for extrinsic reasons of prudence arising out of times and circumstances, than because they contain any untenable or censurable propositions." But is there any warranty whatsoever for such an inference? It is extremely rare, and only in very exceptional cases, according to the testimony of one of the highest living authorities on the subject, that books are placed on the Index without a previous examination, or without a condemnation on their merits. These exceptional cases are expressly explained and provided for, and Rosmini's case by no means comes under that exceptional category. In his letter to M. Rouland, the then Minister of State, Mgr. Nardi, Auditor of the Rota and Consultor of the Index, explains the course of proceeding, and the rules of the Sacred Congregation. It will be much to the purpose to give a few extracts from his letter. "In the first place," he says, " if the author be a man known to fame as a Catholic, and the error be not palpable, he is appealed to, and is requested either to explain the objectionable passages in his work, or to correct them in subsequent editions of his book, as has been done in numerous instances, and as was done quite recently in the case of an eminent Italian historian.* If the error is serious, and one which necessarily entails condemnation, we always question him at the least in order that he may submit to judgment, and that we may be able, while we publish the censure upon his books, to praise him for having submitted." Rosmini comes under this category, for the fact is beyond question, as I will show, that he was appealed to and laudably submitted to his sentence. "If there are points which are obscure or doubtful, the law," continues Mgr. Nardi, gives the author the benefit of the doubt. If his impiety and perversity are evident; if truth is manifestly falsified to a serious and dangerous extent, what need have we of further proof, of further evidence, or of depositions? The Congregation are in a manner judges of fact, not of guilt, if guilt there is; for error, although it puts a danger in the path of Christians, may sometimes, and up to a certain point, be excused in the person of the author." 66 The writer then cites instances to show that the intentions of an author may be innocent, though his works be censurable. "Piety, zeal, charity itself may be carried to excess," he continues, may inspire indiscreet words, and may degenerate into pernicious principles. When the Church sees a danger, she regards neither the worth nor the desert of the person, his excellence of character, or erudition. She fulfils her mission as the guardian of pure doctrine. By the help of God, she preserves the world from error; and when she places an interest in this or that book, her aim is not to wound or stigmatize an author, but to warn the faithful of the snares which are laid for their faith or their morals. It is her duty to do this: she has done it from the beginning, and she will do it to the end." As you expressly state that Rosmini's books "were both placed on the Index without the least indication being given of the motives of the Sacred Congregation," and since you not unjustly consider it unbecoming in any private individual to pronounce an opinion as to these motives, you cannot complain if, in reply to your objections, I once more appeal to an authority so high and public as Mgr. Nardi. His explanation, which precisely touches your objection as to the non-indication of motives in the condemnation of Rosmini's books, is as follows:-"But why, it may be asked, do we not at least publish the reasons for our decisions? I reply that we do publish them in very grave cases, as appears in the Pontifical briefs, which condemn the writings of Hermes, of Günther, and of Frohschammer, writings which were very pernicious, and which might have generated scholastic errors and heterodox sects. Besides, it is only inferior tribunals that publish * Cesare Cantu. the reasons of their judgments, in order that the party condemned by them may appeal, if he pleases, from them to a higher court. Now, the sentence of the Index is that of the Sovereign Pontiff, from which there is no appeal. It would be, therefore, useless to publish the reasons. Yet the 'reasons,' although they are not published, are made the subject of study and discussion, and nothing is neglected which may insure the justice of the sentence." Such an answer from such a quarter is more than sufficient, I should think, to meet your objection as to the non-assignment of motives, on the part of the Sacred Congregation, in their condemnation of Rosmini's two works. The It would be superfluous to do more than merely allude to Mgr. Nardi's remarks as to the care and impartiality of the sacred tribunal. consultors, he says, are men who are thoroughly versed in the matter in question. They have to read the incriminated book from beginning to end, and to study it according to the rules laid down by the Council of Trent, and by the immortal Benedict XIV. One of the rules on which he comments, and which is not without application to the matter in question, in this correspondence, runs thus:-" Ambiguities should always be construed favourably in the case of an author who bears a good name." In reference to some great men whom he mentions in connection with this rule, the writer says, "The Pope, however, abstained from condemning the works of these great men when brought before his notice, because he considered that the reputation and the merit of these writers deserved some indulgence in cases where indulgence can be granted without certain peril to the Church, who weighs advantages and disadvantages before speaking out. Sometimes the consultors propose to leave the book uncondemned, which is often done; at others they suggest to the author certain alterations to be made in a fresh edition. Lastly, in a case of decided perversity, they decree that the work deserves to be condemned. . . . But the decision, even though unanimous, is by no means definitive. It has to be revised by the Superior Congregation, which is composed of Cardinals alone and yet this second and more solemn judgment is not a definite sentence, but only an inquiry of a superior class. The whole is referred to the Sovereign Pontiff, who passes the final sentence, and until he has spoken nothing is condemned." It follows from this that "private individuals," when they know that a certain book has been placed on the Index, or, in other words, has been condemned by the Pope, have a perfect right, without laying themselves open to the imputation of unwarrantable motives, to speak of the writer of such a condemned book as having advanced "untenable positions;" provided, only, that the Sacred Congregation has not thought fit to depart from its usual course of proceeding. The usual course, however, is to condemn books on their merits; that is, for intrinsic reasons. Mgr. Nardi, so familiar with the practice of Rome, has also explained, in a private communication on the subject, which I have shown to you, under what exceptional circumstances only, books, on purely extrinsic reasons, are placed on the Index. The cases, he says, are few. Such as if an author be known as constantly and notoriously hostile to religion, or if a writer, who, although calling himself a Catholic, were to teach constantly and in a dangerous manner heretical doctrines. In such cases, he observes, it might be that the Church could pronounce not as condemning writings, still unknown, but as prohibiting them from being read. Still less does the Index condemn books on political motives, to satisfy the approbation or the malice of a strong party. The Index says Mgr. Nardi is very indifferent to political matters while they remain only political; and no party has power to influence its decisions, which are completely free and independent. Any moral pressure would be impossible, and if possible, useless. Very seldom could the inexpediency of its publication be a motive for the condemnation of a book by the Index. If circumstances of places or persons would perhaps make a book so dangerous as to produce scandal or dissensions or troubles or other disorders among the clergy, then a prohibition for that reason may be possible. "For instance," continues Mgr. Nardi, in explanation of these rare and exceptional cases, "if the Holy See command silence to both parties on a very irritating question, and one party were to break the silence with a very violent book, this work, for such an extrinsic reason, might perhaps be prohibited." Since, then, none of these exceptional cases are of a kind to apply to Rosmini's speculative politics and ecclesiastical theories, it is no longer a matter of inference that the works of his which were placed on the Index were prohibited, not for extrinsic reasons, but for their intrinsic errors. It by no means, however, necessarily follows from the fact of a book being placed on the Index, that such a book is condemned for heresy, it may be condemned for lesser errors. It is, indeed, no very uncommon an occurrence that writers, the general tendency of whose works, especially on matters more intimately connected with religion, are in every way of the most edifying character, yet on political questions, in which the interests of religion are deeply involved, fall into serious errors, against which, on account of the very excellence of the writers in other respects, it is the more imperative to protest. And so in the case of Rosmini; however excellent his other works may be, it is not to be denied that such of his writings as were placed on the Index, like those of Gioberti, by flattering the spirit of false nationalism-everywhere dangerous, as setting up a standard of its own, but in Italy pregnant with incalculable mischief-could not fail to engender revolutionary ideas on matters of Church and State. Such writings served, in the hands of malicious men, to provoke an agitation in men's minds as alien to the spirit of Christianity, and to Catholic unity, as it was adverse to the legitimate authority of the civil power. With what force and frequency have not the Encyclical letters, of late, reprobated this growing evil of modern society? Can we, therefore, be surprised at finding such Catholics, even though of great name, as have tampered or temporized with this evil spirit, falling under the censure of Rome? By the help of Mgr. Nardi's evidence on the rules and customs of the Index I have shown that Rosmini was one of those Catholics of high repute, some of whose works fell under such a grave censure. Nay more, since you not unnaturally required a still more authoritative witness than Mgr. Nardi, and referred me in our conversation on this matter, as to an unquestionable source, to the Bull of Benedict XIV., prefixed as its explanatory code to the Index, it now appears, on reference, that no such exceptional cases, as you seem to rely on, as exempting Rosmini's two works from censure, are to be found in that highest authority on the rules and practice of the Index. On the strength of such unimpeachable authorities as I have cited, you must now, I think, admit, not only that it is true in fact, that two of Rosmini's books, together with their appendixes, were placed on the Index; but that they thereby incurred the prohibition and censure of the Holy See. Hence, it necessarily follows, that the assertions and implications in your letter, that Rosmini's two works had not been censured by Rome, or pronounced untenable, are unfounded: which is what I had to prove. I was the more bound to do so, in self-defence, since the contradictory of your proposition is not only the justification of the allusion in the DUBLIN REVIEW to the political errors of Rosmini, but a complete vindication from the charge of calumny. You must permit me, too, in conclusion, to say that I cannot, without a protest, allow you to take so lightly for granted that Catholic writers, glibly or otherwise, merely in order to round off a period, or to express a theological bias, would make themselves guilty of a grave calumny against an individual or an order. Moreover, I trust, that by the testimony of the authorities which I have referred to, I have now satisfied you that, not from the perverse malignity of human nature, but from motives of loyalty to the Holy See and out of a jealous regard of the authority of the Sacred Congregation, Catholics may have declared, as they may declare again, whenever the occasion demands it, that in political questions, gravely affecting spiritual interests, Rosmini had unfortunately advanced positions so untenable as to draw upon them prohibition and censure from the ecclesiastical authorities of Rome. All Catholics, however, will gladly avow that your venerated founder was too true a son of the Church to attempt to break the force, or explain away the motives, of such a condemnation; and they will see an additional claim on their veneration in the following words, appended to the sentence of the Index-auctor laudabiliter se subjecit. It is, perhaps, neither needless nor unbecoming in the writer of this letter, since he has been compelled to comment on some errors into which Rosmini was betrayed, to express the deep gratitude which he, in common with every Catholic, owes to the venerated founder of your order, not only for his learned labours on behalf of religion, but still more for his devoted loyalty to the person of the Pope during his exile at Gaeta, and for the practical piety so well expressed in the foundation of the Institute of Charity. I remain, Rev. and Dear Sir, yours truly, THE WRITER OF THE ARTICLE ON FREEMASONRY. INDEX. ACTA CONCILII FLORENTINI, reviewed, 496. ALEXANDRIA, THE CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS OF: Origen, 377-412; Mystery of Allies (T. W., M.A.), Church of England cleared from the charge of schism. Allies (T. W.) Letter to Dr. Pusey, 239-259. Arnoldi (P. J., S. J.), De Imitatione Sacri Cordis Jesu, noticed, 296. BADELEY (EDWARD, M.A.), the Privilege of Religious Confessions, noticed, 273. Barrow (John Croker), the Valley of Tears, noticed, 288. Barruel (Abbé), Memoirs illustrating the history of Jacobinism, reviewed, 137. Belgium, 576-579: the death of King Leopold, 576; probabilities of annexa- Bossuet's controversy with Orsi, 522, 524, 532, 534. Butt (Isaac), the Liberty of Teaching vindicated, noticed, 271. 2 R |