What the Prohibition of a Book Forbids

What does the prohibition of books import? It imports the prohibition of reading those books, translating or rendering them into another language, retaining, defending, printing, publishing, selling, and donating them. For books proscribed by the cited Constitution are simply prohibited. "All booksellers, especially those who glory in the Catholic name, are neither to sell, nor lend, nor retain books treating explicitly of obscene things; let them not have other prohibited books for sale unless they have obtained permission from the Sacred Congregation of the Index through the Ordinary; nor are they to sell them to anyone unless they can prudently judge that they are legitimately sought by the buyer." § 46. Cf. nn. 1304-1307, 1311. If at any time all the works of some author are expressly prohibited in the Index, this prohibition does not pertain to those books which either in no way touch, or only incidentally touch, the truths of faith, and are proscribed by no general or special decree. Preface to the Index of Prohibited Books. By the reading or retention of prohibited books excommunication is incurred only in the two cases already related above, §§ 47, 48. Cf. 1165, 1212. Cf. also the preceding number at the end. Absolutely, the book is to be handed over to Inquisitors or Ordinaries. The reason is that superiors may know what poisons are offered to the faithful, and prepare the antidote. But as the practice of many places is today, and so that such books may be extirpated more safely and quickly, they can also be burned. But they cannot be torn up so that afterwards things may be wrapped with their leaves.

To wait a few days either to hand the book to a superior or to seek permission is not grave, and consequently not liable to censure. Finally, books are understood to be books printed with type and of some regular bulk, not manuscripts, lithographs, etc.; nor booklets of slight bulk or flying leaves. This distinction is indeed openly made in the present Constitution. Cf. n. 1165; Sanchez, in Decal., book 2, chap. 10, n. 56; La-Croix 349; Laymann, de Fide XV, 7; E.M.

"45. Prohibited books, until they are expurgated, can be retained until, with diligence applied, they are corrected." Proposition condemned by Alexander VII.

1237. 1. Besides books prohibited under penalty of excommunication,¹ and books reported in the Index, from the Code itself these are prohibited by the law itself:²

¹ Code, c. 2318.

² Code, c. 1399.

1. Editions of the original text and of ancient Catholic versions of Sacred Scripture, even of the Eastern Church, published by any non-Catholics whatever; likewise versions of the same into any language, made or published by the same;³

³ Yet the use of these books is permitted to those who devote themselves to theological or biblical studies, provided that the same books have been published faithfully and integrally, and that the dogmas of the Catholic faith are not attacked in their prolegomena or annotations. Code, c. 1400.

2. Books of any writers whatever which defend heresy or schism, or strive in any way to overthrow the very foundations of religion;

3. Books which, by set purpose, attack religion or good morals;

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

5. Books of which there is question in c. 1385, § 1, n. 1, and c. 1391; likewise, from those of which there is question in the cited c. 1385, § 1, n. 2, books and booklets which narrate new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, or miracles, or which introduce new devotions, even under the pretext that they are private, if they have been published without observing the prescriptions of the canons;

6. Books which attack or deride any one whatever 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 by set purpose heap reproaches upon the ecclesiastical hierarchy, or the clerical or religious state;

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

8. Books which establish as licit the duel, or suicide, or divorce; books which, treating of Masonic sects or other societies of the same kind, contend that they are useful and not pernicious to the Church and civil society;

9. Books which professedly treat, narrate, or teach lascivious or obscene matters;⁴

⁴ But expurgated classical books do not fall under the prohibition.

10. Editions of liturgical books 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;

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

12. Images printed in any way whatever of Our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of the Angels and Saints, or of other Servants of God, alien from the sense and decrees of the Church.

1238. 2. Local Ordinaries can also proscribe books, and they must warn the faithful of the danger and harm of reading depraved books, especially prohibited ones.⁵ They can besides grant permission to their subjects to read books prohibited by the law itself or by decree of the Holy See, but only for individual books and only in urgent cases. 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 selection and for a reasonable cause.⁶

⁵ Code, c. 1405.

⁶ Code, c. 1402.

1239. 3. Those only can read and retain proscribed books who have obtained opportune faculties. - License to read or retain books condemned by the Holy See does not include license to read and retain books prohibited by a Bishop, unless in the case of express mention.⁷ Besides, they are held by grave precept to guard prohibited books in such a way that these do not come to the hands of others.⁸

⁷ Code, c. 1403.

⁸ Code, ibid., § 2.

1240. 4. Sellers of books are wholly prohibited from selling, lending, or retaining books treating professedly of obscene matters; moreover, they are forbidden to have other proscribed books for sale without permission of the Congregation of the Index, or to sell them to those who do not legitimately ask.⁹

⁹ Code, c. 1404.

A full prohibition must be distinguished from a less full or imperfect prohibition.

Defense of the book is prohibited

47. I. 1. In the first place, we are prohibited from defending a book that has been simply reproved.

For this defense contains a certain rebellion against legitimate authority, whose act it strives either to impede or to render less effective.

Publication, reading, keeping

2. That book can neither be published, nor read, nor retained. For to this already formerly pertained the simple prohibition of a book. Then, in article 12 of the Constitution Officiorum, these three words, publish, read, retain, are used in place of the word prohibition, which alone is used elsewhere. Finally, as often as a book is placed in the Index, we are taught the same thing. For the customary clause thus states: "Therefore let no one, of whatever rank and condition, dare in any place and in any language, either in future to publish, or to read or retain when published, the aforesaid condemned and proscribed work."

What of selling, of renting

3. To these acts neither the selling nor the renting of a book, or lending it, are added by positive law, if you except the precept which article 46 of the Constitution Officiorum directs to sellers of books.¹ Therefore, with this disposition excepted, which will be explained in its proper place, those acts are governed by the natural law, by which they are not rarely forbidden, either of themselves or consequently upon the positive prohibition of the book.²

II. It remains that the individual acts be explained in a few words.³

¹ You will say: Is not the lending of a book itself prohibited at the end of article 26? By no means, since in the said article there is merely recalled the precept which is contained in the clauses of the faculty by which permission is granted to read and retain prohibited books. Those who obtain this are generally ordered to keep books in such a way that they do not come into the hands of others.

² Cf. Cardinal de Lugo, De Fide, disp. 21, from n. 71.

³ When they can be excused, cf. below, nn. 58, 59.

What defense is

48. 1. Defense of a book occurs both physically, by rescuing the book or material volume from destruction, from being handed over to superiors, etc.; and morally, by defending it in speech or writing, either absolutely or insofar as it gives occasion to the prohibition.¹ But he does not defend an evil work who praises only the innocent part, or even the style, etc., "provided it does not imply praise or approval of the book." Lugo, De Fide, disp. 21, n. 94.²

¹ By the word defend, "defense both of right and of fact is imported." Barbosa, Dictiones usu frequentes, dict. 81, n. 4.

² Cf. Lehmkuhl, II, 924; Arndt, op. cit., p. 240; Hollweck, p. 26; Cardinal Gennari, Monitore, loc. cit., p. 145.

Publication

49. 2. He publishes a book who takes care that the book be published and disseminated. Such is the publisher strictly so called, and generally the writer or author. For by the common labor of both, a book is accustomed to come into the light. Yet this is not necessary. For works are published against the will of the writer, or without his knowledge, or after he has died. But in order that he himself may be said to have assumed the role of publisher, it is necessary that, for this end of publishing the work, he have handed over the book written by himself.

Moreover, the publication of an evil book is intrinsically evil.

Cooperators

Several can furnish cooperation to those publishing a book, whether formal, which necessarily shares in the evil of the publication, or material, and that either proximate or remote. Only from most grave necessity can proximate cooperation be justified; the other is excused by a grave inconvenience.

First, the printer, distinct from the publisher, who has undertaken the work to be printed, cooperates proximately with the publisher.

And he is very often a formal cooperator. Yet his act of printing is not intrinsically evil.¹ Therefore, in a certain case of avoiding an extreme evil, his material cooperation could be excused.

Next, among proximate cooperators are to be numbered those among whom evil works are available for sale to all, or for renting, or who sell them through the streets. Therefore only a nearly extreme necessity will excuse these until they can provide for themselves otherwise.

Theologians were accustomed, rather acutely, to distinguish even among workers those who cooperate proximately - those who set the type, ink it, place the paper on the type, turn the press² - from those who cooperate only remotely - those who prepare the paper, arrange the books already printed, apply fire to the machine. Yet if you observe that the publication of a work is distinguished from its printing and sometimes is entirely separated from it, you will rather easily agree with those who today no longer impute anything but remote cooperation to workers.³

Moreover, this cooperation has various degrees of proximity, and certainly in him who is the "sub-manager" of the inner workshop (chef d'atelier) it approaches very closely to proximate cooperation. Now the more proximate the cooperation you have exhibited, the more difficultly you will be excused.

¹ Cf. Laymann, Theologia moralis, book 2, treatise 3, chapter 13, n. 5; Villada, n. 21.

² Cf. D'Annibale, vol. 3, n. 142 and note 19. By most writers, among remote cooperators are placed those who correct the printed matter; yet those correctors at the same time read the work.

³ Konings, I, 315; Hollweck, Die kirchlichen Strafgesetze, section 107, 5.

Who formally read

50. 3. They read, not those who merely hear someone reading,¹ or recite from memory, or, ignorant of the language, materially run their eyes over a passage, but those who perceive with their eyes, understanding the things which are written.

¹ And this probably even if they have induced him by counsel, request, or command to read it aloud to them. So Lugo, loc. cit., n. 75; St. Alphonsus, book 7, n. 292; D'Annibale, II, 36. We do not deny that against this interpretation, with Hollweck, p. 24, note 1, one can object a certain rigorous adherence to the letter by which the end of the law can be eluded. Nevertheless, the end of the law is not the law; someone finds a person to read aloud with more difficulty than he reads himself; nor is it repugnant that a positive law be deficient in a rarer case, even one which, according to itself, would be touched by a stronger right. This is not to be attributed to a defect of the law, but to the variety of contingent cases; nor does it supply sufficient reason why, in an odious law, you should abandon the strict propriety of the words.

Who retain

51. They retain who keep a book in their possession, whether their own or another's; or also those who deposit it with another, while retaining ownership, unless he has the faculty of reading prohibited books and can keep the book until either it is expurgated or the one handing it over has himself obtained the faculty of reading. Nor are you here excused by ignorance of the language.

What of a custodian of a library, of a bookbinder

But he does not seem to retain who is merely the custodian of a library in which books of this kind are contained, unless he has preserved them in his own house or room.

Strictly speaking, a bookbinder also retains. Nevertheless, from a certain epikeia, it seems permitted that he retain prohibited books while he binds them for one having the faculty. Indeed, even for one not having it, if a reason of loss has intervened. Besides, he will generally be protected by ignorance. Cf. Arndt, p. 235, n. 173.¹

What if you retain because of the extrinsic apparatus of the volume, etc

What if you have wished not indeed to read certain works of prohibited reading, but merely to retain them, because a notable price is present in the covers with which they are bound (reliure artistique), or in the images with which they are decorated, or in the ancient or rare type with which they are made?

Of itself, indeed, a just cause is present here for seeking a faculty, which will not be denied. Yet if, as not rarely happens, from the mode in which they are kept and from the price of the art itself there is no moral danger that they be read, they seem, as it were, to have lost the nature of a book. For the formal use of a book is reading. Therefore the necessity of seeking a faculty, especially if some inconvenience is added, does not seem to be strictly urgent.

¹ Lessius, however, whom Arndt names (Auctarium V. Haereticorum libri), speaks only from natural law.

Prohibition of publishing

52. The prohibition of publishing a book without previous approval does not of itself prohibit the reading or retention of a book published without the prescribed censorship. For neither do the words sound more broadly; nor, when he intends a more severe sanction, is the Legislator accustomed to suppress it in silence.¹ Cf., for example, articles 13, 18, 20. So also Pennacchi,² Gennari,³ etc., against Péries.⁴

¹ Nor is it sufficient, contrary to the opinion of Hollweck - who, p. 36, 37, note 3, and p. 50, 51, note 3, introduces this distinction - that the necessity of previous censorship for certain books is expressed in the chapter contained under the title On the Prohibition of Books. This, I say, is not sufficient. For the insertion is sufficiently explained by the connection of the matter, just as under the same title certain articles, for example article 4, positively permit certain kinds of books. But in the contrary opinion no reason can be given why in certain articles the sanction of the prohibition of a book is appended to the requested censorship, while in others there is complete silence about that sanction. Therefore let us hold this: a prohibition which the Legislator has not expressed is not to be introduced. As Wernz elegantly observes, n. 53, a rubric denotes the principal matter, but not the exclusive one.

² Acta Sanctae Sedis, loc. cit., n. 54, p. 311.

³ Monitore, loc. cit., p. 66 and note 1.

⁴ P. 114.

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.