Replies

You avoided my question,

False statement on your part

The Reformation and the consequent strictness in enforcing the censorship of books reacted on the condition of the Jews in so far as converts from Judaism eagerly displayed their zeal for their new faith by denouncing rabbinical literature, and especially the Talmud, as hostile to Christianity. Consequently Pope Julius III. issued an edict which demanded the burning of the Talmud (1553) and prohibited the printing of it by Christians. In Rome a great many copies were publicly burned (Sept. 9, 1553). The worst was yet to come. Paul IV. (1555-59), in his bull "Cum nimis absurdum" (July 12, 1555), not only renewed all canonical restrictions against the Jews—as those prohibiting their practising medicine among Christians, employing Christian servants, and the like—but he also restricted them in their commercial activity, forbade them to have more than one synagogue in any city, enforced the wearing of the yellow hat, refused to permit a Jew to be addressed as "signor," and finally decreed that they should live in a ghetto. The last measure was carried out in Rome with unrelenting cruelty.

should Julius III be declared an anti-pope for his Nazi-like order to burn Jewish property?

No, I don't think so; perhaps you (or I) don't understand the term anti-pope. He should be judged by King Messiah for what he did and did not do, just as I posted previously with Matthew, Catholic chapter twenty five.