ANTI-SEMITISM. – Aversion toward the Jewish people, which has occurred in ancient and modern times, based more on social than religious motives. The term is highly inappropriate (it should be called “anti-Judaism”), also because the Jews have traditionally been hated by the greatest modern Semitic people, the Arabs; coined—it seems—by W. Marr in 1880 and spread in Germany and Austria on the basis of ethnic-social antitheses, today it usually signifies hostility toward Jews deriving from any motive. “The word is new, but the thing is old... It designates a state of mind, a socio-logical theory (conflict of races and class struggle), a political party, above all a legislation” (S. Depolige, p. 6).
OUTLINE: 1. A. in the ancient world, 2. A. in the Christian world, 3. A. in the modern world, 4. A. and Catholic morality.
I. A. IN THE ANCIENT WORLD. – The phenomenon of anti-Semitism has extended wherever Jews have settled in communities among other peoples. “Judaism and the hatred of Jews have traversed centuries of history as inseparable companions” (L. Pinsker, p. 29). With the Jewish diaspora, from the 5th century B.C., the “ever-present question” (D. Goldstein) begins.
The first known episode of anti-Semitism is narrated in Esther, under Ahasuerus (Xerxes I). At the end of the same century a popular anti-Jewish uprising led to the sacking, and then the destruction, of the temple at Elephantine (from about 412 to 404 B.C.), in Upper Egypt, and the killing of the Jewish colony with its high priest Je-doniah. The Hellenistic world opposed the Jews, for the reason already expressed in Esth. 3:8, “when it saw that this strange race was spreading over the entire inhabited world, yet without blending with the various environments” (G. Ricciotti, p. 231). The texts of Greek and Roman writers (collected by Th. Reinach) concerning the Jews reveal an antipathy in which contempt and distrust predominate before a people that appeared too different. “Anti-Semitism corresponds to Jewish exclusivism” (E. Zolli, p. 32).
From the 3rd to the 1st century B.C., the Hellenistic writers Manetho, Manethas of Patara, Posidonius of Apamea, Apollonius Molon,
attacked the Jews. They reproached them for their exclusivism (ἐμείξα), both religious (Hecataeus of Abdera, Strabo, Varro, Dio Cassius, Petronius, Martial; Pliny, Hist. nat., XIII, 4, 46: gens contumelia numinum insignis; Tacitus, Hist., V, 4-8; Juvenal, Satire 6, 542-477, 14, 96-106) and social and national (Posidonius, Trogus Pompeius, Seneca, Persius, Tacitus), by which they were regarded as contraires mortalibus, inimici generis humani (Tacitus), perniciosa ceteris gens (Quintilian, Inst. Orat., III, 7, 21). Hence arose calumnious legends about the immoral and atrocious practices of the Jews; in the time of Caligula the Alexandrians Chaeremon, Lysimachus and especially Apion (v.) spread them, and Philo had to refute these charges of inhumanity (ἐπανθρωπήσα). Economic rivalry already loomed: Trogus Pompeius denounced their wealth. Against the closed and impenetrable islands of these Orientals that clashed with the classical and patriotic sensibility of the civilized world of that time, unpopularity grew; already for Cicero (Pro Flacco, 28) “Jew” was equivalent to “troublemaker,” almost to “seditious”; it was recalled that in 139 B.C. the praetor Hispalus had expelled “Judaeos, qui Sabazii” (Sabath). Jovis cultu Romanos inficere mores conati sunt (Valerius Maximus, I, 3, 2). “The racial pride inspired in the Jews sentiments and attitudes of hatred, contempt, separation, which pagans keenly resented as an affront and to which they responded with a fairly general anti-Judaism” (J. Bonsirven, Le Judaisme palestinien, I, Paris 1934, p. 104).
Julius Caesar was a friend of the Jews, who at his death honored him with funeral laments for several nights. The official attitude in the Empire was generally benevolent toward them, also because many wealthy Jews were influential at court. But the people abhorred them, also because of the privileges they enjoyed, including exemption from military service and certain taxes, and because of their proselytizing among the upper classes.
In Alexandria they were often maltreated and harassed, especially under the governor of Egypt A. Avillius Flaccus (32-37/38 A.D.; Philo, Contra Flaccum), and Philo (Legatio ad Caium) led the Jewish embassy to Caligula (winter 38/39). Claudius sent the letter (discovered in 1924) to the Alexandrians (A.D. 41) to restore calm. In Rome they were expelled (400 deportees to Sardinia) under Tiberius (19 A.D.), whose minister Sejanus, who hated them, left Pontius Pilate in charge of Judea for ten years. Claudius, who ERODE AGRIPPA I (v.), was favorable to them, but could not prevent a new expulsion from Rome (Acts 18:1-2) of the Jews (who had returned under Caligula) “constantly raising disturbances” (Suetonius, Claud., 25, 4). Nero protected them; Vespasian and Titus, after crushing the Jewish revolt (66-70), did not persecute them, but the last Flavian, Domitian, together with his successors Trajan and Hadrian, remained execrated in rabbinic books as persecutors.
Hostility toward the Jews was therefore widespread in the world long before the Crucifixion. The pagans remained anti-Jewish, from Justin and Plutarch (De superstitione) to Ammianus Marcellinus and Rutilius Namatianus (4th century); the latter reproaches Pompey and Titus for having conquered Judea, and concludes: “Latius excisae pestis contagia serpunt / Victoresque suos natis victa premit” (Itinerarium, V, 385 sg.).
II. A. IN THE CHRISTIAN WORLD. – The Christians, mindful of the precept of charity, had no social prejudice toward the Jews on grounds of nation or race; they opposed, rather, the evangelical-Pauline universalism to their particularism. But after Calvary, Jewish hatred toward Christians was very active, as attested, besides the sacred books of the New Testament (1 Thess. 2:15-16; B. Allo, L'Apocalypse, Paris 1921, p. IV: “Les ennemis les plus actuels sont encore les Juifs”),
The *Martyrium Polycarpi* 12, 2; 13, 1; 17, 18; *Ad Diognetum* 5, 17; Giustino, *I Apol.* 31, 36; *C. Tryph.* 16, 95. 110 (no Christian is left alive). 133; whence Tertullian, *Scorpio*, 10 (cf. *Apol.* 7), calls the Jewish synagogues “sources of persecutions.” In the 3rd century: “Judaism preserved its ancient attitude of hostility, while on the other hand its doctrine and customs penetrated here and there into Christian circles, making necessary an activity of defense and clarification” (B. Altaner, *Patrologia*, Italian trans., Turin 1940, p. 66). Hence from the 1st century the divine reprobation of Israel was emphasized (*Epist. Barnabae* 4, 6-8; 14, 1-4; etc.). Around 200 the *Clementine Homilies* IV, 6: PG 2, 161 praise Apion of Alexandria for defending Hellenic culture against “Jewish impiety.” The anti-Jewish polemic of the Fathers (well set forth by F. Vernet and A. L. Williams) was continuous, from St Justin to the priest Evagrius in Gaul (430).
Origene, St Ephrem, St Gregory Nazianzen, St John Chrysostom, St Jerome (*In Isaiam* 2, 8) complain of persecutions and outrages by Jews. In the time of St Ambrose “the wealth and proselytism of the Jews provoked, here and there, anti-Semitic reactions” (A. Paredi, *S. Ambrogio*, Milan 1940, p. 377); when the synagogue at Callinicus on the Euphrates was burnt by the populace, Theodosius I ordered the bishop of Callinicus to rebuild it, but Ambrose (*Epist.* 40-41 to Theodosius, to Marcellina) forced the emperor to grant impunity to all. The synagogue at Rome was burnt about 395. Augustine accuses them (*Sermo* 62, 17-18) of inciting pagans and heretics against Catholics, and often speaks of Christian distrust of Jews (e.g. *Contra adversarios legis et prophet.*: PL 42, 600 ff.). In 415 St Cyril the Patriarch did not oppose their expulsion from Alexandria. Theodosius II suppressed the Palestinian rabbinic schools (425). Under the Goths the atrocities of the last years of Theodoric were attributed to the Jews (A. Amelli, *Cassiodoro e la Volgata*, Grottaferrata 1917, p. 14 ff.). In 521 persecutions against Jews revived in Rome; they had recourse to Aligern, legate of Theodoric.
Restrictive laws issued by Theodosius II (between 425 and 439) and Justinian (*Novella* no. 146 of 553; *Code* I, 8: *De iudaeis et coeliciis*) remained in force in Christian nations until modern times.
In the Middle Ages, as always, the Church, attending only to moral and religious principles, openly protected Jews against persecution, but forbade them to exercise influence in Christian society; “it prevented, as far as it could, that violence be done to them; it prevented, as far as it could, that confidence be placed in them” (M. Landrieux, p. 86). The Third Council of Toledo (589) forbade them every public office and the possession of Christian slaves, decreeing confiscation of the goods of converts who returned to Judaism; the Sixth Council of Toledo (633), presided over by St Isidore of Seville, confirmed this, but blamed King Sisebut for forcing Jews to become Christians; the Tenth (656) and the Seventeenth (694) increased the rigours. Paul Alvaro (d. 861) remained in this line.
In the East St Maximus the Confessor (580-662) and St John Damascene (670-749), in the West St Gregory of Tours (520-93) and Raterius of Verona (896-974) denounced grave dangers arising from the Jews. The bishops of Lyons, Amulo (*Contra Iudaeos ad Carolum regem*: PL 116, 141-184, in 846, asks Charles the Bald to apply the decrees of the Council of Meaux of 846) and above all his predecessor Agobard (d. 840) opposed the growing Jewish influence; the latter sent to Emperor Louis the Pious four learned writings to this effect (the *De Iudaticis superstitionibus* was composed with other bishops) and to Nebridius, bishop of Narbonne, the *De cavendo convictu et societate iudacia* (PL 104, 9-353). But after various grave crimes against the Jews (in the First Crusade [1096], massacres of Jews at Cologne, Speyer and Mainz; in 1147 the monk Radulf incited the people of Mainz to massacre the Jews, and these were killed by crusaders at Carrentan and elsewhere), St Bernard (*Epist.* 323 to Archbishop Henry of Mainz, *Epist.* 363 to the clergy and people of eastern Gaul) rose up, condemning these ferocious methods, recommending that Jews be converted but not killed.
Unfortunately the cruelties continued, and Innocent IV published two bulls (to the archbishop of Vienne in France, 28 May 1247; to the archbishops and bishops of Germany, 5 July 1247) to forbid maltreatment of Jews except for personal crimes. Meanwhile at Paris (1244), Toulouse (1248) and elsewhere Talmudic books were burned.
Canon Law forbade (Decretals of Gregory IX, I, V, tit. vi, chaps. 1-18) that Jews exercise public offices, that they keep Christian servants, that they build new synagogues; it imposed on them to wear a special dress or badge. But it also prescribed: “Principes saeculares excommunicari debent, qui Iudaeos baptizatos suis bonis spoliare praesumunt” (chap. 5) and: “Iudaei inviti non sunt baptizandi, nec ad hoc cogendi, vel in suis festivitatibus molestandi, nec ipsorum coemeteria violanda” (chap. 9).
From the 12th century anti-Jewish legislation progressively worsened. Jews were, according to civil public law, “subject to perpetual servitude.”
In France, St Louis IX (*Ordonnance* of Melun, Dec. 1230, art. 2) sanctioned the provisions of Philip Augustus and Louis VIII: Jews were considered serfs of the soil and could not move about. St Thomas, *De regimine Iudaeorum ad comitissam Flandriae* (or *ad Ducissam Brabantiae*), about 1270, admitted these laws, but interpreted them in the most lenient way.
Passions and selfish interests, however, prevailed; Edward I expelled the Jews from England (1290), where they could return, but only with difficulty and in isolation, under Cromwell (1653). The chronicles of the time record mass killings of Jews at Fulda, Mainz, Munich, Oberwesel, Boppard, Coblenz and in Thuringia (MGH, *Scriptores*, XV, 31; XVII, 77, 255; XVIII, 415; XXV, 717); similar massacres were frequent in Spain from 1390 to 1473. Thomas of Cantimpré, then Peter of Blois (*Contra perfidos Iudaeos*), Berthold of Regensburg, St Vincent Ferrer presented to the people the dangers of Jewish cohabitation. The people defended themselves from the sects by which they felt threatened (e.g. the Cathars) by lynching, regarding them as a social danger all the more grave the more they were closed in upon themselves, secret and elusive; this barbarous practice (Lex Visigothorum, *Nov. tit.* II) was energetically reproved by the Church. Nicholas V (Bull of 2 Nov. 1447) condemned the anti-Jewish riots in Spain; Paul III (Bull of 12 May 1540) those in Hungary, Bohemia and Poland.
The papacy was essentially a moderating power, as is evident even from the bull *Licet perfidia iudaeorum* of Innocent III (15 Sept. 1109; *Bullarium Romanum*, III, Turin 1858, pp. 330–31), and from various letters in which he urges the repression of Jewish “insolence” while forbidding violence against them solely because they are Jews (PL 214, 864 sqq.; 215, 501 sqq., 617 sqq., 694 sqq.). Yet the secular order presented the most wretched spectacle of folly, inconsistency, and inhumanity—with few and occasional exceptions. While brutal mobs knew only to hurl themselves upon synagogues and ghettos, setting them ablaze and bathing them in blood whenever some graver provocation came from an Israelite centre or economic distress grew too acute, the constituted powers—both great and small, feudal and communal—vacillated between wholesale expulsions, which left the economic environment utterly unprepared as the Jewish financial market was abruptly withdrawn, and the most unforeseen transactions with the ghetto, which remained more master than ever of the economic situation. “All this bespeaks the improvidence and impulsiveness proper to the barbarian” (U. Benigni, p. 108). “The Jewish policy of the medieval world, whether pursued by governments or by the masses, is sometimes a crime, almost always a colossal blunder... despite the insistence of ecclesiastical authority for a policy at once more prudent and more humane” (ibid., p. 113).
In the Middle Ages the Jewish question presented an exceedingly important economic aspect, owing to the concentration of money-lending in Jewish hands (S. Deploige, pp. 34–48). Between Jews and non-Jews there was a continual seesaw of mutual reprisals. Philip IV the Fair and Louis X aggravated the condition of the Jews in France, whence Charles VI expelled them definitively on 17 Sept. 1394. The Middle Ages closed with the expulsion from Spain (1492) and its dependencies (Sardinia) of the Jews, who were required to surrender all their wealth. John II of Portugal admitted them to his kingdom, only for Emanuel I to expel them in 1496. In 1510 they were driven from the kingdom of Naples; yet the physician “Mastro Leone” (v. GIUDA) obtained from the viceroy that Fra Francesco de l’Angelina should no longer preach “contra zudei.” Cosimo I de’ Medici expelled them from Tuscany (Oct. 1541), St Pius V from the Papal States except Rome and Ancona (1569), and around 1650 they were expelled from Brazil.
The popes defended Christians against Jewish usury (Council of Lateran IV, ch. 67: “Brevi tempore christianorum exhauriant facultates”), encouraging the monti di pietà, promoted in the 15th century by the Franciscans Bl. Bernardino da Feltre, St James of the Marches, and Michele da Milano; they counselled avoidance of Jews but forbade maltreatment of them, even going so far as to prohibit preachers from dwelling too long on them (Martin V, bull of 3 Feb. 1429). Yet when Johann Reuchlin praised Jewish books, his *Augenspiegel* (1511) was condemned by Leo X as “dangerous, suspect, and full of partiality for the Jews” (1520). Julius III ordered the burning of the Talmud (1554), and Paul IV (bull of 14 July 1555) decreed its annihilation; in Cremona the converted Jew Sisto da Siena destroyed many copies, as did Salomone Romano from 1552 to 1558 in Rome and the Marches. Clement VIII also adopted rigorous measures in 1593.
The popes complained of the Jews, from Gregory IX, deploring that, “ingrati gratiarum et beneficiorum obliti,” they had become unbearable to the German bishops (bull of 5 March 1233; *Bull. Romanum*, III, Turin 1858, p. 479), to St Pius V (bull *Hebraeorum gens*, 26 Feb. 1569): “Cognitum satis et exploratum habemus quam indigne Christi nomen haec perversa progenies ferat, quam infesta sit omnibus qui hoc nomine censentur” (*Bull. Romanum*, VII, Turin 1862, p. 740). The dangers to Christians are enumerated by J. Balmes, *Il protestantesimo paragonato col Cattolicismo nelle sue relazioni con la civiltà europea*, trans. II. A. Orioli, 2nd ed., Naples 1849, I, pp. 217–20; II, pp. 231–42, 301–10. Cf. G. Fabiani, *Gli Ebrei e il Monte di pietà in Ascoli Piceno*, Ascoli 1942.
The compulsory ghetto, begun in 1412, spread widely; in Rome it remained until 1870 (L. Wirth, *The Ghetto*, Chicago 1928). The laws forbidding intimate relations between Jews and Christians were intended for the benefit of both parties. The Jewish scholar J. Darmesteter (*Essais orientaux*, Paris 1883, pp. 262–70) nevertheless dared to assert: “The hatred of the people for the Jew is the work of the Church,” and went on: “Yet only the Church in the Middle Ages protected the Jew... It is that she both needs the Jew and fears him at the same time” (quoted by U. Benigni, p. 102, n. 1). This thesis—that the Church is responsible for the injustices suffered by the Jews—is widely held among modern Jews (H. Graetz, Th. Reinach, I. Loeb, Bernard-Lazare, down to A. Spire, *Quelques Juifs et demi-Juifs*, II, Paris 1928, p. 183), and freemasonry denounces it as a “clerical manoeuvre” (P. Nourrisson, *Le Club des Jacobins sous la 3me République*, Paris 1900, p. 13). Yet they should recall that anti-Jewish hatred existed before the Church and outside the Church (D. Goldstein, p. XII: “The anti-Semitic spirit has never been absent where Jews abide”). The papal Rome was always hospitable to the Jews, as was papal Avignon, as C. F. Heman well demonstrates in *Revue de théologie et de philosophie*, IX (1901), pp. 500–502, whereas the severe judgment of G. J. Hoogewerff, *Felix Roma*, Zutphen 1928, is unjust.
3. IN THE MODERN WORLD
The civil emancipation of the Jews, begun with the Edict of Tolerance of Joseph II (1782), was promulgated by the French Revolution. “Unlike the policy of the entire Christian Middle Ages, the French Revolution resolved the Jewish question with liberty, i.e., by practically denying its existence” (S. Deploige, p. 50). On 27 Sept. 1791 the abbé Grégoire secured the Constituent Assembly’s vote for their full equality of civil rights. Yet emancipation did not diminish anti-Jewish hatred; on the contrary, representative Jews from H. Heine to I. Zangwill, L. Pinsker and Th. Herzl have deplored the opposite. The cause lay in the rise of national feeling in much of Europe and the reaction, among both Catholics and Protestants, against liberalism and materialism. “Jewish emancipation amplified the propaganda of revolutionary theories” (R. Lambelin, in DFC, IV [1920], col. 1015); the Grand Rabbi J. Weill proclaimed: “The Messiah is the triumph of Justice, the reign of Liberty and Fraternity. This reign began with the French Revolution” (quoted by P. Loevengard, *La splendeur catholique*, Paris 1910, p. 99). “Antisemitism is one of the ways in which the principle of nationality manifests itself” (Bernard-Lazare, *L’Antisémitisme*, II, p. 137). Antisemitism is indeed a product of the 19th century as a doctrinal system seeking to justify scientifically, apart from religious considerations (which persisted only among Islamic peoples and the Russian “Orthodox”), the traditional aversion. An antisemitic *Weltanschauung* arose in the Slavic and German worlds, where contacts with Jews were broader and social crises more frequent. International treaties imposed civil equality between Jews and other citizens (Treaty of Berlin 1878, art. 44), but in practice Russia, Romania, Hungary, and Poland applied them only partially.The dissident Russian Church, in the time of the tsars, fomented a theological antisemitism: the Jewish people were held to incarnate evil and satanic powers, against which the blind and brutal *pogrom* (Russian: “devastation”) was unleashed from 1882 until the most ferocious of 1905. The rise of Pan-Slavism reinforced this antisemitism with politico-social motives, the Jewish people being seen as the inspiration of anarchic demonstrations and of mechanical capitalism and industrialism.
In Germany, with the rise of German nationalism in contrast to revolutionary ideology, antisemitism was based on the concept of race, already with J. G. Fichte (cf. E. L. Schaub, *Fichte und Anti-Semitism*, in *The Philosophical Review*, 1940, pp. 37-52), with F. Rühs and J. F. Fries (Berlin 1816), then with H. H. E. Paulus (1830), K. Streckfuss (1843), Br. Bauer (*Die Judenfrage*, Brunswick 1843), H. Wagener (1857); above all, E. Renan (*Histoire générale et système des langages sémitiques*, Paris 1855; *Le Judaïsme comme race et comme religion*, 1883) provided weapons for this racist "science." In the years of nationalist enthusiasm following the victories of 1866-70, and in the severe economic crisis of 1873, antisemitism strengthened (O. Glagau, H. von Scharff-Scharffenstein, M. Busch, mainly Wilhelm Marr, H. von Treitschke, Paul de Lagarde, Ad. Wahrmund). The theories of the Count de Gobineau, H. St. Chamberlain, and O. Weininger, exalting the Aryan race, were favorable to II. In Austria (and Bohemia) too, antisemitism spread widely between 1875 and 1900.
Precursor of G. F. Daumer (d. 1875), the antisemitism of the "Christian Socials" developed: in Germany with the Catholic newspaper *Germania* and the Lutheran Ad. Stöcker (*Das moderne Judentum in Deutschland, besonders in Berlin*, Berlin 1880; his follower E. Böhme, *Berliner Briefe*, Hagen 1902), court preacher in Berlin; in Austria with the Catholics G. von Schönerer (with the newspaper *Deutsches Volksblatt*), K. Lueger, mayor of Vienna, and Prince Alois of Liechtenstein. A. Rohling reinforced it with crude anti-rabbinic writings, *Der Talmudjude* (Munster 1871, 7th ed. 1924, enlarged French trans. by M. de Lamarque, *Le Juif talmudiste*, Paris 1888) and various others (last *Das Judentum*, 1903), engaging in polemics for over 30 years, even against Franz Delitzsch and H. L. Strack. After Bismarck's fall (1890), antisemitism grew further despite some official prohibitions (in Vienna, in July 1896, the seizure of Franz Deckert's pamphlets, *Pater Noster* and *Credo*). The Biclis trial for ritual murder (1913-14) fueled anti-Jewish hostility.
Meanwhile, a nefarious pagan antisemitism took root with K. Eugen Dühring (from whom H. St. Chamberlain drew much), *Judenfrage als Frage der Rassenhändlichkeit*, 1881; *Der Ersatz der Religion durch Vollkommenes und die Ausscheidung alles Judentums durch den modernen Völkergeist*, Karlsruhe 1883, 2nd ed. 1906 (cf. A. M. Weiss, *Riforme della religione*, Italian trans., Florence 1905, pp. 19-27).
From this current, mitigating some blasphemous aspects, the great theorist Th. Fritsch emerged (*Antisemitischer Catechismus*, 1893; *Der falsche Gott*, 1911; *Die Rechtfertigung des Antisemitismus*, 2nd ed. Munich 1924; *Handbuch der Judenfrage*, 33rd ed. 1933). The "Deutsche Christen" of this tendency went so far as to vituperate, as once Marcion and the Manicheans did, the sacred books of the Old Testament (cf. H. Kaupe, *Die antisemitische Bekämpfung des A. T.*, 1932). The extravagances surrounding "Aryan" nobility became, in the hands of some impious individuals, weapons against the Christian religion.
From 1919, through the work of the *deutsch-völkisch* (populist) party, antisemitism spread in Germany, where defeat and chaos were attributed to Jewish factors (A. Hitler accused them in *Mein Kampf*, Munich 1925, over 300 times). While even the Catholic press of the post-war period 1919-24 protested against the actions of various Jews (*Reichspost*, *Das neue Reich*, *Schönerer Zukunft*), antisemitism gave rise to increasingly absurd and pernicious forms: a new Dühring, A. Steiger (*Die neudeutsche Herde im Kampfe gegen Christen und Juden*, 1924) founded German "neo-paganism," and other syntheses of racial delusions arose, such as the occultist religion founded (1924) by the former Cistercian Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels and H. Reichstein ("ariosophia"), then the "religion of blood" of E. Ludendorff and his wife Mathilde.
This bellicose couple founded a publishing house in Munich that fought against the Bible. Cf. O. Eissfeldt, E. Kloßermann, F. K. Schumann, *Die Zuverlässigkeit der Bibel*, ein *Gutachten über die neuesten Angriffe über sie*, in *Theol. Studien u. Krit.*, 107 (1936), pp. 354-70; E. Aland, *Wer fälscht? Die Entstehung der Bibel*, Berlin 1936; H. von Soden, *Hat Ludendorff Recht?*, Marburg 1936; H. Straßmann, *Saladin-Ludendorff im Kampf gegen die Bibel*, Essen 1936; K. Pieper, *Ludendorff und die Hl. Schrift: Antwort*, Munich 1937. Even if not reaching the extremes of neo-paganism, some Catholics nurtured an antisemitism that sometimes culminated in anti-Jewish agitation (J. A. Kofler, *Katholische Kirche und Judentum*, 1929).
National Socialism sanctioned antisemitism, incorporating it into its program and justifying anti-Jewish hatred with two arguments: 1) the inferiority of the Jewish race, formulated by F. K. Günther (*Rassenkunde des jüdischen Volkes*, Munich 1919, 16th ed. 1933) as a mixture of races according to two main types (Oriental Judaism, a mixture of Asiatic-Mongoloid-Nordic-Hamitic-Negroid elements; and Southern Judaism, a mixture of similar elements in a different order); 2) the moral danger of capitalist social organization and the anarchic-subversive drive, which allegedly derives from the Jews (A. Rosenberg insists on this in *Der Mythus des XX. Jahrhunderts*, Munich 1930, placed on the Index in 1934: departing from purely biological considerations, he regards Judaism as a "spiritual type" that is disintegrative; mechanistic-hedonistic in morals, liberal-communist in politics, rationalistic-atticist in religious matters); to this he adds socio-economic and historical-national motives. Two characteristic works of this kind are: G. Feder, *Die Juden*, 4th ed., Munich 1933; F. O. H. Schulz, *Jude und Arbeiter. Ein Abschnitt aus der Tragödie des deutschen Volkes*, Berlin 1934. This absurd and iniquitous theory was clearly condemned by the Church (Pius XI and Pius XII in many speeches against hatred and violence, and on the respect due to human personality). The monstrous effect of this was the numerous massacres of innocent and peaceful Jews during the war of 1939-45.
In modern Italy, antisemitism never existed. However, as international disputes fueled ideological excesses, the Fascist government, in 1938, raised the "race" issue, imitating National Socialism, which led to restrictive laws on Jews (Royal Decree-Law of 17 Nov. 1938). Among these was the prohibition of marriage (even for converted Jews) with "Aryans," which Pius XI condemned as a "vulnus" to the Concordat between Church and State of 1929. The magazines *La difesa della razza* and *La vita italiana*, and the newspapers *Regime Fascista* and *Tevere*, repeatedly echoed anti-Jewish commonplaces, but they did not influence the generally balanced Italian mentality. During the war of 1940-45, the Italian occupation authorities in France protected Jews against the rigors of the German and Vichy French governments (L. Poliakov, *La condition des Juifs en France sous l'occupation italienne*, Paris 1946).
Much more intense had been the French antisemitism between 1880 and 1914. The anticlericalism of the government of the Third Republic, the scandals arising from the failure of the “Union générale” bank (1882) and of the Panama Canal Company, led many Catholics to denounce the Jews as the cause of so many evils (E. A. Chabauty, *Les Juifs*, Paris 1882; Gougenot des Mousseaux, *Le Juif, le judaïsme et la judaïsation des peuples chrétiens*, Paris 1869, 2nd ed. 1886; Léon Bloy, *Le salut par les Juifs*, ibid. 1892); the most vehement was Ed. Drumont (*La France juive*, 2 vols., Paris 1885) in the newspaper *La libre parole*, which he founded in Paris in 1893. The Dreyfus Affair (1897–1902) gave rise to violent anti-Jewish polemics, in which *La Croix* of Paris took part. As often happens, the backlash fell upon Christianity: from the great national crisis that was the antisemitic *affaire* there emerged the anticlerical laws of 1903–1908 (J. Brugerette, *Le prêtre français et la société contemporaine*, II, Paris 1935, pp. 415–524). The mentality of anti-Jewish distrust among many “right-wing” Catholics, such as P. Bourget, A. Monniot, A. Retté, G. Bernanos, Ph. Henriot, X. Vallat, is found in Gabriel Malglaive, *Juif ou Français*, Vichy 1942, which calls for “defense laws” without, however, the Jews being persecuted or humiliated. The Jews accuse the Vichy government of having cruelly persecuted them (J. Weill, *Contribution à l'histoire des camps d'internement dans l'Anti-France*, Paris 1946).
In Romania, the greatest national poet, Mihai Eminescu, had already been fighting the Jews since 1877; Professors Tura and Iorga founded the *Alianța antisemitică universala* (1895); C. Z. Codreanu organized in 1927 the “Legion of the Archangel Michael,” and A. C. Cuza (1922) the “League for Christian Racial Defense”; antisemitism was also a foundation of the newspaper *Porunca Vremii* and of Codreanu’s “Iron Guard,” to which Prince Cantacuzino and O. Goga adhered, along with a large part of the “Orthodox” clergy. The restrictive laws of Marshal Antonescu (9 Aug., 3 and 14 Oct. 1940) were hailed as an act of patriotism.
The same European literatures were hostile to the Jews: the English, in particular, from Shakespeare (whose *Merchant of Venice*, with the satanic figure of Shylock, has been removed from public school curricula in many American states because of protests by the Jewish Anti-Defamation League) to G. Byron and C. Dickens (M. F. Modder, *The Jew in the Literature of England. To the End of the 19th Century*, Philadelphia 1939). For French literature, cf. I. Schapira, *Der Antisemitismus in der französischen Literatur*, Berlin 1927, and J. Kaplan, *Témoignages sur Israël dans la littérature française*, Paris 1938.
4. ANTISEMITISM AND CATHOLIC MORALITY
Antisemitism, insofar as it involves hatred and incites, or even merely justifies, violence, is contrary to Christian morality and entails grave dangers to the faith (errors of racial inequality, contempt for the Old Testament), which many forms of it reject. The Church therefore condemns “that hatred which is commonly designated by the name of ‘antisemitism’” (*Decretum S. Officii*, 25 March 1928: *AAS*, 20 [1928], p. 104). As a religion of love, Christianity forbids harming or vilifying any human being, even one considered to have injured or offended II. Still less does it authorize the persecution of an entire people or race, for in so doing one violates not only charity but also the justice due to countless innocents; masses, as such, can never be held responsible. The absolute respect for every human person, sacred and inviolable, is the foundation of social and international coexistence.“Justice and charity do not exclude prudent and moderate defense” (*Civ. Catt.*, [1945, 11], p. 274; cf. [1937, 11], pp. 418, 497; [1938, 11], p. 76; [1938, 11], p. 146; [1938, 11], p. 3). There is no question of the defects or dangers of Judaism (D. Goldstein, pp. 118–20). Those who believe that the Jews are at the head of Freemasonry (Civ. Catt., 13th series, 12 [1888, 11], pp. 320–32; H. Delassus, *Il problema dell’ora presente*, Italian trans., I, Rome 1907, pp. 630–59; *La Massoneria* [Civ. Catt.], Rome 1920, pp. 43–45; H. Belloc, Italian trans., p. 20; D. Goldstein, pp. 96–99; L. de Poncinis) or of Bolshevism (H. Belloc, pp. 28–39; L. Massoutié, *Judaïsme et Mavisme*, Paris 1939; G. Manacorda, *Il bolscevismo*, 4th ed., Florence 1942, p. 84 sq.) cannot, however, without grave injustice, accuse all Jews. Whoever condemns a system or an organization cannot hate the persons who adhere to II. It may also be noted that “in point of fact the Jews, as a whole, today in the world occupied by the white race, wield an altogether excessive power” (H. Belloc, p. 148; E. Eberlin, p. 31 sq.). But the answer is obvious: “If a man cannot tolerate the contrast between the Jewish race and our own, or considers this race to possess energies that invariably defeat him in commercial competition, then let him refrain from entering into any alliance with Jews. It is the simplest system. But to meddle in Jewish commercial activity and then to be indignant at the results is unworthy” (H. Belloc, p. 107). A Catholic, however, cannot, on grounds of blood or race, shun Jews regenerated by Baptism, but must embrace them fraternally. As for the others, there can be no moral or religious defense except on the basis of understanding and love.
Only on these foundations, excluding every hatred of persons, is antisemitism permissible in the realm of ideas, aimed at vigilant protection of the religious-moral and social patrimony of Christianity (G. Gundlach, s.V. in *LThK*, I, col. 504 sg.). Such is the attitude of St. Thomas Aquinas: “No hostility, but defensive measures; freedom for the Jews, but protection for Christians” (S. Deploige, pp. 7, 14–23, 49–51). Thus, for example, the Hungarian law of 1926, which fixed the maximum Jewish student quota at 6.20 per cent in universities, may be considered just (P. Delattre, *L’organisation cathol. des universités en Hongrie*, in *Messager du Cœur de Jésus*, 69 [1920], pp. 203–300).
The Catholic Church, while imposing respect for the Jews, in order to prevent dangers and misunderstandings, advises Christians not to depart from their age-old tradition of caution: “both in the domain of faith and in that of the interior life, the differences between the two religions are such that there is no room for reciprocal interpenetration” (L. Escoula, p. 73; cf. J. Bonsirven, in *Etudes* 209 [1931, iv], p. 69). The Holy Office therefore condemned (25 March 1928) the association of the “Friends of Israel” because it “adopted a line of action and speech repugnant to the mind of the Church, to the Fathers of the Church, and to the sacred Liturgy itself” (*AAS*, 20 [1928], p. 104). More objective Jews justify this restraint on the part of Catholics (L. Pinsker, Th. Herzl, B. Lazare, E. Eberlin), which has nothing in common with the scornful “social antisemitism,” widespread from Poland to the United States, which aims to exclude the Jew, converted or not, from higher schools, certain clubs, or public offices (A. Siegfried, *Les États-Unis d’aujourd’hui*, Paris 1927, p. 25 sq.).
It is to be hoped that anti-Semitic hatred will disappear; but it is to be feared that it will remain, latent or violent, until the “Jewish question” is resolved, a question for which scholars and politicians, both Jewish and Christian, propose ingenious solutions, unfortunately discordant (assimilation, a national territory or “Zionism,” international protection of minorities). Meanwhile, Jewish authors A. L. Sacher (A History of Jews, 1930, p. 335) and E. Ovazza declare that nationalist Zionism gives ammunition to the anti-Semites. “The a. that arose after emancipation is definitive,” wrote Th. Herzl to Grand Rabbi Güdemann. The solution must come from the triumph of Christian brotherhood in the world, so that Jews are neither persecuted nor humiliated, pending their conversion to Christ (Rom. 11:20-32); every other plan seems illusory (L. Escoula, p. 75 ff.). As for the past, mutual wrongs should be forgotten; “the mutual recriminations should now cease, for it is these that make understanding difficult: they are the oil poured on the fire; hands must meet, and hearts must meet too, for the time of tribulation is not yet over” (Kalman Molnar to converted Jews, in Magyar Kurir, Rome edition, 15 Nov. 1947, p. 1).
Principles of violence, however they may be justified, are un-Christian. It must be a matter of concern to Catholics that Jews convert and live. There are many problems in today’s world, no less vital, concerning far more numerous peoples; yet the “Jewish question” is perhaps the gravest, because of the 17 million people involved; it is one of those most prone to confusion and abuse, since Judaism is both nation and religion. “As in past times, the eternal problem called the Jewish question agitates men even today. It remains unsolved like the squaring of the circle, with the difference that it continues to be the most burning problem among the problems of the day” (L. Pinsker, p. 23). To seek to “liquidate” it by the arbitrary use of force is a mad scheme, as well as a criminal undertaking.
On the medieval period: S. Deploige, S. Thomas et la question juive, Louvain 1897; M. Landrieux, L'Inquisition, Italian trans., Turin 1916, pp. 84-90; U. Benigni, Storia sociale della Chiesa, IV, I, Milan 1922, pp. 94-113; F. Murawski, Die Juden bei den Kirchenvätern und Scholastikern, Berlin 1925; G. Pearlson, Twelve Centuries of Jewish Persecution, Hull 1927; J. Parkes, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, A Study in Origins of Antisemitism, London 1934; W. Grau, Antisemitismus im Späten Mittelalter (1450 bis 1519), Munich 1934, 2nd ed. augm., Berlin 1930; M. Haller, La question juive dans le premier millénaire chrétien, in Revue d'histoire et de philosophie religieuses, 15 (1933), pp. 293-334; A. L. Williams, Adversus Judaeos: A Bird’s-Eye View of Christian Apologetic until the Renaissance, London 1935; H. T. Obbink, Middelmeesthe theologische antikultus en exegese van het O. Test., in Nieuwe Theologische Studiën, 20 (1937), pp. 77-87; P. Browe, Die Judenbekämpfung im Mittelalter, in Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie, 62 (1938), pp. 196-231, 349-84; id., Die Judenmission im Mittelalter und die Päpste (Miscellanea Historiae Pontificiae P. Univ. Gregor., VI, 8), Rome 1942; A. Viñayo González, S. Martín de León y su apologética antijudía, Madrid 1948.
On the modern period: 1) Works by Jews: Bernard-Lazare, L’Antisémitisme, son histoire et ses causes, Paris 1894, definitive ed. in 2 vols., 1934; id., Le Fumier de Job, 1912; G. Fox, Judaism, Christianity and the Modern Social Ideals, Fort Worth 1919; I. Breuer, Judenproblem, 4th ed., Frankfurt a.M. 1922; E. Eberlin, Les Juifs d’aujourd’hui, Paris 1927; E. Fleg, Pourquoi je suis juif, Paris 1928; B. Hagani, L’émancipation des Juifs, Paris 1928; B. Jacob, M. Balaban et al., A. in Enciclopedia Judaica, II (1928), cols. 956-1104; E. Ovazza, Sionismo bifronte, Rome 1935; H. J. Schoeps, Jüdisch-christliches Religionsgespräch in 19 Jahrhunderten, Geschichte einer theologischen Verständigung, Berlin 1936; L. Pinsker, Auto-emancipazione ebraica (1882), reissued by D. Lattes and M. Beilinson, Rome 1938; M. Samuel, The Great Hatred, New York 1940; E. Orvieto, Intorno alla questione ebraica, Lineamenti di storia e di dottrina, Rome 1942; J. Trachtenberg, The Devil and the Jews, The Medieval Conception of the Jew and Its Relation to Modern Antisemitism, New Haven 1943; J.-P. Sartre, Réflexions sur la question juive (Italian trans.), Milan 1948.
2) Works by Christians: L. Chiarini, Théorie du Judaisme appliquée à la réforme des Israélites de tous les pays d’Europe, 2 vols., Paris 1830; H. Delassus, La question juive, Lille 1911; L. Besse, Les religions laïques, Paris 1913, pp. 101-115; F. Vernet, Juifs et chrétiens, in Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, II, 165-176; id., Juifs (Controverses avec les), in Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, VIII, cols. 1870-1914; A. Bea, Antisemitism, Rassentheorie und Altes Testament, in Stimmen der Zeit, 100 (1920), pp. 171-83; R. Lambelin, Le règne d’Israël chez les Anglo-Saxons, Paris 1921; J. et J. Tharaud, Quand Israël est roi, ibid. 1921; id., Quand Israël n’est plus roi, ibid. 1934; id., Le chemin d’Israël, ibid. 1948; G. Batault, Le problème juif, ibid. 1921; id., Israël contre les nations, ibid. 1939; R. N. Coudenhove-Kalergi, Das Wesen des Antisemitismus, 1923 (critique by Th. Fritsch); H. Belloc, The Jews, London 1924, Italian trans., Gli ebrei, Milan 1934; Fr. Steffen, Antisemitismus und deutsch-völkische Bewegung im Lichte des Katholizismus, Berlin 1925; G. K. Chesterton, La nouvelle Jérusalem (French trans.), Paris 1926, pp. 267-302; L. Thieben, Che cos’è l’Ebraismo? (1930), Italian trans.
ITAL, Milan 1937, pp. 16-33, 189-230; L. Escoula, Quelques aspects du problème juif, in Revue Apologétique, 52 (1931, 1), pp. 53-76; J. Bonisviren, Racismes, in Études (1934, 1), pp. 351-367; id., Y-a-t-il en France un réveil de l'Antisémitisme?, ibid. (1935, 1), pp. 97-116, 226-38; id., Juifs et chrétiens, Paigri 1936; id., Les Juifs et Jésus, 1937, pp. 170-205; id., Problèmes juifs et le mystère d'Israël, in Études (1938, 1), pp. 81-85; E. Rosa, La questione giudaica e l'antisemitismo nazional-socialista, in La Civiltà Catt., (1934, 1), pp. 126-36, 276-85; G. Kittel, Die Judenfrage, 3rd ed., Stuttgart 1935; L. Massoulié, Judaisme et hilelisme, Paigri 1935; A. Drexel, Die Judenfrage in wissenschaftlicher Beleuchtung, Innsbruck 1936; L. de Poncin, La misère internationale juive, Paigri 1936; L. J. Levinger, Anti-Semitism Yesterday and Tomorrow, New York 1936; P. Claudel and J. Bonisviren, Les Juifs, Paigri 1937; W. Eichrodt, Anti-semitismus in alter und neuer Zeit, Zurich 1937; G. Sottochiesa, Sotto la maschera d'Israele, Milan 1937; P. Orano, Gli ebrei in Italia, Rome 1937 (2nd ed., 1 vol. 1938); M. Barbera, La questione giudaica e il sionismo. La questione giudaica e le conversioni. La questione giudaica e l'apostolato cattolico, in La Civiltà Catt., (1937, 1), pp. 418-31, 407-510; (1937, 1), pp. 27-30; J. Parkes, The Jew and his Neighbour. A Study of the cause of Anti-Semitism, London 1938; B. Hartmann, Der Glaubensgegenstand zwischen Juden und Christentum, Paderborn 1938; A. Leroy-Beaulieu, Les Juifs et l'antisémitisme. Israël chez les nations, 16th ed. (1st vol., ed. L. Romer), Paigri 1938; R. Tritoni, L'antisemitismo risorgente e la Palestina, in Oriente Moderno, 18 (1938), pp. 255-271; V. Eichstädt, Bibliographie zur Geschichte der Judenfrage, I (1750-1848), Hamburg 1938; H. De Vries de Heekelingen, Israël, son passé, son avenir, Paigri 1937 (Italian trans., Rome 1937); id., L'orgueil juif, 1 vol. 1938; id., Juifs et Catholiques, 1 vol. 1939; id., L'antisemitismo italiano, Florence 1939; L. J. Dantinne, La question juive, Liège 1939; J. Maritain, Antisemitismo, London 1939; C. Cecchelli, La questione ebraica e il sionismo, Rome 1939; G. E. Closen, «Quaestio Judaeorum» quam aiunt effatis S. Scripturae illustratur, in Verbum Domini, 19 (1939), pp. 129-177; J. E. Ross, Catholics and Anti-Semitism, in Ecclesia, Review, 100 (1939), pp. 416-21; A. Amsee, Die Judenfrage, Lucerne 1939; L. Rood, En steeds het problem: de Joden, in Studiën, 133 (1940), pp. 360-82; D. Goldstein, Jewish Panorama, Boston 1940, pp. 111-29; J. Meinville, El judío, 2nd ed., Buenos Aires 1940; W. Grundmann (et al.), Germanentum, Christentum und Judentum, 3 vols., Leipzig 1940, 1942 and 1943; E. Picard, Synthèse de l'antisémitisme, new ed., Brussels 1941; G. Preziosi, Giudaismo, Bolescovo, Plutocrazia, Mussolini, Milan 1941, pp. 19-51; W. Grau, Weltkampf. Die Judenfrage in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 2 vols., Munich 1941; Ch. Journet, Vues chrétiennes sur la politique, Montreal 1942, ch. 10; K. S. Pinson (et al.), Essays on Antisemitism, New York 1942; E. Zolli, L'antisemitismo, Rome 1943; P. Cartice (et al.), Situation d'Israël, Judaisme et christianisme, Antisémitisme, Sionisme (Coll. «Catholicité»), Lille 1948.