The censorship of the Church of Rome and its influence upon the production and distribution of literature, volume 2 (of 2)Putnam, George Haven
History
The censorship of the Church of Rome and its influence upon the production and distribution of literature, volume 2 (of 2)
Putnam, George Haven
Freedom of the press; Liberty of conscience; Prohibited books
In 1522, Robert Estienne of Paris, working as the assistant of his
stepfather Colines, undertook the preparation of an edition in Latin
of the New Testament. The text followed, in the main, the version
of the Vulgate, but the youthful editor found occasion for certain
corrections. The textual changes ventured upon at once called forth
criticism from the divines of the Sorbonne, and Robert found himself
classed with the group of heretical persons. It appears from his
correspondence that he held himself ready to justify on critical
grounds the corrections that he had ventured to make in the text of
the Vulgate. The divines, while continuing their invectives, took
pains to avoid any direct controversy on the points at issue.[5] In
1540, Robert was brought into special jeopardy through an impression
of the Decalogue executed in large characters and printed in the
form of a hanging map for placing on the walls of schoolrooms. Such
an undertaking seems to our present understanding innocent enough,
whether considered from a Romanist or a Protestant point of view, but
in this publication of the Ten Commandments, the divines discovered
little less mischief than in the heresies of Luther. The censors caused
to be put into print a counter-impression of the Decalogue in which
the first two commandments were combined into one, with the omission
of the prohibition of making and worshipping images, while the tenth
commandment was divided into two in order to make up the complete
number. During the same year, various proceedings were taken against
Estienne on the part of the Sorbonne, and on more than one occasion he
was compelled to leave his home and to betake himself for safety to the
King’s court. The fact that a publisher, in order to protect himself
against the violence of officials who were (at least nominally) the
King’s censors, should take refuge at court, throws a curious light on
both the strength and the weakness of the Crown. With all the authority
of the kingdom at his command, Francis was evidently unable to control
the operations of the ecclesiastical censors who, in their dogmatic and
unruly zeal, did what was in their power to throw the influence of
the university against the literary development of France and Europe.
On the other hand, the doctors of the Sorbonne, although backed by
the authority of Rome, were not strong enough, at least for a number
of years, to put a stop to the publication in Catholic Paris of works
stigmatised by them as dangerously heretical.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account