Yehoshua Feigon is Back

Q Indirectly about Sts Simon of Trent and Andrew of Rinn · Nope, Not for "Blood Libel" · Yehoshua Feigon is Back

Here is the question.
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Jews-in-ancient-times-drink-human-blood-What-kind-of-rituals-were-they-following/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1

Yehoshua Feigon

Fri

You are STILL living in a sick fantasy. Jews have never killed Christian children to “save“ them from Christianity. Religious Christians with the explicit connivance of their churches organized on a mass scale to slaughter Jewish communities, including children, in the name of the Christian religion from the time of the Crusades to the Holocaust. (The Holocaust itself would have been impossible without 2,000 years of Christian prep work, from the promulgation of the blood libel by the Catholic Church to the writings of Martin Luther.) Jewish communities in Western Europe, from Portugal to Germany, were very much targeted at various points in history. England is fairly far west. Does the massacre of the Jewish community of York ring a bell? It was carried out at Passover time. The conduct of the Catholic Church in Iberia with its conversions of entire families under torture is especially famous. Not a single case of a Jewish religious “mafia” murder of Christian children has ever been documented. Stop the slander. It’s a projection. Have a sense of decency.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“Religious Christians with the explicit connivance of their churches organized on a mass scale to slaughter Jewish communities, including children, in the name of the Christian religion from the time of the Crusades to the Holocaust.”

You live in a sick fantasy. Or you give specifics.

“Jews have never killed Christian children to “save“ them from Christianity.”

I gave specifics on some cases when this seems to have happened.

CASES. Like, not some vague, general accusation, but CASES when a specific child was found dead.

At least for St. Simon of Trent and for a boy in Xanten late 19th century, doctors have certified the boy had his throat slit through and the blood let out, like in kosher butchery.

“Many members of the community chose to commit suicide rather than be murdered or forcibly baptised by the attackers.” - York, 1190.

This was fairly soon after early cases like St. William of Norwich. Note, here the suicide would have fuelled anti-semitic sentiments. Suicide is one of the least respected sins in Medieval Catholicism, kind of equivalent to raping a toddler these days. Also, the horror of the baptism which it expressed. Also, if not here, then in a similar case, it could have been the one in Constanz, one seems to have observed trapped Jews killing other Jews to save them from forceful baptism or even from willing surrender to baptism.

Note, in your general intro, you spoke of :

// with the explicit connivance of their churches organized on a mass scale to slaughter Jewish communities //

The York massacre is obviously a horrid thing, but where was the connivance of the Catholic Church here?

“The conduct of the Catholic Church in Iberia with its conversions of entire families under torture is especially famous.”

You can document that? Seems like Protestant slander to me.

Could involve some slander on your own part convenient when seeking refuge with Turks too.

PLUS doesn’t in any way involve the kind of massacre we were talking about. You are mixing apples and oranges.

Yehoshua Feigon

19h ago

You are citing two murders POSSIBLY committed by Jews, yet do not hesitate to implicate them nor to suggest that the motivations were religious and, without a shred of evidence, that they were organized or “mafia” killings. The Crusades were specifically launched by the Church, and the various Inquisitions carried out under the aegis of the Church. Thousands were slaughtered here for explicitly religious motives.

This just on Spain, not France, Italy, or Portugal. One article. Among many. The Inquisition has been amply documented by Catholic critics as well as by Protestants.

Spanish Inquisition - Wikipedia

One among a very large number of works on the Crusades:

Sanctifying the Name of God

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

The Spanish Inquisition certainly did get die-hard crypto-Jews killed, but was launched mainly to prevent bona fide converts getting targetted simply for origins or for inadvertently keeping a Jewish custom they ought to have dropped.

Tomás de Torquemada had an uncle known as Cardinal Turrecremata, active in preventing (successfully) a pogrom taking place. Perhaps partly because the family was a marrana one. Yes, conversos did exist before the exile of 1492.

The first Crusade was certainly launched by the Church and as certainly the undoubted exactions, possible massacres on Jews were not. Blessed Peter the Hermit (blessed means a saint you are free not to honour, whom others are free to honour, so a Jewish convert need not honour him) certainly did argue Jews could be forced to contribute to the Crusade, but as certainly, he left off running the people’s Crusade, which is where this took place and left the crusading to actual knights, the barons’ crusade, when he saw this went out of hand.

In other words, the Church did not connive to get Jews killed there either.

However, I do not think I singled out any purely “religious” motive for the child killings. I also did not single out the entire Jewish community.

I mentioned sth like Jewish maffias.

I think I even mentioned - if not, I do so now - a political motive.

Jews were forbidden to carry out death penalties. This was taken as demeaning to Jewish sovereignty. Ergo, the people doing so would have been carrying out a death penalty for crime of Christianity (as against St. Stephen and against St. James the Greater) in order to make a kind of claim about Jews not having lost the sovereign right to mete out death penalties.

A different way around the same problem would be to claim that death penalty isn’t part of sovereignty anyway. There is a Jewish connection to Badinter who argued for abolishing death penalty in France.

Another way would have been to make the national sovereignty accessible to Jews. Done for instance at French Revolution.

My theory very obviously presupposes that the boy in the Beiliss case, the boy in Xanten, St. Simon of Trent were ethnically Jewish. Not necessarily Andreas Oxner.

In fact, St. Andrew of Rinn might be a different thing altogether, if the uncle was the sole perpetrator, but he could still be a martyr for chastity. Instead of last words being “don’t cut there” the last words could have been “don’t touch me there” - a colleague of Charles Kwanga instead of such of St. Simon of Trent.

My theory got started at the family of Simon - with whom I had mixed up Andreas’ story - actually receiving the very small and for good or evil therefore very select Jewish community of Trent in their home. Suggests to me, they had some Jewish origin.

Other theories, see Ariel Toaff, although he abandoned it, and Chesterton’s idea it were Molochists, ethnic Jews but totally disconnected to the Jewish religion.

The cases exist, and from St. William of Norwich to Beiliss case, I think there were about 90. I only know a few of them.