There was this which many RCs like to overlook.
*****
68. Jews appearing in public
A difference of dress distinguishes Jews or Saracens from Christians in some provinces, but in others a certain confusion has developed so that they are indistinguishable. Whence it sometimes happens that by mistake Christians join with Jewish or Saracen women, and Jews or Saracens with christian women. In order that the offence of such a damnable mixing may not spread further, under the excuse of a mistake of this kind, we decree that such persons of either sex, in every christian province and at all times, are to be distinguished in public from other people by the character of their dress — seeing moreover that this was enjoined upon them by Moses himself, as we read. They shall not appear in public at all on the days of lamentation and on passion Sunday; because some of them on such days, as we have heard, do not blush to parade in very ornate dress and are not afraid to mock Christians who are presenting a memorial of the most sacred passion and are displaying signs of grief. What we most strictly forbid however, is that they dare in any way to break out in derision of the Redeemer. We order secular princes to restrain with condign punishment those who do so presume, lest they dare to blaspheme in any way him who was crucified for us, since we ought not to ignore insults against him who blotted out our wrongdoings.
69. Jews not to hold public offices
It would be too absurd for a blasphemer of Christ to exercise power over Christians. We therefore renew in this canon, on account of the boldness of the offenders, what the council of Toledo providently decreed in this matter : we forbid Jews to be appointed to public offices, since under cover of them they are very hostile to Christians. If, however, anyone does commit such an office to them let him, after an admonition, be curbed by the provincial council, which we order to be held annually, by means of an appropriate sanction. Any official so appointed shall be denied commerce with Christians in business and in other matters until he has converted to the use of poor Christians, in accordance with the directions of the diocesan bishop, whatever he has obtained from Christians by reason of his office so acquired, and he shall surrender with shame the office which he irreverently assumed. We extend the same thing to pagans.
Fourth Council of the Lateran
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum12-2.htm
All of these extra ecumenical councils ARE the problem!
“Papal Councils” and their fake authority have ruined the
majesty and holiness of the Latin Church. No bishop has the
authority to supersede the all-agreed-upon seven Ecumenical
Councils, even the Bishop of Rome.
Was there no truth to this?
We often hear that Christians were hostile to Jews, but were Jews never hostile to Christians? If Jews were required to be wary of Christians, were Christians never required to be wary of Jews? Was the antagonism always one-sided?
Nah, any Catholic who knows history doesn’t overlook these.
These are emphatically not doctrinal, but more local/temporal.
Are they bad in today’s sense? You betcha - very bad
Were they bad in the 1215s? No. It does say that “a blasphemer of Christ should not exercise power over Christians” - which, considering what the Talmud says about Jesus, is pretty mild.
However these oppressive measures are not “die or convert” as was the norm of the centuries right until the 19th or 20th in Europe/NordeAmerica
If you wish to judge people of 800 years ago by today, I assume you also are among those who condemn any founding fathers who may have had slaves at some point in their lives?