The Proper Meaning of "Cum nimis Absurdum"

Author(s): Kenneth R. Stow

Source: The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 71, No. 4 (Apr., 1981), pp. 251-252
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1454617
Accessed: 02/09/2010 06:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upenn.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Jewish Quarterly Review.

http://www.jstor.org
 THE PROPER MEANING OF CUM NIMIS ABSURDUM
DAVID BERGER OF BROOKLYN COLLEGE faults my translation of the
papal bull Cum nimis, the elimination of which will rob it of the unique
importance I claim for it, namely, that it introduces a new theory, viz.,
of oppressing the Jews as a means of converting them. I think I am
right and he is wrong in the English rendition of the Latin document.
For one thing, medieval and especially ecclesiastical Latin regularly
use "convenire" in the active sense of "to agree" (my translation);
the verb need not be confined in usage to the more classical "it is
fitting" (Berger). My syntactical reading "convenire ... pervenire
satagant" ("make all haste to arrive ... and agree") is no less valid.
Beyond that, my interpretation rests on more than a reading of the
Cum nimis alone. Rather, it is based on a thorough knowledge of the
origins of the various clauses the bull contains. As will be apparent
from my forthcoming study, Taxation, Community, and State 1, a clause
stating explicitly that the Jews were "tolerated so that (ut) they
convert" was in regular use from some time in the I520's. And it
appeared in literally hundreds of letters granting extensive privileges
to Jews on the ground of the traditional theology of Gregory the
Great that "the sweetness of lips is the most effective agent for pro-
moting conversion." Paul IV identified with this goal; but following
the example of Benedict XIII, he disdained a method based on
kindness. Cum nimis announced this change in favor of conversion
through restriction and pressure by taking clauses of the earlier
letters of privilege and calculatingly reversing them one by one,
leaving only the concept "tolerated ut" intact.
Apart from this, as I wrote pointedly at the end of the first chapter
in Catholic Thought and Papal Jewry Policy, I5 5 5- I5 9 3, the bulls of
the later sixteenth century popes provide only a "rudimentary
understanding" of papal programs. "Other tools are required" to see
the issues in full. Despite Berger's claim, therefore, Cum nimis was
hardly intended to supply the "clinching evidence" for my thesis, if
for no other reason than that the novel formulae of Cum nimis are
rooted in tradition; and the only way to grasp the changes in tradi-
tional formulae and policies which Cum nimis put into effect is to
place the bull in context. This Berger failed to do. In Catholic Thought,
however, it is just such a broad context which provides the "clinching
evidence." In particular, that evidence came from the materials
found in chapters IO and 11, which explicitly dealt with conversion
I Stuttgart, I98I (Papste und Papsttum, I9).
I6*
252 THE JEWISH QUARTERLYREVIEW

through restriction and/or identified Cum nimis as an instrument of a

conversionary policy. But most important were the words of Paul IV
himself on the subject of the End of Days. No contemporary who
knew that Paul IV believed the End of Days was imminent could have
understood Cum nimis differently from the way it was interpreted in
Catholic Thought.
Perhaps the moment of the inception of a conversionary papal
policy should be questioned. The degree to which Cum nimis and its
attendant measures affected Jewish life in all its aspects throughout
the Italian peninsula is also a matter which bears further investigation.
But there seems to me little reason to proceed unarmed with any other
evidence, or even any other issue, than an incorrect claim of a single
mistaken translation and to cast doubt on a thesis developed over the
course of 300 pages and through the use of evidence of great variety.

University of Haifa KENNETH R. STOW