressPrint publication year: 2007