Chapter XI: The Literary Policy of the Modern Church (3)

“One of the great book collectors of New York has recently
secured from his foreign agent a copy of the new edition of the
Index _Librorum prohibitorum_ issued under the directions
of Leo XIII. It is seldom that a copy of an official Index
or record of books, the perusal of which is prohibited to
Catholics, comes into the hands of an outsider. The copies
printed are reserved for the use of the readers of the Church.
It is necessary in order to secure a copy, to pay a high price.
This particular copy, for instance, was estimated as worth from
$40 to $50, while a little later, in connection with the greater
difficulty of securing copies, it might easily have cost $400.
The history of the famous Index is interesting. Its intellectual
originator was the Emperor Charles V of Spain whose production
bears date about 1550. In 1554, the Pope Paul IV took into his
own hands the matter of the supervision of literature. This
has since been retained under the direct control of the pope.
Many hundreds of books which are not specified and mentioned in
the catalogue are prohibited under the general decrees, which
decrees, first issued by Benedict XIV in 1744, from that date on
are repeated in the succeeding Indexes. It is well known that no
Catholic ventures, under penalty of excommunication, to possess
or read books which are contained in the Index unless he may
secure a specific privilege or permission. It is not so well
known that the catalogue is itself three centuries old and that
it contains thus far the name of no single American writer, not
even Thomas Paine or Robert Ingersoll. There are, however, in
the lists dozens of works of the English classics and hundreds
of French books which belong to the world’s classics. Here for
instance are to be found Bossuet and Pascal. The latter always
believed himself to be a good Catholic. Among the English
names placed under the ban are Gibbon, Hume, Hallam, and
Goldsmith.”[169]

Hilgers amuses himself, and with justice, with the mass of errors that have been crowded into the few paragraphs cited from the article. It is his conclusion that if an American writing in the city of Rome could be so thoroughly ignorant of matters that were easily within his reach, the impressions of Americans elsewhere and of Protestants generally concerning the purpose, the history, and the nature of the Index are probably equally erroneous.

The conclusions of the German Jesuit concerning the literary policy of the Church of Rome as expressed in its latest Index, may conveniently be supplemented by a statement (written in November, 1898) by a scholarly American priest, on the present policy and methods of the Roman censorship. This statement comes in a personal letter to myself and I am, therefore, not at liberty to bring into print the name of the writer.

“The action of the Index is meant to be both preventive and
repressive. Its preventive action is exercised through the
diocesan censor, that is, there is in every well constituted
diocese an officer known as the _censor deputatus_, to whom
the bishop can hand over, before they come into print, all
works written by Catholics which deal with religion or morals.
This officer gives his opinion in writing to the bishop, who
thereby issues an _imprimatur_ (permission) or a _nihil
obstat_ (no reason to the contrary). There is, moreover, at
Rome a similar censorship on a somewhat wider scale which is
to-day, as through the past centuries, exercised through the
master of the sacred palace. This official continues to be a
Dominican friar. The greater part of the works submitted to this
censor are of course books printed in the city of Rome or at
least within the territory of the old papal States.

“As far as the repressive action of the Index is concerned, this
is performed by the Congregation itself. I may recall, however,
that at the Council of the Vatican, many bishops from France,
Germany, and Italy asked that the ‘Ten Rules of the Index’ be
revised. They asserted that the changed social and literary
conditions in these countries made it impossible to continue to
enforce these ‘Rules’ with the former strictness. The further
request was made public that books should no longer be censured
(condemned) at Rome until the local episcopal authorities had
been heard in the matter so that the author might have his
errors pointed out, and that, if he were writing in good faith,
he might thus be afforded an opportunity of recalling his
erroneous statements and thus save himself from the disgrace
that from a Catholic point of view would of necessity have come
upon him through the condemnation of his book. The text of
this document may be found in the _Acta Sacrorum Conciliorum
Recentiorum, Collectio Lacensis_, volume viii, 843–844.
On pages 11, 79, and 780 will be found a petition of certain
Catholic laymen for the abrogation of the Index.

“The application of the legislation of the Index is made by
the refusal of the permission to print, or by condemnation
of the printed book and the insertion of its title on the
catalogue of prohibited books. This latter act is accomplished
by means of special decrees in which one or more works may be
specified.... As far as the positive legislation of the Index
goes, it may be said that this is, as a matter of principle,
everywhere obligatory in that it emanates from the supreme
ecclesiastical authority. Nevertheless, it may in certain places
be modified by use or by non-use. Sometimes it is not strictly
applied or insisted upon; still, it does not lose its binding
force although the consciences of Catholics may thereby to some
extent be relieved. In certain countries, and undoubtedly in
English-speaking countries, the Index legislation has not been
strictly observed. I must say, however, that within the last
year (1898) a formal enquiry having been sent to the Roman
authorities as to whether in these English-speaking countries
the legislation of the Index was to be considered as in force,
an affirmative reply was returned to the questioners.

“Publishers and booksellers, if they be Catholics, are in
like manner bound to the observance of this ecclesiastical
legislation. Inasmuch as the legislation is preventive, it
is looked upon by them as a security and moreover in general
it offers a _présomption d’innocuité_ [presumption of
innocuousness] to the book, which is of importance for those
who furnish the capital for its publication. [This remark of
the American Father is, it may be pointed out, in line with
the conclusion submitted sixty years earlier by the Englishman
Mendham to the effect that if a book were not included in an
Index of its period, those interested in its publication had
a right to assume that it contained nothing considered as
objectionable by the authorities of the Church.]

“The repressive action of the Index may of course from time to
time occasion losses to writers, publishers, and to booksellers.
An author whose book has been placed upon the Index is under
obligation to withdraw the book from circulation or to modify
its text. [It is of course the case, although the Father does
not mention it, that any modification of the text of the
original edition calls for the cancellation of the copies of
this edition and involves the outlay of printing further copies
with the revised text]. Publishers and booksellers, if they be
Catholics, are bound, as is the author, by the action of the
Index authorities. If they be not Catholics and do not pay any
attention to ecclesiastical legislation, they may still, in
case the work has been written by a Catholic and is addressed
to a Catholic reading public, expect to see its sale blocked or
diminished through the censorship....

“It may be said in general that the Index legislation, as
formulated by Leo XIII, is no longer as severe as formerly;
it has been modified in the sense of mitigation. For example,
a book written by an American for the purpose of education or
instruction for instance in the Scriptures, is no longer _ipso
facto_ forbidden. As far as the Index is concerned, such
books may be freely read by Catholics who may need them.... The
famous ‘Ten Rules’ of the Index issued under the authority of
Pius IV (1564) are to be interpreted to-day by the Constitution
‘_Apostolicae Sedis_’ issued by Pius IX, a Constitution
which reformed considerably the well-known system of censures,
excommunication, and the like, and which is to-day the juridical
source of general ecclesiastical censures of all kinds. In the
_Compendium Juris Ecclesiastici ad usum cleri_, written by
the Austrian Bishop, Simon Archner, Bishop of Brixen, (the sixth
edition of which was printed in 1887), you will find (on page
521) the following passage:

“‘The ecclesiastical prohibition of books, whether placed
_nominatim_ on the Index or forbidden by its general rules,
whether forbidden by the natural law or by the positive law,
remains still intact. Therefore, such prohibited books cannot
be printed, read, or kept _sine peccato_. But, at the same
time, certain modifications of these prohibitions remain also
in force, modifications which have doubtless been introduced
in various regions through legitimate custom. As to Germany,
authors of authority mentioned by the Council of Vienna have
maintained that profane books written by heretics, on special
subjects, as law, medicine, philosophy, history, etc., although
they may contain one or more heresies scattered throughout the
text, heresies held by the authors _obiter tantum_, do not
fall under the ecclesiastical prohibition. They say the same
of those writings of Catholic authors, otherwise worthy books,
which contain one or more doctrines that are not entirely in
accord with Catholic theology, the sacred canons, and the
constitutions of the popes, and which in certain matters may
exceed the proper limits in comment on subjects that the
writers ought not to touch. This moderation is extended also
to the rules of the Index which are scarcely anywhere received
in their entirety, and which still less can be republished in
this century _ex integro_. Finally, in Germany, even those
writings of non-Catholics may, generally speaking, be safely
read by Catholics which speak of religious matters in a manner
conformable to the doctrine of the Church; and especially is
this the case with the works of writers who may seem to be
nearing conversion to the Catholic religion. On the other hand,
no such license can be given to writings which treat of obscene
matter, superstitions, magic, incantations, and the like; such
works, even though written by Catholics, are forbidden in
Germany, and rightly so. It is further to be noted that even
bishops can issue and are under obligations to issue positive
precepts by which, even under pain of censure, they may forbid
the reading of books if they are satisfied that such reading
would bring danger of perversion. In such case, they will
declare that the reading of the works in question is forbidden
under the law of nature. In regard to this point, Pius IX on the
24th of August, 1868, renewed the injunction of Leo XII, urging
the bishops to proceed in this matter not only by their own
episcopal rights but also as delegates of the Apostolic See.’

“The work of the Congregation of the Index is continued at Rome
practically under the same routine as in former centuries,
modified only by the late legislation of Leo XIII.... The
prohibitions of the Index are, as a rule, made known by being
published in the _Osservatore Romano_. I am not able to say
how the individual author learns of the condemnation of his work
and whether it is customary to write a letter to the bishop of
his diocese or whether the publication in the _Osservatore_
is looked upon as sufficient; nor can I say whether there is
any earlier or more juridical means of promulgation than that
mentioned. As a matter of fact, such condemnations are first
more widely published by means of the Catholic press; but there
is no law or usage compelling further publicity than that
specified. Indeed, I doubt whether the fact of the condemnation
of a book by a decree, or the fact that it has been placed on
the Index, is always known to the Catholic world in general or
even to those Catholics who speak the language in which the book
is printed.... It may be well to remember that, in practice,
the condemnations of the Index probably affect very much less
than is generally imagined the actual sale or distribution
of the books condemned; partly because of ignorance of the
condemnation, which is often very general, partly because of
the accepted and increasing modification of the legislation,
and partly because the persons for whom such books were chiefly
intended are often by privilege or by dispensation provided with
the authority to read the same.”

At the time of the completion of the proof-reading of this division of my treatise (March 1907), there does not appear to be any prospect of the production, under the direction of Pius X, of any later issue of the Index. Books that are brought to the attention of the Secretary of the Congregation, or of the Master of the Palace, are, however, condemned from time to time by separate decrees. Among other recent similar condemnations, may be cited: Schell, Hermann (of Wurzburg), _Treatise on Catholicism_, (and three other works) 1899. Loisy, the Abbé, _L’Évangile et l’Église_, 1903. Horitin, the Abbé, _La Question Biblique chez les Catholiques_, etc., 1903.

The writings of these three authors gave rise to fierce controversies during the years between 1898 and 1903. Schell and Loisy submitted themselves. The treatise by Ehrhart, _Catholicism and the Twentieth Century_, published in 1901, and that by the Protestant, Harnack, _What is Christianity_, published in 1900, escaped condemnation. In July, 1906, a condemnation was made of _The Saint_ (_Il Santo_) by Senator Antonio Fogazzaro. The author, who is reported to be a devout Catholic, is said to have “submitted himself” in regular course, but his submission could not prevent the continued sale of the book in the Italian as well as in the foreign editions.

I am informed by the publishers of the American edition that the prohibition by the Roman authorities was duly respected by the publishers of the leading Catholic papers of America, which declined to accept advertisements of the book.