The Office of Censors

Argument of the chapter

Once the person of the censors has been defined, we now suitably come to describing the manner in which they ought to exercise their office.

Let Bishops, whose office it is to grant the faculty of printing books, take care that for examining them they employ men of tried piety and doctrine, concerning whose faith and integrity they can promise themselves that they will give nothing to favor, nothing to hatred, but, every human affection having been put aside, will look only to the glory of God and the utility of the faithful people.

Concerning various opinions and sentences (according to the precept of Benedict XIV) let censors know that they must judge with a mind empty of all prejudices. Therefore let them shake off affection of nation, family, school, institute; let them lay aside party zeal. Let them have before their eyes solely the dogmas of the holy Church and the common doctrine of Catholics, which are contained in the decrees of General Councils, the Constitutions of the Roman Pontiffs, and the consensus of Doctors.

Censors to be well chosen

115. 1. By each article it is commended to Ordinaries that they choose learned and upright censors, who set aside party zeal and consider only dogmas and the common doctrine of Catholics (art. 38, 39).

2. And since we are referred to the Constitution of Benedict XIV, it will not be displeasing here to transcribe from it two golden rules.

One must not judge from a separated place

"This also," the Supreme Pontiff observes in sec. 18, "we warn must diligently be noted, that a right judgment concerning the true sense of an author cannot be made unless his book be read from every side ... nor indeed is it to be pronounced concerning him from one or another proposition torn from its context or considered and weighed apart from the others which are contained in the same book."

One must incline into a good sense when the author is Catholic

And in sec. 19, he adds this, so consonant with evangelical charity: "But if certain ambiguous things have fallen from an author who otherwise is Catholic, and of intact reputation in religion and doctrine, equity itself seems to demand that his sayings, explained kindly as far as possible, be taken in a good part." The book of the Exercises of our holy father Ignatius already contained similar things. "It is to be supposed," thus that Saint says at the opening of the Exercises, immediately after the annotations, "that every pious Christian ought with a readier mind to draw the sentence or obscure proposition of another into a good part than to condemn it. But if he can protect it by no reason, let him inquire into the mind of the speaker; and if he thinks or understands less rightly, let him correct him kindly: if this does not suffice, let him attempt all opportune ways by which he may render him sound in understanding and secure from error."

When the examination has been completed, if nothing seems to stand in the way of the publication of the book, the Ordinary, in writing and entirely gratis, should grant to the author the license of publishing it, to be printed at the beginning or at the end of the work.

Discretion of the Bishop

116. 1. If nothing seems to stand in the way of the publication of the book. Therefore the faculty of denying approval is greater for the Ordinary than that of reprobating a book already published. Which books can be reprobated by him, we saw above, n. 102.

But in order that he not concede the faculty of publishing, it is enough that a truly just cause stand in the way, for example, of protecting peace, concord, of awaiting opportuneness.

At the same time, however, if nothing seems to stand in the way, he must concede the license. He cannot at will give or deny a faculty which in itself is to be given, unless something stands in the way.

Yet the reasons for rejection are to be indicated

2. From the rescript of the Sacred Congregation of the Index, September 3, 1898, if the book seems capable of correction or expurgation, the Ordinary must indicate to the writer the reasons why he was unwilling to approve the book. This is an equitable disposition, and one by which arbitrary rejections are guarded against.

Whether remuneration of the censor is excluded?

3. Necessary gratuitousness does not exclude, strictly speaking, congruous remuneration for the labor of the censor. Yet provision for the decent sustenance of the censor will be better made by another arrangement. Cf. Desjardins,¹ Peries,² Pennacchi.³

What if the faculty is given orally?

4. The faculty must be given in writing. Yet one which has been conceded only orally does not therefore become null, or without effect. Pennacchi, cited work, n. 77.

How the obtained faculty is to be expressed

5. You will ask whether the obtained faculty must be published in the very words by which it was given, or whether it is enough to use a formula by which it is clearly and distinctly indicated whose license was obtained?

C. Gennari⁴ and Hollweck⁵ hold the former; and formerly it was thus resolved.⁶ They argue from the text by which the license, which was given in writing, is said to be printed; and from the fact that otherwise it could not authentically be established concerning the license obtained.

Dilgskron,⁷ Genicot,⁸ Pennacchi,³ Wernz⁹ admit the latter, as quite sufficient for the end of the law; and consonant with the character of this Constitution, by which the solemnities have been made simpler. And this is confirmed by practice. Wherefore the law is obeyed if a secular man uses this or a similar formula: "with the permission of the Ordinary of such a diocese"; but a regular: "by the license of the Superiors of the Order and of the Ordinary of such a place."

Whether it can sometimes be suppressed

6. Formerly, if a just cause, for example lest the public utility of the book be impeded, demanded this, they admitted that, with the Bishop consenting, the obtained faculty could be suppressed.¹⁰ We are not compelled to be more severe today. And unless the omission, unduly made, is going to be for scandal or seems to contain contempt of authority, it does not seem to introduce grave guilt.

Gravity of the obligation

¹ Etudes, t. 71, p. 366.

² Pp. 205, 206.

³ Cited work, n. 77.

⁴ Monit., cited place, p. 112.

⁵ Cited work, p. 58.

⁶ Cf. Albitius, cited work, chapter 30, n. 125, or Arndt, cited work, n. 209, p. 296.

⁷ Analecta Ecclesiastica, 1897, p. 228.

⁸ Cited work, I, 459.

⁹ N. 121, note 109.

¹⁰ Dilgskron, in the same place, citing De Brabandere, II, 1348.