Section 3. The External and Internal Growth of Roman Catholicism (Cont.) (11)

Besides questions concerning monasteries (Titulus VIII), popular education (Titulus IX), and other means promoting the development of church life (Titulus X), to which because of their importance we devote separate chapters of investigation, the council did not fail to turn most serious attention to one public force which in America more than in any other country exerts influence on society—namely, literature both in books and especially in periodical, newspaper and journal form. An entire section it devotes to the question “of books and newspapers (De Libris et Ephemeridibus).” Having praised the art of printing, “which more than all other inventions of recent times has brought convenience for literature, science, religion itself and all human life and society,”[1] the prelates note with sorrow: “But alas (Verum proh dolor), this excellent art that cunning enemy of God and mankind strove to steal for himself and turn to his own use. And it is scarcely credible what progress heresies made in the sixteenth century, how many souls that infernal robber and murderer destroyed by making use of this most clever and almost divine art. Such is the weakness of human nature, such is the persistence and malice of the demon in the destruction of people redeemed by Christ.”[2] Turning to a survey of literature’s contemporary influence, the prelates say: “Now daily there issue forth in every form and at cheap prices bad books, booklets, tales and newspapers which are eagerly snapped up (fere teruntur) by all. What is most lamentable, some of these books, tales, journals, public papers and others of this kind, whose writers, if not openly then covertly and as if by cunning stratagems strive to attack and undermine religion and morality, are bought by Catholics or published at their expense, received in their homes and read by their children and families. Truly sad is the blindness of those parents who with their own hands dig for themselves a pit and prepare their ruin (ruinam parant)!”[3] Having portrayed the ruinous influence of immoral publications, the prelates call on all the faithful, especially heads of families, to cleanse their homes of all harmful and dangerous books, confirming their exhortation with the words of the apostle: “if anyone does not care for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”[4] In view of this all school books must be carefully reviewed, corrected and subjected to episcopal approval.[5] For this purpose a special council has been established, composed of rectors of three colleges of the Baltimore metropolitan province.[6] But if bad books must be eliminated in every way, then on the contrary, boni libri should be distributed as widely as possible among the people. The prelates express the desire that societies specially engaged in spreading salutary and useful books be formed everywhere, and they point to the New York (Neo-Eboraci) “Society of Catholic Publications” as a model.[7] In each city committees should be formed, connected with the central society, and annual monetary collections should be made to support this work.[8] Prayer books should always be examined by theologians and not printed except with episcopal approval.[9] “What we have said above concerning good and bad books, the prelates say, can easily be applied also to newspapers (Ephemeridibus) or public papers. Of them some are impious and accursed; very many are extremely (maxime) ruinous to morality; few are such as can perhaps (utcumque) be tolerated, and very few that would merit praise and recommendation. Reading of those which are worthless, the shepherds of souls should altogether forbid, but carefully and wisely and not always by name, so that the souls of the younger or coarser might not be inflamed thereby to more avid reading. Good ones and those admitted to the list as beneficial to religion and souls let them recommend and take care to maintain, read and spread them.”[10] “Public papers published or managed by Catholics should exist if they contribute to the good of the Catholic faith. But from fears lest the political opinions of writers be attributed to church authority or the Catholic religion, as this often is done by malicious opponents, we wish all to be duly informed that we recognize no journal as Catholic if it does not bear the approval of the bishop (Ordinarii approbationem).”[11] “In many dioceses there exist journals which enjoy the very name of Catholic and bear the approval of the bishop. For by them as if the bishop uses them as means and instruments through which he announces to the clergy and people his commands and his thoughts. Hence they are commonly called official organs (Organa officialia), as if he who holds episcopal office and dignity teaches and speaks to his flock on every page and line. This opinion, false as it is, arising from an erroneous understanding of such a designation, fills the minds of all, especially heretics. From this great inconvenience arises; for all that is written by the writers of these papers or sheets, sometimes under the influence of human passion falsely, confusedly and immoderately, is attributed to the bishop himself, as if he were thus teaching the people by force of his office.”[12] “So that in this way we might remove this heavy and burdensome responsibility from episcopal office hereafter; so that we might correctly and clearly establish the true relationship, as it is said, of bishops to church papers or Catholic journals; so that afterwards no doubt might exist on the part of ours or of opponents,—the fathers of this plenary council declare and proclaim that the approval of the bishop, which is commonly given to Catholic papers, means nothing other than that the bishop finds in them nothing contrary to faith and morality, hopes that in the future there will be nothing such, and that the editors themselves are such that their writings can be useful for edification; the bishop himself cannot and should not be responsible or give account for everything that is in such papers, but only for what he himself publishes by virtue of his office for the instruction, exhortation, command or prohibition of the people, and under which he signs his own hand.”[13] The prelates of the council considered this question so important that they found it necessary with persistence to repeat this determination also in their pastoral letter. “We joyfully acknowledge, they say, the services which the Catholic press has rendered to religion, and also the disinterestedness with which in the majority it is conducted, giving editors and publishers very small remuneration for their labors. We exhort the Catholic community to render these publications more generous support, so that they might become more worthy of the cause for which they work. We recall that the power of the press is one of the most striking features of modern society, and that we are bound by duty to use this means for proclaiming the truths of our religion and removing misunderstandings which generally prevail concerning them. If many of these publications do not represent what we would wish them to be, it is often explained by the fact that the actual cause of their unsatisfactory quality lies in insufficient support received from the Catholic public. Demand and supply correspond to each other; and if in many cases the former produces the latter, then at least in regard to Catholic publications demand should precede supply. We also wish to warn against the misunderstanding which often arises from the fact that the bishop’s name is connected with such publications, so that they are recognized as organs, that is, means through which the bishop communicates with his flock. This circumstance gives no other sanction to articles appearing in these publications except that which they receive from the name of the writer when it is designated; much less does it identify the bishop with the publication so as to justify the conclusion that everything that appears in it has his sanction and authority. This simply means that the bishop may from time to time place in it such official documents as he finds necessary to publish; but concerning them in the highest degree it would be desirable to have a special regular method of communication.”[14] The prelates of the council then express the desire that a special journal (Quarterly Review) be founded, which would be specially devoted to the exposition and defense of Catholic doctrine and which would be the property of the Archbishop of Baltimore, New York or others with him,[15] and in their pastoral letter again dwell on the special recommendation of the “Society of Catholic Publications” in New York. “In connection with this, they say, we cordially recommend to the faithful the Society of Catholic Publications, recently founded in the city of New York by a zealous and devoted clergyman. Besides the publication of short tracts, with which the Society began and which can be useful for attracting the attention of those who have neither inclination nor leisure to read large works, this Society intends the publication of Catholic books, according to how circumstances may allow and the interests of religion may require. Judging from the good taste in the composition and selection of those books already published by the Society, we dare hope that it will be very useful in acquainting with the truths of our holy religion and in dispelling the prejudices which owe their existence mainly to the lack of familiarity with them on the part of so many of our countrymen. For this reason it is necessary that generous assistance be rendered both by the clergy and by laypeople to this enterprise which in importance yields to none of the auxiliary means which the inventions of modern times present to our service for the spread of Catholic truth.”[16]

Besides the press as an open force, in the United States another force has great significance in public life—in the form of an extensive network of secret societies formed for the achievement of various goals—religious, moral, economic and political. The council’s prelates did not overlook this circumstance and devoted to it the twelfth section of their decrees.[17] “Secret societies, which hide in darkness to work more effectively against the good of the Church or civil society, have always been condemned by the Catholic Church,” they say.[18] Having cited various papal determinations regarding the prohibition of secret societies, the prelates confirm them in regard to American secret societies and especially the society of Freemasons, which is strongly widespread in America. “Masonic and other such societies, which openly or covertly contrive against the Church or legitimate authorities, are censured and condemned.”[19] But besides societies that have more or less declared their hostility to the Church or existing order, in America there are many such societies which claim to have nothing against the Church and state, and constitute a secret society either for cooperation, or for mutual aid, or even simply for ordinary social pleasures. Thus the Archbishop of Philadelphia Kenrick appealed to the Roman Curia for a decision on the question how to apply the determinations prohibiting secret societies to such an American society as the “Odd Fellows,” which is very extensive in America. The Congregatio inquisitionis, to whose jurisdiction this question belonged, was not able to find an answer to this question and responded only: “conform to the papal bulls.”[20] Having compiled these bulls and determinations, the council’s prelates came to the following conclusion: “After careful examination of them, we find no grounds for the Church’s prohibition against Masonic and other secret sects to extend to those societies of workers which have no other purpose than to afford mutual protection and assistance to members of their craft. Yet care must be taken lest under this pretext anything favorable to condemned sects be permitted; and that workers who give their names to these societies not be seduced by base and covert tricks of wicked men, not withdraw from their proper work, and in no way trample upon laws. Yet all this should not be understood so as to regard as tolerable those societies, whatever their character, in which members from the moment of entering are bound by oath to obey whatever may be commanded by the society’s leaders, or to enter into such secret alliances which have as their object the obstruction of legitimate authority. Neither are permitted those societies in which members unite for mutual defense in such a way that danger of uprising or disorder might arise.”[21] But in any case, the prelates conclude, “the children of light do only the deeds that are of light, do not love what is secret and dark, on the contrary hate it and are horrified by it. And so let the faithful beware and strive in every way not to be deceived in this matter, lest under the guise of good they be drawn into worse bondage, lest finally, moving in darkness and the shadow of death, trampling upon the most sacred laws, they enter into such communities which should be feared as the greatest evil of our age, whose sole purpose might turn out to be the trampling underfoot of all rights, both divine and human.”[22]

The thirteenth section treats the establishment of new sees and the fourteenth concerns more effective means of executing the council’s decrees. “We exhort the bishops that they move no stone neither in visiting the diocese nor in synods both eparchial and provincial, nor in assembling priests for discussion of theological teachings until there shall be fulfilled in all the determinations of this plenary council, whose collection completes and confirms all laws, established and proclaimed by the preceding Baltimore councils and recognized by the judgment of the holy see.”[23] “Finally, so that the determinations of this plenary council might better reach the knowledge of our priests and be better realized in practice, we decree that they, after recognition by the holy see, be published, received in our schools of canon law and theology as a certain norm which the professors should follow and explain in teaching, and all students diligently and carefully study.”[24] Then follow the signatures of the council’s prelates.

To the council’s acts is appended a “pastoral letter,” in which the prelates briefly set forth the council’s determinations, and its first paragraph establishes the legislative force of plenary councils. “The authority of these councils,” the prelates say, “is original, not borrowed; and therefore their determinations from the time of their promulgation have the character of church law for the faithful in the district or region subject to the jurisdiction of the bishops by whom they were established. But by a wise rule which combines the beneficence of central authority with the advantages of local legislation, the determinations of these councils are not proclaimed until they have been presented to the holy see. This is not only to give them even higher authority, but also to guard against any inaccuracy in the exposition of faith, or any determination at variance with the general teaching of the Church or even such as might be contrary to the spirit of ecclesiastical legislation.”[25]