699. On the law itself. 1. All the precepts of the Church which concerning the reading and publication of books still have force today are contained in the recently issued constitution Officiorum ac munerum and in the Index of Prohibited Books published by command of this constitution: for all laws and statutes formerly issued on this matter having been abrogated, only the decrees which are contained in this constitution and in the Index have the force of law.¹

a. There is indeed also another constitution treating of bad books, namely Sollicita et provida of Benedict XIV (July 9, 1753), which by the will of the supreme pontiff still retains its force; but since this Benedictine constitution establishes only norms to be followed by the Sacred Congregation of the Index and by the Holy Office in examining and proscribing books, the constitution Officiorum and the Index contain all the universal laws now in force concerning this matter.

b. Therefore the prescriptions of Urban VIII concerning the narration of miracles and concerning the title Saint or Blessed attributed to servants of God have also been abrogated; wherefore the protestations which previously had to be prefixed to lives of saints or blessed can now be omitted.

c. The twofold excommunication which concerning prohibited books is found in the Bull Apostolicae sedis (1. 2, IV. 5) is indeed abrogated by this constitution; nevertheless in the future it still has force, because both are restored in this constitution (n. 47, 48).

2. The obligation of the precepts and prohibitions of this constitution in grave matter is grave: for the end of the law, of warding off from the faithful the danger which threatens faith and morals from the reading of bad books, is grave, and the law itself contributes greatly to obtaining this end. The same is further gathered from the grave penalties added.

Therefore both precepts grave in themselves in light matter, and some lighter precepts of this constitution because of smallness of matter, oblige only under light obligation. Thus a book which is prohibited because of the matter which it treats is judged prohibited under grave obligation; but a book in itself either not at all or not very dangerous, which is prohibited because of lack of approval, is ordinarily not judged prohibited under grave obligation.

3. This constitution is universal, affecting all the faithful of the whole world: for thus it is found in the preface of the constitution itself: let Catholics throughout the whole world religiously obey these general decrees; and in n. 45 it is said: Books condemned by the Apostolic See are to be held prohibited everywhere among the nations. Therefore by these words the controversy concerning the obligation of the Index has been removed.²

Therefore universal custom contrary to this constitution, if anywhere it was legitimate, has certainly been removed by this constitution. Whether legitimate particular customs also have been abrogated, authors do not agree. It seems one must assent to those who judge all customs, even particular ones, abrogated: for although a derogatory clause is not expressly contained in the constitution itself, nevertheless the will of the legislator to introduce a uniform discipline concerning this matter among all Catholics of the whole world is established.³

4. Not only the penalties but also the prohibitions which this constitution contains are of strict interpretation: for they bear before themselves all the marks which make a law odious. Moreover the ancient laws, according to the mind of the legislator, have been made somewhat milder by this constitution, in such a way indeed that to obey them cannot be grave and difficult;⁴ but only a strict interpretation corresponds to this end.

Nor is the argument worth anything that they were issued in favor of faith: for all laws favor either faith or morals, but they favor them by restricting liberty and inducing fault and penalty.

5. The prohibitions of this constitution which forbid books because of the matter which they treat comprehend also books previously published, because they bring the same danger to readers as books to be published afterwards; but those which prohibit books because of lack of approval do not extend to books previously published: for since in this case the law affects a human action, the principle holds: law does not act retroactively.

¹ Constitution Officiorum ac munerum of Leo XIII, Jan. 25, 1897.

² Cf. Sacred Congregation of the Index, May 23, 1898.

³ Cf. Wernz, n. 110, note 46; contra Vermeersch, n. 21.

⁴ Cf. Preface of the constitution Officiorum ac munerum.

700. What matter is grave. a. As regards the publication of a book, he ordinarily commits grave sin who publishes a book prohibited for this reason, that it is bad and its reading harmful: for he can induce indefinitely many persons into danger of spiritual damage. But if the book is prohibited for this reason, that it lacks due approval, grave sin can more easily be absent.

b. As regards reading, he commits grave sin who reads a notable part of a prohibited book; but in a book (or part of a book) truly dangerous either because of the matter which it treats or because of the mode of treating it, three or four pages constitute a notable part; but in a book, or rather in a part of a book, which it is established is not gravely dangerous, about thirty pages (if the book is of small format, sixty) constitute a notable part.

The opinion of the ancients concerning this matter was almost this: that a few lines suffice for grave matter if an error against faith is contained there, and that a few pages constitute grave matter if indifferent matter is treated in them.¹ Grave matter is to be determined from this principle: matter which of itself or ordinarily induces grave danger for the reader is grave, although accidentally in a particular case it brings greater or lesser danger; from which principle, considering the circumstances of our time and the reason of the recent constitution, the norm set forth above seems to follow.

c. As regards retention, he commits grave sin who retains a prohibited book beyond a month. Yet if someone retains a prohibited book from a reasonable cause, for example until the license arrives or until he has found an opportunity of handing the book over to someone having the faculty, he is not to be condemned of sin, although he retains it longer, but not notably beyond a month: for within this time the license sought or the occasion awaited can easily be present.

¹ Cf. Lugo, De fide, disp. 21, n. 85; St. Alphonsus, l. 7, n. 284, 292.

701. What is understood by the name of book. By the name of book is understood a writing which consists of some bulk and unity of object and is printed in type. What is signified by the name of book must be taken from the manner of speaking received today; but today a writing is not called a book unless it is distinguished by these marks.

a. Some bulk. What bulk is required that a writing can be called a book must be drawn from common use; yet so that some norm may be had, it can be said that a writing composed in the form of a book or an entire treatise and consisting of ten complete sheets, that is, 160 pages, is signified by the name of book.

a. This opinion, by which by the name of book only a writing consisting of some bulk is signified, is confirmed besides by a twofold argument. For from the declaration of the Church, those who read newspapers defending heresy do not incur the excommunication inflicted on those reading prohibited books.¹ Then this constitution itself distinguishes between books and writings of lesser bulk, since it expressly names journals, papers, fascicles, etc., wherever it intends also to comprehend these by its decrees.

b. Wherefore by the name of book are not comprehended newspapers, flying sheets, letters, speeches, small fascicles, nor sheets separated from a prohibited book.

b. Unity of object; wherefore small fascicles of diverse object bound into one volume are not books, nor are newspapers or journals collected into one volume; but the unity of object which is required for constituting a book is not lacking in periodical publications which are destined to compose one volume. Wherefore both individual fascicles of a periodical publication (provided they consist of the required bulk) and a volume composed of several fascicles of this kind constitute a book.²

Therefore by the name of book are not comprehended anthologies or chrestomathies which contain parts taken from prohibited works, and therefore they are not prohibited unless either from the whole character of the collection they are opposed to faith or good morals, or the prohibited parts are so great that either individually or all together (to which the purpose of the collection seems to give sufficient unity) they grow to the quantity of a book.

c. Printed in type. In antiquity indeed, namely before the art of typography was invented, a manuscript work was called a book; but today in common use books are distinguished from manuscripts. Moreover because manuscripts are spread with more difficulty and less danger of perversion threatens from them, it is at least probable that manuscripts are not comprehended by the name of book.

Therefore those decrees in which there is discussion of books alone are not to be extended to booklets and writings of such slight bulk that they are not judged books, nor to manuscripts or to writings printed lithographically.

¹ Holy Office, Apr. 27, 1880.

² The Holy Office, Jan. 13, 1892, declared that the censure imposed on those reading books of heretics is incurred by those "who knowingly read periodical publications bound into fascicles."

702. By the term "to prohibit," in ecclesiastical use three actions are directly forbidden: to publish, to read, and to retain a book.¹

a. They are said to publish a book who see to it that a book is made public, and therefore stand forth as the primary and principal cause of its publication: namely, the author who wrote the work, if however he handed it over for this end, that it be published; the printer, who undertakes the work to be printed; and the publisher, who sees to the circulation of the printed work.

Not rarely the printer is distinct from the publisher; in which case the printer belongs to those who cooperate proximately with the publisher, and this for the most part formally, although he can also cooperate only materially.

b. They are said to read a book who, scanning the book with their own eyes, themselves understand the things written.

Therefore they are not said to read who hear another reading, nor those who recite something from a book by memory, nor those who, scanning the book with their own eyes, do not understand the things which they read because of ignorance of the language. He who hears another reading, whom he himself induced to read by prayers or command, truly reads morally, namely through another. Nevertheless according to the probable opinion of St. Alphonsus (n. 292), he is not numbered among readers, because the law must be restricted to those reading physically.

c. They are said to retain a book who keep a book, whether their own or another's, with themselves, or, ownership being retained, deposit it with another, unless the latter has the faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books and keeps the book until the one handing it over obtains the faculty of reading.

a. It is not lawful even for him to retain a book who does not understand it because of ignorance of the language.

b. The keeper of a library is not said to retain books, because he does not preserve them in his own house, nor in his own room, nor in his own name.

c. A bookbinder who binds prohibited books must be said to retain them; yet if he binds them for one having the faculty of reading, he is excused by epikeia; if he binds them for one not having the faculty of reading, one must investigate whether he has a proportionately grave excusing reason.

d. He who has a prohibited book must either destroy it, or hand it over to one having the faculty of retaining, or obtain for himself the faculty of retaining it.

¹ Cf. D'Annibale, Summula Theologiae moralis, 5th ed. (Rome: Desclee, 1908), III, n. 143.

703. On a prohibited book. a. The whole book is prohibited, not only the part which contains the error or brings danger to the reader; yet if this part is removed in any way whatever so that it cannot be read, the prohibition ceases.¹

Therefore not even the harmless parts of a prohibited book can licitly be read, even if someone proposes to omit the part which had given occasion to the prohibition, because, considering the character of men, the danger threatens that those who have once begun to read another part may also read the prohibited part. Hence it also happens that when the part which had given occasion to the prohibition has been removed, the prohibition of the book ceases, because every danger of reading the harmful part ceases.

b. If a prohibited work consists of several tomes, all are prohibited if they treat of the same argument and one indivisible; only the tome which contains the error or dangerous part is prohibited if the diverse tomes treat of a diverse argument, or indeed of the same but divisible argument, as universal history is, for example, because in this case the diverse tomes are judged to be several diverse books.²

c. A new edition of that book is also prohibited, however much amended it may be, unless permission to publish has been obtained from the Sacred Congregation of the Index (n. 31), as also its translation, into whatever language it may be turned (n. 45).

A compendium of a prohibited work is not a new edition of the same work, but must be considered as a new work distinct from the former.

d. If all the works of some author are prohibited, a. those works which treat of religion are judged prohibited; but of those which do not treat of religion, only those which are forbidden either by a special or by a general decree; b. works of the same author published afterwards are indeed not prohibited, but are to be presumed prohibited by a general decree; for which reason they cannot be read licitly unless it is established that they are prohibited by no decree; c. the prohibition seems to be understood of books alone, not likewise of writings of lesser bulk, unless by reason of matter these also are prohibited by a general decree.

¹ St. Alphonsus, n. 283.

² Lugo, De fide, disp. 20, sect. 2, n. 9.

704. On the author and mode of prohibition. 1. Books are prohibited by the Holy See for the universal Church:

a. through apostolic letters; b. through the Sacred Congregation of the Index, from which most prohibitions proceed; c. through the Holy Office, which, as the supreme tribunal of faith and morals, sometimes exercises the office of prohibiting books.

2. Books are prohibited by ordinaries for their own diocese and by regular prelates for their own subjects.

a. Ordinaries are warned that they themselves should proscribe harmful writings published in their own diocese (even if by exempt persons) or spread there (even if published elsewhere), but that those which require a more subtle examination they should refer to the Holy See (n. 21, 29).

b. Prohibitions of bishops do not affect exempt regulars, whether bishops act by ordinary power or as delegates of the Holy See.¹

3. Considered as to mode, books are prohibited either by general decrees (kinds of books) or by special decrees (individual books). All books prohibited by name are inserted into the Index of Prohibited Books with the express name of the author, if he is known, and the title of the book.

The Index of Prohibited Books, which the supreme pontiff in this very constitution commands to be reviewed most diligently and, after review, published (Preface), appeared at Rome from the Vatican Press; and Leo XIII, through the brief Romani pontifices (Sept. 27, 1900), commanded it to be published and to be observed by all everywhere.

¹ Vermeersch, n. 6 ter.

705. On the faculty of reading and retaining. Because the law or prohibition is universal, the necessity of obtaining license to read a prohibited book is also wholly universal, so that neither hierarchical degree (the cardinalate) nor the singular learning of the reader exempts from this law. Nevertheless necessity or great utility of reading a prohibited book excuses from observance of the law, at least where an occasion of seeking license is not available.

1. Who can give it.

a. A general faculty of reading and retaining books prohibited by the Holy See can be given (n. 24):

a. by the Sacred Congregation of the Index and the Holy Office for the whole world; b. by the Master of the Sacred Palace for the City only.

b. A special faculty, that is, "for individual books and in urgent cases only," can be granted (n. 25):

a. by bishops and their vicars general;

b. by prelates possessing quasi-episcopal jurisdiction. Of this kind are nuncios, apostolic vicars, capitular vicars, and superiors of regulars: abbots general, provincials, and probably also local superiors (guardians, priors, unless they are subject to an abbot, rectors).

Since this power is quasi-ordinary, namely one which belongs by law to bishops and prelates having quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, they can also delegate it to others.¹

c. The faculty of reading and retaining books prohibited by ordinaries is given:

a. by the ordinaries themselves; b. by those to whom the ordinaries have given delegated power for this.

2. How it is to be interpreted.

a. Those who have the faculty of reading and retaining books prohibited by the Holy See do not by that fact also have the faculty of reading and retaining books and newspapers proscribed by ordinaries, "unless in the apostolic indult power has expressly been given of reading and retaining books condemned by anyone whatsoever" (n. 26).

b. He who has the faculty of reading prohibited books by that very fact can also read journals, papers, and periodical booklets (newspapers) which are prohibited by this constitution (n. 21): for the lesser is contained in the greater, but not conversely.

c. He who received this faculty from the Holy See can use it everywhere; the same must likewise be said of a faculty received from the ordinary: for since this dispensation is a personal privilege, the contrary opinion of some lacks foundation.

Question Second. On the Publication of Books

In this place are gathered the decrees which refer to printers and booksellers.

¹ Besides this faculty, bishops (and superiors of regulars) have another specially delegated to them by the Holy See, which nevertheless is bounded by several limits: for ordinarily they can grant only to priests (the bishops of Germany also to laymen) a general license of reading and retaining prohibited books, "excepting, however, works treating expressly of obscene things and against religion." But the faculty granted by force of this constitution suffers no exceptions, since, when a just cause exists, they can permit any book to any one of their subjects. By the clause treating expressly against religion are prohibited books which act against the whole of religion, both revealed and natural. Therefore books which attack revealed religion but leave natural religion intact are not excepted by this clause. Cf. Konings-Putzer, Commentarium in facultates apost., 3rd ed. (New York: Benziger, 1898), n. 157.

706. To printers it is prescribed: a. That they not dare to publish again a book proscribed by the Apostolic See unless license has first been obtained from the Sacred Congregation of the Index, and the conditions prescribed by it have been observed, if indeed from a grave cause such a book seems to be published again (n. 31).

There are some who not without merit judge that here there is discussion only of books prohibited by special decrees and listed in the Index.

b. That they not publish any writing which needs ecclesiastical approval without approval.

c. That no book which needs ecclesiastical approval be printed unless it bears before it the name and surname both of the author and of the publisher, the place and year of printing and publication, unless the ordinary, for just causes, has given license to conceal the author's name (n. 43).

a. Therefore books which do not need ecclesiastical censure can be published without the name of the author, without the place and year of printing and publication. And since the decree speaks only of books, writings which do not reach the bulk of a book, and even periodical publications, as it seems, can be published without the author's name.

b. If there is question of publishing a translation, this precept seems to be satisfied whether the name of the author or of the translator is placed before the work.

c. The ordinary who can grant license either of suppressing the author's name or of publishing a book under an assumed name is the ordinary who grants the book's approval.

d. That they not undertake to print a new edition of an approved work or a translation into another language without new approval (n. 44).

An article excerpted from a periodical publication is not judged a new edition, and therefore does not need new approval;¹ but a book composed from several articles and published is judged a new edition and therefore needs new approval.

e. That a book not be published without the approval of the ordinary of such place, and, if there is question of regulars, without the approval of the superiors of the order and of the ordinary of such place (n. 36), to be printed at the beginning or at the end of the work (n. 40).

Authors do not agree whether the approval obtained must be printed in authentic form in the very words in which it was granted, or whether it suffices to indicate it only in general words. Gennari, Hollweck, Schneider hold the former opinion; Pennachi, Vermeersch, Genicot, Dilgskron, Gopfert adhere to the latter, because the words of the constitution do not expressly require that, because this is sufficient for obtaining the end of the law, and because usage interprets the law in this way.

¹ Sacred Congregation of the Index, May 23, 1898.

707. To booksellers it is prescribed: a. That they not sell, lend, or retain books treating expressly of obscene things (n. 46).

Yet books which can licitly be read and retained are also licitly sold; wherefore classical books treating expressly of shameful things can be sold to those to whom the reading of them is granted (n. 10).

b. That they not have other prohibited books for sale unless they have obtained license from the Sacred Congregation of the Index through the ordinary (n. 46).

c. That they not sell a prohibited book to anyone unless they can prudently judge that it is legitimately sought by the buyer (n. 46).

In order that prohibited books can be licitly sold, it is not necessary that the bookseller question each buyer seeking a prohibited book concerning his license to read it; but it suffices that, taking account of the book and the buyer, it does not appear with moral certitude that he lacks license to read it. Under the same conditions the bookseller can also procure for one seeking it a book which he does not have for sale.

Note. 1. The sale of a bad book of whatever kind (whether it happens in a shop, in the streets, or by auction) is prohibited by these things not only by the law of nature but also by positive law. Yet license can be obtained of retaining prohibited books and selling them in any manner, except books treating expressly of obscene things.

2. Those selling writings or periodical papers prohibited by ecclesiastical law cooperate by their own action toward evil. Now this action is wholly illicit if the book or paper is altogether bad, as pornographic or plainly impious writings are; but the remaining prohibited writings or papers can be sold from a proportionately grave cause. Sellers of this kind must be warned, however, that they also have good newspapers for sale and offer them to buyers.

Books can be prohibited under a twofold aspect, either insofar as they fall under a general rule prohibiting books of some kind, or insofar as they are proscribed by a particular decree. The former are said to be prohibited by the law itself.

I. Those who in any way devote themselves to theological or biblical studies can use even prohibited texts and versions of Sacred Scripture, provided the said texts and versions have been published faithfully and integrally, and the dogmas of the Catholic faith are not attacked in their prolegomena or annotations (can. 1400). It is said:

1. Those who... in any way devote themselves, i.e. both clerics and laymen who not merely incidentally or passingly, but habitually for some time, are especially intent upon those studies.

2. Dogmas of the Catholic faith; under this name do not come other truths, however theologically certain.

II. Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, Bishops, even titular Bishops, and other Ordinaries, with the necessary precautions employed, are not bound by the ecclesiastical prohibition of books (can. 1401).

III. With respect to the faculty of granting permission, note: the following can grant it:

1. The Supreme Pontiff, who grants it through the Holy Office (can. 247, § 4). Yet those who have obtained an apostolic faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books cannot therefore read and retain any books whatever proscribed by their Ordinaries, unless in the apostolic indult the power of reading and retaining books condemned by anyone whatever has been expressly given to them (can. 1403, § 1).

2. Ordinaries, namely both local Ordinaries and major Superiors of an exempt clerical religion, are able, with respect to books prohibited by the law itself or by decree of the Apostolic See, to grant permission to their subjects only for individual books and only in urgent cases (can. 1402, § 1). But if they have obtained from the Apostolic See a general faculty of permitting their subjects to retain and read proscribed books, they should grant it only with choice and for a just and reasonable cause (can. 1402, § 2).

Note that local Ordinaries can also grant to subjects permission, but only in particular cases and for a just cause, to use books prohibited by a plenary or provincial Council (can. 82; 291, § 2).

The petition by which permission is sought must be recommended by the local Ordinary if there is question of a secular cleric, and by his own Superior if there is question of a religious. For a layman, generally the recommendation of the confessor suffices.

IV. With respect to permission granted, observe:

1. Those who have obtained permission are held by a grave precept to guard prohibited books in such a way that they do not come into the hands of others (can. 1403, § 2).

2. Permission obtained from anyone in no way exempts a person from the prohibition of natural law against reading books which present a proximate spiritual danger to him (can. 1405, § 1).

Add the warning of the Code: Local Ordinaries and others having care of souls should opportunely warn the faithful concerning the danger and harm of reading bad books, especially prohibited books (can. 1405, § 2).

What prohibition of books exists? The prohibition of books is one thing by natural law, another by positive law. The reading of books, for example, handing down false religion, superstitious or lascivious matters, and attacking any virtue whatsoever or defending vice, speaking in itself, is prohibited by natural law.

The reason is that the reading of these books, speaking in itself, has annexed to it the danger of perversion. Therefore unless such reading is done by learned men, and from an honorable intention of attacking, extirpating, etc., these books, it will be sinful in proportion to the danger of perversion.

As regards positive law, there is no doubt that the Church has the power of prohibiting harmful books. Now "to prohibit books throughout the whole world pertains to the Supreme Pontiff, and for him to the Sacred Congregation. But Bishops and Inquisitors can prohibit books in their own territory," even under penalty of censure to be undergone. L. 290. "Let Ordinaries," says Leo XIII in the cited Constitution, § 29, "even as Delegates of the Apostolic See, strive to proscribe books and other harmful writings edited or spread in their diocese, and to remove them from the hands of the faithful. Let them refer to Apostolic judgment those works or writings which demand a more subtle examination, or in which the sentence of supreme authority seems to be required for obtaining a salutary effect." Therefore there is an obligation for Ordinaries to proscribe not all harmful books and writings, but only those edited or spread in their diocese, and therefore with a certain regular number of copies. But other books or writings to be examined more deeply, or requiring the judgment of a higher authority, are all to be denounced. And because Ordinaries of places can proceed in this matter by power delegated from the Holy See, by their prescriptions they can oblige even exempt regulars.

Ordinaries, even as Delegates of the Apostolic See... let them strive to remove them. "By these words a right indeed, but also an office, is mandated... It is the office of Bishops to see that the writings of modernists, or those which savor of and promote modernism, if published, are not read; if not yet published, to prohibit their being read." Pius X, Encyclical Letter Pascendi dominici gregis, September 8, 1907.

The Supreme Pontiff condemns modernism, that is, rash and false novelties which not a few bring forth in this our age as regards Theology, Philosophy, Exegesis and Biblical History, and also ecclesiastical History. Namely, pervaded by an intemperate zeal for novelty, the doctrines constantly handed down by the Fathers and by Catholic Doctors being set aside, they assert opinions little founded, and, prescinding from the supernatural character of facts and from the inspiration of Sacred Scripture, they seem to overturn Religion itself. The Supreme Pontiff indeed condemns modernism, not any modern discovery whatsoever which is approved by solid reason. The Supreme Pontiff himself is author of this matter in his Brief to Ernest Commer Summa nos, June 14, 1907. "Indeed," he says, "it is calumny to assert that the Apostolic See, 'adhering to more obsolete studies, obstructs the progress of disciplines, clips the wings of every keenest genius, and resists those teaching the truth. Yet nothing more false or more unjust can be devised in thought; for indeed the Church disapproves a certain liberty of erring, and watches that the faithful not allow themselves to be entangled in fallacies; but she does not prohibit this in any way, indeed by urging commends and persuades it, that the truth handed down divinely, for the guarding of which she herself was given, be more openly explained according to the character of peoples and ages, and be unfolded by legitimate interpretation.'"

Now, as regards the common law in force, at present one must stand by the Index of prohibited books, most recently recognized by order of Leo XIII, Brief Romani Pontifices, September 17, 1900; and also by the General Decrees already established by the same Leo XIII in the cited Constitution Officiorum ac munerum. These alone have the force of law, "the Rules issued by order of the Holy Synod of Trent, the Observations, Instruction, Decrees, Warnings, and any other statute and command of Our Predecessors concerning this matter being abrogated, with the one exception of the Constitution of Benedict XIV Sollicita et provida, which, just as it has hitherto been in force, so We will to remain entire in force hereafter." Par. Itaque. The Rules being abrogated, etc., simply, and therefore as regards obligations and as regards penalties. Contrary customs likewise remain abrogated, although in the cited Constitution a clause abrogating them is not had. For this is openly deduced from the purpose of this Constitution, namely that provision be made for the necessities of the present time. The Constitution of Benedict XIV Sollicita et provida prescribes the method to be observed in the examination and proscription of books in the Sacred Congregations of the Holy Office and of the Index. But the aforesaid Constitution Officiorum ac munerum has obligatory force everywhere, even in regions of the British idiom. Sacred Congregation of the Index, May 23, 1898. Cf. here 1312. Therefore the Index of prohibited books also is to be observed everywhere. Leo XIII, Constitution Romani Pontifices, September 17, 1900. Pius X, motu proprio Sacrorum antistitum, September 1, 1910; E.M.

Bishops are bound to interdict in their own Diocese all harmful books and especially those of the Modernists, nevertheless restraining the prohibition, if it suffices, to the clergy alone; while the duty of Catholic booksellers remains intact, that they by no means have for sale books marked by the Bishop. If these refuse obedience, Bishops, after a warning has first been given, are to deprive them of the title of Catholic booksellers, and with stronger right if they are called episcopal; but those who are adorned with the pontifical title, they are to report to the Holy See. Pius X, motu proprio Sacrorum Antistitum.

By Decree of October 20, 1907, the book Il programma dei modernisti was proscribed in the City. "Therefore it is lawful for no one of whatever grade and condition subject to Our jurisdiction to sell or read or retain the same book under mortal fault. "Moreover, since the authors and writers of this book in the asserted Response sharply defend the system which in the Encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis is affirmed to be 'the collection of all heresies,' Our Most Holy Lord Pius PP. X, by this Decree, strikes with the penalty of excommunication the authors and writers, and all others whatsoever who in any way contributed labor to the making of this book, absolution from which he reserves to himself alone. Our Most Holy Lord adds that this Decree is valid just as if it had been delivered into the hands of each one of the said authors and writers; and if they are priests and exercise an act of Order, they will incur irregularity. "But nothing would be more satisfactory," says the Most Holy One, "than that all Bishops, each in his own diocese, should impose this prescription and promulgate the censure. Given at Rome, on October 20, 1907." Peter Respighi, Cardinal Vicar. First Supplement to the Enchiridion Morale, 3rd ed.

And by Decree of December 28, 1908, the periodical booklet Nova et Vetera and Rivista di cultura was prohibited in the City. "Therefore let no one print it or cause it to be printed, let no one sell or read it. If anyone does otherwise, let him know that he has sinned gravely. Besides, clerics of whatever order who associate themselves with the same periodical, or if they have already made the association, do not retract it as soon as possible, let them know that they have incurred suspension from divine things by that very fact." Given at Rome, on January 28, 1908. Peter Respighi, Cardinal Vicar. First Supplement to the Enchiridion Morale, 3rd ed. Cf. 1313.

Are harmful books to be denounced? "Although it belongs to all Catholics, especially those who excel in doctrine, to denounce pernicious books to Bishops or to the Apostolic See, nevertheless this pertains by special title to Nuncios, Apostolic Delegates, Ordinaries of places, and Rectors of Universities flourishing by praise of learning." § 27. It belongs to all Catholics, i.e., from charity obliging when grave danger is present, and denunciation is not made by others, and it can be done without grave inconvenience. Pernicious, as regards faith or morals. To the Apostolic See, i.e., to the Sacred Congregation of the Index, or of the Holy Inquisition, or de Propaganda Fide, or of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs. By special title of office and justice, whence the aforesaid obligation presses the aforesaid more gravely.

What about editions of the original text, and of non-vernacular and vernacular versions of Sacred Scripture? "Editions of the original text and of the ancient Catholic versions of Sacred Scripture, even of the Eastern Church, published by any non-Catholics whatsoever, even if they appear to have been edited faithfully and integrally, are permitted only to those who devote their work to theological or biblical studies, provided nevertheless that the dogmas of Catholic faith are not attacked in the prolegomena or annotations." § 5. Ancient: there is question here only of ancient versions, not of more recent ones. By non-Catholics: therefore editions of the original text and of the ancient Catholic versions of Sacred Scripture published by Catholics are permitted to all.

Only to those: therefore they are not permitted to others. Who devote their work to theological or biblical studies, whether by private study or in a public school, whether teachers or students. Sacred Congregation of the Index, May 23, 1898. To attack properly is not simply to deny, but to deny with the reason of denial added. Dogmas of Catholic faith, not any opinions and views whatsoever of theologians. "In the same manner and under the same conditions other versions of the Sacred Bibles, whether in Latin or another non-vernacular language, edited by non-Catholics, are permitted." § 6.

In the same manner, etc.: namely any other non-vernacular versions whatsoever made by non-Catholics are permitted only to students of theological or biblical matters, provided nevertheless that dogmas of faith are not attacked in the prolegomena or annotations. "All versions in the vernacular language, even made by Catholic men, are altogether prohibited unless they have been approved by the Apostolic See, or edited under the vigilance of Bishops with annotations taken from the Holy Fathers of the Church and from learned and Catholic writers." § 7. Unless they have been, etc.: therefore vernacular versions without notes must be approved only by the Apostolic See; with notes they can also be approved by Bishops.

"All versions of the Sacred Bibles in any vernacular language whatsoever, made by any non-Catholics whatsoever, are interdicted, and especially those which are spread by Bible Societies more than once condemned by the Roman Pontiffs, since in these the most salutary laws of the Church concerning the editing of divine books are fundamentally set aside. These versions nevertheless are permitted to those who devote their work to theological or biblical studies, while observing those things which were established above." § 8. The most salutary laws, i.e., concerning tradition, which non-Catholics altogether contemn. These versions nevertheless, whether made by non-Catholics or by Catholics. While observing those things: namely provided that the dogmas of Catholic faith are not attacked in the prolegomena or annotations. Decree of the Holy Office Lamentabili, July 3, 1907, proposition 1; E.M.

What about books of apostates, heretics, schismatics, and other writers? "All books which before the year 1600 either the Supreme Pontiffs or Ecumenical Councils condemned, and which are not reviewed in the new Index, are to be held condemned in the same way as they were formerly condemned, with the exception of those which are permitted by these General Decrees." § 1. Before the year: for in the Index of prohibited books, almost no books are inserted except those condemned afterwards. Examples of those condemned books are had in the same Constitution at the beginning of the paragraph Praecipue vero. In the same way: for the prohibition of many ceases to be in force both because of the age of the errors, concerning which no one cares any longer; and because of sufficient knowledge already propagated and becoming prevalent concerning the same errors, whence they have ceased to harm; and because of the utility which is had from the reading of such books, from which many things can be established that pertain to the practice and doctrine of the Church. Such are, for example, the books of Tertullian, Origen, etc. With the exception of those: cf. §§ 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, etc. Hence "those works now which either do not treat explicitly of religion, or, even if they treat of it, nevertheless contain nothing against faith, are permitted, unless perhaps they are found prohibited by some general or special decree." Preface to the Index of Prohibited Books. "Books of apostates, heretics, schismatics, and writers of any kind whatsoever, defending heresy or schism, or in any way overturning the very foundations of religion, are altogether prohibited." § 2. Books, not all, but those defending heresy or schism; not merely containing, but defending with proofs added. Of any writers whatsoever, even Catholics. Foundations of religion, namely the motives of credibility of revealed Religion, and its fundamental truths, such as the spirituality and immortality of the soul, the existence of the one and triune God, the creation of the world, Sacred Scripture, the Divinity of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church, the Roman Pontiff, etc. In any way, whether by false proofs, or even by ridicule and another manner; whether by writing or by images. "Likewise books of non-Catholics which explicitly treat of religion are prohibited, unless it is clear that nothing against Catholic faith is contained in them." § 3. Of non-Catholics, namely of those not pertaining to the Catholic religion: heretics, schismatics, Jews, infidels. Explicitly, not incidentally and in passing. Concerning religion, i.e., concerning sacred matters, concerning the Sacred books, concerning the mysteries of Faith, concerning Dogmatic or Moral Theology, concerning the Rites or Canons of the Church, concerning the cult of the Saints, etc. Against Catholic faith: hence books of Roman Antiquities and others of that kind are not prohibited. "Books of the same authors which do not explicitly treat of religion, but only touch the truths of faith incidentally, are not to be held prohibited by ecclesiastical law until they have been proscribed by special decree." § 4. Of the same authors, non-Catholics. Explicitly: therefore books of heretics which do not treat of religion by design, but only incidentally, even though perhaps they err concerning Catholic doctrine, are not positively prohibited, and much more if they contain nothing at all concerning religion.

What about liturgical and prayer books? "In authentic editions of the Missal, Breviary, Ritual, Ceremonial of Bishops, Roman Pontifical, and other liturgical books approved by the Holy Apostolic See, let no one presume to change anything; if otherwise has been done, these new editions are prohibited." § 18. And other liturgical books: such as those which mark liturgical chant and which cannot differ from the authentic and typical Vatican edition, and therefore are to be approved by the Ordinary of the place. Pius X, motu proprio, April 25, 1904; Sacred Congregation of Rites, August 11, 1905; February 14, 1906. Anything of some moment. For if the matter is altogether slight, it will pertain to the ecclesiastical superior to permit or prohibit the use of the book. To change: not to correct a typographical error. To change: not to report something more fully, not abbreviated, for greater clarity and convenience, or to repeat it in its proper place. Let him presume: and therefore from intention, not inadvertently. If otherwise: namely if anything whatever has been changed from the typical and approved editions, whether there is approval or there is not; lacking that, the book is not by that very fact prohibited. Cf. E.M. 125. "All litanies, except the most ancient and common ones which are contained in Breviaries, Missals, Pontificals, and Rituals, and except the Litanies of the Blessed Virgin which are customarily sung in the sacred House of Loreto, and the Litanies of the Most Holy Name of Jesus already approved by the Holy See, are not to be edited without the review and approval of the Ordinary." § 19. Except, etc. By Decree of April 2, 1899, the Litanies of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus were also approved. By Decree of March 18, 1909, the litanies in honor of St. Joseph, Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary, were likewise approved. Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 1, p. 290 ff. Are not to be edited: here only the publication of those litanies is prohibited. But by force of the following paragraph the books themselves containing them, published without legitimate approval, are prohibited. From the Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, June 20, 1896, and February 11, 1898, Dub., the public recitation in churches or public oratories of litanies which the Holy See has not yet approved is prohibited, although the Ordinary approved them, even if that recitation is made without the intervention of a sacred minister. "Books or booklets of prayers, devotion, or religious, moral, ascetical, mystical doctrine and instruction, and others of this kind, although they seem to conduce to fostering the piety of the Christian people, let no one publish without permission of legitimate authority; otherwise, they are to be held prohibited." § 20. Books or booklets, not flying leaves. Or of doctrine... although, etc.: therefore there does not seem here to be question of books in which that doctrine is set forth merely speculatively. Of legitimate authority, namely of the Ordinary, who can also permit books of devotion containing a version of the Epistles, Gospels, and Canon of the Mass. Sacred Congregation of Rites, August 4, 1877. Collection of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, n. 1890. Let him publish: otherwise. Therefore all books reviewed in this paragraph, to be edited from now on without authentic approval of the Ordinary and not previously edited, are to be held as prohibited. Cf. n. 1308, § 13; n. 1312, § 41. E.M.

Prayers for obtaining the intercession of Servants of God are to be approved by the Ordinary. Sacred Congregation of Rites, March 21, 1914.

What about obscene books? "Books which explicitly treat, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene matters, since account must be taken not only of faith but also of morals, which are easily corrupted by the reading of books of this kind, are altogether prohibited." § 9. Lascivious or obscene matters: therefore there is no question of "loves," as they call them, with the narration of which merely erotic novels linger. Explicitly, i.e., not lightly, but by design. Treat, i.e., by disputing, defending, or simply discoursing about matters of this kind, so that they are either the object of the whole book or only the special argument of some chapter. Narrate, by relating facts, histories, or fables.

Teach, by explaining, declaring, etc., the nature of lascivious things to be done. Treat, narrate, teach: namely by insinuating these things, certainly not by showing their unlawfulness and persuading their abomination, or by scientifically explaining medicine, surgery, etc.; for it is said: which of this kind, etc. "Books of authors, whether ancient or more recent, which they call classics, if they are infected with this very stain of shamefulness, on account of elegance and propriety of speech, are permitted only to those whom the reason of office or teaching excuses; nevertheless they must in no way be handed over or read before boys or adolescents, unless they have been expurgated with diligent care." § 10.

If they are infected with this very stain of shamefulness: i.e., if they explicitly treat, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene matters, as is had in the preceding § 9. They are permitted, unless nevertheless they are related by name in the Index. The reason of office or teaching excuses. Therefore professors of humane letters and others can read these books insofar as this is demanded by the reason of office or teaching, namely insofar as it is necessary or useful to them for that reason. But they are by no means permitted to students unless they have been expurgated of that stain of shamefulness.

What about other books of special subject matter? "Books are condemned in which God, or the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Saints, or the Catholic Church and her worship, or the sacraments, or the Apostolic See, are disparaged. Works in which the concept of the inspiration of Sacred Scripture is perverted, or its extension is too much restricted, are subject to the same judgment of reprobation. Books also are prohibited which deliberately afflict the ecclesiastical hierarchy, or the clerical or religious state, with insults." § 11. Books of any authors whatsoever, whether non-Catholic or Catholic. Disparage: namely speak ill, although not explicitly, but in grave matter. Inspiration of Sacred Scripture, which, "written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, has God as author." Vatican Council, Constitution Dei Filius, chap. 2; Decree of the Holy Office Lamentabili, July 3, 1907, prop. 9. Is perverted: if, for example, the concept of inspiration were constituted in a subsequent approval of the Sacred Books by the Church; or in a certain concomitant direction of the Holy Spirit, if necessity demands; or in divine assistance for preventing errors. Cited Decree, props. 10, 12, 19, 20. Is restricted: namely to only some books of Sacred Scripture, not to all; or to only some part of the books, not to the entire books; or only to dogmas of faith and morals, not also to the remaining matters, to historical matters, to profane matters, to matters pertaining to the natural sciences; or only to matters concerning which they treat explicitly, not also to others said only incidentally. Cited Decree, prop. 11. Deliberately: and therefore not if there is only some injurious expression, but if either the whole book, or a notable part of it, or some entire chapter afflicts the ecclesiastical hierarchy, or the clerical or religious state with insults; not some private person, unless from this vituperation turns against the hierarchical order itself, or a part of it, or against the clerical or religious state itself. "Let it be forbidden to edit, read, or retain books in which sorceries, divination, magic, evocation of spirits, and other superstitions of this kind are taught or commended." § 12. Are taught, for exercising them. Are taught or commended: not if they merely narrate superstitious facts, or treat or discourse concerning them, for reproving them and showing their malice and danger. "Books or writings which narrate new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, miracles, or which introduce new devotions, even under the pretext that they are private, if they are published without legitimate permission of the Superiors of the Church, are proscribed." § 13. Writings, although they are not books, but booklets or leaves; although they are manuscripts, for they are most properly writings. If they are published: therefore the prohibition does not affect books published before this Constitution. Without legitimate permission: if this is had, it now no longer seems to be required, by force of the present Constitution, that there be a protestation according to the Decree of Urban VIII. But cf. what is had here at the end of the number. Without legitimate, etc. All books concerning sacred things and morals are indeed to be subjected to ecclesiastical censure so that they may be licitly edited; but not for that reason are all prohibited if they have been edited without legitimate approval, § 41; while on the contrary books of which there is question in this paragraph, published without permission of the superiors of the Church, are proscribed, and consequently can neither be read nor retained. Cf. 1306. "Likewise books are prohibited which establish as lawful duel, suicide, or divorce; which treat of masonic sects or other societies of the same kind, and contend that they are useful and not pernicious to the Church and civil society; and which defend errors proscribed by the Apostolic See." § 14. Books of authors of any kind, non-Catholics or Catholics. Establish, contend, defend: therefore they do this not incidentally but deliberately. Errors proscribed by the Apostolic See, e.g., errors proscribed in the Syllabus. Sacred Congregation of the Index, May 23, 1898. E.M. "Concerning sacred Relics these things are to be held. If Bishops, who alone can in this matter, know certainly that a Relic is spurious, let them remove it from the worship of the faithful. If the authenticating documents of some Relic, perhaps because of civil disturbances or from any other case, have perished, let it not be proposed publicly unless duly recognized by the Bishop. The argument of prescription or of founded presumption will then only be valid if the cult is commended by antiquity; namely according to the decree issued in the year 1896 by the sacred Council for examining indulgences and sacred Relics, by which it is declared: Ancient Relics are to be preserved in that veneration in which they have been up to now, unless in a particular case certain arguments are present that they are false or supposititious. But when there has been a judgment concerning pious traditions, it is necessary to remember this: the Church uses so great prudence in this matter that she does not permit traditions of this sort even to be narrated in writing unless much caution has been employed and the declaration sanctioned by Urban VIII has been prefaced; and although this is duly done, nevertheless she does not assert the truth of the fact, but, unless human arguments for believing are lacking, only does not prohibit it from being believed.

Thus plainly the sacred Council for guarding legitimate rites, thirty years ago, declared by Decree of May 2, 1877: Apparitions or revelations of this kind have neither been approved nor condemned by the Apostolic See, but have only been permitted as piously believable by human faith alone, according to the tradition which they bear, confirmed also by suitable testimonies and records. He who holds this will be free from every fear. For the religion of any apparition, insofar as it regards the fact itself and is called relative, always has the implicit condition concerning the truth of the fact; but insofar as it is absolute, it always rests on truth, for it is borne toward the very persons of the Saints who are honored. Similarly it must be affirmed concerning Relics. Finally We entrust this to the Council of vigilance, that they assiduously and diligently keep their eyes also on social institutions and on any writings concerning the social matter, lest anything of modernism lie hidden in them, but that they correspond to the precepts of the Roman Pontiffs." Pius X, Encyclical Letter Pascendi dominici gregis, September 8, 1907.

What about newspapers, sheets, and periodical booklets? "Newspapers, sheets, and periodical booklets which deliberately attack religion or good morals are to be held proscribed not only by natural law, but also by ecclesiastical law. But let Ordinaries, where there is need, opportunely warn the faithful concerning the danger and harm of reading of this kind." § 21. Revealed religion, and consequently also natural religion. Deliberately, i.e., by design, expressly, and therefore not incidentally, not lightly, but habitually they gravely attack religion and good morals, by whomever they may be written, whether by Catholics or, a fortiori, by heretics.

Are to be held proscribed: therefore it is not lawful to read, retain, or subscribe to them. Where there is need: with that warning omitted, it is not therefore lawful with impunity to read the aforesaid newspapers, which remain proscribed by this general law. Where there is need: and therefore the warning is not always to be made, but only in a particular case in which a special reason is present. The Cardinal Vicar of the City, by Letter of May 16, 1903, prohibited by name the newspaper Asinus. "Let no one of the Catholics, especially of ecclesiastical men, publish anything in newspapers, or sheets, or periodical booklets of this kind, unless a just and reasonable cause persuades." § 22.

In newspapers of this kind, namely those of which there is question in the preceding § 21. Anything, whether it is an article, as it is called, or even some simple notice of some matter. "Men of the secular clergy are prohibited from undertaking the direction of newspapers or periodical sheets without the previous permission of the Ordinaries." § 42. Newspapers, etc., not periodical booklets. Direction: therefore the permission of the Ordinary is required only for the direction of a newspaper, not for writing some article, or, as it is said, for collaboration.

What about images and indulgences? "Images of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, Angels and Saints, or other Servants of God, printed in any way whatsoever and differing from the sense and decrees of the Church, are altogether forbidden. But new ones, whether they have prayers annexed or are edited without them, are not to be published without permission of ecclesiastical power." § 15. Images, not statues, not medals, not paintings. Printed in any way whatsoever, for they can be printed in various ways. Already printed ones are forbidden if they differ from the sense and Decrees of the Church. Cf. Trent, sess. 25, *de Sacr.

Imag.*; Benedict XIV, Constitution Sollicitudini, October 1, 1745. Altogether forbidden: therefore they can neither be publicly exposed nor privately retained. Except unless they are retained as a mere historical monument of art. New ones, or those to be printed hereafter, and new as regards their form, cannot be printed and published without permission of ecclesiastical power. Published without it, they were indeed illicitly published, but they are not proscribed unless they differ from the sense and Decrees of the Church. "It is interdicted to all in any way to spread indulgences which are apocryphal and proscribed or revoked by the Holy Apostolic See.

Those which have already been spread are to be removed from the hands of the faithful." § 16. Apocryphal, namely false. Cf. true indulgences in authentic Collections of Indulgences approved by the Sacred Congregation, Raccolta delle Indulgenze, etc. Proscribed by the Holy Apostolic See: cf. Ferraris, v. Indulgentia, art. 4. To spread: reading in itself is not interdicted, but it is prescribed that those spread, whether in print or in manuscript, be removed from the hands of the faithful, which especially pertains to ecclesiastical superiors. "All books of indulgences, summaries, booklets, leaves, etc., in which grants of them are contained, are not to be published without permission of the competent authority." § 17.

Of the competent authority, namely either of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences or of the Bishop; of the Sacred Congregation, if there is question of new indulgences and of new summaries of them; of the Bishop, if there is speech of indulgences and summaries already approved by the Sacred Congregation, according to the norms established before the new Constitution Officiorum ac munerum. Sacred Congregation of the Index, Constitution, August 7, 1897. Permission: without it they are illicitly published, but those published are not for that reason proscribed by that very fact. E.M. 1310, 1355.

What about the faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books? "Only those will be able to read and retain books proscribed either by special Decrees or by these General Decrees who have obtained opportune faculties from the Apostolic See, or from those to whom it has delegated its authority." § 23. By special Decrees, namely those inserted in the Index of prohibited books. By General Decrees, that is, those proscribed by these General Decrees. "The Roman Pontiffs have placed the Sacred Congregation of the Index over the granting of permissions to read and retain any prohibited books whatsoever. Nevertheless, the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office and the Congregation de Propaganda Fide enjoy the same power for regions subject to their governance.

For the City only, this faculty also belongs to the Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace." § 24. Since those who are referred to in this paragraph enjoy ordinary power in the case, they can delegate it to others. "Bishops and other prelates possessing quasi-episcopal jurisdiction can grant permission for individual books, and only in urgent cases. But if the same have obtained from the Apostolic See a general faculty to impart to the faithful permission to read and retain proscribed books, let them grant it only with selection and from a just and reasonable cause." § 25.

Therefore the aforesaid have ordinary and delegated power in the case. Each can be subdelegated. By ordinary faculty they can permit the reading of individual books, and in an urgent case in which recourse cannot be had to the Roman Pontiff or another having power from him. But by delegated faculty, when they have obtained it, they can permit prohibited books generally. With selection, not generally to any person whatsoever, but to an upright and prudent person for whom there is no danger of perversion. With selection, not indeterminately and indefinitely for any book whatsoever, but with individual or at least specific indication of the books having been made, the more pernicious ones being excluded. From a just and reasonable cause, e.g., by reason of studies, of a book to be written, etc.

"All who have obtained an apostolic faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books cannot on that account read and retain any books whatsoever, or newspapers proscribed by the Ordinaries of places, unless in the apostolic indult the power of reading and retaining books condemned by anyone whatsoever has been expressly given to them. Moreover, let those who have obtained permission to read prohibited books remember that they are bound by a grave precept to guard books of this kind so that they do not come into the hands of others." § 26. Proscribed by the Ordinaries of places: cf. n. 1301, § 24 of the Constitution. Do not come: therefore they cannot give them to others. Lugo, Resp. Mor., book 4, dub. 42.

981. • Excommunication on account of heresy is the first and principal one of the Bull Apostolicae Sedis ¹. Not only heretics incur it, but also their supporters.

¹ See above, no. 972, I.

With respect to heretics themselves, for excommunication to be incurred, it is required that true heresy be present, that is, a voluntary error, externally manifested and pertinacious, against some article revealed by God and proposed by the Church. Hence:

1. Even vincible, indeed crass, ignorance excuses; but more probably affected ignorance does not excuse, because contumacy is present. St. Alphonsus, no. 301 ², nevertheless holds the contrary as more probable on account of the defect of contumacy.

² This judgment is not that of St. Alphonsus alone, but is almost common. See the things said in volume I, in the Note to no. 210.

2. A positive doubt externally disclosed does not excuse, because one who doubts judges positively that the truth proposed by the Church can be false. St. Alphonsus, no. 302.

3. One who holds heresy within his mind, or who, while manifesting it externally, dissents internally, is excused from the censure. A fortiori, one who manifests his heresy in order to seek counsel is excused, because he does not manifest the error with the intention of professing it. St. Alphonsus, no. 304.

I. A Bishop can absolve from heresy which is notorious and brought into the judicial forum, either by himself or through a delegate. Benedict XIV, On the Synod, book 9, chapter 4.

II. The Pope alone can absolve from heresy, whether notorious or occult, which has not yet been treated in the judicial forum. But an occult heretic is said to be one who, although he has exchanged heretical conversation with another, is nevertheless not notoriously held as such; or one who, although he has communicated his heresies to no one, has nevertheless performed some external acts from which he could be recognized as a heretic. Benedict XIV, Constitution Pastor bonus, 13 April 1744.

Hence it is clear that no one guilty of heresy can be absolved by an inferior judge before he has been summoned into the judicial forum or has spontaneously presented himself to it. A Bishop, however, can receive the abjuration of Protestants in either forum.

According to Laymann, a usage is in force in Germany of not sending to the Bishop Protestants who wish to embrace the Catholic Church; but after they have been taught the true Faith and have abjured heresy, they are admitted to sacramental confession and the reception of the Eucharist. A practice of this kind also obtains elsewhere.

But with respect to the rite of absolving heretics in the external forum and receiving their abjuration, see the rules which Father Maurel gives in the excellent work entitled Guide pratique de la Liturgie romaine.

982. • It was said above (no. 972, II) which books after the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis are forbidden to be read under penalty of censure, namely, that all and each knowingly reading, without authority of the Apostolic See, books of Apostates and heretics defending heresy, and also books of any author, even one not a heretic, prohibited by name through Apostolic letters, are punished with excommunication reserved to the Roman Pontiff. Therefore the penalty of excommunication incurred by the act itself, although not reserved, has ceased, by which according to the Rules of the Index there were prohibited all books of heresiarchs, or of those who are considered the chiefs or leaders of heretics, and also books of heretics treating expressly of Religion; or even books of an author, whether a heretic or not a heretic, condemned and prohibited on account of heresy or the suspicion of false dogma.

With respect to writings whose reading we have said is forbidden under censure, several teach that those reading a letter or sermon separately printed do not incur excommunication, because it is not a book. But St. Alphonsus, no. 293, rightly notes that in the Roman Expurgatory issued from the Tridentine Decree, all writings, even brief ones, were prohibited under excommunication, which we have said has ceased. But because public journals, commonly les journaux, are subject to ecclesiastical censure, it is evident that they are included under the aforesaid law if they are written by heretics and defend heresy. This is evident from the following Response of the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition, directed in the year 1832 to the Bishops of Switzerland:

QUESTION 1. Whether newspapers or journals ought to be subject to the censure of the Ordinary, and whether also with respect to political opinions?

Reply. Affirmatively, with respect to both parts.

QUESTION 2. Whether not only doctrinal articles, but also articles in which facts are narrated, are subject to the same censure ³?

³ By the name censure in this Response of the Sacred Congregation there does not appear to be meant the penalty either of excommunication or suspension, etc., but merely the ecclesiastical examination and approval which is required by law before books are printed. Wherefore from it, in itself and directly, it is not proved that the aforesaid newspapers are subject to excommunication. Indirectly, however, it pertains to the matter in some manner, insofar as it sufficiently indicates that the care concerning books or writings to be published, which ecclesiastical power exercises by its own right, extends also to this kind of writing; and thus that with respect to these also it can appear not incongruous that it use the customary remedies for forestalling dangers to the faithful.

On this matter, that which we observe in the Decrees concerning books prohibited but not expressed by name in the Index is plainly worthy of notice. For in section 1 the title is prefixed: Books Written or Published by Heretics; then in no. 6 there is read: Poems, Orations, Images; and in no. 9: Confessions, Articles, or Formularies of Faith. Therefore in the Decrees concerning the reading of Books the name BOOKS extends also to these. Say the same of section 2, whose title is: BOOKS of Certain Subjects Prohibited. Nevertheless, see mentioned therein, in nos. 5, 6, and 7, Pamphlets, Letters, Ordinances, Arrests, Decrees, Epistles. Therefore, if in Decrees which condemn the reading of books even under censures it must be judged that the name Books is used in that sense in which it is generally accustomed to be employed in Decrees of this kind, the argument sought by others from the common appellation of a book, by which, namely, the reading of a letter, poem, oration, or some newspaper is exempted from the condemnation and added penalties, could appear empty. And this can be confirmed by another reason. For, after the Decrees have been inspected, it is sufficiently evident that by the name of a book there is understood anything whatever whose reading contributes to the detriment and corruption of faith and morals. But this belongs not only to writings which commonly have the name of books, but to any little writing. Therefore.

It is useful here to subjoin those things which the Rieti Commentary adds after relating the contrary opinion of Bouvier: The most learned writers of the periodical whose title is La Civilta Cattolica think otherwise (series VIII, volume VI, from page 648), being led chiefly by this reason, that newspapers differ from books in this: the former are issued from individual sheets or leaves on individual days, while the latter coalesce into books from several joined sheets published at the same time; a brief and pressing reason. However that is altogether indubitable, that newspapers whose reading is dangerous to faith or morals are forbidden under grave obligation by the natural law itself. And this is most certainly so after the Letters of Our Most Holy Lord Pope Pius IX given to the Most Eminent Vicar of the City on 30 July 1871....

Reply. Affirmatively.

But one who hears another reading does not incur excommunication, at least probably, because he does not read. Nor does one who reads some small portion, on account of paucity of matter. But the gravity of matter cannot be strictly determined; sometimes a few lines suffice if heresy occurs. St. Alphonsus, no. 284. Nor does one who reads from necessity in order to refute a heretic incur it, if recourse to the Superior is not available. St. Alphonsus, no. 283. Nor one who retains a book for a short time, for example, one or two days. St. Alphonsus, no. 295. Nor if he retains a book while awaiting an opportune time to hand it over to the Superior; but otherwise if he retained it for a long time, even though he abstained altogether from reading it. St. Alphonsus, ibid.

983. • The Index was composed and promulgated by command of Paul IV in the year 1558; Pius IV perfected it with the Council of Trent and published it in the year 1564. Clement VIII enlarged it in the year 1595. The Congregation of the Index was instituted by St. Pius V. See St. Alphonsus, Appendix On the Prohibition of Books, book 1, at the end, no. 17, etc.

The Index presents three principal classes of prohibited books. The first class contains all books of heretics which contain heresy or treat expressly of Religion. The second class embraces books of Catholics against the Faith or good morals. The third class contains books published without the name of the author which hand down depraved doctrine. St. Alphonsus, no. 289.

Books of the first class, which by the ancient law were all prohibited under penalty of excommunication, still all remain prohibited; but which are now forbidden under penalty of excommunication, and indeed a reserved one, was said above. Books of the second and third class are not considered prohibited unless they are specially designated in the Index, unless nevertheless they pertain to certain general classes of matters which are designated in the Rules of the Index. Furthermore, in the Index all books of heresiarchs are prohibited generally in hatred of the author, even if they do not contain heresy or treat of Religion ⁴.

⁴ Avanzini notes (Commentary, no. 8) that, with account taken of penalties, books prohibited or to be rejected can be divided into three classes, namely: 1. books prohibited under penalty of excommunication reserved to the Roman Pontiff, concerning which above, no. 972, II; 2. books prohibited under penalty of fault according to the Index of Prohibited Books and its rules in force. To this class can also be referred books or writings forbidden only by the law of nature, although not yet placed in the Index, which nevertheless can otherwise easily be referred to certain general classes of prohibited books; likewise, books prohibited by Bishops in individual dioceses. That Decree, however, both as regards the force of a positive precept and as regards the censure, if any were added, would bind only the subjects of each diocese. 3. Books which, according to the ancient usage in the Church, we shall call apocryphal, which, namely, we hold as destitute of all that authority, force, or use to which they might appear to be ordained. In this class we call a monument, canon, testament, decree, etc., apocryphal; but the Church simply repudiates these books without any sanctioned penalty. Of this kind are books treating of sacred matters but printed without the approval of the Ordinary. To this class can be referred all books of indulgences, journals, summaries, pamphlets, and sheets in which their concessions are contained but which were published without permission of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences; likewise ritual books issued without the approval of the Congregation of Sacred Rites, etc.

984. • 1. All books condemned before the year 1515 are prohibited, even if they are not found described in the Index.

2. All books of heresiarchs are altogether forbidden, even if not erroneous or not treating expressly of Religion. Other books of heretics which are not erroneous and do not treat of Religion can be permitted, provided they have been examined and approved ⁵.

⁵ This clause does not appear now to be in force.

3. The Scriptures and books of controversies in the vernacular language cannot be read unless they have been approved by the Holy See or published with notes taken from the holy Fathers of the Church or from learned Catholic men ⁶.

⁶ POSTULATUM. Since it has been reported with certainty to the Sacred Congregation of the Index that in some places the most sacred books of the Bible are printed in the vernacular language without the most salutary laws concerning this matter being observed, and since it is therefore to be feared that, such being the conspiracy of wicked men especially in these times, errors wrapped in the more sacred array of the divine word may be insinuated perversely, the same Sacred Congregation judged that those things which were otherwise decreed must again be recalled to the memory of all: namely, that vernacular versions of the Bible are not to be permitted unless they have been approved by the Apostolic See or published with annotations taken from the holy Fathers of the Church or from learned Catholic men. 13 June 1757. Likewise, 7 January 1836.

4. Books treating expressly of obscene things are absolutely prohibited, although they are not found in the Index.

5. Likewise, all books treating of astrology, divination, and sorceries are forbidden, more probably under an excommunication not reserved.

6. All books condemned on account of suspicion of false dogma are prohibited under penalty of excommunication, but see above, no. 972, II; others under guilt of mortal sin.

Besides the ten Rules issued by command of the Council of Trent, there exist other general Rules established by the Sacred Congregation of the Index itself and published by command of the Pontiffs in the volume of the Index of Prohibited Books, under this title: Decrees Concerning Prohibited Books, etc.

By the ancient law, books of heretics treating of Religion or containing heresy were prohibited under excommunication in two ways: one reserved to the Roman Pontiff through the Bull Coenae; the other not reserved. For the new law see above, no. 972, II.

985. Questions. - QUESTION 1. Whether the law of the Index, prohibiting the reading of certain books, binds by natural law or only by positive law?

Reply. It obliges by both laws, at least of itself, because it does not prohibit books except because they are pernicious and induce proximate danger of perversion or sin; but by natural law everyone is bound to flee danger of this kind. Hence, even if the obligation of the Index were not acknowledged somewhere, nevertheless the reading of books placed in the Index would be prohibited under grave obligation. Concerning this St. Alphonsus observes: All theologians add that even with the permission of the Pontiff the reading of that book which could be an occasion of ruin to someone cannot be permitted. Appendix On Prohibited Books, chapter 1, no. 12.

Two things must furthermore be noted.

1. Private persons ought to obey the commands of the Confessor in those things which concern the reading of books. Thus the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition replied in the year 1832 to the Bishops of Switzerland asking: Can the faithful, with conscience safe, read newspapers or books which have not undergone the censure of the Ordinary? Reply. Let them have recourse to the Confessor ⁷.

⁷ Indeed, even when the faculty of reading prohibited books is given to someone, a clause is sometimes added that in this matter the counsel and judgment of the confessor are to be employed.

2. The Confessor himself ought carefully to seek the direction of the Bishop and diligently to keep before his eyes the most grave admonition which St. Alphonsus handed down, namely: In this matter it is ordinarily expedient to follow the stricter opinions. Chapter 5, no. 8.

986. • QUESTION 2. Whether the law of the Index is binding in France?

Reply. Not all agree concerning this matter. Some affirm it because the law is general. Others, however, deny it both because, they say, the law of the Index was not received, which the opponents otherwise say is historically false, and because of the long desuetude of the law. But others, walking a middle way, used to say that the prohibition of the Index was not received in France as regards the penalty of excommunication, but was binding as regards the guilt of sin, which is generally committed on account of the danger of perversion or of evil delight from reading such books.

But whatever not a few theologians of France formerly said, it does not now appear that there should be any further doubt on account of the unambiguous Declarations of Pius IX. For the Pontiff not only acted by persuasions to induce the Bishops of France to put the laws of the Index into execution, but also displayed such authority that henceforth it is licit for no one to affirm that the law of the Index is not in force in France. It suffices to bring forward the testimony of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, and consequently of the Pontiff himself, in the acts of the Council of Rheims in the year 1857, namely: Moreover, let the Rules of the Index be observed. See Cardinal Gousset, Exposition des principes du Droit canonique.

It is also worthy of note that the Bishops of France strive daily that the laws of the Index be put into execution, as is evident from the Provincial Councils of Avignon, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Auch, La Rochelle, etc.

987. • QUESTION 3. Does one violate the law of the Index who reads, for example, manuscripts of larger format written by a heretic?

Reply. It appears that this must be affirmed with St. Alphonsus, no. 293, Suarez, La Croix, and others more commonly. The reason is that in common usage manuscripts are often accustomed to be designated by the name of books; for thus all writings were called before typography had been invented. Several nevertheless contradict this because manuscripts do not come under the name of books ⁸.

⁸ Yet it must not be neglected that in the Decree On Prohibited Books, section 2, nos. 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 13, mention is expressly made also of manuscripts. Therefore, according to the proper sense of the Curia, manuscripts too come under the name of a book.

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

1. Antoninus, a bishop, hearing that heretical books are being spread in his diocese, without delay orders them to be brought to himself, so that he may read them, examine them, and, insofar as there is need, proscribe them. Can Antoninus read the aforesaid books of heretics in the Case?

R. Affirmatively. For bishops, according to necessity or time, can well read the books of heretics, C. 1, Dist. 37. And the contrary opinion of certain persons was seen in the Holy Office as too rigorous, Albitius, de Inconst. in fide, c. 30, n. 204. Namely, bishops are the born judges of the faith, and to their office it belongs to defend the faith, and therefore to ward off from the sheep committed to them the harmful pastures of faith. Whence it is of their office to prohibit the reading of depraved books, and also, if it is necessary, to denounce them to the Holy See. Leo XIII, C. Officiorum; I. M. 1301. Now how could they ever execute such an office unless they read the aforesaid books? Commentar. in C. Apostolicae Sedis n. 13, ed. 5; D'Annib., Comment. in C. Apost. Sed., ed. 4, n. 41.

2. Alphonsus, owner of a typographical workshop, and Alfredus, corrector in the same workshop, in which books of heretics have until now been printed, doubt whether they have incurred excommunication, and their confessor himself also doubts.

It is asked: Whether Alphonsus and Alfredus have incurred, in the Case, excommunication reserved in a special mode to the Supreme Pontiff, art. 2 of the first series of C. Apost. Sed.?

R. Affirmatively. For first as regards Alphonsus, he cannot indeed be counted among readers, nor among defenders, nor even among printers from the fact that he is owner of the workshop, himself provides the expenses, and by his will and mandate the books are printed. Nevertheless he must be counted among retainers, since he very truly retains them in his own workshop. But Alfredus, because he is corrector, is reckoned among readers. Wherefore both incur the aforesaid excommunication. Comment. in C. Apost. Sed. n. 13.

3. Seius, having lapsed into heresy, wrote several heretical books, which he himself was continually reading and correcting in order to prepare new editions. He was converted to the faith, and his uncertain confessor asks whether, besides the excommunication because of heresy, he also incurred excommunication because of the reading of heretical books.

R. The more common opinion affirms. And by the rigor of law and of the law it must be affirmed, because Seius in reality was retaining and reading books of a heretic championing heresy. Yet D'Annib., Comm. in Const. Apost. Sed., n. 41, note 44, says: "I fear lest this be true; for who, in the proper and common meaning, would say that a heretic reading his own books reads books of heretics?"

4. Guido, an editor of books, gratuitously furnishes the expenses of the edition of a heretical book of Vincentius, his friend. Does he incur excommunication reserved in a special mode to the Supreme Pontiff, art. 2, first series, C. Apost. Sed.?

R. Negatively, as is clear from the preceding case; because he does not read, does not print, does not retain. Nevertheless he incurs excommunication art. 1, as a favorer of heretics. Comm. in C. Apost. Sed. n. 9 seqq.

"Whether in decree no. 17 of the General Decrees concerning the prohibition and censure of books recently issued by Our Most Holy Lord Pope Leo XIII, these words: let them not be published without the permission of the competent authority, are to be understood in such a way that henceforth all books, booklets, sheets, etc., of indulgences are to be referred only to the Ordinaries of places in order to obtain permission? Or are they to be subjected to the review either of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences or of the Ordinary of the place according to the norms established before the new Constitution Officiorum ac Munerum? - Response. To the first part: Negative. - To the second: Affirmative." Sacred Congregation of the Index, 7 August 1897.

"Article 12, section 3, of the Decrees issued after the old Rules of the Index is to be understood in such a way that, if there is question of publishing the grant of some indulgence, or a summary of indulgences which is to be taken from an Apostolic Brief or Rescript, or a summary already published by authority of the Sacred Congregation, it is within the power of the Ordinary to grant permission to print the grants of those indulgences (provided that there is not a special and express prohibition for some list); but, on the contrary, if there is question of a summary previously collected but never approved, or now to be collected for the first time from various grants, the express permission of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences is required. His Holiness approved." Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, 22 January 1858.

General Decrees on the Prohibition and Censure of Books

1. All books which before the year 1600 either the Supreme Pontiffs or ecumenical councils condemned, and which are not listed in the new Index, are to be held condemned in the same way as they were formerly condemned: except those which are permitted through these General Decrees.

2. Books of apostates, heretics, schismatics, and any writers whatsoever, defending heresy or schism, or in any way overturning the very foundations of religion, are altogether prohibited.

3. Likewise books of non-Catholics which expressly treat of religion are prohibited, unless it is established that nothing against Catholic faith is contained in them.

4. Books of the same authors which do not expressly treat of religion, but only touch incidentally the truths of faith, are not to be held prohibited by ecclesiastical law until they have been proscribed by special decree.

5. Editions of the original text and of ancient Catholic versions of Sacred Scripture, even of the Eastern Church, published by any non-Catholics whatsoever, even if they appear to have been edited faithfully and integrally, are permitted only to those who devote themselves to theological or biblical studies, provided nevertheless that in the prolegomena or annotations the dogmas of Catholic faith are not attacked.

6. In the same manner, and under the same conditions, other versions of the sacred Bibles, whether in Latin or in another non-vernacular language, edited by non-Catholics, are permitted.

7. Since by experience it is manifest that, if the sacred Bibles in the vernacular language are everywhere permitted without discrimination, more detriment than utility arises thence, on account of the rashness of men, all versions in the vernacular language, even those made by Catholic men, are altogether prohibited, unless they have been approved by the Apostolic See, or edited under the vigilance of bishops with annotations taken from the holy Fathers of the Church and from learned and Catholic writers.

8. All versions of the sacred Bibles, made in any vernacular language by any non-Catholics whatsoever, are interdicted, and especially those which are spread abroad through biblical societies, condemned more than once by the Roman Pontiffs, since in them the most salutary laws of the Church concerning the publishing of divine books are fundamentally disregarded.

Nevertheless these versions are permitted to those who devote themselves to theological or biblical studies, with those things observed which were established above (n. 5).

9. Books which expressly treat, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene matters, since account must be taken not only of faith, but also of morals, which are customarily easily corrupted by the reading of books of this kind, are altogether prohibited.

10. Books of authors, whether ancient or more recent, whom they call classics, if they are infected with this very stain of foulness, on account of elegance and propriety of speech are permitted only to those whom the reason of office or teaching excuses; nevertheless they will by no reason be handed over or read aloud to boys or adolescents, unless expurgated with diligent care.

11. Books are condemned in which there is detraction from God, or from the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Saints, or the Catholic Church and its worship, or the Sacraments, or the Apostolic See. To the same judgment of reprobation are subjected those works in which the concept of inspiration of Sacred Scripture is perverted, or its extension too much restricted. Books also are prohibited which of set purpose afflict the ecclesiastical hierarchy, or the clerical or religious state, with insults.

12. Let it be forbidden to publish, read, or retain books in which sortileges, divination, magic, evocation of spirits, and other superstitions of this kind are taught or commended.

13. Books or writings which narrate new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, miracles, or which introduce new devotions, even under the pretext that they are private, if they are published without legitimate license of the Superiors of the Church, are proscribed.

14. Likewise books are prohibited which establish duel, suicide, or divorce as licit, which treat of masonic sects or other societies of the same kind, and contend that they are useful and not pernicious to the Church and to civil society, and which defend errors proscribed by the Apostolic See.

15. Images printed in any way whatsoever of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of angels and saints, or of other servants of God, which differ from the sense and decrees of the Church, are altogether forbidden. But new ones, whether they have prayers attached or are edited without them, are not to be published without the license of ecclesiastical power.

16. It is interdicted to all to spread abroad in any way whatsoever apocryphal indulgences, and those proscribed or revoked by the Holy Apostolic See. Those which have already been spread abroad are to be taken from the hands of the faithful.

17. All books of Indulgences, summaries, pamphlets, sheets, etc., in which their concessions are contained, are not to be published without the license of competent authority.

18. In authentic editions of the Missal, Breviary, Ritual, Ceremonial of Bishops, Roman Pontifical, and other liturgical books approved by the Holy Apostolic See, let no one presume to change anything: if it has been done otherwise, these new editions are prohibited.

19. All litanies, besides the most ancient and common ones which are contained in Breviaries, Missals, Pontificals, and Rituals, and besides the litanies of the Blessed Virgin which are customarily sung in the sacred house of Loreto, and the litanies of the most holy Name of Jesus already approved by the Holy See, are not to be published without the review and approval of the Ordinary.

20. Books or pamphlets of prayers, devotion, or doctrine and religious, moral, ascetical, mystical instruction, and other such things, although they seem to conduce to fostering the piety of the Christian people, let no one publish apart from the license of legitimate authority: otherwise let them be held prohibited.

21. Newspapers, sheets, and periodic pamphlets which attack religion or good morals of set purpose are to be held proscribed not only by natural law, but also by ecclesiastical law.

But let Ordinaries take care, where there is need, opportunely to warn the faithful concerning the danger and harm of reading of this kind.

22. Let no one of Catholics, especially of ecclesiastical men, publish anything in newspapers, or sheets, or periodic pamphlets of this kind, unless a just and reasonable cause persuades.

23. Books proscribed either by special decrees or by these general decrees can be read and retained only by those who have obtained opportune faculties from the Apostolic See, or from those to whom it has delegated its place.

24. The Roman Pontiffs placed the Sacred Congregation of the Index over conceding licenses of reading and retaining any prohibited books whatsoever. Nevertheless, the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, and also the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide for regions subject to its governance, enjoy the same power. For the City alone, this faculty also belongs to the Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace.

25. Bishops and other prelates possessing quasi-episcopal jurisdiction may be able to concede license for singular books, and only in urgent cases. But if the same have obtained from the Apostolic See a general faculty, so that they may be able to 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 the apostolic faculty of reading and retaining prohibited books are not therefore able to read and retain any books whatsoever, or newspapers proscribed by the Ordinaries of places, unless in the apostolic indult there has been made for them express power of reading and retaining books condemned by any persons whatsoever. Let those who have obtained license of reading prohibited books also remember that they are held by grave precept to guard books of this kind in such a way that they do not come to the hands of others.

27. Although it belongs to all Catholics, especially to those who excel in doctrine, to denounce pernicious books to Bishops or to the Apostolic See, nevertheless by a special title this pertains to Nuncios, Apostolic Delegates, Ordinaries of places, and Rectors of Universities flourishing in praise of doctrine.

28. It is expedient that in the denunciation of bad books not only the title of the book be indicated, but also, insofar as it can be done, the causes be set forth on account of which the book is judged worthy of censure. But to those to whom the denunciation is referred, it will be sacred to preserve secret the names of those denouncing.

29. Ordinaries, also as Delegates of the Apostolic See, should strive to proscribe and take from the hands of the faithful books and other harmful writings published or diffused in their diocese. Let them refer to apostolic judgment those works or writings which demand a subtler examination, or in which, for pursuing a salutary effect, the sentence of supreme authority seems to be required.

1. The right and duty to forbid books for a just cause belongs:

a) For the universal Church, to the Supreme Pontiff and to ecumenical councils; b) For their respective subjects, α) To the diocesan Ordinaries and particular councils; β) To the abbots of independent monasteries and to the highest superiors of exempt institutes of religious clerics, acting together with their chapter or council; or, γ) When delay would be dangerous, to the other major superiors, acting with the advice of their consultors; but in this case the highest superior must be informed of the matter as soon as possible.¹

¹ C. I. C., can. 1395.

2. Laws prohibiting books do not affect:

a) Cardinals, bishops (diocesan and titular), and other Ordinaries,² including the major superiors of exempt clerical orders,³ all of whom, however, must apply the necessary precautions.

² C. I. C., can. 1401.

³ C. I. C., can. 198, § 1.

When issued by the Roman Pontiff or by his authority, these laws do affect.

b) All other members of the Church, no matter where they live or into what language the forbidden books are translated; when issued by an inferior prelate, they bind all his subjects.⁴

⁴ C. I. C., can. 1395 sq.

3. The common law of the Church, as laid down in the Code, forbids:

a) All editions of the original text and the ancient Catholic versions of Sacred Scripture, including those of the Eastern Church, when published by non-Catholics; also all translations of the Bible or any part thereof, into whatever tongue, when made by non-Catholics or edited by them.⁵

⁵ C. I. C., can. 1399.

The use of such editions of Holy Scripture and vernacular translations as lack the required approbation is permitted to those who are engaged in theological or scriptural studies, provided, however, that the editions are faithfully and completely edited and do not attack the doctrines of the Catholic Church, either in their prolegomena or notes.⁶

⁶ C. I. C., can. 1400.

b) The common law further forbids all books, pamphlets, leaflets, and periodicals, no matter by whom composed, that defend heresy or schism, or in any way strive to undermine the foundations of religion.⁷

⁷ C. I. C., can. 1399, n. 2.

This prohibition, in the opinion of competent theologians, includes all writings which in word or picture (caricature) ridicule religion and aim at subverting its foundations. But it does not include encyclopedias compiled by Catholics and non-Catholics in collaboration, even though the articles contributed by the latter may contain heresies or champion materialism and other grievous errors.⁸

⁸ Cfr. Arregui, Summarium Theol. Mor., p. 260; Ferreres, Compend. Theol. Mor., Vol. I, p. 636.

c) The common law of the Church also forbids all books that purposely or professedly attack religion or morals.⁹

⁹ C. I. C., can. 1399, n. 3.

d) Also all books written by non-Catholics, which treat ex professo¹⁰ of religion, unless it is certain that they contain nothing against the Catholic faith.¹¹

¹⁰ On the meaning of this phrase see Timothy Hurley, A Commentary on the Present Index Legislation, Dublin 1907, pp. 84 sqq.

¹¹ C. I. C., can. 1399, n. 4.

e) Likewise, unapproved editions of, or commentaries upon Sacred Scripture, or translations into the vernacular, whether with or without notes; also those mentioned supra, as well as all books describing new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, or miracles or introducing new devotions, even though it be under the pretext that they are private, if published without canonical approbation.¹²

¹² C. I. C., can. 1385, § 1, n. 1; can. 1391; can. 1385, § 1, n. 2; cfr. Ferreres, Compend. Theol. Mor., Vol. I, p. 638.

f) The common law also forbids books which impugn or deride any Catholic dogma, or defend errors that have been condemned by the Holy See, or detract from divine worship, or attempt to subvert the discipline of the Church, or purposely (data opera) malign the ecclesiastical hierarchy or the clerical or religious state.

g) All books that teach or recommend any form of superstition, witchcraft, divination, magic, the evocation of spirits, or other similar practices.

h) All books that represent duelling, suicide or divorce as permissible, or defend Freemasonic or other societies of the same kind as useful and not pernicious to Church and society.

i) Also all books which treat ex professo of lascivious or obscene things.

j) Also any and all editions of approved liturgical books in which anything has been changed, so that they no longer agree with the authentic originals approved by the Holy See.

k) Also all books containing spurious indulgences or such as have been proscribed or revoked by the Holy See.

l) Also images or pictures, no matter how manifolded, of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the angels and saints or other servants of God, depicted contrary to the mind and the decrees of the Church.¹³

¹³ C. I. C., can. 1399; cfr. Ferreres, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 637.

The last-mentioned prohibition does not affect statues, coins, or paintings.

4. The effects of the prohibition of a book by the ecclesiastical authorities are indicated in canon 1398, as follows:

a) The prohibition of a book has the effect that it cannot, without due permission, be published, or read, or retained, or sold, or translated into another language, or in any way communicated to others.¹⁴

¹⁴ C. I. C., can. 1398, § 1.

b) A book which has been in any way forbidden, may not be republished except after the necessary corrections have been made and permission has been obtained from him who forbade it, or from his superior or successor in office.¹⁵

¹⁵ C. I. C., can. 1398, § 3.

To publish a book (edere) means to cause it to be manifolded and disseminated, either at one’s own expense, or at the expense of somebody else.¹⁶

¹⁶ A. Vermeersch, S.J., De Prohibitione et Censura Librorum, 4th ed., Rome 1906, n. 49, 127.

To read a book means to peruse it understandingly, not merely to listen to its being read, or gaze at the letters without comprehending their significance.

To retain a book means to keep it in one’s house, or to entrust it to another, without relinquishing one’s ownership. This prohibition does not affect book-binders and librarians.

A forbidden book may not be sold, either publicly or in private, nor may it be given or loaned to any one who has not permission to read forbidden books.

5. The laws of the Church on books bind per se under pain of mortal sin, but admit of parvitas materiae.

It is a mortal sin to retain a dangerous book that has been forbidden by the Church, for more than a month, or to read any considerable part of it, or to read any passage in it which is apt to cause serious danger to faith or morals. It is also grievously sinful to read habitually forbidden newspapers or magazines, or any sizeable pamphlet or article directly opposed to faith or morals.

6. Permission to read and retain books forbidden by the common law of the Church or by decree of the Apostolic See, can be obtained for a just and reasonable cause from the Supreme Pontiff, either personally or through the Roman Congregations.

The diocesan bishop can give permission to individuals to read single forbidden books in urgent cases. If he has obtained the necessary faculty for this purpose from the Holy See, he may also give a general permission, but should not do so except for a just and reasonable cause.

The general faculty to read forbidden books does not extend to books specially forbidden by the Ordinaries, unless the respective papal indult contains the clause “a quibuslibet damnatos,” or something to the same effect.¹⁷

¹⁷ C. I. C., can. 1402 sq.

No permission, from whomsoever obtained, excuses a person from obeying the precept of the natural law which forbids the reading of books that constitute a proximate occasion of sin, and commands that forbidden books be properly safeguarded, so that they do not fall into the hands of those who are not allowed to read them.¹⁸

¹⁸ C. I. C., can. 1405, § 1; can. 1403, § 2.

Catholic booksellers are forbidden to sell, loan or retain books that treat ex professo, i. e., of set purpose, of obscene things, and they should not sell prohibited books unless they have permission to do so from the Holy See, and even then, should sell them only to those of whom it may be prudently presumed that they are authorized to read and keep them.¹⁹

¹⁹ C. I. C., can. 1404; cfr. A. M. Arregui, S.J., Summarium Theol. Mor., of which we have made liberal use in compiling this section.

7. To denounce dangerous books is a duty incumbent upon all Catholics, but especially upon clerics and ecclesiastical dignitaries, and among these more particularly upon the delegates of the Apostolic See, the diocesan Ordinaries, and the rectors of Catholic universities.²⁰ Denunciation may be made either to the Ordinary of the diocese, or directly to the Holy See, and should contain not only the title of the book, but also, if possible, a statement of the reasons why it is considered dangerous.²¹ Those who receive such a denunciation are bound in conscience to keep the name of the accuser secret.²² Local Ordinaries should, either personally or through reliable priests, watch over the books published and sold within their territories.²³

²⁰ C. I. C., can. 1397, § 1.

²¹ C. I. C., can. 1397, § 1 and 2.

²² C. I. C., can. 1397, § 3.

²³ C. I. C., can. 1397, § 4.

Books that demand a more careful examination or call for action on the part of the supreme authority, should be submitted by the Ordinaries to the judgment of the Holy See.²⁴

²⁴ C. I. C., can. 1397, § 5.

To decide whether this or that particular book is forbidden by the general laws of the Church is left to the judgment of the individual, unless a special declaration exists on the subject. Hence, when one is in doubt as to the character of a book, whether it belongs to the category of forbidden books or not, one is allowed to read as much of it as may be necessary to form an opinion. Those who are unable to form a judgment for themselves, should consult learned men, especially their pastor or confessor.²⁵

²⁵ H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. II, p. 747.

Generally speaking, the law of nature forbids the reading of any book that one feels to be dangerous to faith or morals. Nor does that law make any distinction between bad books of one kind or another, or between the manner of reading, whether a book be read in the ordinary way or by listening to others. The prohibition ceases with the danger. Consequently, the same book may be prohibited to one person and permitted to another.

394. - 1. Tender words, whether uttered orally or written:

They are most excellent between spouses, between parents and children, between brothers, indeed between friends, when they are dictated by a noble friendship and not by love;

They are honorable between betrothed persons;

They are reprehensible and dangerous among others if they express a futile, vain, sensual love;

They are certainly gravely blameworthy between persons who love one another lustfully. Among these persons, prolonged and unnecessary conversations already create a grave danger (St. Alphonsus, book 3, no. 422).

2. Prolonged conversations and narratives concerning gravely obscene things, for example concerning seminal emission or the manner of intercourse, held between unmarried persons, are of themselves to be regarded as gravely unlawful, especially among younger persons and if the matters are described. Custom, however, and related studies can diminish the force of conversations of this kind.

3. Isolated words or base jests, such as are uttered, for example, by reapers and muleteers, are not judged mortal. For these things are generally uttered in sport.

4. One who out of boasting recounts his own base sins easily sins by the sin of scandal; and if, as is likely, complacency in his own sin and, as it were, a new approval of it was present, there will be a new sin, whose gravity and species to be accused are determined by the object. Cf. what was said in no. 362.

5. To sing gravely obscene songs before others will be grave, at least because of scandal; it is otherwise if you sing alone and attend more to the melody (Palmieri, Opus theologicum, vol. 2, treatise 6, no. 989).

Wherefore, we judge that those who in the theater or in a public hall sing base things which, as such, will be received with applause can never be excused.

Nevertheless, as regards the proximate cooperation which by acting or singing is afforded to comedies not absolutely gravely base but notably immodest, they "excuse him who takes part by the acting itself or by singing, a depraved affection being excluded, because of the very grave poverty in which he would otherwise be placed, for a short time - Sanchez, Pontius, Castropalaus, Tamburini, In Decalogum, book 5, chapter 1, § 4, no. 28 - provided that, as much as he can, he moderate the lasciviousness ¹." Cf. also no. 408.

¹ Sanchez, De matrimonio, book 9, disputation 45, no. 37; Lehmkuhl, I, 1034, approved by Palmieri, vol. 2, no. 990.

As regards hearers, unless the base matter itself pleased them in itself, or unless by exciting and encouraging they were the authors of such a conversation or of its continuation, or unless, because of the position they hold and the authority with which they are clothed, they ought to have prevented it or at least could easily have done so, it is not imputed to them as a grave sin that, from a certain shame and human fear, they abstain from reproof, or indeed smile, especially if laughter is excited by the artifice of the speech rather than by the base matter itself ². As is evident, they sin in no way if they have a just cause for tolerating the matters, for example, because rebuke would move others to say or do worse things.

² Lehmkuhl, I, 826. Cf. St. Alphonsus, book 3, no. 427.

But let them endeavor at least by a certain manner of silence to disapprove such things. It can also happen that from one's personal condition, for example that of a priest, a special scandal may arise unless he testifies that he is averse to these conversations.

6. Finally, you should observe that in workshops and offices where several young persons are gathered, the danger of conversations of this kind is so common that a change of place will scarcely be useful. Wherefore, rather let the confessor commend to workers and clerks, urging it gravely, that they not provoke these things nor have a notable part in them. Moreover, having observed the quality and authority of the persons and their natural fortitude, let him give them courage so that they may decline these things not fearfully and timidly but firmly and simply.

But a fuller remedy is to be sought either from the master of the workshop or the head of the office, if he possesses authority by which he can efficaciously restrain these things; or from an association of good men who are more numerous in the same workshop and mutually assist one another in correcting and removing this.

395. - 1. Those who write, or indiscriminately sell to all, books or newspapers which incite to lust or are hostile to good morals sin mortally, because it is certain that many will sin mortally therefrom.

Nor can it be tolerated that obscene newspapers be displayed in taverns and public places.

Sellers can be excused for a short time by the gravest necessity.

2. Without a sufficient cause, which literary studies or dealings with literature can furnish, to read base books, even from curiosity alone, will be at least venial, even with the proximate danger excluded, because a remote danger is certainly incurred.

But if, as wholly obscene books commonly do, they proximately dispose one toward carnal pleasure, this is to be judged rather mortal in unmarried persons. Those, therefore, can be excepted who by age or custom do not incur a danger of this kind.

Rarely, however, will there be a just cause for reading wholly obscene books, and younger persons are greatly to be turned away even from lightly immodest readings: anthropologists themselves testify that these are incentives to lust. And prolonged reading often ends in lustfulness.

And girls and women are especially to be turned away from novels in general, lest they hope for a chimerical life or, given over to vain dreams, lose time and moral vigor.

The ecclesiastical law must also be observed, which by the law itself condemns both books "which deliberately attack good morals" and books "which professedly treat, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene matters" (canon 1399 of the Code of Canon Law).

Adolescents who, moved by curiosity, seek certain obscene words in dictionaries in order that they may know their meaning better commonly do not sin except lightly. Thus also Noldin, De sexto, no. 59.

396. - What has been said concerning words can generally be transferred to less decorous gestures, since these also are signs. Cf. Palmieri, vol. 2, treatise 6, no. 990, at the end.

530. Already for centuries⁷⁹ the Church with watchful vigilance has proscribed bad books and forbidden the reading of them under grave penalties. There will be speech below about those ecclesiastical penalties in the treatise on censures. Almost nothing is so pestiferous for true religion and good morals as the reading of bad books. Hence Leo XIII says: "In the struggle [against the doctrine of Christ] the wiles and arts of harming of the enemies are indeed various and innumerable; but among the first is the full-of-dangers intemperance of writing and disseminating among the people the things which have been written badly. For nothing more pernicious can be thought of for staining souls through contempt of religion and through the many allurements of sinning."⁸⁰ The same Pontiff established certain new general rules for discerning the categories of prohibited books. These rules indeed are renewed in the Code of Canon Law c. 1399. Thus are prohibited, e.g.: "Books of any writers whatsoever defending heresy or schism, or in any way overthrowing the foundations of religion itself; books which deliberately attack religion or good morals; books of any non-Catholics whatsoever which professedly treat of religion, unless it is certain that nothing against the Catholic faith is contained in them; ... books which establish as licit duel, suicide, or divorce, which treat of Masonic sects or other societies of the same kind and contend that they are useful and not pernicious to the Church and civil society; books which professedly treat, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene matters." - All these books are prohibited on account of the imminent danger to faith and good morals. But if in a particular case for an individual man such danger does not exist on account of the firmness of his character, nevertheless the law of prohibition perseveres.⁸¹ But then the faculty of reading prohibited books is easily obtained from the competent authority, if a reasonable cause exists.

Note. No more efficacious way is given of preventing the reading of bad books and papers than to provide good books for the people to read, and especially good daily or periodical papers. Hence with the best fruit in diverse regions associations operate for spreading good books.⁸²

⁷⁹ On the history of the prohibition of books, see Jos. Hilgers, Der Index der verbotenen Bucher (Freiburg, 1904), 2 sqq., Geschichtl. Uberblick des kirchl. Bucherverbotes.

⁸⁰ Const. "Officiorum et munerum," January 25, 1897.

⁸¹ Compare what was said above (n. 218) about law founded on the presumption of common danger.

⁸² E.g. in Germany: the Borromaeusverein; in other regions: l'oeuvre de la bonne presse.

Through the publication of books opposed to faith (or to good morals), especially in this our age, an immense slaughter of souls is made (de Prohib. lib.; ed. G., I, p. 253).

451. PRINCIPLES. I. By force of the natural law, there is given a most grave obligation of avoiding the danger of perversion which arises from the publication, retention, and reading of depraved books. For: 1. "If a pernicious word, which immediately flies away, creeps like a cancer and wounds unto death: what evil does an improper book not bring, which can become a perpetual font of subversion?" (l. c., n. 2). 2. If a continual occasion of lust must altogether be removed, so that the penitent may deserve to be absolved, how much more a pernicious book inducing danger of losing faith?

Hence it is inferred: 1. Bishops, pastors, fathers of families, princes, magistrates, teachers, etc., ought to use the greatest vigilance in this matter.

2. Although someone has been furnished with the faculty of reading prohibited books, nevertheless he cannot read them if he knows or experiences that reading of this kind is harmful to him, or proximately dangerous, for example if he does not know how to distinguish truth from error (ibid., n. 12).

3. "In this matter, it is ordinarily expedient to follow the stricter opinions" (ibid., c. V, n. 8).

452. II. By force of positive law, books prohibited by the Church, whether with censure or without censure, without legitimate license, can neither be read nor retained. The Church has received jurisdiction from the Lord himself for prohibiting to the faithful the reading of books which contain something against religion, good morals, or the discipline of the Church. If this faculty were not with the Church, and the faithful were not bound to obey it in this, neither could faith be preserved unharmed, nor would Christ have sufficiently provided for his Church. Hence the Doctors rightly teach that the judgment of the Church concerning books is altogether infallible (ibid., c. 2, n. 1).

It was said: 1. Books prohibited by the Church. Under the name book is understood a writing which consists in some bulk and unity of object, which must be judged from the judgment of prudent persons. Therefore positive prohibition is not extended to newspapers, letters, flying sheets, unless special mention is made of these. But periodical booklets, whose several fascicles are joined into one, are to be counted among books properly so called (S. Off., January 15, 1892). 2. Whether with censure, such as by the Constitution Officiorum are both books of heretics or apostates defending heresy and books of any author whatsoever prohibited by name through apostolic letters. 3. Or without censure, that is, all books which are contained in the Index of prohibited books or comprehended by the general rules. 4. Can neither be read nor retained; but it is required and suffices that you destroy books of this kind in whatever way, or hand them over to one having the faculty of retaining them, because even by acting thus you do not retain them. 5. Without legitimate license: which license is to be obtained from the Roman Pontiff, for example through the S. Congregation of the Index; for the faculty of permitting belongs to him whose office it is to prohibit. The Congregations of the Holy Office and de Propaganda Fide enjoy the same power; likewise the Master of the Sacred Palace for the City. Sometimes, however, Bishops, by force of special faculties, are able to grant this license to priests (A. S. S., 7, p. 302). Cf. Const. Officiorum, which we shall explain more fully in the Appendix.

453. III. All Bishops by divine right, for their dioceses, have the power of proscribing and prohibiting, even under censure, either books, or even daily papers, of harmful reading. This belongs essentially to their office. Indeed, because knowledge of all harmful books cannot so easily and immediately come to Rome, it is often preferable that they be proscribed by their own authority without any delay interposed (VII, 290).

"Ordinaries, even as delegates of the Apostolic See, should strive to proscribe books and other harmful writings published or spread in their diocese, and to remove them from the hands of the faithful. Let them refer to Apostolic judgment works or writings which require more subtle examination, or in which, for obtaining a salutary effect, the sentence of supreme authority may seem to be required." Const. Officiorum, n. 29.

454. IT IS ASKED. Whether necessity can sometimes excuse from the law of the Index?

Resp. "That which several Doctors teach does not seem improbable, ... namely that by just epikeia a truthful, pious, and learned man reading a heretical book is excused, if he necessarily needs such reading for convincing some heretic from his own, for instance by finding contradictions, concessions, fallacies, and similar things; provided necessity urges, and besides recourse to Rome or to one's own Bishop is not open." Thus St. Alphonsus (de Prohib. lib., c. 5, n. 2). Cf. Const. Officiorum, n. 25.

Outside these cases, to the question: "Whether one who is morally certain that the reading will not harm him can read a prohibited book without license?" St. Alphonsus responds (VII, 291): "Whatever others may say, it must altogether be denied." Cf. n. 451, 452.

455. Note. The INDEX OF PROHIBITED BOOKS was first made by order of Paul IV. Pius IV and Clement VIII perfected it. - It prohibited books partly through general decrees, which are called Rules of the Index, partly by indicating in alphabetical order either the titles of books or the names of authors. But lastly Leo XIII, by the Constitution Officiorum ac munerum (January 25, 1897), after abrogating the general decrees hitherto in force, instituted new ones and approved and confirmed a new Index, through the Brief Romani Pontifices (September 17, 1900).

St. Alphonsus, Appendix de Prohib. libr.; ed. G., I, p. 253; VII, de Cens., n. 281; ed. G., IV, p. 419; Vermeersch, de Prohib. et Cens. libr. (ed. 4); Piat, in Nouv. Rev. Theol. vol. 30 sqq.; Van Coillie, Comment. in Const. Offic.; Lega, de Judiciis eccles., l. 2, tit. IX, c. II and III, vol. III; Boudinhon, in Canoniste contemp., XX; Gennari, in Monit. eccl., XXII; Pennacchi, in A. S. S., vol. 30; Wernz, Jus Decr., III, n. 95; Del Vecchio, Theol. mor., t. II, App. III; Hollweck, Das kirchl. Bücherverbot; Hilgers, Der Index; Sleumer, Index Romanus.

As we already admonished in the treatise de Fide, n. 452, the publication and reading of books, in our times, are governed by the Constitution Officiorum ac munerum, which Leo XIII promulgated on 25 Jan. 1897 (A. S. S., 29, p. 388), and by the Index of prohibited books, which the same Supreme Pontiff made public on 17 Sept. 1900. Our working-out will be concerned only with those things which in the Constitution bear more upon the moral matter.

We shall say nothing concerning the Constitution Sollicita et provida of Benedict XIV (not abrogated by our Constitution), since it pertains only to those to whom the burden is incumbent of examining books brought before the Holy See. But often, according as the argument will demand, we shall report those things which our Most Holy Lord Pius X, in the Motu proprio Sacrorum Antistitum, 1 Sept. 1910, commanded to be observed.

A few things are first to be said: 1. concerning the obligation of this Constitution Officiorum; 2. concerning the norms to be used in interpretation of the same; 3. concerning the force of prohibition.

I. The OBLIGATION is grave and universal. The reason of the first is because there is question of a grave matter, namely of guarding against danger to faith and morals. Yet smallness of matter can be given, whether as regards the edition, or as regards the reading or retention of prohibited books. As regards publishers, we wish it noted that they more easily avoid mortal sin, if they print or sell books... prohibited for this reason, because they lack due approval. The reason of the second is because the Legislator openly set forth his mind: "We have determined to issue General Decrees," he says in the preface, "...which Catholic men throughout the whole world may religiously obey." And to the question, "Whether the said Constitution has obligatory force also for regions of the British tongue, which some think enjoy a tacit dispensation?" the S. Congregation of the Index, 23 May 1898, responded: "Affirmatively." This response certainly must be extended to all regions (A. S. S., 30, p. 677).

IT IS ASKED. But are particular customs in force?

Resp. 1. That new customs can be introduced must not be doubted, provided there is question of legitimate custom, for example of newspapers not to be subjected to censure, which according to law would have to be subjected (cf. art. 13).

2. If there is question of particular customs existing before the Constitution, one must say: the legislator revoked many at least implicitly; for Leo XIII, as is to be seen in the preface of the Constitution, proposed a law aptly accommodated to the times, and substituted the same for the laws previously issued on this matter; whence he sanctioned by his new law only those mitigations introduced by custom which he wished to be observed. Therefore it was superfluous to make mention of them and it sufficed to say: let Catholic men throughout the whole world religiously obey... any contrary things whatever notwithstanding. Yet we would admit with Van Coillie (n. 7) that some secondary temperaments, which had already prevailed universally and which rather explain the new laws than remove them, are still in force. See what is to be said in art. 1, 7, 47.

II. The GENERAL NORMS OF INTERPRETATION of this Constitution must be determined accurately.

1. As regards the sense, it must carefully be observed that of themselves these Decrees alone are to be kept before one's eyes; yet the old Decrees can be recalled as a means of interpretation. Therefore those prescriptions which sound like ancient ones are to be interpreted in a similar way. But as regards those which differ from the prior Law, the manner of interpretation must be sought from the obvious sense of the words of the Constitution.

2. As regards the extension to be attributed to the General Decrees, the more common opinion holds that this Constitution must be interpreted strictly not only in penalties, but also in prohibitions. The reason is because Leo XIII testifies that he wished to make the Rules of the Index "somewhat milder, so plainly that to obey them, provided one is not of an evil disposition, cannot be grave and arduous." He declared the same in his Brief Romani Pontifices, the same is had in the preface of the Index; all which things indeed seem to demand a strict interpretation of the Constitution (Vermeersch, p. 22; Nouv. Rev. Theol., 36, p. 99).

III. The word PROHIBITION (and the words proscribe, condemn, interdict, reprobate sound the same) in its comprehension includes the reading, retention, printing, sale, giving or lending of a book, and finally any defense whatever of it. Cf. things already said n. 1316.

But if prohibition is considered in its extension, the diverse questions which can arise are to be solved.

1. A book being prohibited, the whole is prohibited, and not only the part which gave occasion for proscription; whence even leaves separated from the book are condemned. Yet, the pernicious part which was the cause of the prohibition having been removed (if this is established), the prohibition ceases (St. Alph., VII, 283). Hence, if a work is composed of several volumes, and it is established that in only one an error condemned is found, this volume being removed, the prescription of the work ceases by the very fact.

2. Prohibition of the prior volumes of some work does not hand down condemnation of the volumes which follow; nevertheless those are rightly held suspect, unless the repentance of the author is established.

3. Prohibition of all the works of some author does not now affect all writings of the author, but only those which either treat of religion, or, although they do not treat of it, nevertheless are proscribed by some general or special Decree. Besides, the clause: all works does not comprehend works issued after the Decree. Yet those are held suspect, as we said above; for prohibition in hatred of the author is today obsolete.

4. As regards works prior to the Constitution, the prohibition extends itself to them if they are condemned on account of intrinsic matter, or if they were proscribed on account of omitted extrinsic solemnity (for example the obtaining of legitimate license) which formerly was required.

5. The prohibition which refers to all love stories probably does not reach those of these stories which are reached neither by a singular nor by a general Decree. Cf. Hilgers, Der Index, p. 106; Ami du Cl., 1906, p. 1123. See, as regards all these things, the Preface of the Index itself; Vermeersch, o. c., p. 24 sqq.

From these things you conclude: a) Books, therefore, are not considered prohibited when concerning them it is said only: let them not be published without license (art. 17); or a similar expression is used (art. 16, 19).

b) The clause: until it is corrected regards only the manner, not the effect of prohibition.

Note. What comes under the name of book, little book, newspaper, sheet, to read, to retain, etc., we already said n. 1315, 1316.

1. "All books which before the year 1600 either the Supreme Pontiffs or ecumenical Councils condemned, and which are not reviewed in the new Index, are to be held condemned in the same way as they were formerly condemned: excepting those which are permitted by these General Decrees."

It is said: 1. Either the Supreme Pontiffs or ecumenical Councils condemned; and therefore this prohibition does not reach books condemned by the Sacred Roman Congregations.

2. Excepting those, etc.; this exception seems rather to refer itself to art. 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 sqq. Besides, just as formerly by custom the writings of ancient heretics, such as Tertullian, Origen, Pelagius, etc., could already be read licitly, so today we are not held to be more severe. For these works are held as historical documents in which danger of perversion is not present (Boudinhon, ap. Can. Cont., 20, p. 209).

2. "Books of apostates, heretics, schismatics, and any writers whatever, defending heresy or schism or overthrowing the foundations themselves of religion, are altogether prohibited."

By this article are prohibited: 1. Books by any authors whatever, even those not ascribed to a heretical sect, defending heresy or schism. Now, that a book defend heresy or schism, it is required that the author not only set forth either one in passing, but that with set purpose and, as it were, according to his powers, he try to persuade this by arguments (Nouv. Rev. Theol., 30, p. 49).

2. Books which in any way, or, in whatever way, whether seriously or through ridicule, directly or indirectly, overthrow the foundations themselves of religion, namely those truths of the natural order which either found natural religion itself, or are preambles for an adult infidel to embracing the faith, for example the existence of God, the spirituality of the soul, the possibility of miracles, etc. Cf. Van Coillie, n. 19.

3. "Likewise the books of non-Catholics, which professedly treat of religion, are prohibited, unless it is established that nothing against the Catholic faith is contained in them."

Authors disagree concerning the sense to be attributed to the word non-Catholics. Some understand non-Catholics, but Christians; but others by non-Catholics understand all, even the non-baptized, who in any way are alien from the Catholic community. In art. 5, 6, and 8, there is no doubt that this word must be taken in this latter sense.

Therefore it is said: 1. Which professedly treat; namely, not only in passing but by design, when namely the author directly and in a notable part of the book discusses a religious argument and establishes and defends his opinion with reasons summoned.

2. Of religion; that is, of sacred matter, whether natural or positive, "namely of Sacred Scripture or of scholastic, dogmatic, or moral Theology, or of mysteries of faith, of the worship of God or of the Saints, of the rites of the Church, of canons, of spiritual things, and similar matters" (St. Alph., VII, 283).

3. Unless it is established, etc.; private authority suffices, for example the testimony of a man of proven probity or knowledge: for of itself the presumption stands against books of this kind.

4. "Books of the same authors, which do not professedly treat of religion, but only touch upon truths of faith in passing, are not to be held prohibited by ecclesiastical Law until they have been proscribed by a special Decree."

5. "Editions of the original text and of ancient Catholic versions of Sacred Scripture, even of the Eastern Church, published by any non-Catholics whatever, although they may appear to have been edited faithfully and integrally, are permitted only to those who give work to theological or biblical studies, provided however that dogmas of the Catholic faith are not attacked in the prolegomena or annotations."

All those are to be considered as giving work to theological or biblical studies, both clerics and seculars, both learned men and beginners in theology (S. C. of the Index, 23 May 1898), whether from office in schools, or from private industry, who habitually, for at least some time (say several weeks), attend in a special way to these studies. Students of Hebrew or Greek school, not giving work to theological or biblical studies, cannot use these editions for learning languages, and the Bishop cannot permit this to them. Vermeersch, n. 69; cf. Ami du Cl., 1910, p. 431.

The restriction is placed: provided... dogmas of faith are not attacked. To attack is not simply to bring forth errors against dogmas, but also to support them with reasons. It is said: dogmas of faith, and therefore there is no question of only one dogma which is attacked only once or very rarely, nor of truths which are only theologically certain.

6. "In the same way, and under the same conditions, other versions of the Sacred Bibles, whether Latin or in another non-vernacular language, edited by non-Catholics, are permitted."

7. "Since it is manifest by experience that, if the Sacred Bibles in the vernacular tongue are permitted everywhere without discrimination, more detriment than utility arises thence on account of the rashness of men; all versions in the vernacular language, even those made by Catholic men, are altogether prohibited, unless they shall have been approved by the Apostolic See, or edited under the vigilance of Bishops, with annotations drawn from the holy Fathers of the Church and from learned and Catholic writers."

1. Therefore versions in the vernacular language, even those made by Catholic men, are altogether prohibited, unless either condition is verified, either that, adorned with the prescribed annotations, they are edited under the vigilance of Bishops, or that, if they lack notes, the approval of the Holy See is present. Yet they are permitted to those who give work to theological or biblical studies (under the restriction placed in n. 5); for we think the faculty made through the second paragraph of art. 8 is to be applied to them.

2. That they can be published under the vigilance, or with the approval, of the Bishop, they must be enriched with annotations drawn from the holy Fathers of the Church, etc.; yet it does not seem to be required on that account that all annotations be drawn from this source, but some can be drawn even from learned non-Catholics, for example those looking to geography or archaeology, not however to faith or morals (A. S. S., 30, p. 184). Paraphrastic versions seem to be assimilated to versions with annotations.

Note. The article does not touch sacred histories drawn from the Sacred Bible; or those parts which are inserted in prayer books; or Epistles and Gospels of the liturgical year, if they are printed separately.

8. "All versions of the Sacred Bibles, in whatever vernacular language, made by any non-Catholics whatever, are interdicted, and especially those which are spread abroad through Biblical Societies, condemned more than once by the Roman Pontiffs, since in them the most salutary laws of the Church concerning the editing of divine books are fundamentally disregarded.

"Nevertheless these versions are permitted to those who give work to theological or biblical studies: those things being observed which are established above (n. 5)."

9. "Books which professedly treat of, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene matters, since account must be taken not only of faith, but also of morals, which are accustomed easily to be corrupted by the reading of books of this kind, are altogether prohibited."

In this article is set forth the general prohibition of obscene books, that is, books which treat of shameful things for this end, that they may excite lust; but there is no discussion of books which ought to furnish necessary anatomical notions. Cf. Lega, Praelect., t. III, n. 358.

That such books be prohibited, it is required that they treat of these professedly, that is, not in passing, but either in the whole book or in a notable part; or narrate, that is, describe shameful deeds of men, whether true or fictitious; or teach, that is, explain how shameful acts are performed.

Hence it is clear that all books called "pornographic" are proscribed. As regards novels, namely those which treat of profane or vicious love, very many of our age can be called professedly obscene; yet since not all narrate obscene matters themselves, they are not condemned universally by this article. But as St. Alphonsus very well observes: "By Natural Law they are often prohibited of themselves on account of the grave damage which they inflict on readers; for in them the less the poison appears, the more it harms" (App. de Prohib. libr., c. I, n. 9).

10. "Books of authors, whether ancient or recent, which are called classics, if they are infected with this very stain of shamefulness, on account of elegance and propriety of speech are permitted only to those whom the reason of office or teaching excuses; nevertheless in no way are they to be handed over or read aloud to boys or adolescents, unless expurgated by solicitous care."

By this article two things are established: 1. An exception is made to the general prohibition for classical books. Those are called classics which are held as examples of proper and more elegant speech, and according to some (Lega, n. 360; Vermeersch, p. 74), even their versions into another idiom.

It is said: a) If they are infected with this very, etc.; therefore the exception does not favor classical books condemned for another cause, for example on account of heresy.

b) Whom the reason of office or teaching excuses; by reason of office those are excused who professedly compose or judge works of letters, and to them the prefects of Universities, colleges, etc., seem to be numbered; by reason of teaching all who teach letters are to be excused, but not those who teach only the first rudiments of language or other sciences, although nobler, for example Theology (Palmieri, Op. Theol. mor., ed. 3, II, n. 1181).

c) Excuses; wherefore this reading is permitted to them only insofar as it is necessary or useful to them, and always with the natural law of avoiding proximate danger of sinning being kept safe.

2. To this exception a restriction is added for boys or adolescents. Under the name of adolescents, do there come also young men who at the age of 20 or 24 years attend Universities? Some seem to deny this, but it must altogether be affirmed; for from the general expression boys or adolescents, it is plain that the mind of the legislator is to embrace all who have not attained manly age. Now adolescence lasts at least up to the twenty-fifth year of age. Thus Lega, Van Coillie, Vermeersch, Genicot, and others. Yet Noldin observes that the reason of office or teaching excuses those pupils who prepare themselves in Universities for composing literary works or for teaching letters. Cf. Ami du Cl., 1911, p. 848; Vermeersch, p. 73.

11. "Books are condemned in which God, or the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Saints, or the Catholic Church and its Worship or Sacraments, or the Apostolic See, are disparaged. Works in which the concept of the inspiration of Sacred Scripture is perverted, or its extension is too much narrowed, are subject to the same judgment of reprobation. Books also are prohibited which with set purpose load the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy or the clerical or religious state with reproaches."

It is said: 1. Books... in which are disparaged; the word disparage here comprehends whatever by words takes away or diminishes the fame or esteem of someone. Nor is it required that detractions be made with set purpose, for whenever the legislator requires this condition, he indicates it. More truly it suffices that the detraction be grave and be made in some notable way, yet so that (as the title of the chapter requires) it can be called the special argument of such a book.

2. In which the concept of inspiration... is perverted; if someone, for example, wished by arguments to prove and persuade the reader that inspiration must be restricted to matters of faith and morals or to some parts. Cf. Const. Providentissimus, 18 Nov. 1893; Resp. Biblical Commission, 13 Feb. and 23 Jun. 1905.

3. Books also are prohibited which with set purpose; with set purpose is taken by approved authors almost in the same sense as professedly and in a notable part (Pennacchi, ap. A. S. S., 30, p. 346; Hollweck, p. 34). See what was said above, art. 2 and 3.

4. Church, Hierarchy, etc.; hence a book is not prohibited which only loads singular persons with reproaches.

12. "It is unlawful to publish, read, or retain books in which lots, divination, magic, evocation of Spirits, and other superstitions of this kind are taught or commended."

Since only books which teach these things, or hand down rules of the art, or commend them, namely extol them with praises, are proscribed, those are not condemned which treat of these things in order to refute them, nor those which merely report facts (Can. Cont., 20, p. 307). Cf. what was said above n. 566.

13. "Books or writings which narrate new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, miracles, or which introduce new devotions, even under pretext that they are private, are proscribed if they are published without legitimate license of the Superiors of the Church."

It is said: 1. Books or writings; therefore even manuscripts, but only if they are published; now, for the most part these are not sufficiently made of public law, or spread among the common people. But as regards newspapers which carry to public notice some miraculous fact which occurred on pilgrimage (for example at Lourdes), especially if there is question of a simple narration of facts, authors testify that the practice of publishing supernatural things of this kind has prevailed among all, without either the Bishops or the Apostolic See being solicitous about the matter. "But that which is commonly done, with the prelates of the Church seeing and being silent, is not to be condemned so easily" (cf. A. S. S., 30, p. 290; Del Vecchio, on this article).

2. Which narrate. Authors require that the book narrate rather fully and, as it were, professedly, so that it has this narration for its argument.

3. New apparitions, etc.; we understand those which have occurred recently, or even less recent ones but not yet received by usage, or approved. - As regards new devotions, the word introduce must be attended to; namely it does not suffice merely to report them. Several devotions of this sort in these times have been condemned by the Holy Office (cf. Vermeersch, n. 80, p. 84).

4. If they are published without legitimate license; if there is question of marvelous facts of living persons, the Holy See must be approached; if of those things which pertain to causes of beatification, license must be sought from the S. R. C.; for the rest, the Bishop of the place is competent.

Note. The new Constitution has nothing concerning the protestation of the author prescribed by Urban VIII: whence authors are no longer obliged to place it at the beginning of books. Cf. nevertheless the Motu proprio Sacrorum Antistitum, n. VI (A. A. S., II, p. 665), where mention is made of this declaration.

14. "Likewise books are prohibited which establish duel, suicide, or divorce as licit, which treat of masonic sects or other societies of the same kind, and contend that these are useful and not pernicious to the Church and civil society, and which defend errors proscribed by the Apostolic See."

Authors require that books of this kind treat of these matters not in passing but as if with set purpose, and not without reason: for otherwise someone cannot truly be said to establish, contend, defend. To establish is the same as to demonstrate, to contend the same as to affirm keenly, to defend the same as to champion.

What societies are of the same kind as masonic sects we said n. 1331. Errors proscribed by the Apostolic See are also those which the Holy See proscribes through the Sacred Congregations, provided the sentence has been confirmed by the Roman Pontiff. Among these errors come those which the Syllabus condemned (S. C. Ind., 23 May 1898; A. S. S., 30, p. 698). Cf. n. 1328.

15. "Images printed in whatever way of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, Angels and Saints, or other Servants of God, which are not in conformity with the sense and Decrees of the Church, are altogether forbidden. But new ones, whether they have prayers annexed, or are issued without them, are not to be published without license of ecclesiastical power."

It is said: 1. Images printed in whatever way; whence, from the consensus of interpreters, neither paintings or statues, nor medals, which are rather struck than printed, are struck by this article.

2. Not in conformity with the sense and Decrees of the Church. Which ones are to be reproved for this reason must be drawn especially from the Constitution Sollicitudini of Benedict XIV, 1 Oct. 1745: they are generally those which can introduce danger to faith and morals. These images are altogether forbidden; therefore even for private devotion.

Note. As regards new images, it is not clear whether a new edition of old images is prohibited (Vermeersch, n. 85).

1706. - I. There are prohibited absolutely: 1° all books of heresiarchs (both of those who after the year 1515 invented or stirred up heresies, and of those who are or have been Heads or Leaders of heretics, such as Luther, etc.), even if not erroneous, or not treating expressly of Religion.

2° Books of heretics which treat expressly of Religion.

3° Books treating expressly of obscene things, with the exception of ancient books written by pagans, which, on account of elegance and propriety of speech, and insofar as there is question of ecclesiastical law alone, are permitted; nevertheless they are by no reason to be read before boys.

4° All books treating of astrology, divination, and sorceries.

5° All books entered into the Index without any addition.

II. There are prohibited under clauses:

1° All books which, before the year 1515, either the Supreme Pontiffs or Ecumenical Councils condemned, in the same way as they had formerly been condemned. By this rule however there are not prohibited the old books of pagans, nor even, according to Theologians (see n. 1704, q. 5°), the books of heretics of earlier centuries, as of Tertullian, Eusebius, etc.

2° Books written either a) by heretics, although not treating of Religion; or b) by those who afterward fell into heresy, or after a fall returned to the bosom of the Church, although written in a Catholic manner, unless they have been approved.

3° Bibles in the vernacular language, unless they have been approved by the Holy See, or published with notes drawn from the Holy Fathers, or from learned and Catholic men. Thus, not without foundation, Craisson interprets the Decrees and Responses of the Holy See.¹ I add: provided that a special prohibition has not been made by the Bishop concerning those versions which have been published without the approval of the Holy See or of the Ordinary. But Bishops cannot approve versions without the aforesaid notes, as is plain from the concession made to them in the year 1757.²

4° Books entered into the Index with the clause: until they are corrected, i.e., until they have appeared in a new corrected edition, which has been approved by the Sacred Congregation of the Index.

III. It is established that no book and no writing be printed without the license of the Ordinary.

770. As regards Sacred Scripture, by a general rule, by the law itself there are prohibited:

1. "Editions of the original text and of ancient Catholic versions of Sacred Scripture, even of the Eastern Church, published by any non-Catholics whatsoever" (can. 1399, § 1).

2. "Versions of the same into any language whatsoever, made or published by the same" (can. 1399, § 1).

3. "Books of the Sacred Scriptures or annotations and commentaries on the same, if they have been published without the prescriptions of the canons being observed" (can. 1385, § 1, and 1399, § 5), that is, without previous censorship, even by laymen.

4. "Versions of the Sacred Scriptures into the vernacular tongue... unless they have been approved by the Apostolic See, or unless they are published under the vigilance of the Bishops and with annotations principally excerpted from the holy Fathers of the Church and from learned and Catholic writers"² (can. 1391 and 1399, § 5). This holds for editions after the year 1897: for the law does not have retroactive effect; but before the year 1897 the approval of the bishop was not required, but for Catholic editions a version with annotations sufficed.

² "Books of any writers whatsoever (even Catholics) which defend heresy or schism"1 (that is, not merely stating it in passing, with few words and as if doing something else, but attempting to persuade by adding reasons, proving or defending it); - "or which strive in any way to overthrow the very foundations of religion" (whether directly, by reasons, or indirectly, by insults; whether by serious attack, or even by jokes and derision) (can. 1399, § 2).

But it should be noted: a) the exception of can. 1400: "The use of the aforesaid books... is permitted only to those who in any way devote themselves to theological or biblical studies, provided the same books have been faithfully and integrally published and the dogmas of Catholic faith are not attacked in their prolegomena or annotations." They are permitted, namely, to professors, students, and those who, after their studies have been completed, continue to study Scripture; that is, whoever habitually, not by a merely passing act, cultivate these studies, whether in schools or privately;

b) there is no longer any prohibition of reading Scripture in the vernacular tongue, nor an obligation of asking permission from the parish priest or confessor, provided the edition is approved.

1. This must be taken copulatively (com. int. May 20, 1923). - Paraphrastic versions seem to be assimilated to versions with annotations.

2. Annotations which set forth profane science, geography, archaeology, etc., can be drawn from profane authors.

771. As regards faith and morals, by a general rule, by the law itself there are prohibited:

Heresy is error in Catholic faith. Schism is understood as perfect and complete, by which someone refuses obedience to the Supreme Pontiff; but not simple disobedience, nor contempt of a particular law, nor rebellion against a bishop. The foundations of religion are preliminary truths of the natural order which found the Catholic religion (for example, the possibility of a miracle, prophecy, revelation, or motives of credibility in general, etc.) or every religion (for example, the existence of God, the spirituality of the soul). Hence books defending atheism, pantheism, skepticism, agnosticism, positivism, theosophy (June 16, 1919), and many modern philosophical works are prohibited.

2. "Books which deliberately attack religion" (Catholic, or at least natural religion) "or good morals" (can. 1399, § 3), that is, they do not touch upon them in passing, but professedly attack them, or from intention and by design; this can be manifested either explicitly or by multiplied attacks from the fact that it is done in a notable part, for example, several times, or through several pages or an entire chapter.

Hence sectarian writings are prohibited, and many socialist writings, and those which habitually narrate or describe immoral things.

3. "Books of any non-Catholics whatsoever" (namely, apostates, heretics, schismatics, or the non-baptized) "which professedly treat of religion" (that is, with the intention of teaching, principally, in a notable part, for example, one chapter), "unless it is clear that nothing" (of any moment) "is contained in them against Catholic faith" (can. 1399, § 4).

Books of non-Catholics treating of sacred doctrine, of dogmatic or moral matters, of canon law or ecclesiastical history, of philosophical truths which are the foundation of religion and theology, are presumed erroneous and dangerous in faith, unless the contrary is clear, as for example, in the case of Leibniz, Systema theologiae, or Hugo Grotius, De Religione. Therefore they are not to be read without previous information. - On the contrary, works of Catholics who afterward became heretics.

4. "Books which attack" (by arguments) "or deride any one whatsoever of the Catholic dogmas" (not only deny them), - "which support errors proscribed by the Apostolic See" (either immediately by the Supreme Pontiff or mediately by a Sacred Congregation with pontifical approval, for example, the errors of the Syllabus: thus S. C. Ind., May 23, 1898), "who defend them" (that is, professedly), - "which detract from divine worship" (not in passing but notably, so that its reputation is harmed or it is held in less esteem), - "which contend to overthrow ecclesiastical discipline" (for example, celibacy, the Index), that is, they professedly intend to change it and make it waver, - "and which deliberately" (studiously, advisedly, by design) "affect with insults the ecclesiastical hierarchy" (whether of order or of jurisdiction), "or the clerical or religious state" (not as private persons, but because they pertain to the hierarchy or the state) (can. 1399, § 6).

5. "Books which teach" (so that others may learn and do) "or commend superstition of any kind, sorceries, divination, magic, evocation of spirits, and other things of this kind" (can. 1399, § 7).

Such are those which teach effects of the devil, modes which are known to be insufficient without the intervention of the devil, or true spiritism by which the evocation of spirits or intercourse with them is intended; but not books which hand down merely natural occultism.

6. "Books which state that dueling, or suicide, or divorce" (not only of the civil contract but of the bond itself of marriage) "is lawful" (in conscience), that is, they do not affirm it in passing but attempt to demonstrate it by reasons, - "which, treating of Masonic sects or other societies of the same kind, contend that they are useful and not pernicious to the Church and to civil society," not incidentally but in a notable part (can. 1399, § 8).

Societies of that kind are clandestine sects, such as the Carbonari, Nihilists, Anarchists, etc., also the Fenians (Holy Office, January 12, 1870); but not socialists, who form a political sect, unless nevertheless they were secretly united to overthrow the State.

7. "Books which professedly" (not in passing, but principally, or directly and notably) "treat, narrate" (vividly so that they entice, for example, pornographic books), "or teach lascivious or obscene things," that is, theoretically approve them, for example, free love, Malthusianism, contraceptive means (can. 1399, § 9). - But not theological, scientific, or surgical works, unless under a scientific pretext they appear to have been written to nourish wicked curiosity or to excite venereal appetite.

It should be noted that formerly there existed an exception in favor of teachers for obscene classical works, but this has been removed. Hence if a professor, or judge, or newspaper writer, or official must read an obscene book by office, he should ask permission; but if he had to read it altogether immediately, he could suppose, for this case alone, that the law does not oblige and that its obligation here and now ceases.

1. Custom has excepted the writings of more ancient heretics, such as Tertullian, Origen, Pelagius, etc., whose errors have long since become obsolete.

772. As regards worship, devotion, and liturgy, by a general rule, by the law itself there are prohibited:

1. "Books and booklets which narrate new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, miracles" (as supernatural), that is, they do not report them in passing by the way, but professedly or in a notable part; "or which introduce new devotions" (notably different from ancient and approved ones), "even under the pretext that they are private, if they have been published without the prescriptions of the canons being observed" (can. 1399, § 5).

This holds for books published after 1897, for the law does not have retroactive effect. Books of prayers, devotion, or theological doctrine and religious, moral, ascetical, or mystical instruction are no longer prohibited: they can also be read and retained without approval. Likewise the canon does not hold for apparitions approved by the Church, such as those of the Immaculate Blessed Virgin Mary of Lourdes, the revelations of St. Bridget, St. Margaret Mary, etc.

But several novelties were reproved: the cult concerning the blood of Mary (January 13, 1875), the title of friend of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (May 4, 1892), the title of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Lady of the Sacred Heart because she exercises dominion over the Son (February 23, 1875), the special cult to be attributed to the Face of the Redeemer in the manner in which it was proposed by the priests of the Holy Face (May 4, 1892), the title of the penitent Sacred Heart of Jesus (July 9, 1893), the prayer for the dominion of Christ and Mary Immaculate over all creatures (June 19, 1895), the private cult of the divine hands of Christ (April 17, 1896, Index), the image of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus (May 27, 1891), the image of the Blessed Virgin Mary clothed in priestly vestments (April 8, 1916).

2. "Editions of liturgical books" (for example, the missal, breviary, ritual, pontifical, and ceremonial of bishops) "approved by the Apostolic See, in which anything has been changed, so that they do not agree with the authentic editions approved by the Holy See" (can. 1399, § 10).

3. "Books in which apocryphal indulgences, or those proscribed or revoked by the Holy See, are published" (can. 1399, § 11). Hence also small sheets with apocryphal indulgences are prohibited (can. 1388, § 1).

4. "Images printed in any way whatsoever" (by printing properly so called, engraving, photography, lithography, phototype, etc.) "of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Angels and Saints or other Servants of God, alien from the sense and decrees of the Church" (can. 1399, § 12).

Statues or painted images are not prohibited.³ Nor artistic images which have as their principal end to reproduce art; but pious images, destined for public or private worship. Nor simply images not approved, but new ones. Whether medals are comprehended is uncertain, because they are rather struck than printed.

³ These, for their admission in churches or use in worship, can fall under can. 1279.

773. What is prohibited under the name of books? - Under the name of books manuscripts do not come (even lithographic or polygraphic ones), unless they have been published and made public, handed on or sold to all; but "those things which are prescribed concerning books are to be applied to publications, newspapers, periodicals, and any other published writings whatsoever, unless something else is clear" (can. 1384). Hence:

1. Periodicals, encyclopedias, etc., if by the way, in one or another article, they are touched by the general rules of the Index, are not judged prohibited; - on the contrary, if ordinarily or in a notable or greater part they have such things as their object, then not only the fascicles collected into a volume, but each one is proscribed. Yet excerpts from periodicals (tires a part), which contain good or indifferent things, are not prohibited.

2. If a prohibited work consists of several tomes, all are prohibited if they treat of the same argument and one indivisible; only the tome which contains the error or dangerous part is prohibited if the different tomes treat of a different argument, or indeed of the same one but divisible, as is, for example, universal history, because in this case they are judged different books.

3. A book prohibited only on account of certain places, provided this is certain, is no longer prohibited if this part is removed so that it cannot be read.

4. Mere citations from a depraved book, especially in order to refute them, are not prohibited, unless they are longer such that they would be a reproduction.

774. Special prohibition of writings. - Apart from books prohibited by the general rules, some are also specially and by name entered in the Index, or prohibited in another way by the Apostolic See. This prohibition brings about:

1. that all editions already made are prohibited, unless the prohibition is limited to a determined edition;⁴ likewise all future editions "unless, corrections having been made, he who had prohibited the book, or his superior or successor, gives permission" (can. 1398, § 2);

⁴ Prohibitions which forbid books on account of matter are judged to regard all editions; prohibitions which forbid books on account of defect of approval are not extended to books previously published.

2. that all versions are prohibited, for "the prohibition of books brings it about that without due permission a book cannot... be translated into another language" (can. 1398, § 1), unless nevertheless only the version had been entered in the Index;

3. that if all the works of some author are prohibited, they are to be understood not as later works, but as the earlier ones which exist at the moment of condemnation. From the preface of the Catalogue of the Index published in the year 1940 we have in addition that "when all the works of some writer are condemned, all and each of the same writer's works are judged condemned," and not only those which are prohibited by the general rules. Since this norm is modifying, it does not have retroactive value, so that for condemnations issued before January 2, 1940, all works are only those which are prohibited by the general rules. Nevertheless, a presumption and suspicion is present against the others, whence in practice they are to be submitted to examination.

I say 1st. § 1. It is the right of the Church to require that the faithful not publish books which it has not previously reviewed by its own judgment, and to prohibit, for a just cause, books published by whomever.

§ 2. The things prescribed under this title concerning books are applied to daily and periodical publications and to any other published writings whatever, unless something else is clear (Can. 1384).

By natural law itself any use of bad books from which a proximate danger of sinning arises is prohibited. But the Church, by its providence toward the faithful, has always applied diligent care "that, just as good seed is separated from darnel, so also sound and excellent books might be separated from spurious and apocryphal and pernicious books, lest Christian persons, by an incautious or rash use of these, should suffer detriment to the integrity of faith and morals." Apostolic Letters Romani Pontifices (17 Sept. 1900).¹

Moreover, the Index or syllabus of prohibited books, most diligently reviewed and printed again, which he willed to be held as expressly inserted in the Letters Romani Pontifices, the same Pontiff, Leo XIII, approved by apostolic authority and commanded to be observed whole and inviolably by all in every place.

Wherefore, in order that the reading of some book be permitted, it is required that it neither be enumerated in the Index nor belong to any of those classes which the canons proscribe; but by no means is it sufficient that it not be found in the Index. For it would be neither possible nor necessary to register in the Syllabus all and every bad book. It must also be noted that the prohibition extends not only to the reading of books, but also to the retention, publication, defense, and donation of the same.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1144, n. 117.

Question 1. Which books are to be subjected to prior censure?

Response. § 1. Unless ecclesiastical censure has preceded, let there not be published, even by laypersons:

1st. Books of the sacred Scriptures, or annotations and commentaries on the same;

2nd. Books which regard the divine Scriptures, sacred theology, ecclesiastical history, canon law, natural theology, ethics, or other religious and moral disciplines of this kind; books and booklets of prayers, of devotion, or of doctrine and religious, moral, ascetical, mystical instruction, and other such things, although they seem to conduce to fostering piety; and generally writings in which there is something which particularly concerns religion and uprightness of morals;

3rd. Sacred images to be printed in any manner whatever, whether they have prayers adjoined, or are published without them.

§ 2. The license of publishing the books and images about which in § 1 can be given either by the local Ordinary proper to the author, or by the Ordinary of the place in which the books or images are made public, or by the Ordinary of the place in which they are printed, yet in such a way that, if any one of those Ordinaries has denied license, the author cannot seek it from another Ordinary unless he has informed the same concerning the license denied by another.

§ 3. Religious, however, must also first obtain the license of their own major Superior (Can. 1385).

Question 2. What especially is forbidden to secular clerics and religious concerning publishing books and concerning writing in newspapers? What also is forbidden to laypersons concerning writing in certain newspapers?

Response. § 1. Secular clerics are forbidden, without the consent of their Ordinaries, and religious, without the license of their major Superior and of the local Ordinary, to publish books also which treat of profane matters, and to write in daily papers, sheets, or periodical booklets, or to direct the same.

§ 2. But in daily papers, sheets, or periodical booklets which are accustomed to attack the Catholic religion or good morals, let not even Catholic laypersons write anything, unless a just and reasonable cause, approved by the local Ordinary, recommends it (Can. 1386).

Secular clerics need the consent of their Ordinaries; Religious need the license both of the Major Superior and of the local Ordinary; both are subject to this respective ordinance both as regards books, even if they treat of profane matters, and as regards writing in daily papers, sheets, and booklets, and as regards the direction of these. As regards daily papers accustomed to attack the Catholic religion or good morals, let not even laypersons write anything in them without a cause approved by the local Ordinary.

Question 3. Of what Sacred Congregation is license required for publishing those things which pertain to the causes of beatification and canonization of Servants of God?

Response. The license of the Congregation of Sacred Rites is required. - Cf. can. 1387.

Question 4. Whose license is required for publishing books of indulgences, etc.? What is established particularly concerning Apostolic indulgences?

Response. § 1. All books of indulgences, summaries, booklets, sheets, etc., in which concessions of them are contained, are not to be published without the license of the local Ordinary.

§ 2. But the express license of the Apostolic See is required that it may be lawful to publish in type, in whatever language, both an authentic collection of prayers and pious works to which the Apostolic See has annexed indulgences, and a list of apostolic indulgences, and a summary of indulgences either previously collected but never approved, or now for the first time to be gathered from diverse concessions (Can. 1388).

It is of the highest moment that those booklets, sheets, etc., not spread among the people false notions and apocryphal Indulgences. Hence there is need of the license of the local Ordinary.

Question 5. Is a special permission required for publishing collections of decrees of the Roman Congregations?

Response. Collections of decrees of the Roman Congregations cannot be published again, unless license has first been obtained and the conditions prescribed by the Moderators of each Congregation have been observed (Can. 1389).

In this one way provision can be made against the danger that decrees and responses be adulterated.

Question 6. About what must there be certainty in publishing liturgical books and their parts?

Response. In publishing liturgical books and their parts, and likewise litanies approved by the Holy See, there must be certainty concerning their agreement with approved editions by the attestation of the Ordinary of the place in which they are printed or are made public (Can. 1390).

An error in these books can bring great harm to the people of God.

Question 7. Does the approbation of some original text suffice for a new edition, or for a translation of the same into another language? Are chapters excerpted from periodicals and published separately to be held as new editions?

Response. § 1. The approbation of the original text of some work does not suffice either for translations of the same into another language or for other editions; wherefore both translations and new editions of an approved work must be furnished with a new approbation.

§ 2. Chapters excerpted from periodicals and published separately are not considered new editions and therefore do not need a new approbation (Can. 1392).

Question 8. What conditions are required so that versions of the Sacred Scriptures into the vernacular language may be printed in type?

Response. Versions of the sacred Scriptures into the vernacular language cannot be printed in type unless they have been approved by the Apostolic See, or unless they are published under the vigilance of the Bishops and with annotations chiefly excerpted from the holy Fathers of the Church and from learned and Catholic writers (Can. 1391).¹

The reason of the law is lest any man presume to twist the Sacred Letters to his own senses, contrary to that sense which Holy Mother Church, to whom alone has been entrusted the custody of the deposit of Faith and the judgment concerning the sense and interpretation of the divine utterances, has held and holds. Cf. Pius IX, Encycl. Ep., Nostis et Nobiscum.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1109, n. 52.

Question 9. What is the office of censors?

Response. § 1. In all episcopal Curias let there be official censors, who examine things to be published.

§ 2. Examiners in carrying out their office, laying aside all acceptance of persons, are to have before their eyes only the dogmas of the Church and the common doctrine of Catholics which is contained in decrees of general Councils or in constitutions or prescriptions of the Apostolic See and in the consent of approved doctors.

§ 3. Censors are to be chosen from both clergies, commended by age, erudition, and prudence, who in approving and disapproving doctrines go by a middle and safe path.

§ 4. The censor must give his judgment in writing. If this is favorable, the Ordinary may grant the power of publishing; nevertheless, the judgment of the censor is to be prefixed to it, with his name inscribed. Only in extraordinary circumstances and very rarely, by the prudent judgment of the Ordinary, can mention of the censor be omitted.

§ 5. Let the name of the censor never be made known to authors before he has issued a favorable judgment (Can. 1393).

Question 10. How is this license of publishing to be granted? Whether and how must it be clear that it has been granted?

Response. § 1. The license by which the Ordinary grants the power of publishing is to be granted in writing, to be printed at the beginning or at the end of the book, sheet, or image, with the name of the one granting it expressed, and likewise the place and time of the concession.

§ 2. But if the license seems that it should be denied, unless a grave cause requires otherwise, the reasons are to be indicated to the author asking (Can. 1394).

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).

I. The prohibition of books is ancient, and is found in Acts chapter 19: And many of them who had followed curious arts, brought together their books, and burnt them before all. The Council of Nicaea commanded the books of Arius to be burned, as Socrates narrates, book 1, chapter 6.

II. For a twofold reason the books of Heretics are prohibited: both that the evil of seduction may be impeded, and that the Heretics may be confounded. Heretical books are proscribed in the Bull Coenae. Under this prohibition are not comprehended the books of the Jews, of the Mahometans, or of the Heathen. This prohibition has annexed to it the penalty of excommunication when four conditions concur: 1. That the books be those of Heretics. 2. That they teach Heresy, or treat of Religion. 3. That they be knowingly read, retained, or printed. 4. That this be done without the authority of the supreme Pontiff. Those books treat of Religion which expound sacred Scripture and Theology; which interpret the affairs of Monks, of Clerics, the worship of the Saints, and rites; but not those which handle philosophical and historical matters and other inferior arts.

III. He who reads a book of a catholic author in which the errors of the Heretics were described is not subject to the penalties of the Bull, because the book is not a Heretic's, but a Catholic's. The same must be said of one reading a book of a catholic author in which certain heresies were written through ignorance. Nor does it matter whether the books of Heretics are written by pen or published in type. He who reads a sermon, an oration, an epistle, or a disputation of a Heretic containing heresy is subject to the penalties of the Bull — whatever Sanchez teaches to the contrary. Wherefore the opinion of Fr. Sporer is not to be admitted, who with Sanchez, Laymann, and others teaches that he does not incur the excommunication who should read a writing of a Heretic of fewer than ten leaves. There is, however, a parvity of matter in this reading. What is it? Azor assigns one or two little verses; Suarez, two or three lines; Sanchez, a page of a leaf; Fagundez assigns a page and a half; and each speaks according to his own pleasure. A certain rule cannot be designated. Deliberate reading is not free of venial fault. Wherefore the one safe way is to abstain altogether from this reading. Yet the circumstances of the person reading, of the thing read, and other things of this kind must be regarded, that the gravity of the fault may be defined.

IV. He who reads a book of a Heretic which in no way treats of Religion is not subject to the penalties enacted in the Bull Coenae. Yet the books of the Heresiarchs — of Luther, of Calvin, and of the others — are all forbidden, in whatever matter.

V. That anyone may incur the penalties contained in the Bull, he must read knowingly; that is, knowledge is required both of the law and of the fact: he must know both that the reading of a heretical book is forbidden, and that the book which he reads is heretical. To the same penalties is subject he who hands a heretical book to another to be read, that he may hear the reader. But he who by fortuitous chance hears another reading is not subject to the penalties contained in the Bull, but can sin more or less according to the diversity of circumstances. A Theologian, a Preacher, a Confessor, when grave necessity presses, can read the books of the Heretics, either to confound the Heretics or to confirm the Catholics. Yet this rarely happens.

VI. Those who have obtained a license, either from the supreme Pontiff or from the Congregation of the Holy Office, to read heretical books, if they suffer danger of seduction, and feel their mind shaken by grave temptations, sin mortally in reading such books. For no pontifical license can free from the duty of avoiding an occasion that gravely allures. But those who suffer no temptation do not sin gravely, even if they read from mere curiosity. Not only do they sin gravely who without legitimate faculty read heretical books, and incur the reserved excommunication; but also those who retain them for any cause whatsoever, whether for show and ornament, or to fill their libraries.

VII. Printers of heretical books sin mortally, and contract the excommunication — as do all those who lend helping hands to the printers, who hand over the book to be printed, who furnish inks or types: because all contribute to the printing, and favor the Heretics.

VIII. In the Tridentine and Roman Index, besides the books of the Heresiarchs, many books of Catholics are prohibited. The former are named of the first class, the latter of the second. Those books of Catholics are prohibited which contain errors hostile to the doctrine of faith or of morals, or which instill a suspicion of error, or offend pious ears, or furnish scandal, or contain lax opinions. Books of this class are sometimes prohibited until they be corrected. This happens when in the book absolutely sound doctrine is contained, but some proposition, which is not capital, has fallen from the author's pen beside his intention, or from a slip of the mind, or through ignorance. Such books are prohibited under mortal sin, and an excommunication not reserved.

IX. There are several other kinds of books prohibited in the aforesaid Index. First, all books treating of Magic. Secondly, books of astrology. Thirdly, all obscene books are prohibited by the law itself; nor does any faculty or license avail for the reading of these, for they are by their nature pestilential. Finally, in the fourth rule of the Roman Index the reading of the sacred Bible in the vernacular tongue is forbidden without the license of Superiors. A book proscribed in one language is proscribed in every other, unless there be a difference, and a correction have been made.

Heretics CRY OUT wailing against this truly effective Antidote, whose complaints Bellarmine refutes, Lib. 3. de Laicis, cap. 20. Suarez disp. 20. sect. 2.

Nor is this remedy new in the Church, for in Actorum 19. many brought vain and superstitious Books to be burned.

St. CLEMENS, Lib. 1. constitut. Apost. cap. 7. reports that the Books of the Gentiles and of false prophets were prohibited to the faithful by the Apostles; and in the Council of Nicaea, by the testimony of Nicephorus, Lib. 8. cap. 18. it was decreed that the Books of Arius be burned, and Constantine added the penalty of death for those who concealed them.

IN the Fourth Council of Carthage, can. 16. it is permitted to Bishops alone, in case of necessity, to read the Books of heretics; and Theodosius, in the Lege damnato, Cod. de haereticis, by the precept of the Council of Ephesus, ordered the Books of Nestorius to be burned. Leo I. epist. 91. and Gelasius, in cap. Sancta Romana, dist. 15. prohibited the Books of heretics; and Leo adds that those Bishops are to be judged heretics who would permit Books of this kind in the houses of the faithful. The same is evident from the Fifth Synod, act. 1. and by L. quicunque, §. nulli, and §. omnes, Cod. de haeret. all the Books of Eutyches are prohibited and adjudged to the fire, by the precept of the Council of Chalcedon, act. 3. See the Allegati Doctores reporting other things, with Basilio Pontio in Appendice, post Lib. 12. de matrimonio, cap. 2.

The RATIO is from D. Bonaventure, in Diaeta, tit. 6. cap. 3. because sincere instruction is necessary to us for salvation and the knowledge of God; for we draw spiritual things through corporeal ones. Two senses are chiefly those by which the discipline to be learned is taken in, Sight, and Hearing. And indeed by sight we read the book of creatures, and therefore we rise up into the knowledge of God. For the invisible things of God, being understood by those things that are made, are seen, Rom. 1. We also read Books cut with letters; and truly the Books of Scripture are most apt for this: whence also Christ, Lucae 24. He opened their sense, that they might understand the scriptures. See therefore on the contrary how much books teaching heresies can harm; for they are more subversive and pestilential, since they contain sacrilegious doctrines. For these move most powerfully, since they are more diligently elaborated, and they endure. Hence the Gentiles cautiously prohibited Books adverse to their sects, as Valerius Maximus reports, Lib. 1. cap. 1. and Tullius, Lib. 1. de natura Deorum.

Let the Heretics not grieve that the reading of the Books of the Gentiles is permitted to us, for the Books of Heretics are adorned for that very end with specious titles and doctrines, to seduce: but the Books of the Gentiles report errors already outworn and exploded, which are not so dangerous. Indeed certain Books of the Jews and Turks are prohibited, in which there are some things more dangerous.

But the Books of Heretics are prohibited in the Bull of the Supper which contain heresy, or treat of religion.

He includes, moreover, there also one epistle of a heretic, as Suarez brings forward, disp. 20. sect. 2. Hugolinus in him, Megala 3. p. lib. 3. cap. 1. num. 55. Farinacius de haeresi quaest. 180. num. 70.

OTHERS, however, deny it with sufficient probability: Sanchez 42 cap. 10. num. 20. Durandus, and Bonacina, whom Palao reports and follows, primo Tract. 4. disp. 2. part. 10. Layman, Pottel, and Sousa, whom Diana brings forward and seems to approve, p. 1. Tract. de Bulla Cruciata, resol. 34. and Card. Lugo disp. 21. sect. 2. §. 1. The ratio is, because odia are rather to be restricted. It is confirmed, because although it is not licit to print books without the author's name on sacred subjects, the prohibition of the Council of Trent sess. 4. remaining in force, usage itself has nevertheless declared that these small writings are not contained under that decree, as Azorius testifies, Tract. 1. Lib. 8. cap. 8. cap. 17. quaestio 4. Lugo num. 33.

ALL persons, however, are included in this prohibition, according to the decree of Urban VIII. de motu proprio, 2. Aprilis 1631.

But those are excommunicated who read, or retain, print, or in any way whatsoever defend them, for any cause whatever, publicly or secretly, by any device or pretext. See Cardinal Lugo, and what was said Tomo 4. disp. 17. de conscientia, quaest. 10. ad proposit. ultimam.

Julius, who is a good Catholic, noticed some time back that a young woman, a near relative of his, who cares little about religion or the Church, is passionately fond of the Memoirs of Casanova, which she actually devours herself, and lends to others to read. In order to prevent the spiritual harm done by such reading, Julius borrows the Memoirs from the young woman and hides them where no one can get at them. Some time after this he hears, accidentally, that no one is allowed even to keep in his possession books forbidden by the Index. Thereupon he calls upon his pastor and consults him as to what he ought to do with these Memoirs, of which there are several volumes.

Answer.—Casanova's Memoirs are on the Index, decree of July 28, 1834.

Therefore, 1. Julius dare not keep these Memoirs in his possession, no matter how praiseworthy his purpose, without the permission of the Holy See. St. Alphonsus says:

“A person is not excused who keeps a book either in another’s house, or under another’s name, or with the intention of not reading it” (L. vii., n. 297).

Dr. Hollweck, in his work on the Index, comments on these words as follows:

"Concerning the having in one's possession books forbidden by the Index, we must emphasize the fact that it makes no difference whether you keep the book in your own possession or give it to others to keep for you; whether the book belongs to you or to somebody else; whether you intend to read it or no. Moreover, you must have had the book in your possession for a considerable length of time before you become guilty of a mortal sin, and incur the censure attached to the transgression of the law. St. Alphonsus calls one or two days parvitas temporis (l. c. n. 295). The Popes have usually named eight days as the limit of time for giving up bad books. With this fact in mind, it may be safely said that one must keep in one's possession a forbidden book over one week in order to be adjudged guilty of a serious infraction of the law and to have incurred the censure attached to it. One may keep the forbidden book in one's possession, even longer than one week, if one does so in order to await a more favorable opportunity of turning the book over to the bishop or vicar-general, or to get the necessary permission to keep it. But one should not keep the book longer than one month, for a month is ample time to get the necessary faculties from the Holy See." Thus far Dr. Hollweck.

2. Julius may not burn the book, or otherwise destroy it, because it is not his property.

3. Although the borrower or depositary of another's property is bound to restore the same to the owner upon his demand, or at the stipulated time, still in the case of Julius there is the exception to be made, of which St. Thomas writes: “When a thing to be restored appears to be gravely harmful to the person to whom restitution is to be made, or to another, it ought not then to be restored to him. Nevertheless, the person who thus retains another’s property ought not appropriate it to himself, but either reserve it so that he may restore it at a suitable time, or even hand it over to another for safer keeping” (2, 2, q. 62, ad. 1).

St. Alphonsus, Lessius, Lugo, and others, teach the same.

Julius would sin against charity, or the love he owes his neighbor, if, without more ado, he were to return the forbidden book to the owner, foreseeing the harm that would come to her or to others from its perusal. We say, "without more ado," because if Julius can not refuse to return the forbidden book to its owner, without serious inconvenience to himself, "sine gravi incommodo," he may return the book at once (Cf. Marc, n. 1020).

4. Since, therefore, Julius may not return the book to its rightful owner, simply upon her demand, and since he may not keep it any longer in his possession without the permission of the Church authorities, he should either get the permission to retain the book in his own possession or he should give it to some third person for safe keeping who has the faculty to retain forbidden books.

Perhaps, in the course of time, the young woman may be prevailed upon to waive her right to the book, and no longer to consider it her own property.

1. There are many persons, especially women endeavoring to lead a holy life, who occupy themselves a great deal with so-called revelations made to pious persons, even to the exclusion of all other spiritual reading matter. Sometimes such persons study the revelations made to some particular saint, drawing all their spiritual nourishment from them; then having their appetite whetted by the perusal of one book of this kind, they eagerly devour anything of the same nature that they are able to lay hold of. They believe in these revelations as firmly as they believe in the Gospels and are strongly disposed to brand as heretics, or at least as suspects, all who do not put the same faith in them as they do themselves. This disposition alone is sufficient to prove that the perusal of these private revelations is not a healthy, spiritual exercise for all indiscriminately, and it becomes necessary from time to time to instruct the faithful on this head.

2. That there may be, that there have been, and that there are at present revelations made to private individuals is beyond question. We are speaking, of course, of revelations made to holy and devout persons, which have been investigated by the Church and declared to contain nothing against faith or good morals. No positive ecclesiastical approbation is ever given to such revelations.

3. When the Church revises and approves revelations and visions in this sense, all she does is to certify that these visions and revelations contain nothing against the "rule of faith," the "regula fidei"; so that the faithful may believe them without injury to their faith (pie creditur) and use them as a guide to conduct without fear of believing or doing anything unauthorized by the Church. Where the Church has thus given her approval to any particular private revelation, it is no longer permitted to ridicule or to despise it. “It is not lawful,” says Card. Franzelin, “to despise such revelations” (de div. trad. 22). To do so were to fail in the respect due to the Church. But not to believe the revelation is no sin against the obedience we owe the Church. For the Church, by her approval or quasi-approval of these revelations, has no intention of obliging the faithful to believe them. Whoever believes in them, does so "fide humana," and not "fide divina," at least not "fide divina Catholica."

"In spiritual things," says Catherine Emmerich, "I never believed anything except what was revealed by God and proposed formy belief by the Catholic Church. What I saw in visions I never believed in this way."

4. The body of revealed truth, necessary to salvation and bearing the seal of infallibility, was completed and closed, once for all, by the teachings of Christ and the apostles. When the Church defines a new dogma, she simply declares authoritatively that it is contained in the teachings of Our Lord and the apostles. Just as private revelations do not bear the seal of infallibility, so neither do they bear the mark of inerrancy. There is no divine inspiration guaranteeing the correct recording of private revelations, as is the case with the Holy Scriptures, even though the fact of the revelations has been established.

Private revelations are exposed to a threefold danger. The understanding may err in receiving the revelation. The memory may fail in recording orally or in writing the contents of the revelation. The tongue may err in its effort to clothe the revelation in human words.

Moreover, as Bened. XIV remarks, notions and ideas acquired previous to the revelation may be confounded by the person receiving the revelation with the things learned in the revelation, and thus the saints have sometimes considered things to have been revealed to them which were in nowise revealed. Hence the contradictions in different revelations.

5. The supernatural communication, therefore, as well in its reception as in its transmission, may be unwittingly falsified. The Holy Scriptures alone are preserved from such falsifications. And thus it happens that the private revelations of different holy persons contradict one another openly, and in many things.

6. All that the Church says, therefore, when she lends her approval to the private revelations of the saints or other holy persons, is that these revelations may be believed "fide humana," and that they are adapted and may be used for the edification of the faithful.

The declaration of Bened. XIV does not contradict this: "When the Church has examined and approved these visions, no one may any longer doubt their supernatural and divine origin." The Pope speaks only of their origin, and not at all of their contents, nor of their correct reproduction. And even a refusal to believe in their divine origin would not be a sin against Catholic faith.

7. After these theoretical remarks let us add a few words of a practical nature. The reading of these visions and private revelations is in nowise adapted to the needs of ordinary people, even though they may have correct notions about the credibility of private revelations. Many of these revelations are beyond the needs and the intelligence even of persons already far advanced in the spiritual life, and are often clothed in language quite unintelligible. And herein precisely lies a new source of anxiety, because a new danger, namely, the danger of understanding the revelation in a wrong sense, which may easily lead to positive error and sin against the "rule of faith."

8. Besides the danger just mentioned there is another, namely, the danger of a one-sided and an imperfect direction in holiness, and of laying great stress on trifles and things of secondary importance. But what is worst of all is that the reading of these revelations gives rise to secret spiritual pride and makes silly pious people, for it is such persons that are most addicted to this kind of reading, that imagine themselves farther advanced in the ways of perfection than others and think that they know more about matters of faith and morals than most other people, even more than the priests themselves.

9. It may cause some surprise if we add a warning for members of religious orders, especially of women. As a general rule, it is not advisable to make use of histories of private revelations, made to pious and holy persons, for general community reading. And those in authority in religious communities should be very slow to allow individual members of the community to make use of the same for their private reading. Women in religious orders who are endeavoring to lead holy lives are more apt to evince a weakness for what is extraordinary than for what is ordinary in their quest of perfection, than their sisters in the world. They prefer the revelations of St. Brigitta or of St. Gertrude to an ordinary introduction to the spiritual life. And it is precisely those who are by no means firmly grounded in the spiritual life who hanker after what is higher before they understand or put into practice the most ordinary and necessary requirements of spiritual growth. In the case of religious the evil effects of this kind of reading are more pronounced and more disastrous than in the case of lay people, and they sometimes create disturbance and division in an entire convent.

10. Some may think these remarks and warnings too severe and even exaggerated. And such indeed were the case did we apply them, a priori, to all private revelations. They hold good only for those who read indiscriminately, and without selecting, especially revelations made to holy persons in times long gone by, and which are profoundly mystic, not to say apocalyptic in their presentation.

Simple books, and books that may be readily understood, like the visions of Catherine Emmerich concerning the life and sufferings of Our Lord and His Blessed Mother, are much to be preferred to others, and we would even recommend them.

Common sense, as well as the teaching of the Church, tells us that it is wrong without good reason to put ourselves in the proximate occasion of committing sin. We very soon learn that the reading of bad books is a proximate occasion of sin. If we want a healthy body we must give it healthy food; and if we want a healthy mind, healthy food must be given to it, too. Impure literature is bad for the soul, and so is infidel and heretical literature. Balmes, the well-known Spanish writer of the last century, was obliged to read many infidel and heretical books in order to defend Catholic doctrine from their attacks. He found that such reading had a bad effect on him; it left a bad taste in the mouth, which he used to counteract by reading a chapter of the Imitation of Christ.

It is the duty of the Catholic Church to guide and instruct her children in all that concerns faith and morals. She is the Shepherd of our souls, and it is her right and duty to provide us with healthy food for our souls and to warn us to avoid unhealthy pastures. One of the ways in which she has done this from very early times is by prohibiting bad books against faith or morals. In the new Code of Canon Law the regulations on the subject which have been made from time to time are codified. A dozen canons, some of them containing many subsections, are devoted to the subject. We are told that not only the Pope can prohibit books for the whole Church, but that particular synods, local Ordinaries, and Religious Prelates with the Chapters may do the same for their own subjects.

When a book has been condemned by the Holy See, all translations of it into other languages are also forbidden. A number of general rules are laid down forbidding certain kinds of books in general, but particular books are often condemned by name. This usually happens because someone has denounced such books to ecclesiastical authority as being dangerous to faith or morals. When a book has been prohibited, it is thereby forbidden to publish, read, keep, sell, translate, or in any way to give it to others without leave. Leave for reading and keeping forbidden books may be obtained from the Holy See by those who need it. Local Ordinaries can give particular leave to read and keep a book for good reason to their subjects, and sometimes they receive more ample faculties from the Holy See.

Like other laws of the Church, the laws about forbidden books bind under pain of mortal sin in grave matter, but no special penalty is incurred by transgressors except in the cases mentioned in Canon 2318. That Canon may be translated thus:

“The publishers of the books of apostates, heretics, and schismatics which propound apostasy, heresy, and schism ipso facto incur excommunication specially reserved to the Holy See, as also do those who defend or knowingly without proper leave read or retain the same books, or others prohibited by name by apostolic letters.

“Authors and publishers who procure the printing of books of Holy Scripture or of notes and commentaries on them without proper leave by the very fact incur excommunication reserved to no one.”

It is obvious that no very large class of books is prohibited under pain of incurring this censure. Only those books come under it which propound apostasy, heresy, or schism, and which are written by apostates, heretics, or schismatics. A book which does not propound apostasy, heresy, or schism, though written by an apostate, heretic, or schismatic, is not included under the censure, nor is a book which propounds apostasy, heresy, or schism, but which was written by an infidel. To propound apostasy, heresy, or schism is to maintain and defend it by advancing reasons in its behalf. A merely incidental heresy occurring in a book written by an apostate, heretic, or schismatic would not bring the book under the censure.

Not only the publishers of such books, but also those who defend them or who, knowing that they are forbidden under pain of censure, read or keep them without the required permission, incur excommunication.

Books are condemned by this Canon, not newspapers or articles in magazines, even though they defend heresy or schism and are written by heretics. A few books have been condemned by name, and the faithful have been forbidden to read them under pain of incurring excommunication, by Letters or Briefs or Bulls of the Pope himself. As examples may be mentioned Fénélon’s Explanation of the Maxims of the Saints, and the Spiritual Guide, by Molinos. These books are included under Canon 2318. A Catholic who desires to publish any portion of Holy Scripture or notes or commentaries on Holy Scripture must obtain permission to do so from the Bishop. Authors and publishers who neglect to do this and who have such productions printed incur excommunication, but any approved confessor can absolve them from the censure on repentance.