Selections of Pope Leo XII’s writings on the Jews

Research note: Pope Leo XII (born Annibale Francesco della Genga, 2 August 1760 – 10 February 1829) was one of the most restrictive popes regarding Jewish life in the modern era. His most overtly anti-Jewish actions were enacted through civil edicts of the Papal States in 1826, which reinstated the Roman Ghetto, stripped Jews of property rights, forbade them from leaving the ghetto without a written permit, forbade familiar conversation with Christians, and reimposed compulsory missionary conversion sermons. These measures were administrative acts of the Papal States government rather than formal pontifical documents (bulls, encyclicals, or motu proprios), and are therefore not found in the Vatican’s official register of Leo XII’s papal writings. They would be located in the civil records of the Papal States — the Archivio di Stato di Roma — and are discussed at length in David Kertzer, The Popes Against the Jews (Knopf, 2001). Note: The Motu Proprio “I Gloriosi Nostri” (14 November 1826), which appears on Vatican.va within Leo XII’s documents for that year, was previously assumed to be this anti-Jewish edict, but upon direct examination of its text it proves to be an entirely unrelated administrative reorganization of charitable shelters (Conservatorii) for poor girls in Rome. It contains no reference to Jews. This file therefore focuses on the passages available in verified English translation from his encyclicals and bulls, which contain supersessionism, theological exclusivism, and historically anti-Jewish tropes.

I. Supersessionism — Quod Hoc Ineunte (Bull, 24 May 1824)

This Jubilee proclamation frames the Mosaic law of the Jewish people as a mere “harbinger” of the Christian dispensation, which it claims to supersede and fulfill:

“The old law, a harbinger of the future, had already set aside every fiftieth year among the Jewish people. If indeed sold fields and the goods which had fallen into the hands of others were then restored, we now receive back through the infinite liberality of God the virtues, merits, and gifts lost by sin. If the human law of servitude then ceased, now, with the yoke of diabolical domination cast off, we are recalled into the freedom of the sons of God, namely into that liberty which Christ himself gave us. If, finally, by provision of that law debts were cancelled, we are likewise absolved from the more serious debts of sin and the punishments for them.”

— Quod Hoc Ineunte, §2 (24 May 1824)

Note: This is a textbook instance of Christian supersessionism. The entire Jewish jubilee institution is presented as a type or foreshadowing, now wholly replaced by the Christian sacramental economy. The Mosaic law is thereby rendered obsolete.

II. Supersessionism — Quo Graviora (Apostolic Constitution, 13 March 1825)

In this bull condemning Freemasonry and secret societies, Leo XII appropriates the biblical title “House of Israel” exclusively for the Catholic Church, displacing the Jewish people as the covenant community:

“We, therefore, who have been constituted as the Guardian of the House of Israel, which is Holy Church, and who in accord with Our Pastoral Office ought to beware lest the Lord’s flock divinely entrusted to Us suffer any harm, consider in a case so serious that We cannot abstain from repressing the filthy undertakings of men.”

— Quo Graviora, §3 (13 March 1825)

Note: The identification of the Church as “the House of Israel” — with no remainder of that title for the Jewish people — is rooted in the Adversus Judaeos tradition of patristic and medieval theology. It denies the Jewish people any continuing covenantal identity.

III. Theological Exclusivism / No Salvation Outside the Church — Ubi Primum (Encyclical, 5 May 1824)

Leo XII’s first encyclical explicitly teaches that no non-Catholic religion — including, by necessary implication, Judaism — can lead to salvation:

“It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth Itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members. By divine faith we hold one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and that no other name under heaven is given to men except the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth in which we must be saved. This is why we profess that there is no salvation outside the Church.”

— Ubi Primum, §14 (5 May 1824)

Note: The doctrine extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (“outside the Church there is no salvation”) as stated here explicitly excludes Judaism from any salvific standing. This theological position directly underpinned the Church’s policy of compulsory conversion sermons imposed on Roman Jews.

IV. Condemnation of Religious Indifferentism — Ubi Primum (Encyclical, 5 May 1824)

The encyclical condemns the Enlightenment idea that all religions are equally valid, including those — like Judaism — that “spurn the idea of divine revelation”:

“A certain sect, which you surely know, has unjustly arrogated to itself the name of philosophy, and has aroused from the ashes the disorderly ranks of practically every error. Under the gentle appearance of piety and liberality this sect professes what they call tolerance or indifferentism. It preaches that not only in civil affairs, which is not Our concern here, but also in religion, God has given every individual a wide freedom to embrace and adopt without danger to his salvation whatever sect or opinion appeals to him on the basis of his private judgment.”

— Ubi Primum, §12 (5 May 1824)

“The current indifferentism has developed to the point of arguing that everyone is on the right road. This includes not only all those sects which though outside the Catholic Church verbally accept revelation as a foundation, but those groups too which spurn the idea of divine revelation and profess a pure deism or even a pure naturalism.”

— Ubi Primum, §13 (5 May 1824)

Note: By condemning the principle that Jews and Christians may worship freely without legal hierarchy between their faiths, this encyclical provided the theological rationale for the civil restrictions Leo XII imposed on the Jewish population of the Papal States.

V. Anti-Usury Passage (Historically Coded Anti-Jewish Trope) — Charitate Christi (Encyclical, 25 December 1825)

While Jews are not named explicitly, the denunciation of money-lenders in this pastoral context carries the full historical weight of the Adversus Judaeos tradition. Canon law had for centuries forbidden Christians from practicing usury while simultaneously restricting Jews to that occupation as one of their only permitted trades — then using it to vilify them:

“Move zealously against the injustice of money lenders, who, as the Roman catechism says, plunder the people and kill them with usury, for this evil has grown strong in present times.”

— Charitate Christi, §18 (25 December 1825)

Note: This trope must be read in the context of the Roman Ghetto, where Jews were legally permitted to engage in moneylending precisely because it was forbidden to Catholics, and where they were then subject to social hostility for doing so.

VI. Civil Edict of 1826 Restricting Jews — Archival Note

The measures by which Leo XII reimposed anti-Jewish restrictions in 1826 were not promulgated as formal pontifical documents. They took the form of civil edicts of the Papal States administration and are therefore not present in the Vatican’s register of Leo XII’s papal writings. Based on historical scholarship, these edicts:

  • Reinstated the walls and gates of the Roman Ghetto
  • Forbade Jews from owning property, requiring forced sale within a limited period
  • Forbade Jews from leaving the ghetto without a written permit from the Criminal Tribunal
  • Forbade Jews from speaking “familiarly” with Christians while outside the ghetto
  • Re-imposed compulsory attendance at Catholic missionary conversion sermons
  • Reimposed restrictions on Jewish occupations

No direct quotation is offered here, as no verified English translation of the original civil edict text has been located in the published scholarly literature. The Motu Proprio “I Gloriosi Nostri” (14 November 1826), which appears on Vatican.va and was initially a candidate for this legislation, was examined in full and contains no reference to Jews — it is an administrative reorganization of charitable institutions for poor girls.

Where to find the primary source