Chapter XII · INDEXES AND PROHIBITIONS, SPANISH, ROMAN, BELGIAN, POLISH, AND PORTUGUESE 1612–1768

1612. Madrid, Sandoval.

1617. Cracow, Szykowski.

1624. Lisbon, Mascaregnas.

1628. Papal Decrees re Poza

1632. Rome, Capsiferro.

1632. Seville, Zapata.

1640. Madrid, Sotomayor.

1664. Rome, Alexander VII (see also Chapter XIII).

1707. Madrid, Valladores.

1714. Namur and Liége, Hannot.

1747. Madrid, Prado.

1790. Madrid, Cevallos.

1793–. Madrid, Supplements to Cevallos.

1559–1768. Examples of Spanish Prohibitions.

1. 1612. Madrid. Inquisitor-General Sandoval. This Index, comprising lists expurgatory as well as prohibitory, is the next in the Spanish series to the Quiroga Index of 1584. The inquisitor-general under whose authority it was compiled and issued was at the time both Cardinal and Archbishop of Toledo. The title-page bears, in addition to the name of the Spanish primate, the line de consilio Supremi Senatus Stae. Generalis Inquisitionis Hispaniarum. The volume is one of considerable compass; as printed in the first Madrid issue, it contains 744 pages, five of which are not folioed.

In 1614, an appendix with additional lists was printed as a separate volume. This is called Appendix prima, but no later appendices came into print. In 1619, the Index was reprinted in Geneva in an edition which included, with the appendix, a polemical introduction by Benedict Turretini. In 1628, this Geneva edition was reprinted in Palermo under the instructions of the Inquisitor-General, Zapata. The Index is prefaced by a brief of Paul V, the text of which follows the lines of that contributed in 1559 by Paul IV to the Index of Valdes. The Pope says (in substance) that he had learned that the permissions in existence in the Spanish realm for the reading of prohibited books had grown to be too numerous and that the results were pernicious. All such permissions, whether emanating from the popes, from the local bishops, or from any other authorities, were now cancelled, with the exception of such permissions as might be given by the present inquisitor-general to the devout scholars to whom had been confided the task of the preparation of the present work. The penalty for disobedience of this general prohibition was the excommunicatio latae sententiae. Then follows an edict of the inquisitor-general in which he states that the work has been undertaken by him under the general Apostolic authority that he possesses as inquisitor-general in the Spanish realms; and under the special instructions given to him in the papal brief. The penalties specified in the regulations are incurred by all persons who possess or who read copies of the prohibited books. The penalties are not incurred in connection with books entered under Class II, concerning which the censors give simply a caution. Copies of such books are however to be submitted to the authorities (in Spain usually the local inquisitors) in order that the nature of the caution or correction may be duly specified.

The fourteen rules (based upon the Ten Rules of Trent) follow pretty closely the text of the Rules of Quiroga. Rule X presents a general prohibition of all anonymous books and of all books not bearing the name of the printer, which have been issued since 1584.

Sandoval’s editors follow the Roman model in placing their lists under three classes. Works which, condemned in their original form, are to be permitted after an expurgation, are specified in the original list with a star, and the titles are repeated in the second division, the Index expurgatorius.

The second and third classes present in separate alphabets the titles of Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, French, Flemish, and German publications. In Class I, the only Spanish names are Constantino de la Fuente and Joan Auentrote. In this class is placed also Erasmus, with the memorandum that all of his writings are prohibited as printed in the vernacular. A similar specification is made in connection with the names, given in the same class, of Petrus Ramus and of Macchiavelli.

The chief editor of the Index presents, after the classified lists, a “notice to the reader” in which he says:

“The writings of authors who have been condemned, in so far as these do not have to do with matters of religion, can be made available for the use of the faithful through a thorough expurgation. Even in the writings of orthodox scholars, whose zeal and service in behalf of the Catholic religion deserve the highest praise, are to be found certain errors of statement and expressions liable to misconstruction, which, if left uncorrected, would be likely to work mischief. In other cases, writings of Christian authors, whose work was well-suited for the time and the special conditions under which they wrote, have in these later times come into controversy. The result of their consideration by the scholars of later date has been to show the necessity of some revision or reshaping of the earlier text, in order to prevent these works of repute from exerting an evil influence on later generations.” “The compilers of this Index have undertaken the expurgation of more than three hundred works, among which are included certain books that have secured a very wide circulation. Certain further important expurgations are in train, and in collaborating in such work, devout scholars can be of noteworthy service to the Inquisition.”

This Index prohibitorius contains practically all the titles that were given in the Index of Clement VIII, and such further titles as were compiled by Quiroga. It includes further a number of the later prohibitions. Class I, in particular, has been very largely added to, the new names, chiefly German, aggregating nearly three hundred. The list includes a number of insignificant authors whose writings have been entirely lost sight of. In the expurgated texts, Sandoval utilised to some extent the work of Brasichelli. The appendix presents an edict dated August, 1614, certain modifications of the rules, additional titles for the preliminary lists, and a series of expurgated texts.

Schneemann[184] points out that this Index of Sandoval was utilised by the Dominicans, under the lead of Bañez, to bring into condemnation a number of the books of the Molinists, including the works of the Jesuit Molina himself. The Benedictine Curiel writes to the inquisitor-general to point out that this use of the Index by Bañez and his associate Summel was the result of a disgraceful intrigue against Molina. Bañez had secured, in 1593, from the Inquisition, an instruction to the Universities of Alcala and Salamanca for the production of an Index, but, probably on account of the protest above referred to, the work was never completed.

Sandoval’s editors evidently had before them the text of the Roman decrees of 1603, but they appear to have made a rather arbitrary selection of the authors the condemnation of whom they were prepared to confirm. Among the better known names omitted from the Spanish lists are Bruno, James I, William Barclay, and Roger Widdington. In the Palermo reprint of the Sandoval Index are added the titles of certain Sicilian authors. There is also included a specification that references to Pope Joan must be cancelled from any volumes in which they occur.

The following entries may be cited from the two lists:

Gregorii Capuc. Enchirid. Eccles: this stands for the Neapolitan Index in which the suggestion had been printed that the Spanish Index expurgatorius might be a forgery. Henricus Stephanus and Johannus Scapula find place, the former as usual for his issues of Bibles, and the latter for some treatise not clearly specified. For the works of J. A. Thuanus or de Thou, the entry states that the censure of the present Index covers only the first eighty books of the history. It is not clear whether the last fifty-eight books contained nothing to condemn or simply had not been reached. Isaac Casaubon is reprobated at some length.

Emmanuel Sa, freely censured by the Roman Index is here very lightly corrected and excused. As previously pointed out, the conclusions of the Spanish and Roman Indexes often clash and the framers of the former are reprimanded by the writers of Rome for their presumption.[185] Under Cajaten, are cited two sentences (taken from a work by an orthodox Catholic, printed at Antwerp) which have been, according to Mendham, altered to a directly opposite meaning. Mendham gives as example of his statement the change of the word mali into divini and of impia into sancta. The works of Athanasius are considered in no less than three editions and large changes and “expurgations” are made in the annotations. Examples of the “cancellations” are the following:

Adorari solius Dei esse.

Imagines tollendas esse testimonia.

Angeli non sunt adorandi.

Justificatio fit per fidem.

Contra meritum humanum pro gratia, abundanter disputatum.

Sancti non sunt adorandi, non sunt invocandi.

Scriptura sacra sufficit ad veritatem.

Canonici libri soli legendi, et cur?

Canonici libri soli sunt fontes salutares.

Gratia Christi nos salvat per fidem, non per bona opera.[186]

The text of S. Augustine is also handled at length. Among the propositions condemned and cancelled is: Quae de carne sua manducanda Christus proposuit, spiritualiter sunt intelligenda. Erasmus receives the largest measure of attention, no less than eighty pages being devoted to the condemnation of reprehensible passages. The expurgators protest particularly at the contentions maintained by Erasmus against the worship of saints, images, or creatures.

In St. Chrysostom, passages are condemned which assert that, (a) sins are to be confessed to God, not to man; (b) that faith alone justifies; (c) that grace is excluded if we are saved by works; (d) that images are not to be adored; (e) that nothing is to be asserted without the authority of Scripture, which is to be read by all and which, to all who are willing to learn, is intelligible; (f) that after this life nothing can assist or deliver.

The Theatrum Vitae Humanae, compiled by Theodore Zwinger, receives as much analysis as is permitted by the space at the command of the expurgators. The work itself is comprised in no less than twenty-nine octavo volumes. The reference to it being with a note worded as follows: “Since this work is in a great degree collected from the writings of condemned authors, it is to be read with special caution. The names of these authors are never to be cited or referred to honourably; and, to guard against error in the case of any author of whose condemnation the reader may have doubts, he must have recourse to the schedule of the first class.”

Zwinger has found occasion in his list of popes to use for not a few, descriptive epithets that are by no means honourable. Mendham remarks that “no attainment of vice, and not even the taint of heresy has been considered by the authorities of the Church to be of force sufficient to bar the claim of the popes to doctrinal infallibility in matters of faith and of morals.”[187]

The faithful student who might desire to utilise this expurgatory Index as a guide for his own reading, or who might think it important to verify the accuracy of the citations condemned as heretical, would find difficulty in tracing these citations, as the expurgators have not thought it desirable in a single instance to specify the page or even the volume from which the alleged extract has been made. The opportunity thus given for attributing heretical opinions to one author or another is obvious. An article in the Protestant Guardian[188] gives, as an example of the methods of these Madrid expurgators, quotations from the corrections made in a treatise by Hernando de Santiago, Consideraciones sobre los Evangelios de la Quaresme: “not Abimelech, you mean Melchizedech; and where you speak of Pelagians you certainly should say Socinians; books of chivalry should of course read books of the Maccabees; on page 149, Persia should read Assyria, Anna, the sister of Moses, is evidently an error for Miriam, while Tamar should be changed to Dinah.”

A reprint was issued in Geneva, in 1619, by Turretin, professor of divinity. The editor places on his title-page the following lines:

The allusion is to a line in Terence, Eunuch., Act V, scene 7, Egomet meo indicio, miser, quasi sorex, hodie perii.[189]

2. 1617. Cracow Index Prohibitorius.—Index Librorum Prohibitorum; cum regulis et cum adjecta instructione de emendandis imprimendisque libris et de exequenda prohibitione. Nunc in hac editione congregationis cardinalium edictis aliquot, et librorum nuper scandalose evulgatorum descriptione auctus. Cracoviae. 1617. This was issued under the instructions of Szykowski, Bishop of Cracow. There had, it seems, been two previous editions, one initiated by Macierowski, Bishop of Cracow, the other by Zamoyski, Bishop of Chelmin. The above title is taken from Peignot.

3. 1624. Lisbon. The Inquisition. Prohibitorius et Expurgatorius.

This Index, issued in July, 1624, under the authority of the Inquisitor-General, Fernando Martius Mascarenhan, bears as its main title the wording Index auctorum damnatae memoriae, tum etiam librorum, qui vel simpliciter, vel ad expurgationem usque prohibentur, vel denique jam expurgatae permittentur. As indicated by this title, the Index is expurgatory as well as prohibitory. Part I presents the lists of books prohibited in the Roman Indexes and decrees up to the year 1610. The three classes are merged under a single alphabet. Part II presents an Index prohibitorius Lusitaniae, in which are summarised, under one alphabet for each language considered, the several lists of the Portuguese prohibitions. These Portuguese prohibitions follow very closely the lists of Sandoval. The rules, based in substance upon the Ten of Trent, are here expanded into fifteen.

The material in the expurgatory section is in larger part transcribed from Sandoval. The Index of Trent had been printed in Portugal in 1581, and that of Clement in 1597. The Portuguese historian Seabra takes the ground that, under Philip IV, no Index could be published without the authority of the King. Philip had, in Portugal as in Spain, maintained a certain personal supervision of the censorship operations of the Inquisition. Reusch is of opinion that any reprints of the Roman Indexes must have secured the approval of the King. In 1623, the King issued an order prohibiting the reprinting, without the authority of the chamberlain of the palace, of any book which had originated outside of Portugal. In 1633, this order was renewed, with the specification of books bearing upon the authority of the State and the history of the times.

In the edict which stands at the head of the Lisbon Index, the inquisitor-general directs that copies of all books specified in the prohibited lists shall, within thirty days, be delivered to the local inquisitors, and further, that persons possessing copies of books belonging to the general classes prohibited, or of books the texts of which are ordered to be expurgated, must, within thirty days, deliver lists of the same, and hold said books subject to instructions. The penalty for disobedience is, as usual, excommunication.

In the prefatory note to the expurgatory Index, occurs the remark, that the works of certain well-known writers which, by the editors of previous Indexes, have been considered to require expurgation, have here not been included because their errors have been so thoroughly refuted in the schools and in other books that their influence need no longer be dreaded, and there should be no present risk for thoughtful readers. The list of later Catholic writers whose works are marked for expurgation is larger than in any other Index. Attention has also been given to a number of works in the class of belles-lettres which the editors have undertaken to purge from obscenities. Finally, the Index contains a series of works on astrology, the expurgation of which has been undertaken with reference to the instructions given by Sixtus V in a Bull issued in 1585 (forty years earlier.)

This is the first Index in which appears the title of the essay by King James I of England, written in defence of his requirement for an oath of fidelity. This title, which is entered under the letter A, is worded as follows:

Apologia pro juramento fidelitas, primum quidem anonymos, nunc vero ab ipso auctore serenissimo et potentissimo Principo Jacobo, etc. Lond. 1609.

The work is again condemned in the Spanish Index of 1632, where it is entered under J. Jacobus Rex. In the same year it finds place (this time also under A) in the Roman Index, the Elenchus Capsiferrei, from which it has been repeated into the later Indexes of Rome. The continued condemnation of this treatise is of importance as evidence of the papal doctrine (which appears never to have been revoked) of the right of the pope to depose kings. The Reverend Mr. O’Sullivan, in his testimony before the Parliamentary Committee of 1825, on the State of Ireland, deduces this doctrine from the condemnation given by the Church (in the Index) to the Apologia of King James.[190]

4. 1628. Rome. Papal Decree. This decree contains an article entitled Elucidarium Deiparae Auctore Joanne Baptista Poza.

Poza replies in a caustic Apologia in which he charges Brasichelli with censuring the Fathers, and with an unwarranted condemnation of Emmanuel Sa. This rebellious conduct was punished by the Decree of September 9, 1632, making condemnation of all of the works of Poza. This decree is reversed in a supplement to the Spanish Decree of 1640. The obedient Catholic was therefore at liberty to read the works of Poza and of Sa within the dominions of Spain, but in so doing in other territory, he incurred excommunication.

5. 1632. Rome. Index Prohibitorius.—Elenchus Librorum omnium tum in Tridentino, Clementinoque Indice tum in aliis omnibus Sacrae Indicis Congreg._nis particularibus Decretis hactenus prohibitorum: Ordine uno Alphabetico, Per Fr. Franciscum Magdalenum Capsiferreum Secretarium digestus. Romae. MDCXXXII. Ex Typog. Camerae Apostolicae Superiorum permissu.

The dedication reads: Urbano VIII. Pont. Opt. Max.

This Index is chiefly intended, as is indicated in the preface, to facilitate reference by writing under one alphabet the divisions of the original Indexes, and by giving surnames as well as Christian names.

6. 1632. Seville. Index Prohibitorius et Expurgatorius.—Novus Index Librorum Prohibitorum et Expurgatorum; editus auctoritate et jussu Eminent.^mi ac Reverend.^mi D.D. Antonii Zapata, S.R.E. Presbyt. Card. Tit. S. Balbinae; Protectoris Hispaniarum; Inquisitoris Generalis in omnibus Regnis; et ditionibus Philippi IV. R.C. et ab ejus Statu, etc. De Consilio Supremi Senatus S. Generalis Inquisitionis. Hispali, ex typographico Francisci de Lyra. AN. MDCXXXII.

The Inquisitor’s Edict refers to the Apostolic Brief of Urban VIII as the reason for the production of a new Index, and states further that this comprises, in addition to the works of the later modern writers, no less than 2500 works of ancient authors who had been overlooked by those responsible for the preparation of previous Indexes. The usual prohibitions follow, with the penalty of the greater excommunication. The Brief of the Pope is in line with that of Paul V. Terrified at the abuse of existing licenses, the Pope revokes them all, very emphatically:

Revocamus, cassamus, irritamus et anullamus, ac veribus penitus evacuamus et pro revocatis, etc.

Authority is given to the cardinal presbyter to put into execution the several decrees, and to call in, if necessary, the assistance of the secular arm. The “Notice to the Reader” announces that in place of prohibiting altogether, it has been thought best to permit, with some necessary expurgation, the reading of certain works by heretics. For convenience of reference, there is included in the work a general index covering in one alphabet the titles in both the expurgatory and prohibitory divisions. The volume is the most considerable in bulk of the Indexes thus far put into print, comprising over a thousand pages.

One entry in the class of authors proscribed in toto is rather curious in its wording:

Martinus Lutherus. Islebii natus in Saxonia, an. 1483. Praedicat contra indulgentias 1517. Ab ordine Religioso et a Fide Catholica Apostata, et Heresiarcha, 1517. Reperitur in lecto misere exanimis, 1546.

This passage did not make its appearance in any subsequent Index.

7. 1640. Madrid. Sotomayor. In 1640, the Inquisitor-General Antonio de Sotomayor (a Dominican) produced an Index, also printed in Madrid, which contains both prohibitory and expurgatory divisions. An edition of this Index, printed (without imprint) either at Lyons or Geneva, secured a wide circulation. Sotomayor died in 1648, in his hundredth year. His Index was reprinted in Madrid in 1662, and again in 1667, under the name of his successor. The Spanish Index of 1707 refers, however, to that of 1640 as “the next preceding.”

Sotomayor’s introduction begins with a long declamation against heretical writers who have ventured to issue, under the names of Catholic authors, pernicious and damnable books; who have interpolated into the text of orthodox writings heretical passages; who have described as untrustworthy the writings of the Fathers of the Church (for instance the treatise of Ambrosius on the Sacraments and the works of Dionysius Areopagita); and who have destroyed great numbers of pious books presenting good Catholic doctrine. The regulations which follow are issued under the general Apostolic authority vested in the inquisitor-general, and under the special authority given by the Brief of the Holy Curia. All copies of works which are specifically condemned by title, or which belong to the classes condemned in toto, are to be delivered within ten days to the local inquisitor. Whoever retains books classed as heretical, falls under the excommunicatio latae. The retention of other prohibited books brings upon the possessor the penalty of the excommunicatio ferendae. In either case, there is a further penalty of a fine of six hundred ducats, and such additional punishments as may be ordered by the Inquisition. The power rests with the inquisitor-general alone of freeing delinquents from these penalties.

The sixteen rules contain certain additions to the Regulations of Trent. The writings of Catholics are, for instance, not to be condemned on the ground of containing extracts from the works of heresiarchs cited for the purpose of refutation. In the supervision of books for the purpose of expurgation, care is to be taken not to cancel the names of heresiarchs who are referred to by the authors in connection with necessary refutations.

The rules and penalties are similar to those previously in force. The supplement contains an entry permitting, after certain expurgations, the reading of the works of Poza, which by the Roman Congregation had been absolutely condemned.

As examples of the character of the expurgations which find place in the Spanish Indexes may be cited the following: Sotomayor orders the cancellation, in bibliographies or other works of reference, of the following terms when applied to names of writers standing in the general Index in Class I: vir optimus, pius, bonae memoriae, doctissimus sapientissimus, princeps eruditorum, divinus (Scaliger), Germaniae lumen (Melanchthon), decus saeculi nostri, etc. It is however permitted to describe Buchanan as a “poet of elegance,” Henricus Stephanus as “learned in Greek scholarship,” Tycho Brahe as “a distinguished mathematician and astronomer”; because the attainments so indicated are the gift of God and have not been utilised, at least directly, against the true faith. The Spanish editor goes on to say, that such titles as doctor and magister can, strictly speaking, properly be ascribed to no one outside of the Church; the reference is to cases in which these titles have been given by heretical universities whose authority is not recognised by the Church. The title Dominus can however be permitted.

The expurgatory lists of Sotomayor include the title of the Vitae Germanorum of Adams; the expurgations comprise thirteen folio sheets. There are certain interpolations comprising such terms as notam auctoris damnati or homo damnatae memoriae, etc. In the Bibliographica critica, of Michael Josephus, published in Madrid in 1740, the author says in his introduction:

“In the specification of works of heretics I have taken pains to avoid using any terms of commendation; for it is certainly not right that infamous persons who have fallen away from the true Catholic faith should in any fashion be honoured. Certain Catholic writers have on the other hand contended that heretical authors whose work had been devoted to subjects outside of theology or religion, such for instance as philology, geography, profane history, jurisprudence, and the like, could very properly be commended for their contributions to learning. To this suggestion I should respond that I am prepared to recognise the possibility of heretics possessing learning and talents, and that certain heretics have written on certain subjects works which may be of use to Catholics; but it seems to me entirely improper to give any measure of praise to such men who have failed to use for the support of the true faith the abilities with which they have been endowed by the Lord. They can receive enough praise from their heretical friends and it would tend to make them intellectually insolent to learn that they had been honoured also by Catholics.”

8. 1664. Rome. Alexander VII. The Index of Alexander, which in chronological order belongs at this point in the schedule, is considered separately in Chapter XIII.

9. 1707. Madrid. Index Prohibitorius et Expurgatorius.

Novissimus Librorum Prohibitorum et Expurgandorum Index pro Catholicis Hispaniarum Regis Phillipi V Reg. Cath. Ann. 1707.

On the engraved title is printed, Index Expurgatorius Hispanus ab Ex^mo D^no Didace Sarmiento et Valladores inceptus, et ab Ill^o D^no D. Vitali Marin perfectus, etc. De Consilio Supremi Senatus Inquisitionis Generalis.

The work is contained in two volumes, the first comprising 791 pages and the second 342 pages. It begins with the edict of the Bishop of Ceuta, and Inquisitor-General, Don Vidal Marin, who explains that he is completing the work of his predecessor Don Diego Sarmiento, who had been interrupted in his labours by death. He writes that, considering the importance and necessity of continuing the Spanish Index of 1640, this Index has been prepared in order that the books and pamphlets issued during the last sixty-seven years might, as far as requisite, be prohibited or expurgated and that the faithful might thus be preserved from the errors which would otherwise have been caused through the circulation of heretical or erroneous texts. The previous Advertencias and Mandatos are repeated and are ordered to be enforced with the utmost rigour of the law. Provision is made for the publication of the Index in all churches, cathedrals, colleges, and cities.

An avis of the Privy Council of Brussels, printed in 1708, contains the following naïve remark in regard to this Index: Et pour montrer qu’il est très difficile d’examiner les livres et de discerner s’ils doivent être condamnés ou pas, on n’a que prendre recours a l’Index Expurgatorius d’Espagne, émané dernièrement en l’an 1707, ou se trouvent plusieurs livres approuvés que Rome a condamné, et de même plusieurs condamnés par les Inquisiteurs que la Ste. Congregation n’a pas trouvé convenir de proscrire.

10. 1714. Namur and Liège. Hannot.—Index ou Catalogues des principaux Livres condamnés, rédigé par Jean Baptiste Hannot, Recollet, Lecteur en Théologie.

This Index, while issued avec approbation, was compiled without any specific authority. It comprises a selection, arrived at apparently in a rather haphazard fashion, of works favouring Jansenism.

11. 1747. Madrid. Prado. 2 vols. 1200 pp. Pro. and Ex. This Index is noteworthy for its Catalogo of Jansenist books. The list originally included the History of Pelagianism by Cardinal Noris, but this entry was, as Mendham points out, subsequently cancelled by the reprinting of a leaf.[191] The cancellation was the result of a protest or remonstrance addressed by the Pope (Benedict XIV) to the Inquisitor-General, Compostolla. The brief of Benedict is given in a supplement to the Bullarium of that Pope, and is cited from the edition printed in Mechlin, in 1827. The Pope reminds the inquisitor that it is the policy of the Church to exercise censorship with moderation and conservatism. He refers to the treatise of Bossuet, published under the commands of the King of France, which was written in direct hostility to the infallibility of the Pope and to his claim for authority over the temporal rights of princes; and he reminds the inquisitor that his predecessor had decided that the interest of the Church would be better served by forbearing.

12. 1790. Madrid. Index Prohibitorius et Expurgatorius.—Indici Ultimo de los libros prohibidos y mandados expurgar; para todos los Regnos y Señorios del Catolico Rey de las Españas el Señor Dom. Carlos IV. The work contains the prefatory matter of the three preceding editions, and brings the lists of condemned and expurgated books down to the close of December, 1789. The Inquisitor-General, Cevallos, under whose supervision the work was prepared, declares, as the purpose of the Index, the presentation of an alphabetic compendium which should comprehend not only the contents of the Index of 1747, but likewise the titles of all works which had been prohibited or sentenced to expurgation in the edicts previously cited up to December 13, 1789. “This would,” he believed, “serve to close the door to the excesses of printers and booksellers and also to wrongful action on the part of private persons, and would prevent the evils consequent upon the introduction into the Kingdom of such pernicious commodities as heretical books.”

The Index is noteworthy in expressing the change of policy in regard to the reading of the Scriptures. The inquisitor and his associates profess themselves to be sensible of the benefits to be secured by the faithful from the perusal of the Sacred Text, and with reference to the declaration to the same purpose in the Index of Benedict XIV (which declaration is printed in the present volume) they decide to accord permission for the reading of versions of the Bible in the vulgar tongue, with qualifications similar to those specified in the Benedictine Index. The longer expurgations of the earlier Indexes are not reprinted, but a reference is made, connected with the name of the author, to the Index in which the expurgation originated. For instance:

“Abailardus (Petrus) ejus opera V. Ind. Exp. 1747, p. 920.”

With reference to these condensed entries, the Index of 1790 is often referred to as an Index manual. To the twelfth rule (in the series of sixteen) is added the instruction that the possessor of a book ordered to be expurgated is at liberty himself to make the necessary corrections in the text, provided, however, that his corrected text shall, within two months’ time, be submitted to and approved by the local inquisitor.

Reusch points out that these Spanish Indexes, even the latest, contain many more errors, both bibliographical and typographical, than those of the Roman series before Benedict. The compilers of the Index of Cevallos were of course in a position to utilise in their work the lists and the information brought together in the Index of Benedict. It would appear, however, that they made no use of the Benedictine Index, while it is evident that the compilers were in many cases quite ignorant of even the names of the authors and of the books condemned (not to speak of the contents). The following entry may be cited as an example of some likely to cause perplexity to the devout reader:

“Fulko Grevil, Theliffe Of the Renovudne, Senior Phillip Ciduaey” (Fulk Greville’s Life of the Renowned Sir Philip Sidney).

13. Supplements to the Spanish Index of 1790. The second issue of the Index of 1790 contains two supplements which present the titles of certain books that, during the printing of the Index, came under the condemnation of the Inquisition. The works belong almost exclusively to a group of writings having to do with the French Revolution. In 1805, was printed a third supplement that contains books prohibited between 1789 and 1805. This list includes, in addition to writings of the Revolution, certain Italian works that had during the preceding decade been prohibited in Rome. Between the years 1806 and 1819 (years that covered the period of the French invasion, the short-lived kingdom of Joseph, and the reorganisation of the kingdom), the Inquisition published seven edicts in which a number of works were prohibited. These lists were, however, not combined into any official Index. In 1844, was printed in Madrid an Index in which were combined into one alphabet the lists of the Index of 1790, the supplement of 1805, and the lists of the Mechlin edition of the Roman Index of 1843. This publication was, however, a private and unofficial undertaking. In 1848, was printed in Madrid an appendix to the Index of 1844, which contains the titles of the books prohibited by the Inquisition between 1805 and 1819 together with the titles of the books prohibited in Rome between 1842 and 1846. In 1863, was issued in Madrid a second appendix giving the titles of the books prohibited in Rome between 1846 and 1862.

The edict of 1782, a citation of which appears in the Index of 1790, orders that: All persons having permission for the reading of prohibited books must, not less often than once a year, make statement to the confessors of the books of this class that they are utilising. The confessors are authorised and instructed by the Inquisition to revoke these permits in case they find that the reading in question is causing injury to the faith of those holding the permits. The confessors are to demand of the penitents from time to time, and in any case at the time of the annual confession, whether they have in their possession copies of prohibited books and whether in the course of the year they have read any such books. In the former case, the penitents must agree to deliver the books for destruction; and in the latter must truly express their penitence for the sin committed. Until this has been done, they are not to receive absolution.

The permits for the reading of prohibited books given by the Roman Congregations are not valid in Spain. The permits issued directly by the pope are to be delivered to the inquisitor-general in Spain or to the council of the Inquisition, who are, if they are willing to confirm them, to make registration of the same. They may, however, refuse to confirm such Roman permits on the ground that the results would be injurious for those using them. The permission to read prohibited books or to possess copies of them, does not carry with it the authority to import such books, to buy or to sell copies, to make presentation of copies, or to exchange them for other books.

Among the noteworthy books contained in the supplement to the Spanish Index, issued in 1805, may be mentioned the following: Bonnet, Oeuvres, 18 volumes; the works of Alexander Pope, Laurence Sterne (the reference is to the French version), Forster, Voyage Philosophique; Smith, the Wealth of Nations (French version); Burke, Reflections on the French Revolution; Die Rechte des Menschen, a reply to Burke’s treatise on the Revolution, etc.

14. Examples of Spanish Prohibitions. 1559–1768. The first of the Spanish Indexes, that of Valdes in 1551, contains but one or two Spanish titles, but the lists of 1559 and 1570 give evidence of fuller attention to Spanish authors. The books prohibited belonged for the most part not to heretical literature, but were those presenting, in translations of the Scriptures or in controversies on points of doctrine, matter that was not safe or not suitable for the knowledge of the general lay public. The Inquisition in Spain had, from the beginning, been more sharply opposed than were the Church authorities elsewhere, to the distribution to the lay public of literature, and particularly of literature in the vernacular, having to do with the doctrines of the Church, even when such books were sound in their own teachings and had been prepared to expose and to repress error. The inquisitors took the ground that it was wiser to keep the faithful in ignorance of the existence of errors. An example of this policy is the prohibition in the Index of Valdes in 1559 of the writings of Francisco de Borja, who was later enrolled with the saints, and of Juan de Avila, Luis de Granada, who have since been classed with the best of the ascetic writers and as “shining lights in God’s Church in Spain.”[192] In 1571, permission was refused by the Inquisition for the printing of a Spanish version of the Roman Catechism. Valdes prohibited all tracts, letters, and pamphlets, reports of sermons, etc., that had to do with the Scriptures or with the Sacraments. This prohibition included any reprints in the Spanish tongue of the Gospels or of extracts from the Gospels or of the Epistles of Paul.

A prohibition initiated by Quiroga was continued through the following century, condemning “comedies, tragedies, and farces in which any reflection or ridicule was cast upon the Sacraments, the practice of church-going, the holy orders, or the Inquisition.” In 1581, the Index of Lisbon added to the above a prohibition of the presentation on the stage of any ecclesiastical characters or the performance of any sacramental acts. This latter ruled out, of course, the representation of marriage. In one of the later Indexes, the second part of Don Quixote comes into the list of works to be expurgated, but the material condemned comprises but a single sentence: Las obras de charidad que se hazen flaxamente, no tienen merito ni valen nada.

It is a characteristic of the Spanish expurgatory Indexes that they do not give the references by chapter and by page to the texts of the authors corrected. Mendham points out that the careful and orthodox student, who might wish to assure himself of the accuracy of his own literary guides, would find it important to refer to the originals of the corrected texts if only in order to be placed in a position to defend the action of his Church and to confound or possibly even to convert heretical opposers. “Supposing for instance,” says he, “a discussion should take place between a believer and an heretical critic, and the latter should have the hardihood to assert that the sentences condemned in the Index were not the ipsissima verba or the necessary sense of the author referred to, what reply could be made by the defender of the Index who had never been able to make personal examination of the text in question?”[193]

In 1827, there was published in the Protestant Guardian (on pages 118 et seq.) a review of the censures in the expurgatory Indexes. The writer gives as examples of erasures that seemed to him to be futile or at least open to criticism the following: In the Glossarium Graeco-Barbarum of Mensius, out of twenty-five erasures fifteen consist simply in expunging before the names of Junius and other learned men the terms V. C., Eruditus, etc.

So far from its being lawful to admit that a Protestant could be either learned or illustrious, it was forbidden even to give the name of theologians to Protestants pretending to Holy Orders. The English bishops always figure in the Indexes under the term “pseudo-episcopi.” This is doubtless, however, a logical term for the Church to use concerning officials who must of necessity have been considered as usurping laymen. In the erasures in the ninth book of the history of De Thou, we find corrections of a more exacting character. The following is an instance: Theologis, qui ad concilium, pro Theologis scribe iis. Et ibi decrevisse viros bonos mittere, dele bonos.

The censor actually follows through his rambles the wandering Jew of Tudela, although the translation of this narrative was issued by so good a Catholic as Montanus (himself a censor) in order to blot out every kind word which Benjamin had uttered respecting his nation. For example: Filius Jonae probandae memoriae, dele probandae memoriae; Synagoga sacra, dele vocem sacra; Filii Haziddai felicis memoriae, dele felicis memoriae; and so on through a folio page.

It is somewhat curious that such works of English writers as have been considered by the framers of the Index, are placed almost exclusively in the prohibitory division, and in this are included in the first class, that is to say, under the heading of authors whose works, past, present, and future (opera edita et edenda), are absolutely prohibited. One of the few English books which have been mentioned by title (apart from the names of the authors) in the prohibitory Index is the version of the Psalms by Sternhold and Hopkins. This is the book understood to be referred to by the title Psalmes of Dauid in Englische Metre.