Editto sopra gli Ebrei

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pius VI

Editto sopra gli Ebrei ("Decree on the Jews") is a papal bull, which was one of the first legislative acts of Pius VI. signed on February 15, 1775. It contained essentially no new provisions, but summarized all those church state Jewish laws that had been passed since the bull Cum nimis absurdum , which Paul IV had issued in 1555.

The bull sparked violent protests after it was passed. The regulations on the mobility and right of residence of Jews, the ghetto obligation, the closure of the ghetto, the restrictive regulations on business relationships between Jews and Christians and the Jews' obligation to identify themselves existed before the bull was passed, did not correspond to actual practice and could not be enforced by repeating them confirmed by this bull. The bull soon faded from general memory. An attempt by the Congregation for the Inquisition to make it the starting point for dealing with Jews within the Papal States again in 1793 had no consequences.

background

Various Vatican commissions had worked on the bull since the 1730s. Thomas Brechenmacher therefore describes the bull as a line under a Jewish law that has been in force for around 250 years under the sign of a double patronage. The Pope felt it was his duty, on the one hand, to protect Christians from the Jews, but on the other hand to protect the Jews, as older brothers in faith, also from Christians. Unlike the encyclical of Benedict XIV , which emphasized the protection of the Jews from the Christians, the focus here was again on the protection of the Christians from the Jews. It was assumed that close contact with Jews could weaken Christians in their spiritual stability and, in extreme cases, could even lead them to apostate from Christianity.

content

The preamble is followed by seven paragraphs that are exclusively devoted to the possession and trading of forbidden books by Jews. What was meant here were writings that were accused of "errors", "insults" or "ungodly statements and blasphemies" both against the Christian religion as a whole and against the Roman Catholic Church. This was followed by two paragraphs on magic and witchcraft and two other paragraphs that restrictively regulated Jewish cemeteries and Jewish burial rites. Another paragraph regulates the practice of the Jewish cult on the soil of the Papal States.

The Editto sopra gli Ebrei has a substantive focus on regulating the dealings of Jews with their Jewish fellow citizens who want to profess Christianity (so-called catechumens or baptismal applicants) or who have already converted to Christianity (so-called neophytes or "newly admitted") that Editto regulates this in no less than six paragraphs.

Two further paragraphs regulate the labeling obligation of Jews who, according to this Editto , had to make themselves known to Christians by wearing a yellow mark.

Paragraphs 22 to 34 of the Editto governed dealings between Jews and Christians. Jews were not allowed to sell basic foodstuffs to Christians, or Christians were not allowed to purchase them from Jews. Jews in particular were prohibited from trading in catechumens and neophytes. They were also not allowed to employ Christian servants. The dealings between Christians and Jews during conversations, socializing or gambling, or sharing carriages were also regulated.

The following paragraphs regulated the freedom of residence and movement of the Jewish subjects within the Papal States. Among other things, they forced Jews to attend Christian sermons and regulated the penalties for violations. The supervisory and executive rights were transferred to the Inquisition .

literature

  • Thomas Brechenmacher (2004): The end of double protection - the Holy See and the Jews at the transition to modernity (1775-1870). Anton Hiersemann, Stuttgart 2004, ISBN 3-7772-0405-6 .
  • Thomas Brechenmacher (2005): The Vatican and the Jews. History of an Unholy Relationship from the 16th Century to the Present . Beck, Munich 2005, ISBN 978-3-406-52903-0 .

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ According to the historian Thomas Brechenmacher , the individual contents of the bull, which had been adopted since Cum nimis absurdum , were not a basis for meaningful and concrete action.
  2. ↑ Brechenmacher (2004), p. 70
  3. ↑ Brechenmacher (2004), p. 71
  4. ↑ Brechenmacher, p. 66
  5. ↑ Brechenmacher (2004), p. 67