The Faculty of Reading and Retaining Prohibited Books

988. • QUESTION 4. From whom must permission to read prohibited books be obtained?

Reply. Ordinarily speaking, from the Roman Pontiff alone, or from the Congregations of the Sacred Inquisition or of the Index. For the faculty of permitting belongs to him whose office it is to forbid. Bishops, however, are sometimes delegated to this office. Viva judges that they can grant this permission when some necessity urges.

Bishops and other Ordinaries of Churches possess the power of prohibiting the reading of depraved books, and indeed even under penalty of a censure to be incurred. Leo XII recalled this power to the memory of Bishops on 26 March 1825, and Pius IX more recently confirmed it on 24 August 1864, when he commanded Bishops to discharge this duty as by delegation of the Apostolic See.

Moreover, since in a matter so grave and difficult far more things would have to be said than the brevity of our work permits, we refer the reader to the Canonists.

Argument of the chapter

After the prohibitions have been reviewed, there is suitably joined the tempering of a faculty which removes the obstacle of positive law, but by no means of natural law. For the law is not simply: Do not read; but, do not read without a faculty.

Books proscribed either by special Decrees or by these General Decrees, only those will be able to read and retain who have obtained opportune faculties from the Apostolic See, or from those to whom it has delegated its functions.

Universal necessity of having a faculty

95. 1. Since the article permits only those to read or retain proscribed books who have obtained a legitimate faculty, it makes the same faculty universally necessary.

From this necessity no grade is excepted: since Cardinals themselves obtain the faculty for themselves; nor doctrine or science, as P. Hilgers proves broadly.¹ To declare immune as many as, for example, excel in all sciences or in some, would be a matter full of danger and confusion, and alien from ecclesiastical tradition, while the obedience of the more learned is especially salutary to themselves and to others.

Nor should you argue from the moral security which those doctors enjoy. Even if we have conceded this, this remains: that the law is not taken away because its reason has ceased negatively in only a particular case.

Nor should you bring forward inconvenience. For as long as there is an opportunity of seeking permission, an inconvenience by which you would be excused from the law cannot be alleged.

Moral necessity excuses from the law in a particular case

2. Yet actual exceptions from the law, if at any time, from an assumed office, a moral necessity presses you to read some condemned work, seem able to be admitted even without any faculty having been sought, provided, as is clear, proximate danger of sin is avoided.² In this necessity there can be: a judge, an advocate in a forensic controversy; a person to whom specially, from article 27, it belongs to make denunciation, for denouncing a certain book; an ecclesiastical superior, for examining and reprobating this book; a writer of a Catholic newspaper, for responding promptly; a youth who, for hearing lectures which he lawfully attends, or for making an examination in a philosophical matter or in letters, is compelled to use uncorrected texts; and, according to Hollweck,³ probably also a professor of moral theology, insofar as it is necessary that he know in some manner obscene books, for which a faculty is not conceded. For in these cases the license of reading is contained in the faculty itself of exercising such an office; or the end of the law can be said to cease contrarily and there is place for epikeia. For it ceases contrarily, as Lugo explains diffusely,⁴ when the common good itself demands that the bond of the law be removed in a particular case. Moreover it is for the republic that pious and Catholic men not be prohibited from exercising offices and duties. Cf. Hollweck, Génicot.⁵

What of grave utility?

The end of the law also ceases contrarily if grave utility has demanded that you do something prohibited in itself, and there is no opportunity of approaching the superior for license. They give the case of a disputation with a heretic, if, in order to convert him, it is necessary for you to show contradiction in a heretical author, and you have hope of fruit. Laymann, cited place, tract 1, chapter 15, n. 5.

But the reason of attacking heretics in general does not suffice, since the opportunity of asking license is at hand, and the common good requires that you not dispense yourself by your own private judgment. Cf. Lugo, cited place, n. 66; Arndt, pp. 259, 260, n. 185.

¹ Der Index, pp. 47-59.

² Yet they will do better, if it can be done, to obtain license; indeed Pennacchi, n. 61, seems to require this.

³ Cited work, pp. 32, 33, note 1.

⁴ De Fide, distinction 21, nn. 63-66.

⁵ Hollweck, cited work, pp. 32, 33, note 1; Génicot, cited work, I, 452, 4.

For granting licenses of reading and retaining any prohibited books whatever, the Roman Pontiffs have set over the Sacred Congregation of the Index. Nevertheless, the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office enjoys the same power, and also the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide for regions subject to its rule. For the City only, this faculty also belongs to the Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace.

How widely the faculty of the Sacred Congregations of the Index and of the Holy Office extends

95 bis. 1. a) The Sacred Congregations of the Index and of the Holy Office possess the power, circumscribed by no place, of granting permission for the reading of prohibited books.

Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide

b) That which the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide has is circumscribed to regions subject to its rule. Yet observe that there are certain other regions, for example Belgium, whose bishops have customarily obtained habitual faculties from the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide.

Master of the Sacred Palace

c) Finally, the power of the Master of the Sacred Palace¹ is conceded to him for the City.

Use of the faculty outside the territory of the one granting

2. Come now: those territorial restrictions regard the faculty itself of granting, but not the use of the faculty granted. For the faculty falls into a personal privilege, which it is lawful to use everywhere, and for the time for which it is legitimately granted.²

Wherefore, unless an express restriction has been made, both the Dutchman to whom the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide and the inhabitant of the City to whom the Master of the Sacred Palace have permitted readings of prohibited books can read the books in any places whatever.³

Indeed C. Gennari and Ciolli, on this article, teach that the faculty perseveres in itself even in him who has changed domicile.

¹ This is the name of one of the more outstanding Prelates of the City, who is present with the Cardinal Prefect of the Index in council and exercises the office of censor in the City. He is always chosen in the Dominican family, and now has the name Reverend Father F. Albert Lepidi.

² Cf. Suarez, De Legibus, book 8, chapter 26, nn. 12 and 15; Schmalzgrueber, on book 5, title 33, n. 113.

³ Albitius, De inconstantia in fide, chapter 30, defends the contrary opinion, but his arguments seem either never to have force, or at most under an antiquated regime. And he undeservedly appeals to Suarez, De Legibus, book 8, chapter 86, n. 8, where the eminent Doctor merely holds that a faculty for reading books in another region prohibited by particular law cannot be made by the senate of one region.

Bishops and other Prelates possessing jurisdiction as if episcopal can grant license for individual books, and only in urgent cases. But if the same have obtained from the Apostolic See a general faculty, so that they can impart to the faithful license of reading and retaining proscribed books, let them grant it only with selection and from a just and reasonable cause.

Force of the article

1. This article treats of Bishops and of Prelates who possess jurisdiction as if episcopal. It concedes to them a certain ordinary power for permitting the reading of individual books; and it admonishes them concerning the right use of the broader faculties which have customarily been delegated to them. Hence there are two Parts of the article.

Which Prelates possess this faculty

96. 2. Prelates to whom quasi-episcopal jurisdiction belongs are Nuncios,¹ Apostolic Vicars, Capitular Vicars, and Superiors of exempt Regulars, both Generals and Provincials, and also, as is probable, Locals,² provided they truly preside over a convent or monastery. Thus Guardians of the Friars Minor; Priors of the Friars Preachers; Provincials, Rectors, Vice-Rectors of the Society of Jesus, and Superiors of houses which are of their own right. But not Ministers, nor Priors who are subject to an Abbot.³

The same power belongs to the Vicar General, not as to a Prelate, but insofar as he exercises episcopal jurisdiction as one judge with the Bishop.

What power has been conceded to them

3. To these Prelates an ordinary power is made of conceding license, for individual books, and only in urgent cases.

For individual books

For individual books, strictly, would signify for certain books designated individually, and not by some general reason of books, for example, which might be useful for making this lucubration. Yet because the faculty can be taken broadly, a sufficiently special designation seems to suffice so as to contract the faculty to a few books, provided the other condition of an urgent cause is observed.

In urgent cases

In urgent cases only. A case will urge if a just cause of reading suffers no delay necessary for Roman recourse.⁴

But the cause ought not to be of so great necessity that it excuses from the law; but we seem able to be content with notable utility, on account of which a general license would deservedly be given by a competent Superior; indeed with less, since there is less danger in the reading of one individual book. Suppose, for example, that a rare occasion is offered of reading a book which is indeed prohibited but useful for studies.

It can be delegated

Since this power is ordinary, it can be delegated to Deans, Parish Priests, and Confessors themselves (for whom it will often be useful to have it).

It extends to obscene books

It is not circumscribed by object, so that, if nevertheless a just cause underlies it, it comprises a book obscene of set purpose.⁵

¹ The principle from which they could regularly do those things "which the Ordinary could do in his diocese" seems sufficiently to have force for this use. Pirhing and Schmalzgrueber on book 1, title 30, n. 4.

² Cf. Vermeersch, De Religiosis, etc., t. 1, n. 412.

³ The distinguished Pennacchi, A. S. S., n. 63, p. 385, whom Ciolli, n. 59, still follows, undeservedly excludes from use of this faculty all regular Prelates whose authority, circumscribed to monks, is not exercised over some people. He gives as reason that, in the latter part of article 25, the Legislator sets down the case in which Prelates of this sort have obtained from the Holy See the faculty of imparting to the faithful license of reading and retaining prohibited books. Therefore the Prelates must be understood only as those who would have faithful. But by the name of faithful there come only "secular men and those living in the lay state." But what prevents some expression in the two sentences from being taken in a sense accommodated to each sentence? Therefore in the former sentence, Prelates possessing jurisdiction as if episcopal will be all who are accustomed to come under this name; in the latter they will be those who "de facto" have faithful. Besides, why say more? Even if this article did not include regular Prelates in express words, it was not fitting to pass over the Constitution Romani Pontificis circumspecta of St. Pius V, which universally disposes: "The Regular Prelates themselves, by themselves, can do altogether the same toward Brothers and Nuns ... subject to them, which Bishops can do toward clerics and laymen subject to them, both as regards faculties of absolving and dispensing of this sort and as regards any other faculties whatsoever, by the same authority and tenor, even perpetually we concede and indulge, and also declare." That this Constitution still has force, Piat, Prael. Iur. regul., t. 2, p. 87, note 2, shows. This concession plainly suffices in the present species. Cf. also the general principle in Suarez, De Relig., tract 8, book 2, chapter 12. On the matter also very well Wernz, cited place, n. 111, note 78.

⁴ To Roman recourse, I say. For just as concerning reserved cases, so concerning this matter the impediment seems able to be estimated with respect to him who has the ordinary faculty, that is, in the case, with respect to the Holy See. Therefore the said superiors will enjoy the faculty of an urgent case although opportunity is at hand of approaching a Bishop furnished with a delegated faculty.

⁵ Nordin, Summa theol. mor., n. 694, note.

Faculties delegated by the Holy See

97. Greater faculties are sometimes delegated by the Apostolic See to the same Prelates, by which they are permitted to concede to their subjects a general faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books.

Concerning the right interpretation of those faculties, these things occur to be observed.

Interpretation

a) These faculties are to be interpreted broadly.

Communication with successor and by delegation

b) From the new discipline introduced through the Decree of November 24, 1897, these faculties, which are conceded for a certain space of years, if they are handed to Bishops, also pertain to Vicars General; if they are given to Ordinaries of places, or to Superior Generals of Regular Orders, they pass (in the state in which they were) to their successors, substituted in their place by stable or passing title; and, from the decree of December 14, 1898, they are in themselves delegable.¹

Use in favor of themselves

c) Bishops can concede the faculty to themselves by force of the obtained Indult, since the act pertains to voluntary jurisdiction.²

And of Regulars

c) Bishops seem able to use those faculties which they have obtained in favor of Regulars, lest the favor of exemption yield to their detriment.³

Limits of a temporal faculty

d) Unless the formula restricts the power, the Bishop can make the permission perpetual. But if he cannot give perpetual permission, he does not seem to exceed his power if he gives the faculty until revocation. For this is numbered among temporal faculties.

What if the indult is temporary

But by no means must he circumscribe the faculties which he concedes by the same time by which he himself has the faculty of conceding. For it is well conceived that for a quinquennium a faculty is given to someone of giving even perpetual licenses; and there is no reason why you should restrict to the time of the indult the time of the faculty granted by force of the indult. Otherwise, a Bishop who obtained a quinquennial indult four years earlier could now make a faculty only for one year; and he whose indult would expire after a month could permit reading only for a month. Doctors adhere to our interpretation and the style of the Sacred Congregation of the Index accords with it.⁴

Yet this must be understood in itself. For in the Indult the time can be expressly defined beyond which permission cannot be conceded; and the present mind of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide⁵ seems to understand indults conceded by it in that manner which in itself we reject.

e) The modes and limits which are prescribed in the indult must be well observed.⁶

And so, in the use of the Indult the apostolic authority by force of which the faculty is conceded must be recalled.

The faculty must be conceded altogether gratis.

The power is not accustomed to extend to all books to be conceded, but certain ones designated by name, or certain classes of books, are excepted.⁷ For example, delegation is never given for permitting books obscene of set purpose.

Often, especially for books against Religion, Bishops can concede the faculty only to those persons who are furnished with a certain quality.

While it is always required that Bishops concede this permission only with selection, or with prudent discretion of persons and circumstances, and from a just and reasonable cause (article 25), the cause itself is sometimes indicated taxatively: "for the effect of attacking them (heretics)." Cf. n. 98, 5.

The form of the Indult which the Sacred Congregation of the Index grants to Bishops is this:

Most ample and Reverend Lord,

Our Most Holy Lord Pius Pope X, kindly receiving the suppliant prayers by which Your Amplitude asked the faculty of permitting to the Christian faithful committed to your pastoral care the reading of books prohibited by the Apostolic See, committed to this Sacred Congregation of the Index that it should impart to You, concerning whose religion, doctrine, and piety he has very great confidence, the aforesaid faculty, namely of conceding to the faithful of Your diocese, from a just and reasonable cause, license of reading and retaining prohibited books, with certain laws and conditions nevertheless preserved, until ...

Wherefore you can concede:

1°. To upright and learned men only, license of reading and retaining any books whatever (and periodicals) prohibited by the Apostolic See, excepting those which defend heresy or schism, or overturn the very foundations of religion; whose reading you can permit only to those whom you know to be more outstanding in doctrine, piety, and zeal for the faith; but you shall permit to no one the reading of books treating obscene things of set purpose.

2°. To youths who in public schools, gymnasia, lyceums, academies apply themselves to studies, you can similarly concede license of reading and retaining, for as long as they are placed in that necessity, books proscribed by the same Apostolic See which by command of lay power they are compelled to have at hand.

But the aforesaid licenses are to be conceded gratis under any title whatever, and without any emolument to be received by Your episcopal curia, under penalty of nullity; and in each letter of concession express mention must be made of the Apostolic faculty.

In faith of which, etc.

Given at Rome, from the Secretariat of the Sacred Congregation of the Index, on the ... day of the month ... in the year ...

To the Most Ample and Reverend Lord

Lord ...

¹ Some have been deceived by the prior law, for example Hilgers, p. 31, note 2, who deny that these faculties can be delegated.

² Sleutjes, De prohibitione, p. 32.

³ Vermeersch, De Religiosis, I, n. 382.

⁴ Zitelli, Apparatus iuris eccl., p. 541, note; Arndt, cited work, p. 252; Wernz, cited work, n. 111, note 79; Hilgers, cited work, p. 31, note 2.

⁵ The clause in the diocese is taken by the same Sacred Congregation in such a way that, when the faculty is made, the Bishop conceding it and the subject to whom he concedes it must both be present in the diocese.

⁶ The Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide has a longer Instruction, which we have copied in the fourth part of this work.

⁷ At least expressly. For in n. 2° of the formula just recited no books are excluded.

All who have obtained an apostolic faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books cannot on that account read and retain any books whatever, or periodicals proscribed by Ordinaries of places, unless in the apostolic indult there has been made to them express power of reading and retaining books condemned by whomsoever. Moreover, let those who have obtained license of reading prohibited books remember that they are held by a grave precept to guard books of this sort in such a way that they do not come into the hands of others.

Division of the article into two parts

We shall imitate the disposition of the article itself, if in the former Part we illustrate by certain notes the faculties of reading and retaining books, but in the other we declare the manner to be observed by all who are permitted to read prohibited works.

An apostolic faculty does not permit books prohibited by Bishops

98. 1. The Holy See does not lack the power of permitting someone books prohibited by Ordinaries, but the intention or will is lacking unless the indult gives express permission of reading and retaining books condemned by whomsoever. This clause is contained in no general formula. Therefore the Holy See is accustomed to act here in the same way as when it gives a faculty in reserved cases. Cases which the Bishop has reserved to himself have not customarily been contained by an apostolic faculty.

By their ordinary power

But this holds concerning episcopal proscription as it is a diocesan decree, not however as it is borne from delegated power. For the Holy See itself is judged to act through its delegate. Hence books proscribed by a delegate as such are judged condemned by apostolic authority. Wherefore the faculty of reading books disapproved by the Holy See must consequently comprehend these.

Corollary

Therefore exempt persons, for example regulars, if you contend that they are held by the prohibitions of bishops insofar as delegated faculty has been conceded to these,¹ will be able, once an apostolic indult has been obtained, actually to read works proscribed by Bishops.

One who can read a book can in itself retain it

2. The faculty of reading books seems in itself to comprise the faculty of preserving the same, yet circumscribed by the same limits. Wherefore, if the reading has been conceded only for a passing act, or if the one has permitted it who enjoys power only for an urgent case, a distinct faculty must be sought for habitual preservation, all the more because sufficient time is at hand to obtain it.

One who can read books can also read periodicals

2. The faculty of reading prohibited books comprises the faculty of reading periodicals. For attention is turned less severely to periodicals than to books.² It is confirmed indirectly from our article 26. For while it denies that one who has the apostolic faculty of reading books can read books or periodicals proscribed by Ordinaries of places, it indirectly says that periodicals condemned by the Apostolic See can in themselves be read by him.

But, on the contrary, the faculty of reading periodicals cannot be understood concerning books.

Clauses: excepting books against Religion

3. The clause, excepting books of set purpose against Religion, seems able to be understood concerning books which with direct intention have been written against every religion.³

Of this sort are those which of set purpose try to demonstrate that every religion is harmful or false; or which of set purpose blaspheme God and every worship; but not those which reject positive religion in order to preach natural religion.

Or which overturn the foundations of religion

4. The exception of books which in any way overturn the foundations of religion excepts books which defend materialism, atheism, positivism.

What of the clause: "for the effect of attacking."

5. The concession is sometimes clothed with this clause: "for the effect of attacking them (bad writers)." All admit that this clause is to be interpreted benignly and without scruple.⁴ Indeed, according to a very probable opinion, those words indicate the reason why the exception has been made, not a condition to which the use of the conceded faculty is tied:⁵ so that it is justified by any right end whatever. This is confirmed from the fact that at the same time the Superior judged that the danger of perversion was not imminent for the dispensed person. St. Alphonsus.⁶ Thus Zitelli,⁷ Planchard,⁸ Génicot.⁹ This will hold much more if there is added: and as an aid to one's own office and honorable studies.

Use outside the diocese

6. Unless the use is clearly more circumscribed, you can use everywhere the faculty of reading books condemned by the Holy See, whether the Holy See itself directly, or the Bishop from delegated power, has made this permission for you. For here holds the rule concerning dispensation, according to which dispensation from commission and dispensation from ordinary power are in themselves contained by the same limits. Schmalzgrueber, on book 5, title 33, n. 111. With us is Sleutjes, De prohibitione, etc., p. 31.

Moreover, the clause: in such a way that books are not taken out of this diocese, does not seem in itself to have the force of prohibiting use outside the diocese, since it rather looks to this, that books not be introduced into another diocese in a stable manner, although he who is endowed with the faculty can read also there books occurring there or brought with him there.¹⁰

¹ Cf. above, part I, n. 64.

² Cf. Arndt, cited work, p. 223, n. 166; Pennacchi, cited work, n. 64; Ciolli, cited work, n. 55.

³ Cf. above, n. 92.

⁴ Cf. Heymans, cited work, n. 345.

⁵ A condition sine qua non is customarily indicated more clearly: otherwise not; not otherwise; otherwise the whole will be void. Zitelli, Apparatus, p. 541, note.

⁶ Book 7, n. 291.

⁷ Apparatus, p. 541, note.

⁸ Rev. Th. Fr., 1897, pp. 31, 32.

⁹ Cited work, I, 457.

¹⁰ For reading, in another diocese, books prohibited by the Bishop of that diocese, the faculty of another Bishop cannot benefit those who are bound by this episcopal law, such as those would be who acquired at least a quasi-domicile in another diocese. Against Heymans, cited work, n. 343, and De Brabandere, cited work, n. 136.

Precept of custody

99. Diligent custody is prescribed under grave guilt, yet its manner is not defined.

The guilt will be grave if negligence creates grave danger lest a proscribed book be read by those to whom it is prohibited under grave guilt.

Yet the manner is not defined. And so it is not prescribed that books be locked up with keys, although this caution is to be commended in libraries and sometimes will be the only one by which satisfaction is made to the law; but it suffices that it be morally established that the book will not be read by those to whom it is not lawful.

Come then, let Catholic and even ecclesiastical men, who for the best ends and with legitimate permission possess prohibited books in their Library, bear due solicitude concerning the destination of works of this sort after their death: lest through their negligence they then begin to harm others, when for their own good deeds they hope for eternal reward for themselves.

N.B. The formulas of faculties which are customarily conceded by the Sacred Congregation of the Index are contained below, in part four.

23. "Books proscribed either by special Decrees or by these general Decrees, only those will be able to read and retain who have obtained opportune faculties from the Apostolic See, or from those to whom it has delegated its powers."

See however what was said n. 454. The license of the Ordinary is not required so that someone can use a faculty obtained from the Holy See.

24. "For conceding licenses of reading and retaining any prohibited books whatever, the Roman Pontiffs placed over [this] the Sacred Congregation of the Index. Nevertheless the same power is enjoyed both by the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, and also by the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide for regions subject to its governance. For the City only, this faculty belongs also to the Master of the Apostolic Sacred Palace."

25. "Bishops and other Prelates possessing quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, for singular books, and only in urgent cases, can concede license. But if the same have obtained from the Apostolic See a general faculty, that they can impart to the faithful license of reading and retaining proscribed books, let them concede it only with selection and from a just and reasonable cause."

26. "All who have obtained an apostolic faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books cannot on that account read and retain any books whatever, or periodicals proscribed by Ordinaries of places, unless in the apostolic indult an express power has been given to them of reading and retaining books condemned by anyone whatever. Let those who have obtained license of reading prohibited books remember besides that they are held by grave precept so to guard books of this kind, that they do not come to the hands of others."

Our Most Holy Lord Pius X wished to recall this last article to the memory of all whom it concerns, in the Motu proprio Sacrorum Antistitum (A. A. S., II, p. 661).

775. To what precisely does the law of prohibition oblige? - The aforesaid laws oblige the faithful (not Cardinals, Bishops, Ordinaries according to can. 1401), and indeed under grave obligation, because the end of warding off from the faithful the danger which threatens from reading is more grave, and the law contributes much to this end; this is also clear from the penalties. Moreover, it obliges the faithful so that:

a) they are bound everywhere on earth (can. 1396), unless nevertheless in some place a special indult has been obtained;

b) even those for whom danger is not present are bound (can. 21);

c) and so that "without due permission a book can neither be published, nor read, nor retained, nor sold, nor translated into another language, nor communicated in any way with others" (can. 1398, § 1).

It cannot:

1. be published, that is, be made public, which is done by: the author if he handed over the book for the end that it be published; the publisher who cares for its dissemination; and the owner of the printing house who undertakes its printing; - yet probably not proofreaders or the printers themselves;

2. nor be read in the proper sense, which is done by those who, scanning a book with their own eyes, understand the things written; - but not by those who hear another reading, nor by those who recite from memory, nor by those who scan with their own eyes but do not understand because of ignorance of the language, nor probably by those who hear a reader whom they have induced to read by requests or by command.

Grave matter and mortal sin are present: a) by reason of quality, when a very depraved passage is read, or an article in newspapers, even if it comprises only one or another page; b) by reason of quantity, if someone reads indiscriminately all things, or a notable part of a writing of unknown nature, because he commonly exposes himself to great danger: what a notable part is is difficult to determine, whether 6, 10, or perhaps even 20 pages, according to the depravity or bulk of the writing and the gravity of the danger; but for newspapers it is the custom of reading; c) to read things which certainly are harmless, not only to the reader but by their nature and commonly to all, is venial, unless there is danger of contracting a habit and reading the rest; d) it is venial to read that which is prohibited only because it was published without approval;

3. nor be preserved, which is done by: the owner who keeps his own book with himself, even if he did so not for reading but for mere ornament, even if he does not understand the language; - by the depositary who keeps another's book with himself; - by the depositor who keeps his own book with another, provided he does not deposit it with an agreement not to reclaim it except after permission has been obtained; - yet not by the bookbinder (at least if it is not done for a long time), nor by the custodian or librarian, provided he does not remove the books and transfer them into his own house.

It is a grave sin to preserve one for a notable time, for example, for some weeks or for a month; but if someone is waiting for a suitable occasion of asking permission, the books can be retained somewhat longer;

4. nor be sold. Hence can. 1404: "Sellers of books are not to sell, lend, or retain books treating professedly of obscene matters; other prohibited books they are not to have for sale unless they have obtained due permission from the Apostolic See, nor are they to sell them to anyone unless they can prudently judge that they are lawfully sought by the purchaser." But those also sell who procure the book;

5. nor be translated into another language;

6. nor be communicated with others, for example, by propagating, lending, leasing, etc. (can. 1403, § 2).

I say. § 1. The right and office of prohibiting books for a just cause belongs not only to the supreme ecclesiastical authority for the universal Church, but also, for their subjects, to particular Councils and to local Ordinaries.

§ 2. From this prohibition recourse is given to the Holy See, but not with suspensive effect.

§ 3. Also the Abbot of a monastery of his own right and the supreme Moderator of an exempt clerical religion, with his Chapter or Council, can prohibit books to their subjects for a just cause; and the same, if there is danger in delay, other major Superiors with their own Council can do, yet under this condition, that they refer the matter as quickly as possible to the supreme Moderator (Can. 1395).

Indeed, the right and office of prohibiting books belongs to those upon whom it is incumbent to watch assiduously and to strive with every means that the integrity of faith and of Christian morals suffer no detriment. Nothing can be thought more pernicious than bad books for staining souls through contempt of religion and enticements to sin. Hence to the Holy See for the universal Church, to particular councils for their subjects, to Bishops for the diocese, to the Abbot of a monastery of his own right, and to the Supreme Moderator of an exempt clerical religion for his own, and to other major superiors if there is danger in delay, this right has been entrusted.

Question 1. Are books condemned by the Apostolic See prohibited everywhere?

Response. Books condemned by the Apostolic See are to be considered prohibited in every place and into whatever language they are translated (Can. 1396). - Cf. Leo XIII, Officiorum ac Munerum, n. 45; S. C. of the Index, 24 Aug. 1864.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1145, n. 117 bis.

Question 2. To whom chiefly does it belong to denounce pernicious books? To whom? In what manner are they to be denounced?

Response. § 1. It belongs to all the faithful, especially to clerics and those constituted in ecclesiastical dignity and those who excel in doctrine, to denounce books which they have judged pernicious to local Ordinaries or to the Apostolic See; but by a peculiar title this pertains to Legates of the Holy See, local Ordinaries, and Rectors of Catholic Universities.

§ 2. It is expedient that in the denunciation of bad books not only the title of the book be indicated, but also, as far as can be done, the reasons be set forth why the book is thought to have to be prohibited.

§ 3. For those to whom the denunciation is brought, let it be sacred to keep secret the names of those denouncing.

§ 4. Local Ordinaries, by themselves or, where there is need, through suitable priests, are to watch over books which are published in their own territory or are set out for sale.

§ 5. Books which require a more subtle examination, or concerning which the judgment of the supreme authority seems to be required for attaining a salutary effect, Ordinaries are to refer to the judgment of the Apostolic See (Can. 1397).

Question 3. What does the prohibition of books effect?

Response. § 1. The prohibition of books effects this, that without due license the book can neither be published, nor read, nor retained, nor sold, nor translated into another language, nor in any way communicated to others.

§ 2. A book prohibited in any manner whatever cannot again be brought to light unless, corrections having been made, he who had prohibited the book, or his Superior or successor, has given license (Can. 1398).

Publication, reading, retention, sale, translation, and communication of the book with others are prohibited without license.

Question 4. What books are prohibited by the law itself?

Response. By the law itself are prohibited:

1st. Editions of the original text and of the ancient Catholic versions of sacred Scripture, even of the Oriental Church, published by any non-Catholics whatever; likewise versions of the same into whatever language, prepared or published by the same;

2nd. Books of any writers whatever, defending heresy or schism, or striving in any way whatever to overthrow the foundations themselves of religion;

3rd. Books which deliberately attack religion or good morals;

4th. Books of any non-Catholics whatever which treat expressly of religion, unless it is established that nothing against the Catholic faith is contained in them;

5th. The books about which in can. 1385, § 1, n. 1 and can. 1391; likewise from those about which in the cited can. 1385, § 1, n. 2, books and booklets which narrate new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, miracles, or which introduce new devotions, even under the pretext that they are private, if they have been published without the prescriptions of the canons being observed;

6th. Books which attack or deride any of the Catholic dogmas, which defend errors proscribed by the Apostolic See, which detract from divine worship, which contend to overthrow ecclesiastical discipline, and which deliberately assail with reproaches the ecclesiastical hierarchy, or the clerical or religious state;

7th. Books which teach or commend superstition of any kind, sorceries, divination, magic, evocation of spirits, and other things of that kind;

8th. Books which establish dueling or suicide or divorce as lawful; which, treating of Masonic sects or other societies of the same kind, contend that these are useful and not pernicious to the Church and civil society;

9th. Books which expressly treat, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene things;

10th. Editions of liturgical books approved by the Apostolic See, in which anything has been changed, so that they do not agree with authentic editions approved by the Holy See;

11th. Books by which apocryphal indulgences, or indulgences proscribed or revoked by the Holy See, are disseminated;

12th. Images printed in any manner whatever of Our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of Angels and Saints, or of other Servants of God, alien from the sense and decrees of the Church (Can. 1399).¹

Propugnantes, that is, those defending by reasons brought forward, those trying to persuade, not merely those asserting or narrating. Foundations of religion are such as the immortality of the human soul, the existence of God, miracles, and truths of this kind; in whatever manner, seriously or with ridicule. Acatholici are all those who do not belong to the Catholic Church. Ex professo, that is, not incidentally, but by design. If it is established that no error concerning this faith is contained in these books, they are not prohibited. Impugnant, those who by reasons brought forward deny a dogma. Detrahunt, they speak badly about someone by taking away his reputation. Lascivious and obscene things: books which inculcate, treat, defend, and teach the nature of lascivious matters, which declare the manner of doing lascivious things; pornographic books, by which in practice harm is brought to morals; wherefore many books in which love affairs are narrated are not understood, although these also are very often prohibited by natural law.

The use of books about which in can. 1399, n. 1, and of books published contrary to the prescription of can. 1391, is permitted only to those who devote themselves in any way to theological or biblical studies, provided that the same books have been published faithfully and integrally, and that in their prolegomena or annotations the dogmas of the Catholic faith are not attacked (Can. 1400). Wherefore editions of the original text and of the ancient Catholic versions of sacred Scripture, even of the Oriental Church, published by any non-Catholics whatever; likewise versions of the same into whatever language, prepared or published by the same; and books published contrary to the prescription of canon 1391, namely versions of the sacred Scriptures in a vernacular language published without due approbation, or without the vigilance of Bishops, and without annotations, are permitted only to those who apply themselves to theological and biblical studies, that is, who are learned men devoted to these sciences, all beginners of sacred theology, and those who are occupied with theology and the Hebrew and Greek language in the schools of Seminaries.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1146, n. 118.

Question 5. Who are not bound by the ecclesiastical prohibition of books?

Response. Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, Bishops, even titular Bishops, and other Ordinaries, the necessary cautions having been applied, are not bound by the ecclesiastical prohibition of books (Can. 1401).

Question 6. What can Ordinaries grant in this matter?

Response. § 1. Ordinaries, as concerns books prohibited by the law itself or by decree of the Apostolic See, are able to grant license to their subjects only for individual books and in urgent cases only.

§ 2. But if they have obtained from the Apostolic See a general faculty of permitting their subjects to retain and read proscribed books, let them grant it only with discernment and for a just and reasonable cause (Can. 1402).

Question 7. Does the Apostolic faculty of reading prohibited books carry with it the faculty of reading books proscribed by Ordinaries?

Response. § 1. Those who have obtained the apostolic faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books cannot for that reason read and retain any books whatever proscribed by their Ordinaries, unless in the apostolic indult express power has been given to the same persons of reading and retaining books condemned by anyone whatever.

§ 2. Moreover, they are bound by a grave precept to guard prohibited books in such a way that these do not come into the hands of others (Can. 1403).

Question 8. Is it licit to sell books treating of obscene things?

Response. Let booksellers not sell, lend, or retain books expressly treating of obscene things; let them not have other prohibited books for sale unless they have obtained due license from the Apostolic See, and let them not sell them to anyone unless they can prudently judge that they are legitimately sought by the buyer (Can. 1404).

Question 9. Does a license obtained with regard to forbidden books exempt someone from the prohibition of natural law?

Response. § 1. By a license obtained from anyone, no one is in any way exempted from the prohibition of natural law against reading books which present proximate spiritual danger to himself (Can. 1405).