Chapter VII: Examples of Condemned Literature (3)

In August, 1833, La Mennais sent to the pope through the Bishop of Rheims a letter in which he protests against the strictures expressed in the papal brief. He professes himself prepared to give the fullest possible acceptance to all provisions of the Holy See which have to do with matters of doctrine and of morals. He asks the pope to indicate the expressions occurring in his writings which are open to condemnation. In October, 1833, the pope replies to the Bishop of Rheims, pointing out certain statements by La Mennais the purport of which tends to undermine the authority of the Church. La Mennais had taken the ground that he was not undertaking to interfere with purely ecclesiastical questions. While in such matters he gave the fullest acceptance to the authority of the pope, he was not prepared to accept the judgment of the pope in matters that seemed to him to be outside of the proper authority of the Holy See.

In 1834, La Mennais published, under the title of _Affaires de Rome_, a report concerning his correspondence and relations with the Holy See. This was duly prohibited by the Congregation in 1835. _Le Livre du Peuple_, printed in 1837, was prohibited in 1838. The same course was taken with his later writings, appearing between 1841 and 1846. La Mennais died in February, 1854. The set of his works in five volumes, published after his death, 1855–1858, does not appear in the Index.

=37. The Roman Revolution of 1848.=--The operations of the Index Congregation were not intermitted on the ground of the absence of Pius IX from Rome, from November 25, 1848, to April 12, 1850. During this period, three sessions were held in Rome and two in Naples, and judgment was passed upon a number of the more important of the publications of the day. Among those condemned the following titles may be noted:

Rosmini, Antonio, _Die fünf Wünder der h. Kirche_, and _Die Verfassung gemäss der socialen Gerechtigkeit_.

Gisberti, V., _Der moderne Jesuit_.

Ventura, G., _Discorso funebre dei morti di Vienna_, etc. (The three titles in German are recorded in Italian.)

A few months before the condemnation of the two treatises of Rosmini, his name had been under consideration with the pope for appointment as cardinal. His theological and philosophical writings had been denounced by his theological opponents as early as 1841, but, in 1843, Gregory XVI had ordered the controversies concerning the doctrines of Rosmini to be brought to a close. In 1850, the denunciation of the writings of Rosmini was renewed. The Congregation of the Index caused an examination of the works to be made by a number of consultors and, in 1854, the judgment was given that they were not to be disapproved, _dimittantur opera_. This continued controversy concerning the philosophical and theological teachings of Rosmini brought about, in 1880, an authoritative definition of the formula _dimittantur_.

In November, 1848, Pius IX took refuge in Gaeta. Rosmini followed the Pope thither, but finding that the influence of his opponent, Cardinal Antonelli, was still controlling, he returned without securing any personal consideration. A series of negotiations, controversies, and correspondence followed, but it was not until 1854 that his works finally secured quittance. The question then placed before the Congregation was whether, as the writings of Rosmini had been thoroughly examined and had been shown to be free from errors in matters both of doctrine and morality, the prohibition that had been placed upon them ought not to be cancelled. The Jesuits were still unwilling to give up their contest against the teachings of Rosmini. They pointed out that the Inquisition held higher authority than that of the Congregation, and that in a number of instances books which had been passed with approval by the Congregation had been condemned by the Inquisition. Cornaldi, in a treatise printed in 1882, contended that the philosophy of Rosmini was distinctly opposed to the doctrines of St. Thomas. Leo XIII, in a brief addressed, in January, 1882, to the Bishops of Milan and Turin, reproves the attempts to renew the controversies concerning Rosmini and calls attention to his encyclical in which he had indicated the way by which all devout philosophers could arrive at a harmony of conclusion.

=38. Traditionalism and Ontology, 1833–1880.=--In 1833, Abbé Bautain of Strasburg was responsible for the initiating of certain controversies, in part philosophical and in part theological, which appear to have turned upon the proper interpretation of the doctrines so-called of Traditionalism and Ontologism. In 1870, these controversies were revived in Louvain and in Paris with the result of bringing out certain condemnations from the Congregation and from the Inquisition. In 1840, Bautain was compelled to subscribe to certain propositions formulated by the Congregation, and in 1855 his associate Bonnetty took the same course. In 1861, the Inquisition declared seven propositions, selected from the writings of Ubagh and other French Ontologists, to be heretical. Ubagh was compelled to correct certain treatises of his own according to specifications laid down by the Index; and, in 1866, after lengthy negotiations, his friends in Louvain were obliged to declare their acceptance of the reproval and of the conclusions of the Congregation and of the Inquisition. Ubagh held in the University of Louvain the chair of philosophy and logic.

=39. Attritio and the Peccatum Philosophicum.=--In addition to the Inquisition’s decrees in which whole series of propositions were condemned, certain decrees were issued in which consideration was given to one or two propositions. In May, 1667, Alexander VII issued a decree in which, while not undertaking to decide the issue that had arisen concerning the sufficiency of incomplete repentance to secure absolution, he prohibited any writings which maintained that one view or the other of the matter was in itself heretical. In August, 1690, a decree of Alexander VIII condemns the two propositions, first, that the love of God is not requisite for the leading of a proper life, and, second, the theory that a sin which has been committed by some one who does not know God, or committed during a moment in which the sinner is not thinking of God, (the so-called philosophical sin as distinguished from the theological sin) is not to be classed as a mortal sin. These two definitions of the Inquisition resulted in the prohibition of a number of writings upon the questions. The most important of these was the _Amor poenitens_ by Johannes Mercassel, Bishop of Castro, which, after a long series of investigations, was finally condemned in 1690, with a _d.c._

The Council of Trent[54] had declared that the perfect repentance which has its motive in the love of God (_contritio caritate perfecta_) can secure reconciliation with God before the sacrament of confession may be received, but it does not free the believer from the requirement for this sacrament. The instruction says, further, that the incomplete repentance, the so-called _attritio_, which arises from a consideration of the shamefulness of the sin or is produced by a fear of the punishment of hell and which is therefore connected with the will to refrain from sin with the hope for forgiveness, can not of itself and without the sacrament of confession, bring about a reconciliation with God. Such a condition in the believer places him, however, by means of the sacrament of confession, in a position to secure grace. The doctrines presented in these instructions were, as above indicated, the texts for a long series of writings, many of which failed to secure with the Index authorities approval as orthodox.

=40. Communism and Socialism, 1825–1860.=--The selections from the long lists of works of those classed as socialists are but inconsiderable and, as in the case of certain other important divisions of literature, it is difficult to trace any plan or principle upon which they have been based. Proudhon is distinguished by having his entire series of works included in the Index, while of Saint-Simon (†1825) not a single volume has been condemned. Of the works of Charles Fourier (1768–1837), one book only has been selected for prohibition, _Le Nouveau Monde, Industriel et Sociétaire_, printed in 1829, prohibited in 1835.

Étienne Cabet (1788–1856) is represented in the Index by one only of his long series of treatises, _Le Vrai Christianisme_, printed in 1846, prohibited in 1848.

Esquiros, H. A. (†1876), has, next to Proudhon, the longest list in the Index of works belonging to this class. Of these the most important is _L’Évangile du Peuple_, printed in 1840, prohibited in 1841. This is followed by three socialist tracts entitled _Les Vierges Martyres_, _Les Vierges Folles_, _Les Vierges Sages_, printed in 1841, prohibited in 1842.

Further titles in this group are:

Constant, L. A., _La Bible de la Liberté_, printed in 1841, prohibited in the same year. The author was condemned to imprisonment for his works.

Chevé, Ch. Fr., _Le Dernier Mot du Socialisme, par un Catholique_, printed in 1848, prohibited in 1852.

=41. Magnetism and Spiritualism, 1840–1874.=--From the year 1840, the Inquisition published a series of decrees or opinions in regard to the theory of animal magnetism, but did not undertake to lay down any final conclusions. Certain expressions of opinion were also given in regard to the theories grouped under the name of spiritualism, but for this subject also there is wanting from the censorship authorities any authoritative or final word of counsel. From the long list of writings by the spiritualists of the time, only about a dozen were formally condemned. The list includes:

Kardec, Allan, _Revue Spirite, Journal d’Études Psychologiques_, 1858–1864; _Le Spiritisme à sa plus simple Expression_, printed in 1862, prohibited in 1864; _Le Livre des Esprits_, printed in 1863, prohibited in 1864.

Guldenstubbe, L. V., _Positive Pneumatologie_, printed in 1870, prohibited in 1874.

Under magnetism may be noted:

Cahagnet, L. A., _Guide du Magnétiseur; Le Magnétisme Spiritualiste_.

With this group may also be classed the Memoir of Swedenborg by the Protestant theologian, J. Matter of Strasbourg, _Swedenborg, Sa Vie, ses Écrits et sa Doctrine_, printed in 1863, prohibited in 1864.

=42. French Authors, 1835–1884.=--Among the more important of the books by French authors which are represented in the Index during this half-century may be noted the following:

Ségur, Mgr. L. G. de (1881), _La Piété et la Vie Intérieure_, printed in 1864, prohibited in 1869. The name of the author is not recorded in the Index and it is stated that the omission was due to personal consideration for him. Ségur states, in an article printed in 1860, that the monograph, before being brought into print, had been passed upon with approval by a number of devout scholars. He said further, that seventeen thousand copies had been distributed and that during the five years since the publication no criticism concerning it had come to him. He yields himself now to the authority of the Holy See and recalls the work from circulation.

Cloquet, Abbé. This author comes into the Index in 1864, on the ground of a series of monographs having to do with the subject of indulgences.

Alletz, P. A. (†1785), _Dictionnaire Portatif des Conciles_, printed in 1758 and reissued in 1822, first prohibited (with a _d.c._) in 1859.

Caron, L. H., Abbé, _La Vraie Doctrine de la Sainte-Église_, printed in 1852, prohibited in 1856.

Siguier, Aug., _Christ et le Peuple_, printed in 1835, prohibited in 1836.

Marne, M. G. de la, _La Religion Défendue contre les Préjugés et la Superstition_, printed in 1823, prohibited in 1843.

Quinet, Edgar (1803–1875), _Ahasuérus_, printed in 1833, prohibited in 1835; _La Génie de Religion_, printed in 1842, prohibited in 1844; _L’Allemagne et l’Italie_, printed in 1839, prohibited in 1848; _La Révolution_, printed in 1865, prohibited in 1866.

Michelet, J., _Mémoires de Luther_ (a translation from the German), printed in 1835, prohibited in 1840; _Du Prêtre_, _De la Femme_, _De la Famille_, _L’Amour_, _La Sorcière_, _La Bible_, _De l’Humanité_, printed between 1845 and 1864, prohibited promptly after publication.

Mickiewicz, Adam (1798–1855), _L’Église Officielle et le Messianisme_, printed in 1843, prohibited in 1848.

Renan, E. The writings of this author ought properly to have come into the Index under the specification _Opera omnia_. The Congregation appears to have taken prompt action concerning each book as soon as information of the publication came to hand, but a few titles escaped attention. The more important of those recorded are the following: _Le Livre de Job_, _Étude d’Histoire Religieuse_, _Origine du Langage_, _Histoire des Langues Sémitiques_, _Averroés et l’Averroisme_, _Vie de Jésus_, _L’Antéchrist_, _Les Évangiles_, _La Mort de Jésus_. (These books appeared between the years 1858 and 1884.)

Pêyrat, Alphonse, _Histoire Élémentaire de Jésus_, printed in 1864, prohibited the same year.

Soury, Jules, _Jésus et les Évangiles_, printed 1878, prohibited 1878.

Scholl, _Le Procès de Jésus_, printed in 1878, prohibited 1878.

Havet, E., _Le Christianisme et ses Origines_, printed 1873, prohibited 1878.

Aube, B., _Histoire des Persécutions de l’Église_; _Histoire de l’Église_; _La Polémique Paienne à la fin du deuxième siècle_; _Le Christianisme dans l’Empire Romain_, printed 1876–1880, prohibited as published.

Larroque, P., _Examen des Doctrines de la Religion Chrétienne_; _L’Esclavage chez les Nations Chrétiennes_, printed in 1859–1864, prohibited as published. Later writings by this author were also placed on the Index, apparently in so far as their titles were brought to the attention of the Congregation.

Jacolliot, L., _La Bible dans l’Inde_; _Vie de Jezeus Chrishna_, an identification of Christ with the Chrishna of the Hindus, printed in 1869, prohibited the same year. A group of later writings by this author were also promptly condemned.

Rodrigues, H., _Les trois Filles de la Bible_, printed in 1865; _Les Origines du Sermon de la Montagne_, printed in 1868; _La Justice de Dieu_, printed in 1869; _Histoire du Premier Christianisme_, printed in 1873. The above books were prohibited together in 1877 with the specification: “these works are condemned in accordance with the Constitution of Clement VIII, issued in 1592, on the ground of their presenting Jewish writings which contain heresies and errors tending to undermine Christian doctrine.”

Lajollais, Mlle. Nathalie de, _Le Lime des Mères des Families sur l’Éducation Pratique des Femmes_, printed in 1845, prohibited (with a _d.c._) in 1846.

Gréville, Mme. Henri, _Instruction Morale et Civile des Jeunes Filles_, printed in 1882, prohibited the same year.

Bert, Paul, _L’Instruction Civile à l’École_, printed in 1883, prohibited the same year. The volume of Bert had been officially adopted for use in the schools of Paris and also in certain other of the large cities. The decree of the Index was published by the Archbishop of Albi and by the Bishops of Annécy, Viviers, Langres, and Valence. The ecclesiastical authorities were sharply reproved by the magistracy for their interference in the matter and for their undertaking to criticise the action of the Government in a matter which, as it was claimed, belonged to the temporalities. In May, 1883, Minister Ferry, speaking in the Senate, says:

“We will never recognise as binding in a matter of this kind
the conclusions or judgments of the Congregation of the Index.
We propose to maintain free from interference the Gallican and
the French tradition of the independence of the civil power. How
is it possible to conceive that a Frenchman would be prepared
to accept conclusions of a body like the Congregation which has
in past years seen fit to condemn and to attempt to repress
great spirits of humanity like Descartes, Malebranche, Kant,
Renan, Bouillet?... I understand that a manual by Compayré was
condemned because the author says that it is more important for
a child to know the names of the Kings of France than those of
the Kings of Judea.... This Index decree is sent out over the
heads of our ambassador in Rome and of the Papal Nuncio in Paris
in such manner as to arouse needless antagonism in France.”

=43. Italian Writings, 1840–1876.=--Of the works by Italian authors condemned during this period, the following may be noted as indicating the policy of the Congregation.

Lazzeretti, David, _Opuscula omnia quocumque Idiomate edita_, printed in 1876, prohibited in 1878. Lazzeretti represented a mystic school of thought. He had for a time been in favour with Pius IX.

Gravina, D. B., _Su l’Origine dell’ Anima_, printed in 1870, prohibited in 1875.

Nuytz, G. N., _Juris ecclesiastici Institutiones_, printed in 1844, prohibited in 1851. In this condemnation, the critics have taken the pains to specify certain propositions which are considered pernicious.

Zobi, Ant., _Storia civile della Toscana_, 1737–1848, prohibited in 1856.

Amari, Mich., _Storia dei Musulmani in Sicilia_, volume one, printed in 1845, prohibited in the same year. The following volumes of this work escaped condemnation.

Rusconi, Carlo, _La Repubblica Romana del 1849_, printed in 1849, prohibited in 1850.

Leva, Jus. de, _I Jesuiti e la Repubblica di Venezia_, printed in 1866, prohibited in 1873.

Cantu, E., _Storia Universale_, printed in 1858, prohibited in 1860.

Torti, Giov., _Un Abisso in Roma_, printed in 1864, prohibited (by the Inquisition) in 1865.

=44. American Writings, 1822–1876.=--The first work by an American author which finds place in the Index is a monograph by W. Hogan, a priest in Philadelphia, having to do with a controversy that had arisen concerning the Church of Saint Mary which Bishop Henry Conwell proposed to have consecrated as a cathedral. The action of the Bishop was contested in some fashion by the trustees acting on behalf of Hogan who wanted to retain his pastorate. Hogan’s pamphlet was condemned in 1822. Hogan finally gave up the contest and at the same time left the Catholic Church and married. In 1864, was placed upon the Index a translation, printed in New York, of a monograph by Fr. Hollick, entitled _Guia de los Cassados o Historia Natural de la Generacion_.

Draper, J. W., _History of the Conflict between Religion and Science_, printed (in New York) in 1874, prohibited (in a Spanish version) in 1876.

Canada is represented in the Index of this period by the titles of two year-books issued by a literary association in Montreal, which, printed in 1858–9, were prohibited in 1864. In the year 1858, at which time the association contained seven hundred members, a proposition, submitted at the instance of certain ecclesiastics in the membership, was brought up for consideration, under which all non-Catholic members were to be excluded and two Protestant journals were to be removed from the reading-room. This proposal was voted down, and on that ground and also on the further complaint that the library contained pernicious literature, the Catholic members were called upon to leave the association. One hundred and fifty left and instituted a Catholic French-Canadian institute. The majority of the original association issued a statement declaring that the library contained no unworthy books and that, in any case, the decision concerning its literature rested with the managers of the association. In April, 1858, Bishop Bourget issued a pastoral brief in which he reminded the members of the old association that the reading or possession of heretical books involved the penalty of excommunication, and that any books recorded in the Index were to be classed as heretical. The institute was instructed to recall its action, and if it refused, the Catholic members were ordered to resign, under penalty of excommunication. Two hundred Catholics disregarded the command of the Bishop and remained members. They explained that they did not assert the right to read forbidden books, but they did maintain their right to remain members of a society in whose collections such books might be contained. In 1864, these Catholic members took the pains to place before the Bishop a catalogue of the library with the request that he would indicate the books classed as pernicious and with the suggestion that these books should be placed in a separate collection. To this proposition the Bishop paid no attention, whereupon seventeen of the members made direct appeal to Pope Pius IX. From the Pope they received no reply, but in July, 1869, the Bishop, then in Rome, sent to Montreal a pastoral brief in which he reported that the Inquisition declared the work of the institution to be pernicious. He reported, further, that the annual volume of the Canadian institute for 1868 (in which volume were contained certain addresses on toleration and freedom of conscience) had been condemned and that any person possessing or reading this year-book or remaining in the institute had come into mortal sin and must be refused the sacraments. Later in the year, a second memorial was addressed to the prefect of the Propaganda by the Catholic members of the institute, in which they stated that they accepted without question the condemnation of the year-book. To this memorial no reply was received. The Bishop, however, declared in a report to the vicar-general that the submission rendered in this memorial was inadequate because the writers remained members of an institute in which was maintained the righteousness of religious toleration. In November, 1869, died a distinguished Catholic member of the institute named Guibord, a man whose life had been above reproach. The pastor and the other authorities refused to make burial of the body even without religious ceremonies. The widow secured a provisional interment in unconsecrated ground. She then instituted a suit demanding the right of burial in consecrated ground. The suit continued until after her death in 1873. In November, 1874, the judicial committee of the priory council in London decided that the body was entitled to burial in the consecrated ground of his pastoral church and decided further that the Church authorities must provide for the very considerable expenses of the suit. The re-burial took place in November, 1875, after the Church authorities had filed a protest and had ordered faithful Catholics to take no part in the ceremonies. The record is of value in the history of censorship proceedings as an example of the overriding by the authority of the State of a decision of the Church, in regard to a matter which had heretofore been held as belonging strictly within ecclesiastical control, namely the right of burial in consecrated ground. In 1870, a later annual giving the record of the conclusion of the process, was condemned by the Inquisition.[55]

The contributions to the Index from the literature of South America are for this period more considerable than those from the United States and Canada. The following titles indicate the direction of the censorship.

Vidaurre, Manuel Lorenzo de, _Proyecto del codigo eclesiastico_, printed (in Paris) in 1830, condemned in 1833. The author, a doctor of law of the University of Lima, was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Peru. His “project” proposed certain rather radical changes in ecclesiastical regulations. _Tratado sobre Denaciones_, printed (in Madrid) in 1820, prohibited in 1833. In the same year were placed upon the Index three monographs by Vidaurre, one on the Bishop of Rome and the condition of the Church, the second on Celibacy, and the third on Confession.

Vigil, Francisco P. G. de, _Defensa de la Autoridad de los Gobiernos y de los Obispos contra las Pretenciones de la Curia Romana_, printed (in Lima) in 1848, prohibited in 1851. The author was a priest and at the time of his death Curator of the National Museum at Lima. The work, issued in six volumes, octavo, gives consideration to almost every detail of the organisation of the Church. _Manual de Derecho Publico Eclesiastico, and Dialogos sobre la Existencia de Dios y la Vida futura, á la Juventud Americana_, printed (in Lima) in 1863, prohibited in 1864. Vigil died in June, 1875. He had declined to submit himself to the condemnation of the Church and he was therefore refused the last sacraments. The Congress of Peru directed, however, that he should have the honour of a public funeral.

La Riva, J. F., _El Espiritu del Evangelio comparado con las Practicas de la Iglesia Catolica_, printed (in Lima) in 1867, prohibited in the same year.

Fotvárad, Carlos H. de, _O Casamento civil_, etc., printed (in Rio Janeiro) in 1858, prohibited in 1859. This monograph was written in reply to a treatise, published in Rio in 1858, by Canon de Campo. The author undertook to maintain the exclusive authority of the Church (as against the State) in all matters connected with marriage. _Las Biblias falsificadas_, etc., printed (in Rio) in 1867, prohibited in 1869. This was a further criticism of the utterances of de Campo.

D’Aranjo, M. R. (Bishop of Rio), _Elementos dé direito Eclesiastico publico_, etc., printed (in Rio) in 1857, prohibited in 1869. _Compendio de Theologia Moral_, printed (in Oporto) in 1858, prohibited in 1869.

Monte, Carmelo J. de, _O Brazil Mystificado na Questao religiosa_, printed in 1875, prohibited in 1876.

Mexico is represented in the Index of the period by a treatise entitled _Conducta_, the work of D. J. C. Portugal, Bishop of Michoachon, printed (in Mexico) in 1835, prohibited in 1840; and by two treatises of N. Pizarro, _Catecismo Politico Constitutional_, and _Catecismo de Moral_, printed in 1867, prohibited in 1869.

=45. Periodicals, 1832–1900.=--In 1832, the Congregation of the Index issued a declaration stating that the regulations of the Index of Trent (renewed in the succeeding Indexes) concerning ecclesiastical censorship, covered material printed in journals as well as that published in books. After the year 1848, however, the attempt to enforce in Rome ecclesiastical censorship, over the contents of journals as given up was impracticable. It was pointed out that no advantage could be secured in placing upon the Index journal issues of a back date, the reading of which had already been completed.

During the 18th century, however, various attempts were made to control the literary policy of journals the managers of which were within reach of ecclesiastical authority, and during the 19th century, censorship decrees were issued in regard to a number of journals which concerned themselves with ecclesiastical subjects. The only practicable measure to take against journals the articles in which are judged to be pernicious in their influence is to prohibit the faithful from reading or from possessing copies of the same. It has, however, been found convenient, in the cases in which such prohibitions appeared to be called for, to have the same issued and enforced, not by the Congregation, but by the local authorities.

After 1850, the Minister of the Interior in the papal States printed lists of the foreign journals the reading of which was forbidden.

1862. December. Adames, Apostolic Vicar of Luxemburg, declared in a pastoral letter that the publisher of the _Courier de Luxemburg_ and his editors were excommunicated. The subscribers and readers of the journal were to be excluded from the sacraments on the ground that they were helping to support a work of Satan. The publisher took the matter into the courts, but the judges dismissed the complaint against Adames, taking the ground that his action was within his ecclesiastical and legal rights. (Vering, _Archiv_, X, 422, XII, 172.)

In 1863, the Patriarch of Venice and the ten Venetian bishops, in a pastoral letter, prohibited the reading of three journals specified.

1870. Melchers, Archbishop of Cologne, published an instruction against the _Rheinische Merkur_, with which instruction the Bishop of Mayence and the Capitular-Vicar of Münster concurred. The Bishop of Paderborn issued an edict forbidding, as a mortal sin, the possession of a copy of the journal. No action appears to have been taken by the publishers, possibly because the circulation of the _Merkur_ was not seriously affected by these episcopal fulminations.

1871. Under instructions of Pius IX, a circular letter was issued by Cardinal Vicar Patrizzi to the pastors or parish priests directing them to forbid to their parishioners the reading of certain Roman journals. The list included _La Libertà_, _Il Capital_, _Il Tempo_, _La nuova Roma_, _La Vita Nuova_, and six others. Disobedience to this order was to be classed as a grievous sin. In 1873, a papal brief gave certain general instructions in regard to journals. It pointed out that these were covered by rules 2 and 7 of the Index. Papers were to be considered sheet by sheet, simply as open books. Permission might be accorded to a person to whom the information was necessary, to read in heretical or dangerous papers the political or financial articles, but the permission should be strictly limited to these portions of the journal.

In 1882, September, the Patriarch of Venice prohibited in like manner the reading of _Il Veneto Christiano_, and of _Fra Paolo Sarpi_, as “godless, blasphemous, and heretical productions.” The Patriarch declared that the publisher and those who read these journals with belief were excommunicated.

1885. February. The Archbishop Magnasco, of Geneva, condemned the _Epoca_. Editor, publisher, distributor, and readers were alike condemned to excommunication. Whoever buys or reads a number, or gives it to another, has committed mortal sin.

=46. The Roman Question, 1859–1870.=--Between the years 1859–1861, a number of monographs and volumes, chiefly by French writers, were brought into print that had to do with the question of the political authority of the Papacy. These French theories brought out a full measure of criticism and condemnation. Among the works thus reproved was a treatise by La Guérronnière, _La France, Rome et l’Italie_, printed in 1861, in regard to which Cardinal Antonelli issued a specific condemnation. No single title of the group is, however, to be found in the Index. The monograph by La Guérronnière expressed, as was well understood, the views of the Emperor Napoleon III, and had probably been written at the Emperor’s suggestion. A companion volume was published about the same time by Edmund About and this also was sharply condemned not only by Cardinal Antonelli but also by a number of the French bishops, including Dupanloup. The list of the Italian controversial publications on this question is also considerable. The earlier works had to do simply with the political authority of the pope, but since 1870, a number of writers have given attention to the desirability, on the ground of the welfare of Italy and also of that of the Church universal, of the reconciliation of the Papacy with the Government of the United Italy. These writings were met with sharp condemnation on the part of Pius IX and Leo XIII and of the supporters of the civil authority of the Papacy, but in only few instances was action taken in regard to them by the Congregation of the Index.

=47. The Council of the Vatican, 1867–1876.=--The conclusions reached by the council held in the Vatican in 1867 resulted in the publication of a number of controversial works of which certain titles found their way into the Index. The more important of these are the following:

Michelis, Fr., _Fünfzig Thesen über die Gestaltung der kirchlichen Verhältnisse der Gegenwart_, printed in 1867, condemned in 1868.

Renouf, Le Page, _La Condamnation du Pape Honorius_, printed in 1868, prohibited in the same year.

“Janus” (the name adopted for the moment by Döllinger) _Der Papst und das Concilium_, printed in 1869, prohibited in the same year.

Wallon, Jean, _La Vérité sur le Concile_, printed in 1872, prohibited in 1873.

Dupanloup, Archbishop, _Testament Spirituel de Montalembert_, and _La Cour de Rome et la France_, printed in 1871, prohibited in 1872.

Pressensé, _Le Concile du Vatican_, printed in 1872, prohibited in 1876.

In 1870, the general Congregation published a protest, signed by a number of members of the council, calling for the specific condemnation of a series of newspapers, articles, and pamphlets in which the work of the council had been criticised. The secretary of the Congregation of the Index reported, however, that it did not seem wise to take action. During the years 1871 and 1872, were, however, condemned by the Inquisition a number of periodical articles on the work of the council by such authors as Lord Acton, Berchtold, Friedrich, Ruckgaber, Schulte, Zirngiebl, and others.

=48. Example of a License.=--A license given by the inquisitor-general of Spain to Dr. Andrew Sall in June, 1652, states that he was permitted to keep and to read prohibited books for use in connection with the writing of any doctrinal or devotional books or treatises. The holder of the license was charged with the duty of giving information to his Grace of any censurable propositions that he might find in books, ancient or modern, which might not already have been comprehended in the expurgatory Index. The license was marked as duly entered in the record of licenses, the page (Number 138) giving indication of a considerable series of licenses outstanding. These instruments were renewed from year to year. Dr. Sall relates that with the second grant came a complaint that he had reported no censurable propositions. He had excused himself by saying that he had not had in his hands any Protestant books; but he gave specification of some perverse and apparently heretical doctrines he had found in certain books which were approved and were much in use with themselves. He gave as an example citations from the Commentaries on Esther by de Murcia:

_Etiam Deus Op. Max. proposita ante oculos morte in meliora contendat_; and

_Etiam demon morte ante oculos constituta contendit in meliora_.[56]

Sleumer gives the following example of the form in force to-day (1906) for an application for the permission to read forbidden books.

“To the very reverend Vicar-General of the diocese: The undersigned respectfully request permission for the reading of certain books which have been specifically forbidden in the Index or which in their class come under the general provisions of the Index. The requirement is based upon the following grounds:...

“The undersigned feels assured that the proposed use of this forbidden literature may be made by him on these grounds without any undermining of his faith or any interference with his conscientious duty to the Holy Church.”[57]