Shield and Sword: Jewish Polemics Against Christianity and the Christians in France and Spain from 1100-1500 (review)

106 SHOFAR Winter 1995 Vol. 13, No.2 the Christian tradition. Moore is basically correct in this judgment, even though van Buren would tend to deny he holds a "Christianity as Judaism for the Gentiles" position. Until some of his recent writings (including several still unpublished, where he has floated the notion of Jesus' sufferings as enhancing God's "transparency" for humankind) this seems a fair assessment. Secondly, Moore argues for a shift in Christian theology from a Jesus/Christ-centered approach to a scripture-centered one. The focus, he says, should be on Torah, not on Jesus. In my judgment he has overstated the necessary shift. There is simply no way we can abandon totally the focus on the ministry and person of Jesus and the resultant Christology in stating the basics of Christian faith. Finally, something needs to be said about the composition of the book. Unfortunately, the publisher has allowed far too many errors (including one fully blank page!) in the final text not to have it noted. Professor Moore has indicated that some steps will be taken soon to correct this most unfortunate situation which is unfair to both reader and author. But potential purchasers of the volumes, including librarians, should insist on receiving an updated text. Professor Moore has offered us the "seeds" for a major shift in the theological orientation ofthe Christian-Jewish theological discussion. While his work needs considerable expansion and some revision, something he himself has admitted in conversation, it has the potential to be a groundbreaking contribution. I, for one, am very grateful he has undertaken this line of research and look forward to its further development. John T. Pawlikowski, O.S.M., Ph.D. Catholic Theological Union, Chicago Shield and Sword: Jewish Polemics Against Christianity and the Christians in France and Spain from 1100-1500, by Hanne TrautnerKromann . Tiibingen:]. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1993. 216 pp." $110.00. During the past generation, scholars such as Frank Talmage, David Berger, and Daniel Lasker have enriched our understanding of medieval Jewish polemical literature through extremely important publications of texts and thematic studies. Hanne Trautner-Kromann has added to this body of scholarship in an English version of her Danish doctoral dissertation at the University of Copenhagen, presenting her own selection and interpretation of polemical texts. The passages, taken from a total of 17 different works (three each from northern and from southern France, eight Book Reviews 107 from Aragon and three from Castile), were selected to illustrate the themes of 1) moneylending at interest, 2) criticism of Christian morals and way of life, 3) criticism of Christian doctrine, and 4) Verus Israel or the length of the exile. Dr. Trautner-Kromann uses the material to provide evidence for two major theses about polemical literature. The first has to do with its function. There are several possible purposes for a polemical text: a) to convince the opponent of the truth of one's own position, b) to provide arguments for those on one's own side who will actually engage in polemics with the opponent, c) to buttress those on one's own side whose faith is weakening under the attack of the opponents, by providing answers to the challenges that disturb them. As all these texts were written in Hebrew and therefore obviously intended for Jewish readers, the first possibility is clearly not very plausible. Trautner-Kromann spends considerable time and effort arguing that the real purpose of the texts is reason "c" and not "b," namely, they were written to encourage Jews to persist in their' faith. The apparent implication, although not explicitly drawn by the author, is that the High and Late Middle Ages-the "Age of Faith"-were for Jews in France and Spain a period of spiritual crisis, and that many Jews must have suffered the kinds of doubt posited by recent historians for Christians during this period. I believe that the "either/or" way in which the author formulates the issue is overly simplistic. Surely texts can be written with more than one purpose and more than one potential audience in mind. Furthermore, there are significant differences among the issues themselves. I suspect that few medieval...