The Prelates Set Over the Censure of Books

Subject of the chapter

This chapter first proposes the censures which are reserved to the Holy See or subject to a special condition; then it defines the Prelate to be approached by seculars and by regulars.

In whose hands there is the power of approving or permitting editions and versions of the sacred Bibles is clear from those things which were established above (n. 7).

105 bis. By this article we are thrown back to the sanction explained above, and our interpretation of the words "under the vigilance of the Bishops" is confirmed. Cf. n. 71.

Let no one dare to publish again books proscribed by the Apostolic See; but if, from a grave and reasonable cause, some singular exception in this matter should seem to be admitted, that shall never be done unless the license of the sacred Congregation of the Index has first been obtained, and the conditions prescribed by it have been observed.

Force of the sanction

106. This is the force of that article: that it prohibit a book, prohibited by a special Decree, from being published even when corrected. But it says that the Sacred Congregation of the Index must be approached, and that its laws must be observed.

What if a book prohibited anew is published?

Indeed, as long as the proscribed book comes forth as morally the same, the new edition itself is affected by the decree of proscription, unless it has been positively permitted by the Sacred Index. Nor does it matter that the book was condemned only until it should be corrected. Cf. the preface of the Index, and the things said above, n. 46, 47.

Those things which in any way pertain to the causes of Beatifications and Canonizations of the Servants of God cannot be published without the approval of the Congregation set over the guarding of Sacred Rites.

What things pertain to causes of beatification or canonization

107. The matter concerns those persons whose cause is pending, not yet completed by the definitive Decree of canonization. Examples are the proofs brought forward by defenders, the observations made by the Promoter of the faith, etc. Cf. Pennacchi, who pursues these things at length from n. 69. Therefore these things cannot be published without the approval of the Sacred Congregation of Rites.

The same is to be said concerning Collections of Decrees of individual Roman Congregations: namely, these Collections cannot be published unless license has first been obtained, and the conditions prescribed by the moderators of each Congregation have been observed.

What Collections are

108. 1. Those periodicals do not make Collections which are accustomed to spread abroad various decrees of the Sacred Congregations, whether concerning several subjects or concerning one subject. For formally they do not come forth as Collections of some Congregation; nor even materially do they exhibit a sufficiently complete series of the acts of some Congregation, or draw documents from one Congregation in such a way that they can be regarded as Collections. Thus, for example, our volume II, De Religiosis Institutis ac Personis.

Published Collections are not prohibited

2. Collections published without due license are not now prohibited. For this sanction has not been enacted by the Constitution. Thus also Pennacchi, cited work, n. 70; Wernz, n. 122, note 100; Ciolli, n. 80.

Vicars and Apostolic Missionaries should faithfully observe the Decrees of the sacred Congregation set over the Propagation of the Faith concerning books to be published.

Apostolic Vicars, who they are

109. 1. Apostolic Vicars, as we take them here, are ecclesiastical Prelates, for the most part distinguished by the episcopal character, who in places of missions, in the name of the Supreme Pontiff, shepherd a region where the ordinary hierarchy has not yet been introduced. They are subject to the authority of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide.

Apostolic Missionaries, who they are

2. Apostolic Missionaries are not those Priests who, for the sake of honor and privilege, are decorated with this title by the Holy See even in our regions; but, says Pennacchi,¹ they are those Priests who, approved by the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, dwell in the aforesaid places (of Missions), and there exercise their ministry under the authority of Apostolic Vicars.

Prohibition made for Missionaries. Apostolic Missionaries

3. The decrees of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide remain to be observed, insofar as they are in use today.²

Now, from those decrees, Apostolic Missionaries are prohibited from publishing any writings whatever or books (both their own and others', both by themselves and through others), whether treating of religion directly or indirectly, or discoursing on ecclesiastical matters, unless by previous examination and approval of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, to be obtained in writing and printed at the beginning of the work itself.

Nevertheless the respective Bishops or Apostolic Vicars can permit small doctrinal works, catechisms, instructions, and prayers to be published, which serve the daily use of the faithful.

Sometimes, by special Indults, they obtain greater faculties.

These things are drawn out from various Decrees of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, especially those which are reported in Coll. P. F., nn. 1869, 1870, 1872.

What concerning books, periodicals, which report letters of Missionaries

4. From the former law, all books treating of the sacred missions were to be approved by the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide. But if even before merely historical or geographical reports, taken, for example, from letters of missionaries, were published without penalty without the faculty of that Congregation,³ that will much less have to be reputed illicit today. Reports of this sort, or books "concerning knowledge which in no way refers to religion," Pennacchi⁴ excepts even from the law which regards Apostolic Missionaries.

What concerning the Bishops of these regions

5. You will ask why the Bishops of regions which are subject to Propaganda Fide have been passed over in silence. Thus England, Holland, the Indies, etc.?

C. Gennari⁵ and Pennacchi⁶ judge that those special laws are not in force in places in which the ordinary hierarchy has been restored. And that the matter stands thus in several regions is true. In all? We think that the Bishops of those places must consider the received usages and the proper Instructions which they have received from Propaganda Fide.⁷

¹ Cited work, n. 71. Palmieri proves the same in this place.

² Wernz, n. 121, note 101.

³ Cf. Arndt, p. 277, n. 198.

⁴ Cited work, n. 71.

⁵ Monit., cited place, p. 108.

⁶ A. S. S., cited place, n. 71, p. 490.

⁷ Thus also Ciolli, n. 82. Wernz, note 101, distinguishes regions which are merely subject to the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, as Holland, England, etc., from regions which are still counted among the lands of infidels, although the ordinary hierarchy has been established there. He warns the Bishops of these latter regions that they should act cautiously.

The approval of books whose censure, by force of the present Decrees, is not reserved to the Apostolic See or to Roman Congregations, belongs to the Ordinary of the place in which they are made public.

What things belong or do not belong to the Ordinary of the place

110. 1. Therefore, except for works whose recognition is reserved through these Decrees to the Apostolic See or to Roman Congregations, the censure, from article 35, belongs to the Ordinary of the place in which the work is made public (not therefore, as formerly, of the place in which it is printed¹).

Moreover, through these Decrees there are reserved: versions of the Sacred Scriptures in the vernacular language without notes, concerning which article 7; certain publications of Indulgences, as was said in n. 87; and finally those things which are referred to here in articles 32-34.

A book approved by one can be read everywhere

2. But the approval of that Ordinary causes the book to be able to be read everywhere and by all. Thus from custom. But if another Ordinary shall have prohibited the same book, his non-exempt subjects, living in the territory of the one prohibiting, will have to observe this particular statute.

What if there were several editors?

3. What if there have been several editors, and these in different Dioceses? It will be enough if you report the approval of one Bishop: namely, of him whom you prefer, provided he truly was an editor. Thus it seems to us. For why the distinguished Pennacchi² should look to the domicile of the author, we do not see. But the reason why the book should not be approved by several Bishops is both because article 35 speaks in the singular, "to the Ordinary," and because usage favors, and satisfaction is thus made to the mind of the law; and because it would be against the benignity of present law to impose too great a burden on writers.

¹ Rule X of the Tridentine Index required that.

² A. S. S., cited place, n. 72, p. 491.

What in places where very many books are published?

111. 4. What if in some city so many books are published that the forces of the censors seem unequal to recognizing them? Besides other provisions, this also can be taken: that the Ordinary of the place of publication defer to the sentence of the censor of the place where either the writer lives or the book is printed, so that, with the consent of this Ordinary, he makes that external censor as it were his own censor. And the Sacred Congregation itself positively confers a faculty of this kind. (Cf. the formulas below in Part Four.)

What concerning books of Bishops?

112. 5. What if a Bishop publishes a work outside his own diocese? Outside, I say, his own diocese. For it is too evident that a work of which he himself is author is approved by him, for any mention of this matter to be necessary.

But although article 41 directly imposes the obligation of censure only on the faithful (by which word Bishops are not designated in themselves), since those faithful are not only the writers of a book but also the editors, the law of previous censure must also be observed concerning these books. We are confirmed by the usage of the City, where even the works of Cardinals come forth recognized by the Master of the Sacred Palace and by the Vicegerent of the City. But if a Bishop publishes a book at the same time in his own diocese and outside it, he himself will have to require no censure.

Regulars, besides the license of the Bishop, should remember that by the decree of the sacred Council of Trent they are bound to obtain from the Prelate to whom they are subject the faculty of publishing the work into the light. But each concession is to be printed at the beginning or at the end of the work.

It confirms the disposition of Clement

113. 1. That clause reports, almost to the letter, the words of the Instruction of Clement VIII added to the Rules of the Index. From this:

Equally with the rest they are subject to the censure of the Ordinary

a) The doctrine, already certain before, is confirmed, according to which exempt Regulars are subject to the censure of the Ordinary of the place equally with the rest. Equally, I say, not more.¹ Therefore, only for books which from common law are subject to censure.

How far, besides, the faculty of the proper Prelate is required

b) There is also commemorated the decree of Trent, session 4, concerning the edition and use of sacred books, by which they are further bound to obtain the faculty of their proper Prelate. But because, in that decree, speech is only concerning books of Sacred Scripture, annotations, and commentaries, the pontifical law concerning the faculty of the proper Prelate to be sought seems to be circumscribed to the same things. Cf. Desjardins, Etudes, t. 71, p. 365.² But as to other works, they will stand by their proper Constitutions.

Which Regulars?

2. Regulars are to be understood as those strictly such.³ Those who are called such more broadly will much less escape the censure of the Ordinary. For the rest they will observe their proper Rules.

Each concession to be printed

3. Each concession is to be printed at the beginning or end of the work in that manner in which the sole concession of the Bishop is to be appended to the books of others. Cf. below, n. 116.

¹ Wernz, n. 121, note 103, also holds the same, against certain persons who, relying on I know not what reason, already wish all books of Regulars to bear testimony of a double approval.

² Most think that by the Instruction of Clement VIII that prescription was extended to every book. Thus C. Gennari (cited work, in this place), Genicot (cited work, 460), and Pennacchi (n. 73). But in the same words by which our article does, that Instruction appeals to the decree of the Council of Trent. Therefore we do not perceive the force of the inference made. Nevertheless Boudinhon also admits this in this article, and Wernz, note 103. For the rest the matter is of the smallest importance, since at least from their proper Constitutions the books of Regulars must be approved by their Superiors.

³ They are, however, the solemnly professed, and, from the Constitution of Gregory XIII, Ascendente Domino, also the simply professed of the Society of Jesus. Concerning the simply professed of other Orders this is doubted. Cf. Bizzarri, Collectanea, 1st ed., p. 801, note.

If an Author dwelling at Rome should wish to print a book not in the City, but elsewhere, besides the approval of the Cardinal Vicar of the City and of the Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace, no other is required.

The former law partly abrogated

114. 1. By the former law, by order of Alexander VII, those dwelling in the Pontifical State had to offer their books to be approved by the previous censure of the Cardinal Vicar of the City and of the Master of the Sacred Palace. Now the special obligation, if any remains, is circumscribed to the City alone.

Force of the present article. It imposes an obligation

2. Proceed now: the obligation seems to remain. For although the sentence of the law is in itself ambiguous and can be taken of a mere privilege,¹ nevertheless the reason of the former disposition remains in such a way that a correction of that law, which would be inexplicable, does not seem to have to be admitted. The usage of the City agrees, in which the Masters of the Sacred Palace urge their right in this way.²

But the reason of this sanction is drawn from a certain peculiar authority with which books that are considered to have been written under the eyes of the Holy See are vested, so that they seem to have to be fortified by the caution of Roman censure.

And it confers a privilege

3. At the same time, however, the article confers a most equitable privilege, by which these books, even if they are published elsewhere, need have no other approval. Thus the law is not made harsher for the inhabitants of the City, and fitting honor is given to Apostolic censure.

Whom it affects

4. Those properly dwell in the City who there have at least a quasi-domicile.³ Those, however, who actually stay at Rome even for a shorter time will be able, as pilgrims, to share in the privilege of the inhabitants.

¹ Cf. Palmieri, in this place; Ojetti, Analecta Eccl., 1898, pp. 383, 384.

² Cf. Wernz, n. 121, note 104.

³ Quasi-domicile is acquired by real habitation joined with the intention of staying in some place for the greater part of the year. Thus the opinion received in the curia, although some, as Lehmk. II, 775, are content with staying through a notable part of the year: as, for instance, through 4 months. Penn., A. S. S., cited place, n. 74, p. 495, judges that no space of stay is required for the use of that privilege.