Yeshiva University - Masmid Yearbook (New York, NY)

Page 27 text:

M A S M I D 25 The yew in the German Literature of the 15th, l6th and 17th Centuries By Bernard A gloomy picture unfolds itself to our view when we consider the German literature of the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in its relation to the Jew. Hate and prejudice for the Jew are the funda- mental features of the literature during these centuries. The poets, to be tolerated, wrote from the peoples ' viewpoint, and the people were filled with the most venomous hatred for the Jew. Superstition and fanaticism, fanned by the goading and persuasions of the travelling friars and flagellants united to por- tray the Jew as the enemy of Christianity. The first part of the literature to be con- sidered is the Passion Plays. It was the purpose of those plays to show the Jews the weakness of their religion and to strengthen the Christians in theirs. As a result, all men- tion of the Jew in these plays, as well as in the moralities, brings forth a debate over the relative values of Judaism and Christian- ity. Considering the purpose of these plays, the outcome of the debates is obvious. The debates in the Passion Plays occupy a position of secondary importance, being inserted only where they have a bearing on the main theme, and take the form of direct cross-examinations of each side by the other. The participants of the debate are the lead- ers of the Church and the leaders of the Synagogue. When the synagogue puts the questions, they are made simple and easy to answer, but when the church puts the ques- tions, they are complicated and very difficult to answer. The answers of the Christians are generally polite and polished while the answers of the Jews are almost always vul- gar and boorish. The debates almost always end with the victory of the Christians, and some of the Jews accept baptism, while those who don ' t, go off amid the abuse and jeers of the mob. It is interesting to note that only rarely does Jesus appear in personal debate with the Jews, and when he does it is only to say a few short words, at the con- clusion of which the Jews stone him. He. however, is not affected by this, and goes un- harmed. We next encounter the debates in the mora- Greenberg lities. where we find them promoted to a position of primary importance. The debate here finds its inception between two ordinary laymen but ultimately they invoke the aid of theii respective religious orders. Typical of this sort of play is the morality play of Kaiser Constantin, by Hanz Folz. Constantin had gone over from Judaism to Christianity, and his mother was trying with the aid of the Rabbi to bring him back to the teachings of his forefathers. Constantin demands that a Jew and Christian dispute the question before him. A long dispute ensues. Here also the questions are so adroitly framed that the Christians can answer without difficulty, while the Jews can ' t. At the end of the argu- ment, the Rabbi, who had set out to convert the Christians to Judaism, is himself con- vinced of the truths of Christianity, and ac- cepts baptism, as do also Constantin ' s mother and other Jews who were present during the argument. Immediately afterward, the mother and the Rabbi are seen eating swine ' s flesh, thus giving the poet a chance to ex- press his scorn and contempt for them, saying that they accepted Christianity not because they believed in it, but because of their desire for swine ' s flesh. Another interesting incident occurs in this play, revolving about the religious belief that the name of God cannot be mentioned with- out bringing about immediate and powerful results. The Jew deduces from this belief that Jesus cannot be the true God because his name may be pronounced without any consequences whereas if the Jew pronounces the name of his God, the one to whom it is spoken must die. An ox is brought up for demonstration. The Jew whispers some- thing in the ear of the ox, whereupon the ox falls dead. The Christian asserts, how- ever, that the Jew spoke the name of the Devil. Then he declares that he can bring the ox back to life again. He whispers the name of Christ in the ear of the ox, and lo! the ox is revived. All the Jews are convinced by this miracle. This incident may well serve as an example of the manner and means by which the religious strife was carried on.

Page 26 text:

24 M A S M I D ness on earth, commits suicide. The epilogue consists of a scene in Pales- tine where an American Chalutz and a Hun- garian Chalutza. finding perfect harmony between themselves, decide to marry. They desire to have a child, so that the interest of the land of the fathers may be advanced. Mr. Lewisohn has expressed nothing new in this, his first play. The drama contains the ideas he has been preaching since the writ- ing of Up-Stream — the racial unity of Israel, the failure of assimilation: the dual conscience of the Anglo-Saxons and the thor- oughly Jewish doctrine that the basic instinct for marriage is not sexual desire but repro- duction and the preservation of the race. He has, however, given another evidence of how deeply these ideas have penetrated his soul and how they have inspired him to start on new forms. This form of dialogue has the added value of realistically portraying the actual at- titude of the Gentiles when they are faced with the problem of assimilating the Jews; and convinces one more than any of the pas- sionate pleas that Mr. Lewisohn has ever written in the interest of the Jews. We have lately read views questioning the reason for Mr. Lewisohn ' s return to Judaism. A certain popular critic has claimed that Ludwig Lewisohn was persecuted during the War not because he was a Jew but because he was a German. But, says the critic, Mr. Lewisohn was too proud of his German ex- traction to admit this fact, and he therefore alleged he was persecuted because of his Jew- ish faith. No one who has read Mid-Chan- nel will take this critic ' s view seriously. There is, moreover, another side of Mr. Lewisohn ' s turning his back upon the Anglo- Saxons and that is that he feels himself per- fectly at home in Jewry. Since his return to Judaism, Lewisohn has devoted himself pas- sionately to the study of Jewish culture. He is enthusiastic about the Jewish past and future. We have always been unable to agree with Mr. Lewisohn ' s statement that the Anglo- Saxons as a race are possessed of a dual con- science. Were not the Puritans, were not all genuine English religionists and, for that matter, some of the outstanding English athe- ists, consistent in belief and action? Lack of unity between theory and action is a quality that belongs to any man, irrespective of race, who is without religion, without firm con- viction. Real Jews, it is very true, are har- monious in thought and action: but this is also true of Anglo-Saxons or even of Budd- hists. Mr. Lewisohn himself urges passion- ately, in almost all of his works, that the Anglo-Saxons should adopt unity of theory and action, thus admitting that the fault is not inherent in the race but lies in their en- vironmental conditions. Ludwig Lewisohn ' s contribution as the in- troducer of the modern Jew and his problems into the English literature is undeniable. He delves deeply and truthfully into the Jew ' s soul and breaks off the tradition of caricatur- ing the Jew. Though Lewisohn may be mis- taken in some of his theories and though he lacks a high moral dignity, yet he is sincere, and thoroughly human. H. M. SUMMER TIME Scrawled demands On shifting sands. Ardent expression of fleeting affection Glibly proclaiming a vague predilection. Promising Most anything. Eegee

Page 28 text:

26 M A S M I D Thus, we find throughout the Passion and Morality Plays the emphasis upon the strength of Christianity as opposed to the weakness of Judaism, and as a consequence of the almost continual victory of the Chris- tians over the Jews we find the latter accept- ing baptism at the close of the play. The Jewish religion is portrayed as ridiculous and false, and only rarely is the fault of the Jews themselves mentioned. If the poets hoped, however, that by means of these plays they might really convert the Jews, they were greatly mistaken, for only very rarely did the Jews take part in the pres- entation, or offer the ideas contained in it. The Jews thus remained un- affected by the Christian influences of the plays. The Christians realized this, however, for they resorted to force to bring the Jews into conflict with them, and a great amount of prose disputations have come down to us in which the Jews defended themselves against Gentile attacks. Perhaps the most famous is the Reuchlin-Pfefferkorn dispute. Johann Pfefferkorn, a Jewish apos- tate, published his Judenspiegel in 1507, in which he demanded the confisca- tion of all Hebrew books on the grounds that they were detrimental to Christian interests, and succeeded in 1509 in extorting from the German Emperor Maximilian an edict for the destruction of all Hebrew books in the possession of the Jews in Cologne and Frank- fort. The Jews appealed and John Reuch- lin. a noted Hebrew scholar, was asked in 1510 to give his opinion on the case. Reuch- lin ' s report was favorable to the Jews. Of the whole mass of Hebrew literature only writings like Toledoth Yeshu, which con- tained blasphemies against Jesus, he consi- dered ought to be destroyed. The Bible, Talmud, Zohar and the various commenta- ries were exonerated. Largely as a result of this report the edict was revoked. These debates ended with Luther who found occasion in his Das Jesus ein gebo- rener Jude sei, to harshly criticise the „hurch for its tactics in endeavoring to con- vert the Jews. He said that had he been a Jew. the example of cruelty set by the Church would have tempted him to become a pig rather than a Christian. This, of course, being the statement of a man who was him- self persecuted by the Catholic Church, loses a great deal of its sincerity and truth — but the stimulus for such strong derogation must have existed in some form. With the advent of Luther, Germany was split into two reli- gious factions which, for a short time, were so busy fighting each other that they had no time to devote themselves specifically to troubling the Jews. The presentation of the plays grew less and less frequent, for the vain endeavors of the poets discouraged them. The Jews would have been content, how- ever, had the anti-Semitism confined itself to literature. Unfortunately the desire to put the Jew in a contemptible position spread into actual practice. During the Middle Ages the Jews were forced to wear special cloth- ing, and the poets immediately proceeded to mock this garment, even though it was forced upon the Jew. Since the time of Pope Inno- cent III the Jews in France, Germany, and Holland had to wear a golden ring on their breast as a sign of identification. Thus, the poets had a definite pattern to follow when describing a Jew. He wore a long coat and a skull-cap and had a bristly beard that shook with every motion of his chin. This indivi- dual form of dress was so prevalent that it was sufficient description of a person to mere- ly say that he was Jewishly clad. The poet Johann Fischart makes specific reference to the golden ring, and Sebastian Brant and Geiler von Kaiserberg, among others, make more generalized fun of the Jewish cloth- ing. Now leaving the Jew for a while, the poets went further to ridicule the Israelites ' ceremonies and prayers. These rituals were so revised as to make them senseless or vulgar, or both. Among the prayers that were thus parodied are Adoun Olam ' in Von der Mten und Neuen Ee. by Hans Folz. and Avinu Malkenu in the Himmelfahrts- spiel ' of the Sterzinger Assemblage. It should be noted that in all of these parodies the Jew speaks a correct German, showing that there was not yet a peculiarly Yiddish dialect. In Hebrew literature the Talmud came in for by far the harshest criticism, perhaps be-