The 4th Rule of the Council of Trent respecting Prohibited Books:—

“Since it has been found by experience that if the Sacred Scriptures are allowed everywhere without distinction in the vulgar tongue, more harm than good arises in consequence of the rashness of man; let this be left to the judgment of the Bishop or Inquisitor; so that with the advice of the parish priest or confessor he may allow the use of the Bible in the vulgar tongue, when translated by Catholic authors, to such persons as they may consider capable of receiving not injury, but an increase of their faith and piety, from this kind of reading: which permission they must receive in writing. But any one who shall presume without such permission either to read or to possess them, shall be forbidden the absolution of his sins, unless he first restore the Bible to the ordinary. Booksellers also, who shall sell the Bible in the vulgar tongue to any one without the aforesaid permission, or shall in any other way provide it, shall forfeit the price of the books, to be employed in pious uses by the Bishop, and shall be subject to such other penalties as the Bishop may think it right to inflict, according to the character of the offence. Regulars may neither read nor purchase them without receiving permission from their prelates.”

N.B.—It is very important to observe that this rule refers to Roman Catholic versions, i.e., to their own authorized translations, and forbids even the regulars to possess a copy without permission from the Bishop.

B.

The following extracts from the letter of the present Pope, dated 8th of May, 1844, show that the decree of the Council of Trent is still in full force with reference to the circulation of the Scriptures:—

“To return to Bibles translated into the vulgar tongue. It is long since pastors found themselves necessitated to turn their attention particularly to the versions current at secret conventicles, and which heretics laboured, at great expense, to disseminate.

“Hence the warning and decrees of our predecessor, Innocent III., of happy memory, on the subject of lay societies and meetings of women, who had assembled themselves in the diocese of Metz, for objects of piety and the study of the Holy Scriptures. Hence the prohibition which subsequently appeared in France and Spain during the sixteenth century, with respect to the vulgar Bible. It became necessary, subsequently, to take even greater precautions, when the pretended Reformers, Luther and Calvin, daring by a multiplicity and incredible variety of errors, to attack the immutable doctrine of the faith, omitted nothing in order to seduce the faithful by their false interpretations, and translations into their vernacular tongues, which the then novel invention of printing contributed more rapidly to propagate and multiply. Whence it was generally laid down in the regulations dictated by the Fathers, adopted by the Council of Trent, and approved of by our predecessor, Pius VII., of happy memory, and which regulations are prefixed to the list of prohibited books, that the reading of the holy Bible translated into the vulgar tongue, should not be permitted except to those to whom it might be deemed necessary to confirm in the faith and piety. Subsequently, when heretics still persisted in their frauds, it became necessary for Benedict XIV. to superadd [96] the injunction that no versions whatever should be suffered to be read but those which should be approved of by the Holy See, accompanied by notes derived from the writings of the holy Fathers, or other learned and Catholic authors. Notwithstanding this, some new sectarians of the school of Jansenius, after the example of the Lutherans and Calvinists, feared not to blame these justifiable precautions of the Apostolical See, as if the reading of the holy books had been at all times, and for all the faithful, useful, and so indispensable that no authority could assail it.

“But we find this audacious assertion of Jansenius, withered by the most rigorous censures in the solemn sentence, which was pronounced against their doctrine, with the assent of the whole Catholic universe, by the sovereign pontiffs of modern times, Clement XI. in his unigenitus constitution of the year 1713, and Pius VI. in his constitution auctorem fidei of the year 1794.

“Consequently, even before the establishment of Bible Societies was thought of, the decrees of the Church which we have quoted, were intended to guard the faithful against the frauds of heretics, who cloak themselves under the specious pretext that it is necessary to propagate and render common the study of the holy books. Since then, our predecessor, Pius VII. of glorious memory, observing the machinations of these societies to increase under his pontificate, did not cease to oppose their efforts, at one time through the medium of the apostolical nuncios, at another by letters and decrees, emanating from the several congregations of cardinals of the holy Church, and at another by the two pontifical letters addressed to the Bishops of Gnesen and the Archbishop of Mohilif. After him, another of our holy predecessors, Leo XII., reproved the operations of the Bible Societies, by his circulars addressed to all the Catholic pastors in the universe, under the date of May 5th, 1824.

“Shortly afterwards, our immediate predecessor, Pius VIII. of happy memory, confirmed their condemnation by his circular letter of May 24, 1829. We, in short, who succeeded them, notwithstanding our great unworthiness, have not ceased to be solicitous on this subject, and have especially studied to bring to the recollection of the faithful, the several rules which have been successively laid down with regard to the vulgar versions of the holy books.”

And again.

“Let all know then the enormity of the sin against God and the church which they are guilty of, who dare to associate themselves with any of these (the bible) societies, or abet them in any way. Moreover, we confirm and renew the decrees recited above, delivered in former times by apostolic authority against the publication, distribution, reading, and possession of books of the Holy Scriptures translated into the vulgar tongue. With reference to the works of whatsoever writer we call to mind, the observance of the general rules and decrees of our predecessors, to be found prefixed to the index of prohibited books: and we invite the faithful to be upon their guard, not only against the books named in the index, but also against those prescribed in the general prescriptions.”

These extracts prove beyond the possibility of controversy

(1.) That the rule of the Index of the Council of Trent has never been permitted to fall into abeyance, and has never been repealed. From the time of its enactment it has always been, and now is, the binding law of the Church of Rome. It has been constantly enforced by Papal authority, and is especially commended to the careful attention of the faithful by the authoritative letter of the present Pope.

(2.) That no Roman Catholic is permitted on any pretext to read, or to possess a copy of the Bible in his own language, without a written order from the Bishop or Inquisitor. It matters not who is the author of the translation, whether Protestant or Romanist, whether Luther or the Pope himself; if any man either possess or read it, for that offence he is cut off from absolution and thereby from church communion.

(3.) That since the days of Benedict XIV. it has always been, and now is, unlawful under any circumstances to read any version without notes. God’s word is not allowed to speak for itself; man’s gloss must accompany it; the truth is forbidden in its simplicity; they are afraid to allow the people to read even their own version, without superadding extracts from “other learned and Catholic authors.”

(4.) That these versions with their notes may not be possessed or read unless they are first approved of by the Holy See. Query. How many versions approved by the Pope exist in the whole world? Is there one in England? It is of course difficult to prove a negative; but those who are best acquainted with the subject assert that they have never been able to discover one. See Venn’s Letter to Waterworth, Jan. 15, 1845.

(5.) That the Church of Rome attacks the broad principle of the general usefulness of the Bible. The Pope does not merely discuss the comparative merits of this or that version, but goes boldly to the great question, whether the reading of the Bible is really useful for the people. The Jansenists, according to his own account, asserted that the reading of the holy books “had been at all times, and for all the faithful, useful, and so indispensable that no authority could assail it.” This he declares to be an audacious assertion, and pronounces it withered by the unanimous condemnation of the whole Catholic universe.

THE END.

LONDON:
G. J. PALMER, PRINTER, SAVOY STREET, STRAND.