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
The machinery of the Inquisition was effective even in the farther
parts of the empire. In 1795, a priest in the settlement of Hopelcheen
in Yucatan published a prohibition of the Inquisition warning his
congregation not to read a certain book which had been described by
the Inquisition as dangerous and to surrender at once all copies in
their possession. The book was entitled _Disengaño del Hombre_, by
Puglia, and bore the imprint (possibly fictitious) of Philadelphia. The
congregation of Indians and half-breeds was hardly likely to have had
knowledge of the book or to have been able to read it even if copies
had reached Hopelcheen.[116]
_The Index expurgatorius_ in its literal sense may be described
as peculiarly a Spanish institution. In the Roman series, there is
record of the publication of but one expurgatory Index, that of
Brasichelli, and this was never republished and was in fact promptly
recalled by the authorities. The inquisitors of Spain took upon
themselves the task of preserving the faithful from contamination, and
the successive expurgatory Indexes give evidence of the enormous labour
expended by the examiners in the correction of the text of books which
they were not prepared absolutely to prohibit, but the circulation of
which they were ready to permit if the heresies could be expunged or
corrected. The Roman prohibitory Index contained against many works
the restriction _donec corrigatur_. This indicated that the book
when corrected was to be permitted; the objectionable passages were,
however, not specified, although the author could ascertain these on
application. As an actual result, it was very rarely the case that it
proved practicable to bring into publication an edition in which the
corrections in question, having been ascertained from the authorities,
could be made. The Spanish censors took credit to themselves for their
liberality in securing the use of heretical works of value through the
expurgation of the offensive passages. It is true that, under this
system, permission was given for the production of the writings of
authors like Erasmus, Casaubon, Bertram, and others who were absolutely
prohibited in Rome. It does not appear, however, that as far as the
publishers of Spain were concerned, this permission brought about
for the greater portion of the books in question the production of
corrected editions. It is in fact easy to understand how the heavy
loss that must be incurred through the suppression of the original
edition would have discouraged both author and printer from the task
of risking a further investment in a second edition which might itself
in like manner be prohibited until again revised. It may safely be
concluded that the restricted prohibition in Spain had as far as the
production and distribution of books were concerned practically the
same result as the absolute prohibition in Rome. In fact, in Spain,
the result was more effective simply because the regulations of the
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account