Review for Religious - Issue 15.1 (January 1956)

Open Access

Abstract

Issue 15.1 of the Review for Religious, 1956. ; A. M. D. G. Review for Religious JANUARY 15, 19 5 6 Sisters' Re÷rea÷s~i .".'- . Thomas Dubay Novice Master and Secrecy .John R. Post Forbidden Readlncj . John J. Lynch Book Reviews Questions and Answers VOLUME XV , NUMBER 1 R ViI::W FOR Ri LIGIOUS VOLUME XV JANUARY, 1956 NUMBER 1 CONTENTS SISTERS' RETREATS--I--Thomas Dubay, S.M . 3 OUR CONTRIBUTORS . l0 SOME RECENT PAMPHLETS . 10 NOVICE MASTER'S OBLIGATIONS TO SECRECY-~John R. Post, S.'J. 1 l QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS-- 1. Difficulty in Submitting to Superior's Will . 2. Permission to Offer One's Life to God . 22 3. Occasional Confessor of Religious Women .22 4. Permission for Private Penances . 23 5. Indulgences for Little Office of B.V.M . 24 6. Name of a Religious Institute . 24 7. Lowering Veil for Holy Communion . 25 8. Ordo to Follow in Convent Masses . 25 FORBIDDEN READING--'John 3. Lynch, S.J . 27 FOR YOUR INFORMATION . 46 BOOK REVIEWS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS-- Editor: Bernard A. Hausmann, West Baden College West Baden Springs, Indiana . 48 REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, 'january, 1956. Vol. XV, No. I. Published bi-monthly: ,January, March, May, 'july, September, and November, at the College Press, 606 Harrison Street, Topeka, Kansas, by St. Mary's College, St. Marys, Kansas, with ecclesiastical approbation. Entered as second class matter, ,January 15, 1942, at the Post Office, Topeka, Kansas, under the act of March 3, 1879. Editorial Board: Augustine G. Ellard, S.'J., Gerald Kelly, S.3., Henry Willmering, S.J. Literary Editor: Edwin F. Falteisek, S.J. Copyright, 1956, by Review for Religious. Permission is hereby granted for quo-tations of reasonable length, provided due credit be given this review and the author. Subscription price: 3 dollars a year: 50 cents a copy. Printed in U. S. A. Before writing to us, please co~nsult notice on inside back cover. Review for Religious Volume XV January--December, 1956 Published at THE COLLEGE PRESS Topeka, Kansas Edited by THE JESUIT FATHERS ST. MARY'S COLLEGE St. Marys, Kansas REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS is indexed in ÷he CATHOLIC PERIODICAL INDEX Sisters' Retreats l Thomas Dubay, S.M. INTRODUCTION THIS article and the others that will follow it1 deal with the results of an experimental study of retreats for religious wo-men. A summary of the purpose of the study can perhaps be given in no better way. than by reproducing the note addressed to each sister participating in th3 survey. Dear Sister : The purpose of this study is to help you to make more profitable retreats. If you will be so kind as to join hundreds of other sisters in answering this question-naire, you will be make a noteworthy contribution to this end, for it is hoped that through publication the results of this study may be made available to retreat masters. Because mere statistics are not .of themsel;ces too reliable, space is provided after the questions for your further comment. And the more comment you offer, the more you will help this study. If the space provided is not sufficient, you are urged to add pages of your own. Sittce it is your individual opinion that is so valuable, Sister~ I would suggest that you consult with no one. Further, you may be assured that your opinions will remain secret. Your Mother Superior has agreed to return all questionnaires without anybody's reading of them. And certainly I will not know you. None of your answers will be interpreted as, negatively critical and so you should feel perfectly free to state your full and frank views . May God bless your kindness! Of approximately 1300 questionnaire forms distributed to a large number of different communitiesz located in all parts of the United States, 701 were returned with answers. These 701 returns seem to represent a reasonably good cross section of the American sisterhood in age distribution, type of order, and kind of work. In respect to the 'number of years of professed religious life the respondents are distributed in the manner indicated in Table I. TABLEI: PROFESSION AGE OF PARTICIPATINGSISTERS 1-5 years . 108 6-10 years . 97 11-20 years . 173 21-30 years . 156 31-40 years. . 97 over 40 years . 66 ~Editors' Note: There will be five more articles. 2A rough estimate would place the number of distinct congregations between 30 and 50. 3 THOMAS DUBAY Review /:or Religious 2~ wide variety of occupations is likewise represented. Table II shows the kinds of work done by the sisters. TABLE II: OCCUPATIONS OF PARTICIPATING SISTERS Teaching in grade school . 230 Teaching in high school . 187 Hospital and nursing education: . . 86 Teaching in college . 79 - Domestic . 55 . Social work . 13 Home for aged . 10 Represented by numbers under ten are the following occupations: orphanages, office work, postulant or novice mistresses, public health nursing, cloistered life, and several miscellaneous offices. Nine sis-ters did not reveal their occupations. That many sisters are vitally interested in the retreat problem is evidenced both by the care with which 701 filled out a nuisance of a questionnaire and by the many appreciative messages that ac-companied their answers. These kind observations we will pass by here and commend to God for reward. Even a brief reading of the returned survey forms can leave no doubt that the sisters have been frank--sometimes bluntly frank-- both in their praise and in their blame. The excerpts that follow are statements characteristic of the sincerity, care, and goodwill with "which the replies are replete. I have tried to answer seriously and thoughtfully the various questions, and hope there is no inconsistency in my answers, or any misleading statements, dust thinking along these lines in order to answer the questions has been, in a sense, a meditation and an inspiration. Hope I haven't been too far out in left field on these answers-~but it was a good opportunity I couldn't afford to miss !--even though I just made it late to class! Father, you must be smiling or laughing at my preachy manner. But no . . . I don't presume to be saying (rather writing) authoritatively. ,Just presenting my observations, since better retreats and better retreat masters for sisters was for a number of years a special object of ~y poor prayers. In the whole course of this study, it has seemed wise to place considerable stress on the sisters' written comments for the reason that a mere statistical presentation viewed alone can be misleading. When explained by the living observation, statistics can be most enlightening and helpful. Manifestly only a fraction of all the sisters' comments can be January,. 1956 SISTERS' RETREATS--l[ included in these articles, but the excerpts ~he writer has chosen are repregentative. There were so many striking statements, so many shrewd observations, so many sincere analyses Of retreat problem~, '~o. many grace-inspired kindly remarks, that, when pressed to choose "~mong them, he felt like a little boy give~n free reign in a well, Stocked candy shop. Only he had no free reign, for lack of space.:has mercilessly curtailed the number of sisters' comments reproduced in "these articles. Perhaps some future detailed stu.dy can exploit the untapped riches of their observations. Views of extreme minorities (i.e., .of one or two sisters only) are usually not represented in the written observations; for their comments, if placed next to an excerpt representing ten or fifteen sisters, would produce an imbalance in favor'of the former. These extreme views are not neglected, however, for they appear in the numerical summaries. It need not be stressed that the views of the sisters are not necessarily those of the present writer. One ~eason is that he is here interested in presenting the sisters' opinions, not his own. A second--and this one is metaphysical--is that what one sister af-firms another sometimes denies. In this connection, however, we should remember that the c6ntradiction is often merely apparent; for rarely are the sisters speaking about the same retreat master or exactly the same idea. SOURCE OF PRIESTS We sh,ll first consider the question, as to whether 'sisters prefer their retreaq masters to come from the same or different orders of men year after year. This item in the questionnaire wfiiworded as follows : As a source of re~reat masters would you prefer p~iests __always from the same order from different orders ~it makes little difference to me Further comment: (space provided) While we will give first of all in one summary a picture of the views of all of the sisters on this question, it would be a mistake to "rest content with that picture alone. There are on this point three types of situations among congregations of religious women, Some are attached to orders of men; others are not so attached' but do obtain their retreat masters from one order of men alone; and still others are not attached and do not restrict the source of retreat. m~isters to one order of men. A priori we might expect different THOMAS DUBAY Reoieu~ [or Religious reactions in the three groups to the question under discussion here. This expectation is borne out to some extent by the answers to the survey question. ]Due to the fact that no sister participating in this study was asked to identify either herself or her congregation, it was impossibl~ to distinguish in most cases into which of the three categories a given reply fell. However, a considerable number of sisters did distinguish their congregation in this general way and so some basis for a com-parison is possible. We will first give a cumulative picture of all the replies relative to this question. TABLE III: PREFERENCE FOR SOURCE OF PRIESTS--ALL SISTERS Always from the same order . 148 (21.8%) From different orders . 353 (52.0%) It makes little difference to me . 178 (26.2%) As already indicated, not much can be proved from this overall picture; and so we will proceed to our breakdown. TABLE IV: PREFERENCE FOR SOURCE OF PRIESTS SISTERS ATTACHED TO AN ORDER OF MEN Always f, rom the same order . 60 (62.5 %) From different orders . 18 (18.75%) It makes little difference to me . 18~ (18.75%) Here we notice a considerable deviation from the overall pic-ture. Most sisters attached to an order of men wish to receive their retreat masters from that order alone. In the~e congregations, bow-ever, there appear to be two rather strong minorities of another mind. TABLE V: PREFERENCE FOR SOURCE OF PRIESTS SISTERS UNATTACHED TO ANY ORDER OF MEBNUT RECEIVING RETREAT MASTERS FROM ONE ORDER ALONE Always from the same order . 10 (11.3 %) From different orders .65 (73.0%) : It makes little difference to me . 14 (15.7 % ) Here also a noteworthy deviation from the overall picture can be seen, and that in a direction opposite to the deviation found in. the immediately preceding table. Because the two groups of sisters included in Tables IV and V almost perfectly balance each other off, the position of unattached sisters receiving retreat masters from several orders of men is fairly well "refledted in Table III, once due allowances are made. As he went through the. returned replies, .January, 1956 SISTERS' RETREATS--I the present writer received the impression that this third group of sisters is for the most part Well pleased with its custom, i.e., re-ceiving priests from different orders. We may turn now to the reasons the. sisters give for their various preferences. The number of excerpts given in each group is approximately proportionate to the number of preferences regis-tered in that category. Those who prefer, the same order: I prefer priests from the same order as my own because I feel that they understand my obligations better and are thus able to help me more. Our community always have the same religious for retreat masters, and there seems to be a definite continuity of purpose represented in their retreats--which is fine. I think that it is ideal to have a priest of one's own order, as he knows and has the same spirit and can lead one in one's own spirituality. A religious usually comes to appreciate what is traditional in her congregation. We always have . We have priests where I come from, and believe you me, Padre, they're "tops" ! If there are two branches of the same order--one for men, one for women--then the sisters profit greatly by having retreat masters of the same order. The retreat master then understands best the way of life through which the sisters are to reach heaven. For any sisters it would be hard to have different ways of spiritu-ality presented and urged on them by priests of various orders. Sisters preferring priests from different orders: I think they should be selected for personal ability. Many'sisters I know get tired of having the same order, as we generally do. Each order has something special, something beautiful that they follow. Knowl-edge of the various orders will not only broaden our intellectual and spiritual outlook but also make for a deeper understanding and cooperation between the orders. I prefer priests from different orders as it would give variety to the types of medi-tations given. The for instance are fine but you always know what their meditations are going to be based upon. I like to be surprised once in a while. I would not consider the order if I had a choice but would find men who were' holy and knew how to inspire others to holiness. However, when one order is always chosen, some souls will grow weary because they like change. It is possible that continued use of the same order would exhaust their supply of the "best." I like the return of the good retreat master. I have made retreats given by the same one five times and am ready for another five more. Where I was in-clined to think the order produced the individuals, I've grown older and wiser and am sure that life, life-work, and production is all an individual job. There are two orders that I like best, but because in their members I have met real sanctity. We are in spirit and have made the effort to get priests, but this is not a hard and fast rule. We have had others and they have also been excellent. THOMA'S' DUBA'Y ¯ Review ~or ~V'e would become more broadminded if we had different orders. We hav~ the same order always, but many sisters have expressed the wish for men from different orders. Some orders of retreat masters adhere to one form of presentation more or less. ¯ . . I hate to say this but sometimes the meditation becomes boresome before he really starts. ~ iCrom different orders--However,'a priest of any order should not try to instill the particular virtues, customs or religious devotions of his order. He should not adopt an attitude that his order is superior to all others. This is boring. Sometimes a change of method is good. I like it when I do not know what the next conference is about. Wl£en the retreat masters come from different orders, they have a different approach and p~attern. This is good. I believe each order has its particular talents to offer, and being human, variations ofeven the most fundamental topics are appreciated.' I have made several retreats and having had' the same order of priests conducting them, I was able to tell almost exactly what incidents Father was about to discuss and in almost the same words he used. Sisters to whom the source of priests makes little difference: I have,made retreats under priests of several orders and I find the order doesn't make much difference--it is the personal sanctity, earnestness, and understanding that counts¯ It is not the order; rather it is the personal holiness of the priest which would be an inspiration to follow. As far as particular retreat masters are concerned, it really matters little who he is, where he is from, or what religious congreg, he represents. The important thing is that he himself is a truly spiritual man, well prepared td give the retreat, en-thusiastic for the cause--the cause of Christ and the interests of His consecrated Spouses. Can love them all! and respond to all. However, I think a religious priest would understand better community problems and regulations than secular priests. The habit does not make the retreat master; it's his union with the Divine Master that makes the difference in the retreat. I believe they should be chosen for their individual capabilities, not confined to orders at all. It might be a good idea if some center could be designated "~here one could send in names to be recommended and likewise receive such information. FAI~IfLIARITY WITH CONSTITUTIONS The. next item of inquiry offered results charac.terized by a greater degree of agreement than the preceding. Dealing with the retreat master"s, familiarity with the congregation's consfitutions, the quest.ion was framed in the fo!lowi.ng words: " Do you like the retreat master to be. familiar with the Constitutions of you~ ,. congregation and refer to them in his talk~? .-~, .yes ___no ___it makes little difference Further comment: danuaCg, 1956 SISTERS' RETREATS--][ The vast, majority of sisters, 616 (89.0%), desire the retreat master to be well acquainted with their particular constitution.s, while an exceedingly small° numl~er, 5 (.7 %), register an opposing vote. A small minority, 71 (10.3%), do not see that a knowledge of the constitutions makes very much difference. The latter group offered the following comments on their answers: I should like the retreat master to be f~miliar with the Rule but not necessarily the specifications given in Constitutions. Retreat should be a time of spiritual deep-ening. Intei'pretation of Constitutions belongs to the religious superior. I think it is more important that he know the spirit of the congregation than the actual constitutions, for every sister can read "these latter at any time herself. If he gives me the spiritual fundamentals, I can apply thXem to my own life. ,I know the practical details of my Rule and its spirit, better than he does. Often retreat masters interpret our rules in terms of the spirit of theic institutes. The sisters holding the majority opinion have a wide variet)~ of somewhat related reasons for their view: Very definitely. You prefer someone whose foundation is sound. It doesn't help you to gain the spirit of someone else's order. If your Constitution states specific virtues, it is more helpfhl to discuss these. Every sister knows that her Rule is her way of life and she has more confidence in you if you are willing to take the time to study God's plan for her. If he isn't familiar with the Rules and practices of tl~e community, it is the better part of wisdom not to assume that this community is exactly like that community'. It loses some of the rapport when a retreat master, for example, keeps referring to. "when you say the office; now in the recitation of the office, etc." when it so happens that your community, does not say the office. Knowing that the retreat master is familiar with the Constitutions makes it easier to discuss problems in confession. It is of no encouragement to have the confessor ask one: Do you have to do that? When I ask for guidance or enlightenment, I presume the confessor to know what I have to do and tell me frankly." If he is familiar with our Constitution he will know. Interpretation by someone outside the community sometimes brings a greater ap-preciation of the rule. The retreat is more practical, and you fed as though he is interested in your com-munity and the advancement of its members in the spiritual life. That is our custom and we prefer it. 'However, retreat masters must be prudent and careful, never permitting themselves the liberty of direct or indirect criticism of an approved rule. We had that ~xperience once and the sisters resented it. This is essential, I think, if a, pplications and illustrations are to be meaningful. As members of a religious congregation our sanctification will be attained by doing God's will according to the spirit and customs of our particular congregation. What better thing could be done during retreat than to .get more deeply acquainted with them? THOMAS DUBAY .It makes us feel he takes more interest and thus gives us more confidence. Customs and traditions are important and a talk on visits home to sisters who are not permit'ted to visit home is wasted. Very definitely. I have gone through whole retreats in which the talks were geared to teaching sisters, and our whole congregation is engaged in nursing. Besides the spirit of each community is different, also the practice of particular virtues, appli- .cation of rules, etc. I think the retreat master should discuss the Constitutions beforehand with some superior or the provincial in order to be sure he applies it as intended. We may conclude from these observations that ordinarily the retreat master will do well to read over a copy of the sisters' con-stitutions before he begins to prepare his retreat. Because it is in the nature of the written word to need a living interpreter, he can also with profit seek comments and observations on community customs 'and interpretations from some one of the older sisters. 'She will ordinarily be a superior. OUR CONTRIBUTORS THOMAS DUBAY, author of The Seminary Rule, is now at the Marist Col-lege, Washington, D. C. JOHN R. POST is master of novices at Shadowbrook, Lenox, Mass. JOHN 3. LYNCH is a professor of moral theology at Weston College, Weston, Mass. SOME RECENT PAMPHI'ETS GRAIL PUBLICATIONS, St. Meinrad, Indiana The Mass: Homage to God. By Paul R. Milde, O.S.B. Pp. 28. 15 cents. dog Is Your Heritage. By John M. Scott, S.J. Pp. 45. 15cents. The Holy Man of Ars. Saint dohn Baptist Vianneg. By Dom Ernest Graf, O.S.B. Pp. 40. 25 cents. Saint Luke Paints a Picture. Our Lady of Perpetual Help. By Sister M. Julian Baird, R.S.M. Pp. 8. 5 cents. FROM OTHER PUBLISHERS Spiritual Direction. A Current Bibliography. Department of Religion, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana. Pp. 11. Padre Magin Catala. By Aloysius S. Stern, S.J. University of San Francisco, San Francisco 17, California. Pp. 20. Free on request. So You're Going to Teach Religion. By Richard R. Baker, Ph.D. George A. Pflaum, Inc., Dayton 2, Ohio. 10 cents. Time Out to Think. By Gene J. Jakubek, S.J. San-Del Printing Co., 602 :Gratiot Street, St. Louis, Missouri. Pp. 22. 15 cents. 10 Novice Masl:er's Obliga!:ions Secrecy John R. Post, S.J. A master of novices by reason of his office is made the custodian of many secrets. His young charges in asking for direction confide in him their faults and spiritual difficulties, and in so doing they lay on him the obligation of concealing these faults from others. To reveal or even t-o use this knowledge outside the limits laid down for the entrusted secret would, of course, be sinful. Yet, a master is often obliged by canon 563 to give a report to higher superiors on the conduct of his novices; and, in order to protect the order from unsuitable members, he may even desire to dismiss a novice on the basis of knowledge learned only in confidence. Can he reveal or use such knowledge with a good conscience? This ap-parent clash of obligations poses a few moral problems which the following pages will attempt to solve. It will help at the beginning if we clarify in general the position of the novice master with regard to his novices. There is more to his job than the rejection of the unfit. He must also act as spiritual director. His work, then, is not exactly the same as the doctor's who examines candidates before entrance. The doctor's work is primarily for the benefit of the order and is known as such by the candidates. Father Vermeersch remarks that a doctor who examines applicants for their physical fitness is thereby excused from the obligation of keeping his entrusted secret as far as revealing his findings to the superior is concerned. The reason given is that the boy understands this to be the purpose of the examination and implicitly gives his ~onsent beforehand to the doctor's revelation. But, if a .novice master wants to carry on as a spiritual director, such a consent on the part of his novices cannot be presumed. Human nature being what it is, he could not expect young men to confide in him their faults and failings while they know that he is free to use this knowledge for their dismissal. So, 'to maintain the confidence of his charges, he must in his many interviews with them consider himself bound by the various secrets, except in the rare cases where the commo,n good allows revelation, trusting that divine providence and his own powers of persuasion will rid the order of undesirable members. GENERAL DOCTRINE ON SECRETS A secret is some hidden knowledge belongjng.to.a person by 11 JOHN R. POST Reoiew for Religious strict right, ,which cannot be sought after, used, or revealed by an-other con.treaty to the reasonable will of the owner. Thus the ob-ligation of keeping a secret usually derives from the virtues of both justice and charity. For example, to learn from reading the incoming mail that a novice's brother is thinking of becomi~3g a priest and to reveal it before the matter has b~come public might be displeasing to the novice and hence against charity. The act would also violate justice, first, because the information belongs only to the novice and his brother by strict right, and secondly, the act breaks an im-' plicit contract with the novice to keep secret the matter of his letters. Of the four different kinds of secrets-~confessionaI, entrusted, promised, and natural--only three have a definite place in the work of a novice master. The con~:essional secret concerns the knowl-edge communicate~d to a priest in the sacrament of penance.1 The entrusted secret is one that is confided to another under a con-tract that he will not use the information without the consent and according to the good pleasure of the giver. This contract is im-plied when one goes to consult with doctors, lawyers, or priests acting in their professional capacity. The natural secret concerns something one happens upon in the life of another and which the nature of human society demands should be kept secret. All three of these secrets bind under grave sin if their revelation' would be seriously harmful. On the other hand, moralists agree that there is.no secret-~ex~ cept the confessional--which does not have its limits. The reason is that no obligation to keep a human secret is so strong that a stronger obligation to reveal it cannot present itself. In other words, when an obligation to conceal interferes with a higher good, ~t shbuld cease. This principle, however diffic[dt in practice, is gen-erally recognized in theory. The Church overrides the obligation to keep a natural secret when she asks her children, to testify to im-pediments found in future spouses and priests. Doctors, too, are sometimes obliged to report bullet wounds to the police in accord-ance with the principle that the common good at times demands exceptions even to the entrusted secret. It is certain doctrine, there-fore, that the revelation of a human secret is justified when it i~ necessary to prevent preponderant h~arm to the community, to the owner of a secret, to its recipient, or to a third party. Sometimes, too, revelation can be justified if the consent of the owner'can be 1Though canon 891 forbids the master to hear novices' confessions generally, it does allow it in certain cases. , 12 January, 1956 OBLIGATIONS TO SECRECY reasonably presumed. THE CONFESSIONAL SECRET The. obligation of keeping secret whatever is known from a sacramental confession is the weightiest there is--stemming as it does from the divine law and protecting one of the most precious means of salvation. Every priest, therefore, is forbidden not only to reveal confessional knowledg,e, but even to use it in a way that would render this consoling sacrament odious or more burdensome to penitents. A novice master, for example, who knew only from confession that one novice had an aversion for another could not, without the permission of l~is penitent, use this information in making out the bands, or groups, for recreation, even though he knew it would be for the penitent's good. The reason why such use of confessional knowledge is forbidden is not merely that it might work a hardship on the individual penitent, but also that the very fact that if such use of confessional knowledge were permitted, it would be a-bur-den for penitents in general and would make confession more diffi-cult. Hence, even in a case in which the individual penitent might be pleased (e.g., because he was removed from the company of someone he found disagreeable), the novice master could not use the knowledge without express permission. One might think that the novice's permission for such changes as these could readily be presumed, but it is" the universal teaching of theologians today that permission may never be presumed for the use of confessional knowledge. The reason is again the same: if permission could sometimes be presumed, this would diminish the security the confessional is supposed to offer and thus make con-fession more difficult. During confession, of course, the master is free to advise, per-suade, and guide the penitent out of his difficulties and even to bring up m.,atter from previous confessions. But outside of confession, if be wishes to speak to the novice about confessional matters he should have permission. Such permiss!on would be implied if the novice himself took the first step by referring to matters he had confessed. Tt~tE ENTRUSTED SECRET It would seem that most of the novice master's knowledge of his charges will come under the heading of entrusted or committed secret. Because he is designated by the order as the spiritual father 13 JOHN R. POST~, . ~ . ; ~ Revieu~ for Religious 6f '.the .novices, ~there~is set up. between him and th~'m the mutual understanding that ,whatever is: confided to him will be kept hidden and~never used in any way that will jeopardize their interests. This promise or pledge.is inherent in his office; and, since the'common good not only of the novitiate, but of every community in which his novices w.ill _live depends' so much upon the confidence which they have in superiors, it is largely his duty to build up this con~ fidence in them from the very beginning. Some of the entrusted secrets are stricter than others, depending upon the channels through which they come to him, so we propose to treat them according to these several channels--secrets of mani-festation and spiritual direction, paternal denunciation and chapter -of faults, and inspection of mail. MANIFESTATION OF CONSCIENCE AND SPIRITUAL DIRECTION Next in strictness to the seal of confession is the secrecy which surrounds the rhanifestation of conscience. The reason for this is that'the manifestation, like the sacrament, has for its primary pur-' pose the spiritual Progress of the one making it, and to achieve this purpose some disclosure of conscience is necessary. Slnce, then, it comes so close in its matter and purpose to the sacrament of pen-ance, this .secret, of all the entrusted secrets, should be 'held the most sacred. Nev.ertheless, except in the case where the manifestation is made ~ander the seal of confession, more latitude is allowed the master in the use of what' he hears, always safeguarding, however, the rights and ~eeliflgs of the one who makes it, and always avoid-ing anything that 'would diminish confidence in. his office. The authors'who comment on this subject say that the novice aster '}nay not reveal anything heard in manifestation, even to higher superiors, without the consent of the novice. Thus, if a master were asked by his provincial or canonical visitor whether he had n.oticed an impediment in a certain novice, and the master knew of this impediment only through manifestation, he would be obliged to answer with a polite, "I do not know," or something similar. Wl~at then, if the impediment were an invalidating impediment --for. example, the novice had once apostatized from the Catholic Church~ and joined a non-Cath01ic sect--and the novice could not be persuade.d.to.d0 anything about it? The master may not reveal the. impe.dim.ent.o He may and should instruct the novice of his se~iou.syobligation to have the impediment removed before going L4" lanuat~, 1956 OBLIGATIONS TO SECRECY on; but, if the novice still refused, the mastei could neither reveal the impediment nor use. his knowledge for such things as dismiss-ing him, °or refusing to recommend him for vows, or even delaying his profession if the novice were acceptable on every other count. In matters such as-the foregoing, the secret of ~manifestation is, for all practical purposes, like the confessional secret. But when there is question merely of the spiritual good Of the novice, greater latitude would be allowed for the use of knowledge because, in some cases at least, permission to use manifestation knowledge may be presumed. The reasons for this are, first, that there is no absolute prohibition of presumed permission as there is in matter of con-fession, and. secondly, all n~vices understand that the novitiate is a time of probation where hard things will be asked of them-. More-over, in some orders novices are ins'tructed beforehand that-one of the purposes of the manifestation is to provide superiors with knowl-edge that will .help them to govern paternally, assign subjects to proper offices, guard them from temptations, etc. In strict right, then, the novice master can, unless the novice expressly forbids it. use manifestation knowledge to change his occupation, living quar-ters, companions, etc., provided that there is no danger of revela-tion and the best interests of both novice and the order are served. .But presumptions must yield to facts; so sometimes prudence may require that, before using this knowledge in a way displeasing to a novice, the master sound him out beforehand. Outside a novice's manifestation, of course, the master may speak to him irl private about sins mentioned, not in confession, but in manifestation in order to warn him or to exhort him to do better, provided that everything is kept under the same seal of secr.ecy; for these private interviews of spiritual direction partake of the nature of a manifestation. PATERNAL DENUNCIATION AND CHAPTER OF FAULTS According to Suarez, the denunciation of another's faults to .a superior as to a father is only a method of-fulfilling the, injunction of fraternal correction imposed on all Christians b) our Lo~d ih Matthew 18:15. Going on occasions to the st~perior first, instead of directly to the culprit, though a departure from the order estab-lished by our Lord, does, nevertheless, fulfill the gospel injunction substantially; for the superior, acting solely .as the instrument ,of the inforrfiant, is obliged to use this knowledge within the limits "of the informant's "ih~ention. 'Pr~siaming, then, that the-informant's JOHN R. POST Review for Religious intention is exclusively one of charity for a fellow novice, the master is obliged to act towards the delinquent as a lather, who desires ,only the correction and improvement of his son, not as a judge who, looking first to the common good, may for that end punish severely and even dismiss from the order. This being so, suppose a novice master learns from one boy that another has been speaking against the institute. Could he dis-miss the culprit or hold up his vows or give him a public penance on the strength of this denunciation alone? No, for this would be acting judiciall~l and contrary to the intention of the informant, whose only intention presumably was that the delinquent be ad-monished privately and Watched over for his own good. $o, in paternal denunciations the master is obliged to restrict his use of the denunciation to what is nicessary for the private correction of the delinquent. Can a superior reveal the matter of the denunciation to others? Not any more than is required to attain the end of the denunciation. But, if. it is necessary to tell the provincial, for example, in order to change the delinquent from one office to another, the master must warn him that this knowledge is in the paternal forum2 and cann6t be used judicially. If others have to be consulted, the same warning must be given to them and the name of the delinquent withheld. But, if it is impossible to get their advice without revealing the name, they must be bound to strict secrecy also. With regard to the use of such knowledge, the master may do whatever he judges necessary for the spiritual good o~ the delinquent short of notable injury to reputation and expulsion. Hence, he may admonish him privately, reprehend sharply, change his occupation, even though these may be repugnant to the novice. In all of this the novice master is bound under a double, secret to the informant. The first is an obligation not to use the knowl-edge contrary to his intention; the second not to reveal the name of the informant and to protect him against any harm that might be-fall him as a result of his act of charity. Both of these ard entrusted secrets. Obviously, if the fault is more serious and the intention of the informant is primarily to protect the community from an unworthy 2For a more complete explanation of the difference between the paternal forum and the judicial forum, the reader is referred to the article "Paternal Government and Filial Confidence in Superiors," by John C. Ford, S.J., REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, II (1943), 146-55. 16 Januar~j, 1956"'" OBLIGATIONS ~: :to SECRECY member, then, this would not be a paternal but a judicial' denunci-ation; and the master would ~be free to proceed to dismissal if he judged it wise. When it is not clear, however, what kind of denunci-ation is being made, the master must question the informant about his intention; for he would be violating an entrusted secret if he began proceedings in the judicial forum without the consent of the informant. And this consent the latter is obliged to give as often as dismissal by. moral estimate is the only way to prevent grave injury to a third party or to the community. The chapter of faults, like the paternal denunciation, is another form of paternal correction. Here a novice in the presence of the master is admonished of his exterior faults by each of his fellow novices in turn. This should be done of course out of the sincerest charity, the only motive being to improve the individual spiritually. The master's use of information learned in chapter, therefore, is governed by the same principles that were laid down for the paternal denunciation, except that, since all present have already learned of the fault, he has more freedom as far as the reputation of the sub-ject is concerned. About this exercise Father John Ford, S.J., writes, "It is not proper to use judicially material revealed therein. The fact that all novices participate in this exercise does not change the principle. But the fact that all are present is the reason why only lesser ex-ternal faults are fit subject matter for revelation in the chapter, and why it would be improper for anyone to reveal anything serious enough to warrant the dismissal of a novice. If an imprudent novice. were to reveal such a fault, all present would be bound by the secret and the master of novices would be obliged to presume that the revelation was intended as part of the exercise of fraternal cor-rection, and therefore, not to be used judicially,, for example, by dismissing the novice." THE INsPEcTION OF MAIL , The last of the secrets entrusted to a novice master are those which be learns from the inspection of mail. Since this right of in-spectioh is given to him only to help in the paternal governm, ent of souls and to protect their interior lives from harm, he may never use this knowledge for any other purpose. As Father Genicot says, "He cannot make a wider use of it, unless he, can presume the con-sent of the writer or receiver, which cannot be presumed, of course, if it would cause hardship to either one.''3 Although the subject 3Tbeologia Moralis, 3rd ed., I, p, 395. 17 ~JOHN R. POST Review [or Religious matter of letters is not usually as confidential as that in the patelnal denunciation, still both are in the paterna! forum; and their use and revelation should follow the same principles. Canon 611 denies to all superiors the right to open letters of subjects to or from higher superiors. To do so, therefore, would be to invade the natural right of the subject; and, if a letter of this kind were opened by mistake, the knowledge so acquired could not be used without injustice. SOME IMPROBABLE CASES OF ENTRUSTED SECRETS Thus far we have taken for granted that revelation of an entrusted secret was not necessary to prevent serious harm to the community or to some third party. Now, let us consider some occasions when the preponderant harm done to others by concealment might seem to.justify the revelation of such a secret, or at least its use in dis-missing a novice. First, suppose a novice master discovered in man(festation that a novice had a habit of impurity that made him unfit for the re-ligious life and that might bring great harm to the community. Could the master reveal this knowledge to the provincial with a view to the novice's dismissal, if after exhortation the novice re-fused to go? Or, could the master himself use the knowledge to dismiss the novice without revealing the cause? It might seem at first that a master of'novices could reveal such knowledge to the provincial. And he could if it were only a ques-tion of choosing between the. harm to the individual novice and that threatening the community. But a third element enters into the case in favor of concealment, and that is the element of general confidence in the institution of manifestation as such. The moral harm done to a community by a loss of confidence in its spiritual directors is so great that moralists are inclined to say that no ex-ception to the secrecy of spiritual direction should be allowed.4 And, if we consider, as we have done, how close the manifestation comes to the sacrament of confession in its matter' and its purpose, we should not wonder that, more than all the other entrusted secrets, it should share somewhat in the inviolability of that sacrament. ~A principal difficulty against this solution seems to come from an, analogy, with other entrusted secrets. Most theologians, for in~- :(Cf. Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R., American Ecclesiastical Review, March, 1953, pp. 200-201; John C: Ford, S.J., "and Gerald Kelly, S.J., ,'Theological StudieL March, 1954, pp. 83-84. 18 ~ ]anuarg, 1956 OBLIGATIONS To'SECREC~ stance, will allow a doctor, to warn a prospective bride qf he finds that her fianc~ has a contagious disease which would threaten her health and future happiness. Here is an entrusted secret which can. be revealed to protect a third party, why cannot the same be done~ '~ove? Because, though both are entrusted secrets, still the s.ecret. of manifestation is on a higher level than that of the medical secret; for the confidence which men have in their spiritual directors is both more important for the common good and also more fragile than. the confidence they have ifi their doctor.s, though both are important. For all practical purposes, therefore, the secret of manifestation should be kept almost as inviolable as that of confession. Can the novice master in the~ case above use the manifestation knowledge to dismiss the novice without revealing the secret to any-one.? Even if he had the power from the provincial, it would seem that he should forego the bare use of it for purposes of dismissal. Father Ren~ Brouillard says that, although in strict right a superior could, to avert a preponderant harm to th~ community, use mani-festation knowledge against an individual, still it would be prefer-able for reasons of prudence and discretion not to use it euen in extreme cases because this kind" of secret approaches the nature of the confessional secret; and a betrayal might easily mean the loss of confidence by'the whole community,5 Next, take a case involving a secret' learned only in paternal denunciation. One novice reports to the master that another has been the aggressor in a mutual sin of unchastity: and, when ques-tioned by the master, the culprit admits it, but says that it is the only time he has ever sinned that way and he is really con- "trite. Moreover, the master cannot persuade him to go willingly. When the master questions the informant about his intention i.n making the denunciation, he finds that it was ~nly to help the. culprit to amend. Hence, if the informant is unwilling to let the master act judicially, the master's hands are tied. The reason is that the threat to the moral health of the community or third ¯ party does not seem to be great enough to excuse from the entrusted secret, especially since other means such as exhortation and separ-. ation of the two novices can still be tried to avert the danger. But," if it were clear that the delinquent were confirmed .in a habit of unchastity with others, then the master, after using all other means,. could resort to dismissal even without, the consent of the informant; fbr the d~iinquent wou'ld in this c~se ,constitute a proportionately gRevue des comrnunautes religieuses, III (1927), 104. 19 JOHN R. POST Review for Religious grave threat to the virtue and reputation of the community. Lastly, suppose the master of novices learns through the inspec-tion of mail that one of his charges just before vows has a debt of $10,000 hanging over his head. His creditor, knowing the situa-tion, writes in his letter that he. intends to "bleed" the order for the sum after vows. The master knows of thi~ debt only through this letter and is unable to persuade the novice to leave. What he to do? In this case to protect'the order from serious harm, the master could dismiss the novice, despite his pbjections; and, if it were necessary to forestall distrust, he might even make public the reason for dismissal. Such cases, thank God, are very rare among novices, due largely to the careful examinations they go through before entrance and also to the fact that, when there is just reason for dismissal, they can usually be made to see it. But, when a case like the above does arise, the master must remember that in choosing between two evils charity always obliges him to choose the less; the two evils here being the harm to be done to the community or to a third party by his concealment, and the harm to the culprit and the institution of fraternal correction, or manifestation, c;r inspection of mail by his revelation. NATURAL SECRETS When the ordinary religious observes an otherwise hidden fault of a fellow religious, he is bound in justice and charity not to re-veal it any more than is necessary, in this matter the novice master is not like an ordinary religious. As regards his novices, he is not only a spiritual director, but also a superior. If he should find a novice engaged in some prank, he would certainly not violate justice by giving him a public penance--though he might violate charity if a private admonition were sufficient for the correction of the cul-prit and for the preservation of religious discipline. Moreover, if the fault were sufficiently serious, he could proceed to the dismissal of the novice. Novices recognize from the beginning that the master ha~ this right, for they know that they are undergoing an exam-ination by the order. A~.d just as in a scholastic examination the results can be used by the teacher to dismiss a boy from school, without any violation of a natural secret, so too in the use of this knowledge which he. acquired from personal observation the master of novices has the widest scope in which to exercise his administrative powers. 2O January/, 19~6 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS As regards externs, the novice master has the same basic duty as others to preserve the natural secret. Suppose, for instance, that he had dismissed a novice for some fault that he had observed, and later were asked by a school or a business firm for the cause of the boy:s dismissal. He would be violating a natural secret were he to reveal this fault if it would not unfit the boy for business or a stu-dent's career." The case, however, 'would be some'what different if be were asked to give testimonial letters concerning an ex-novice of his who wanted to enter another religious order, for here canon 545,n.4, makes it clear that merely natural secrets must give way to the needs of the Church. By the same token he is bound to re-veal the natural secrets of his novices when ordered to do so by his own higher superiors; and, if they are significant enough, he may include them in his regular report (can. 563). CONCLUSION To sum up, then, the master of novices must try to balance as best he can the interests of both the order and the individual soul; and, when any one of his obligations to secrecy seems to tie his hands~ let him take consolation from the words of the divine master, "Let them both grow until the harvest . . . lest while you gather up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it." ( ues ons ncl Answers I In my striving for perfection I find if difficult to submit to God's will by acceptlncj my superior as she. is. Her inconsistencies induce murmur-ing; her injustice provokes scandal; her partiality seems at times unbear-able. What can I do about it? Sister might do well to cultivate the habit, by reading, reflection, prayer, exercise, experience, etc., of seeing the whole matter through God's eyes, as it were, and then of feeling about it as that vision suggests. God sees the superior's imperfections, but also the good consequences that sooner or later He can draw out of them. He does not like her inconsistencies either; but He does not expect human beings to be completely qonsistent, and He will make those deviations conduce to greater good eventually. Similarly He views 21 :QUi~'~IONS"AND ANSWERS Review [oF Religio~s "her injustice and,partiality and disapproves of them; ~but they also ¯ ~re tolerated in His infinitely, wise a'nd holy' and potent designs. He '.knows that if sister shouldobey an imperfect superior perfectly, hei? ¯ obedience would be all the more excellent, and more to His glory, ,and especially to her own pleasure and gain and sanctity in" the end. She would also be more Christlike, with all the advantages ' that this likeness implies; Christ's obedience would haste been rela- ¯ tively commonplace had the powers, in His time been just what :they should have been. The malice and unreasonableness of His persecutors were His opportunity. : May. a religious, without seekln9 permission from his superior, offer his life to God, that is, volunteer to let God take his life for some special pur-pose? Whatever good there is in such an act is contained in loving God with all one's forces, or in trying to accomplish the will of God "on earth as in heaven," or in being perfect as one's heavenly Father is perfect; and very obviously no permission is required for such practices. Superiors do,not have authority in the matter of directly terminating life. Even if. they did, it would seem that one could go over their heads to the Supreme Superior of all superiors. --AUGUSTINE G. ELLARD, S.J. I am a sister and a supervisor on a hospital hall. I wanted to cjo to confession. A priest of one of the ~:ify parishes had finished visiting a patient, and I asked him to hear my confession in a vacant room on the hall and also told him that I could not !eave the hall becauseof a patient. who was in a critical condition and r.equired constant attention. He kept hesltatincj and asklncj me questions. Finally he said he could~not hear my .confession outside of the confessional in the chapel. Why couldn't he? This priest, since he had jurisdiction for the confessions of .other women in the diocese but did not antecedently possess special .jurisdiction over you/ a religious woman, is. termed the occasional confessor of religious women. He could hear your confession validly .only in the legitimate place. This is the only case in which place is required .for the t~alidity of a confession. The confessions of women, including religious women, may not be heard licitly ohtside of the .confessiorial except in a case of sickness or for other reasons of about ~the same or greater import than sickness (c.,910,' § 1). If such a :reason existed, he could have heard your .confes~i0fi bdth validly danuary, 1956 ' QUESTION'S AND ANSWERS and licitly outside the confes.sional, e.g., in the room you mentioned, Examples of such sufficient reasons are those of a sister'confined~ to her room by a sickness that is not serious, deafness, a sister who wishes to go to confession but cannot leave a patient, the probable danger of, a sacrilegious confession or Communion, the probable danger ofserious infamy or scandal, of gossip in the community, or shame or fear with regard to going to the confessional. The prudent and at least probable judgment of the confessor of the sufficiency of the reason for hearing the confession outside the confessional is all that is required. Regatillo gives what appears to me to be a very sound practical norm of action for a confessor when he is requested to hear the confession of a religious woman outside the confessional and the sufficiency of the reason is not immediately clear to him. The confessor is to indicate the prohibition of hearing a confession in this manner except for a sufficient reason; but, if the religious woman insists, he may hear the confession outside the confessional Any .precautions prescribed by the local ordinary on the confessions of women outside the confessional are to be observed. A sufficient reason existed in this case, and the confession could therefore have been heard both validly and licitly outside the confessional. Cf. Regatillo, Institutiones Iuris Canonici I, 355; De Carlo, De Religiosis, n. 172, 5 ; Genicot-Salsmans, Theoloqia Moralis, II, Ed. 17, n. 319. Our constitutions read: "In ~he practice of ordinary private corporal mortifications and penances, the sisters are to be directed by the judcj-ment of the confe'ssor alone; for external and public acts they must have also the permiss~ion of the local superior." I am a mother provincial, and I have a sister who is practicin9 private penance with the consent of her confessor in a way that is injurious to both her physical and mental health. Are her local superior and I simply powerless to do anything? This article of the constitutions is to be interpreted according to the practice of the Holy See in approving constitutions. Accord-ing to this practice, the permission of a confessgr or spiritual director suffices for private acts of mortification and penance. A superior may" also grant this permission. It is more prudent tb consult one,of these, especially for habitual acts; but permission is not o~ obliga-tion unless this obligationqs stated in the laws or customs of the institute. For public acts, i.e., those dbne in the presence of at least a good part of the community, such as the community penanc~'s ~ir~ the refectory, the permission of the superior is necessary, rail su- QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Reoiew [or Religious periors also have the right of vigilance, over private acts and may moderate or forbid such acts, even if permitted by a confessor or spiritual director, when they create a danger to health, religious discipline, or the work of' the institute. All such matters of their very nature fall under the government of superiors, e.g., the care of the health of subjects is not only a right but also an obligation of superiors. --S-- In our community we have always recited the Little Office of the B.V. M. in English. Do we cjain ÷he indulcjences granted for the recitation of this office? The indulgences are listed in the Raccolta, n. 318. Can. 934, § 2, enacts that the indulgences attached to prayers may be acquired by .reciting the prayers in any language, provided the translation is approved. The Little Office of the B. V. M. is an exception to this norm, since the Holy See has declared that for the gaining of its indulgences this office must be recited in Latin when the reci-tation is public but may be recited in the-vernacular when the recitation is private. The Holy See has also defined private recita-tion in this matter. "The recitation of the Little Office of the B. V. M. is still to be held as private although done in common within the confines of the religious house and even when done behind closed doors in a church or public oratory attached to the house." (Acta Sanctae Sedis, 40 [1907], 187-88.) The common or choral reci-tation of the office by sisters is within the confines of the religious house, since it is done in the semipublic oratories of convents. If exceptionally a community Should recite this office in a church or public oratory attached to the house, the doors are considered open only when the public is admitted generally or indiscriminately, not when a few determined persons are allowed to enter. There-fore, not only the individual but also the choral recitation of this office in the houses of religious is to be considered~ private and, if done in the vernacular, sufficient for the indulgences in either case. Cf. Beringer-Steinen-Maz0yer, Les Indulgences, I, nn. 206, 756; De Angelis, De Indulgentiis, n. 92; Heylen, De Indulgentiis, 67; Battandier, Guide Canonique, n. 272. Is ÷here any law of the Church on the name or title of a religious insfi-÷ufe? This legislation is found in can. 492, § 3, which prescribes that 24 danuar~l, 1956 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS new.congregations may not assufiae the name of any religious in-stitute already established. It is sufficient that the flame be somewhat different, e.g., Sisters of St. 3oseph of Cluny, Sisters of St. doseph of Newark. The title or name of the congregation may be taken from the attributes of God, the mysteries of our holy faith, some feast of our Lord or the Blessed Virgin, the saints, or the special purpose of the congregation. The name should not be artificial nor should it express or imply any form of devotion that is not ap-proved by the Holy See. If I may presume to add anything to this law and practice of the Holy See, I would suggest that the name should not be unduly long; and I would emphasize this suggestion even more for the names of provinces and especially of houses. --7-- Is it a fact that the Holy See stated that sisters are not to lower their veil before or after receiving Holy Communion.7 Some communities have stopped doing so; others still do it. I have no knowledge of a published statement of the Holy See directly on this practice. The S. Congregation of the Sacraments did say: "When Holy Communion is being received, all those things are to be avoided which create greater difficulty for a young person who wishes to abstain from Holy Communion, but in such a way that his abstinence will not be noticed" (Bouscaren: Canon Lau; Di- _ gest, II, 214). It can also be held that the same principle is implicit throughout this instruction, which treats of daily Communion and the precautions to be taken against abuse. It would be more in the spirit of this instruction to eliminate the practice. Even prescinding from the instruction, I see no good reason for the retention of the practice. It is also the cause at least of wonderment to small children when done in church. The same lack of reasonableness is to be predicated of an unna.turally slow pace in approaching the altar rail or in returning to one's place in the chapel or church. Like the rubrics of the Church, other practices should express reverence in a natural manner. --8-- I am a religious priest and,regularly say the community Mass in a con-vent. May I never say the Masses of my own institute? Convent chapels are semipublic oratories? The principal semi-public oratory is tba~ used for the religious exercises, especially for the hearing of Mass; other chapels of the house are secondary semi- 25 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Review [or Religiou's public oratories.~ The generhl principle is that the place of celebra-tion determines'the ordo (calendar) to be followed for Mass. Tl~erefore: 1. In the principal semipublic oratory, every priest, diocesan or .re!igious, must say Mass according to the ordo of such an oratory, whether the ordo is diocesan or proper to the religious, e.g., "Fran-ciscan,~ Dominican. a. The priest does not follow the special rites or ceremonies of religious orders or churches, e.g., a diocesan priest does not me, ntion the founder of a religiotis order in the Cont~iteor. b. The. priest may celebrate votive or requiem Masses permitted by the ordo of such an oratory, even though not permitted by his own ordo. ' c. When the ordo of such an oratory permits private votive Masses, the priest may say the Mass of the office of the day for such a place or a votive or requiem Mass, and in all of these he follows the ordo of the oratory in every respect. Or he may say the Mass that cor-responds to his own ordo, even if only that of a blessed. If he does so, he is to say the Mass in the festal, not votive,' manner, i.e., he says the Mass exactly as he would in his own church or oratory. d. The norm for a principal semipublic oratory applies also to a church "and a public oratory. 2. In the secondary semipublic oratories, a priest may.but is not obliged to follow the ordo of the place of celebration. He may and ,prefer.ably should follow his own ordo, because of the general prin-ciple that the Mass should as far as possible be in conformity with the office. 'This norm also applies to Mass in a private oratory and outside a sacred place. ~ 3. The ordo of the oratories of lay religious is the diocesan i~rdo except in the case of religious who have a proper ordo. In practice a proper ordo will be found only iia the second'order of nuns or third orders of c0ngreg.ation~s of sisters. These have the right of following the ordo of the first order of religious men to which they are affili-ated, e.g., Franciscan sisters have the right of following the ordo of the first order.of Franciscan men to which they are affiliated. An in-stitute subject to the diocesan ordo may also have some special Masses granted by the Holy See. 4.~. Cardinais and bishops have the privilege of following' tl~eir own ordo wherever they celebrate. Cf. J'. O'Connell, The Celebra-tion of Mass, 58-61.'---JOSEPH F. GALLEN, S.J. 26 I:'orbidden;,. Re ding John J. Lynch~ S.J. | T-is 'rather cor~mon knowledge among Catholics that ~l~e Church | forbids her subjects to read certain publications which she~judges would be a threat to faith or morals. Beyond ~hat g~neric"facL however, common knowledge does not proceed very far--partiall~r, perhaps, because more detailed information is not a practical ne-cessitj" for the many who prefer to restrict their reading either 'to professedly Catholic publications or to literature which di3es not verge ori religious or moral matters. But it' is also unfortunately true that more detailed information on this law is not abundantly available except.in technical manuals of moral theology and canon law. Hence even those who desire or need enlightenment find them-selves under a certain handicap for want of informationa.l sources. It is primarily for that latter reason that the subject appears, ap-propriate to REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS. Even though limitations of spac? forbid an exhaustive treatment here, it may be possible to in-dicate the basic principles involved and to recommend for more de-tailed explanation other authors' whose writings in the vernacular are conveniently available. THE CHURCH'S RIGHT TO CONTROL RI~ADING The point of departi~re for any intelligent discussion of this question is the established fact that the Church is divinely instituted, vested with full right to teach authoritatively and to rule in matters religious, and charged byr Christ Himself with the responsibility .~f safeguarding Catholic faith and morals. In these matters the voice of the Church is the voice of God and commands the same unques- [ioning obedience which is due the word of God Himself. Further-more-- a psychological fact which any rational individual must ad-mit- the printed word Can and does exert on the human intellect .and will a most powerful influence for both good and evil and is, consequently, a mighty factor in the preservation or destruction of personal faith and morals. Hence in all reasonableness we must concede the right and duty of the Church, if she deems .it necessary, to exercise a measure of control over the literature we read anal to establish norms and regulations whereby the faith and morals" of her subjects will be protected from what we might call "subversive influences," Neither her authority in that sphere, nor her essential 'wisdom in the exercise of that authority, Can be yalidly que~tioned :2,7 JOHN J. LYNCH Reoieto for Religious once we face the fact of her institution by God as official and ~iuthori-tative custodian of faith and morals. THE FACT OF LEGISLATIVE CONTROL In wl~at specific form has the Church de facto expressed her pro-hibition against certain publications? For practical purp6ses we need consider but two documents, one of which restricts itself to the presentation of generic norms which proscribe certain type~ of lit-erature, while the other provides an enumeration of individual works and authors condemned specifically by name. This latter chtalogue is commonly referred to as the Index of Forbidden Books; the more generic legislation is derived from Book III of the Code of Canon Law. They are not mutually independent and unrelated documents, as we shall see. And while the Index is probably more fa~iliar to most people as a term of reference, it is the Code upon which we lean more heavily when decision must be made regarding our freedom to read certain literature. Occasionally, too, local bishops will exercise their rightful .author-ity in this regard and forbid their respective subjects to read ~pecified publications. But since legislation of that kind is invariably brought to the immediate attention of the faithful from the puligit and through the diocesan press, there is no need here to delay; on that species of prohibition. I. THE CODE OF CANON LAW: CANON 1399 Canon 1399 lists eleven different categories of writing:which, regardless of title or specific author, are automatically classified as forbidden reading for Catholics. It is in no sense of the Word an arbitrary catalogue. Divine natural law obliges us to avoid;'if p?s-sible, reading anything which may imperil our faith or mortal recti.- tude. The Church in her wisdom and from the wealth of her ex-perience has merely specified that fundamental obligation of natural law by indicating in this canon various classes of literature, which are most likely to pose such a threat to the average individual. Since her norm of judgment is the ~iverage Catholic, and because We must concede the existence of Catholics who are above average in knowl-edge. of their faith and in unswerving adherence to its priniiples, a word about the pectiliar nature of this law is necessary for° an ap-preciation of its obliging force~ Law Foundbd on Presumption The law enunciated in cani3n 1399 is of the type which is said 28 danuar~t; 1956 FORBIDDEN READING to be: ;"founded on presumption." In other words, the legislator of such .a statute first, with good reason, pre.sumes something to be uhiversally true, and then on the basis of that presumption formu-lates a~ law. Presumption of Fact What is presumed as true may be a fact of some sort, on the assumed universality of which legislation is thereupon enacted. If, however, the fact presumed can be disproVen as non-existent in a given:instance, the law based thereon collapses in a sense, i.e., does not oblige in that individual case. Such laws are said to be "founded on a l/resumption of fact"; and it is the intention of the legislator that his law shall not bind in isolated instances where by way of excepiion the presumed fact is not verified. Perhaps an example will further clarify this notion of presump-tion of fact. Civil law, for instance, holds a husband legally re-sponsible for the support of all children born to his wife during their marriage. The fact on which that legislation is founded is the presumption, valid in the .great majority of cases, that a husband is the~natural father of his wife's children. If, however, contrary fact can be proven in an individual case, the law yields to that fact and dbes not apply in that particular instance. Presumption of Universal Danger Another presumption upon which legislation is sometimes based is that. of universal danger, i.e., danger to the common welfare. In this case a certain act is reasonably presumed to be usuaIl~t dangerous to the.individual and as alu~a~s a threat to the common good if not contr'o]led by law in each individual case. Hence the presumption, .or basis for the law, is twofold and directly regards not only the welfare of individual subjects but also and primarily the good of the commhnity as a whole. For this latter reason such a law does not cease t}o oblige the individual even if it should be apparerlt that the act in question threatens no danger to him personally; for there remains the further presumption that to allow individuals to make that d_ecislon for themselves will inevitably pose a threat to the common good. Thus, for example, in time of severe drought some communities 'have" f6rbidden all outdoor fires unless in each case a permit be first obtalne~t from local civil authority. Such a prohibition is founded on the'presumption tbat'danger to the community cannot be effec-tively ~iverted.if private citizens are allowed to decide for themselves ,JOHN J. LYNCH Review for Religious what precautions are adequate against ,uncontrolled conflagration. Hence civil authority reserves that decision to itself; and despite the acttial efficacy of .the precautions he may take, the individual will be held liable if he lights a fire without the permission of proper officials. For the primary presumption still obtains, viz., that it is dangerous to the common good to permit individuals to make such decisions for themselves without supervision. Presumption of Canon 1399 It is on this latter presumption of universal danger that the Church bases her law prohibiting certain types of literature. She recognizes th'e fact that the general faith will be imperiled if in-dividuals are allowed to judge for themselves in these cases the presence or absence of personal danger. Consequently this law is intended to oblige even those who have every reason to believe that the reading of° certain forbidden matter will not in the least affect their personal faith or morals. In the interests of the common good, the .right to pass judgment on that question is legitimately reserved by the Church to herself. Hence this positive law of the Church is designedly more strict than is natural .law on the same point. Natural law demands only that one avoid reading what is dangerous to oneself; positive Church law requires that we refrain also from reading whatever ecclesiastical~ authority }~as judged to be a threat to the faith and morals of the average individual. Natural law obliges us to consult only our own consciences when choosing matter for reading: ecclesiastical" law en-joins the further obligation of consulting designated superiors be-fore we can consider ourselves free to read certain publications. Extent of Canon 1399 Before summarizing the content of canon 1399, a brief word about the extent of the prohibition which this law expresses: 1. With the ~xception of cardinals, bishops, and several other .high ecclesiastics, all Catholics--clergy and religious as well as the laity--are subject to the Church's law of forbidden reading. It .goes without saying, of course, that no exemption from this positive law can ever imply freedom from natural law. Regardless of dig-nity or rank, no individual can escape the obligation of avoiding as far as possible any reading which may de facto constitute for him personally a threat to faith or morals., It is only within that area where positive precept is more stringent than naturhl law that cer-tain Church dignitaries are declared immune from obligation, on ,]anuarg. 1956 FORBIDDEN READING the legitimate presumption th~at the same exceptional qualities which merit them their rank will likewise guarantee their immunity from the harmful effects of the literature condemned by ecclesiastical law. 2. We are forbidden not only to read certain literature, but also to publish it, retain it in our possession, translate it into other lan-guages, and to sell or in any other way make it available to others. 3.' Although the Code speaks primarily of books, it also ex-plicitly states that, unless the contrary is evident in a particular con-text, the law applies equally to all manner of publications, whether booklets, pamphlets, magazine or newspaper articles, if these are substantially concerned with forbidden matter. 4. The prohibitions of this canon, although binding gravely in conscience, are not absolute in the sense of removing certain pub-lications irrevocably beyond the reach of Catholic readers. As will be seen later,in more detail, permission ~o read such matter can and will be granted v~hen reasonable request is made of proper authority. With these preliminary notions in mind, a glar)ce at the stipu-lations of canon 1399 will provide at least .a bird's-eye view of the literary area proscribed by ecclesiastical law. To cope with all the legal ramifications of this complex statute would require that genius and skill peculiar to professional canonists, and for that reason the following survey is purposely restricted to the larger aspects of the law. _As a possibl~ aid to memory,, the exact order of the canon itself has been abandoned in an effort to gather its finer and more elusive details within several broader categories. The four divisions actually employed here are still not completely distinct from one another; but they may serve to fix more firmly in the reader's memory the various types of literature which the Church considers most likely to exert a malign influence on the faithful. A. SCRIPTURAl. WORKS Since the Bible is the word Of God Himself and one of the au-thentic sources whence we derive the revealed truths of our Catholic faith, the Church has always exercised extreme vigilance over the exact letter and substance of Holy Scripture. As the constituted guardian of divine revelation, she insists therefore upon her exclusive right to pass judgment on any publication which attempts to repro-duce or to interpret the Bible either in whole or in part. Scientific scholarship, if exercised competently, objectively, and without bias, will never contradict the scriptural teaching of the Church. But there always remains the possibility 'that unscientific methods, re- 31 JOHN J. LYNCH Re~ieu~ /:or Religious ligious prejudice, or misdirected piety will adulterate the conclu-sions of biblical scholars; and for that reason the Church has re-stricted our right to read two classes of scriptural writings: 1. All editions of Hol~l Scripture which are compiled or pub-fished bq non-Catholics, whether these editions be presented in the language in which they were originally written or in ancient or modern translation--in other words, any non-Catholic edition of the Bible or parts of the Bible. The example which comes immediately to mind is the King James version so commonly used by English-speaking non-Catholics. But those who have engaged in biblical studies may also recognize such standard works as Rudolph Kittel's Biblia Hebraica, Psalterium duxta Hebraeos Hieronqmi by J. M. Harder, Nestle's Novum Testa-mentum, and Chicago Bible, an English translation of old and new testament compiled by a group of scholars under the auspices of the University of Chicago. All of these, as well as numerous others, are automatically ban'ned for most Catholics. By way of excep-tion, however, the Code allows anyone who is engaged in the study of either theology or scripture to make use of such works, provided that they are known to be faithful and integral reproductions of the original and to contain nothing by way of annotation or com-mentary which impugns Catholic dogma. Under the same. proviso, this privilege also applies to vernacular translations by Catholics when the reason for their prohibition (as explained immediately below) is failure to obtain proper ecclesiastical approbation. 2. Scriptural publications of Catholic authors who have failed to observe ecclesiastical law regarding prior censorship. (One infallible sign of proper compliance with this requirement is the "Imprimatur" usually found at the beginning of religious books published by Catholics.) Hence (a) Catholic editions of the Bible text, either in the original language or in translation, 0s well as (b) annotations'and commentaries on Sacred Scripture, are prohibited reading if they are published even by Catholics without proper ecclesiastical examination and approval. B. WRITINGS DESTRUCTIVE OF FAITH Faith can be understood here in a rather broad sense so as to include firm intellectual a~sent not only to those dogmas solemnly defined or traditionally taught by the Church as having been re-. vealed by God, but also to what may be termed the rational pre-rqquisites of faith in that strict, sense and the corollaries which 32 danuarg, 1956 FORBIDDEN READING logically follow from revealed truth. In order to protect effectively the hard core of revelation, the Church must also guard that peri-phery of truths and principles which, although not divinely revealed or solemnly defined, are inextricably linked to the deposit of faith. It is with this realization that canon 1399 goes into some detail-- repetitiously perhaps in spots--as to the various species of writing forbidden as pernicious to Catholic faith. 1. Writings which attack or ridicule Catholic dogma, or which impugn religion in general, or attempt in ang wag to destro~t the fun~aments of religion; publicatiohs which defend heresy, schism. or other errors condemned by the Holy See. This synthesis of several sections of canon 1399 comprises two generic methods of discrediting the Catholic faith: the direct attack whereby the positive teaching of the Church is allegedly refuted and claimed to-be false: and the more indirect approach whereby, even perhaps without explicit reference to Catholicism, certain false doctrines are defended as ostensibl~ true. The threat in. either case is reductively the same: either to wean the reader away from the true faith through disparagement or specious argu-ments or to attract him intellectually or emotionally to beliefs which a're opposed to Catholicism. When the Code speaks of attacking theological truth or of de-fending doctrinal error, it implies a deliberate, methodical, concen-trated attempt to prove or disprove by means of formal argumen-tation. Isolated and gratuitous assertions, incidental to some other predominant and harmless theme, would not suffice to verify this notion. So too of ridicule, calumny, skepticism, and the like. If such aspersions be persistent and an integral part of an author's manifest thesis they can go a long way towards creating doubt about re-ligious truth and can be sufficient to classify a work as condemned, under this heading. Heresy in theological terminology is th~ pertinacious denial or doubt of any truth which has been infallibly declared by the Church to be part of divine revelation. It is the rejection therefore of dogma, which signifies any doctrine so taught by the Church. By schism is meant the refusal of one already baptized to submit to the 're-ligious authority of the pope or to live in communion with the members of the Church who do acknowledge his authority. Over and above these more blatant defiances of ecclesiastical teaching authority, there-are other doctrines which may not di, rec~ly contradict the above-mentioned truths but which are at 33 JOHN J. LYNCH Reuieto /:or- Rel~'gious variance with certain other theological pri~nciples or conclusions which the Church defends as certainly true even though not con-tained perhaps in the direct revelation of Christ. Denial of these truths is condemned by the Church not as heretical but as false or erroneous. The :undaments o: religion are natural or supernatural order, on ness of our faith. Among these last and immortality of the human soul, bility and fact of divine revelation, all those truths, whether of the which depends the reasonable-' would be classified the existence freedom of the will, the possi-the possibility of miracles, 'etc. Many of these "fundaments" have also been explicitly taught by the Church, and hence would qualify also under one or another of the preceding paragraphs. With regard to the writings of the ver~f early heretics, theologians generally admit that they are not at the present time forbidden ab-solutely, at least to those who are well versed in the faith. The reason they alleg~e i~ that the errors defended in these ancient works have long since been universally recognized as false and no longer pose a common threat of perversion. Hence such collections as those of Labbe or Migne may be kept intact and their contents read~ even though they do include some of the heretical writings of ¯ Tertullian, Eusebius, Origen, and others. The same exception, however, cannot be made for the works of Luther, Calvi;a, Jansenius, and their like, whose errors are still extant and still dangerous. There is no need, however, to return to the Reformation era to find examples of literature which explicitly attacks theologidal truth or defends theological error. Unfortunately such writing is all too plentiful even in our own day. Christ and Catholicism, for instance, by Frederick A. Johnson .(New York: .Vintage Press,. 1954) openly attacks Catholicism both by specious argument and by ridicule, defends heresy, and propounds lesser theological errors. Its subtitle, "A Provocative and Trenchant Analysis of the Real Re-lationship Between Christianity and the Roman Catholic Church," is an accurate portents°of "its theme insofar as the real relationship alleged is one of substantial incompatibility rather than that of identity. Teachings explicitly attacked in one way'or another in-clude the apostolic origin and succession of popes, the indefecti-bility of Church doctrine, devotion to our Lady, the divine insti-tution of the Mass and the dogma of transubstantiation, the effi-cacy of indulgences and sacramentals, and th~ divine origin of all the sacraments except baptism and the Eucharist. (It is significant, 34' FORBIDDEN READING incidentally,, to note on the dust jacket that rMr. Johnson's education ?and background are technblogical, his occupation that of engineeri'ng, his "interest" philosophy, and his hobbies travel, music, and photo-l~ raphy.) Less crude in its presentation, and motivated perhaps by the best of misdirected intentions, is Giovanni Papini's The Devil (New York: E. P. Dutton ~ Co., 1954), originally published in Italian as II Diabolo. The heretical thesis which the author strives to estab-lish is that God's love and mercy are incompatible with an eternal hell and that we may therefore hope that eventually even Satan may achieve salvation and hell cease to exist. 2. Writings which disparage divine worship, which seek to undermine ecclesiastical discipline, or which deliber'ately and per-slstently hold up to opprobrium the ecclesiastical hie?arch~l or the, clerical or religious state. Although literature of this kind is not aimed so directly against the content of Catholic doctrine, it is not difficult to appreciate the pernicious effect it could have on the practical, faith of individuals. Divine worship in this context is not restricted to the Catholic liturgy, but includes any act by which man~ honors God in Him-self or in His saints. As in the previous category, it is not a ques-tion here of occasional disparaging remarks which may be made in passing by an author, but rather of the calculated development at some notable length of an opprobrious theme. Nor is it sufficien.t that individual clerics, religious, or members of the hierarchy be the, target of such abuse. In order to classify as prohibited reading, attack of this kind must ordinarily be leveled against those states of llfe as ecclesiastical institutions. Christ and Catholicism, mentioned just previously in another context, also amply exemplifies almost every" detail of this category of writing. The chapters on the Mass, the priesthood, the sacra-ments-- to cite only the more blatant--are intent upon establishing our liturgy as farcical pantomime and our priesthood .and hierarchy as sacrilegious usurpations of divine power and authority. 3. Those writings of non-Catholics which treat formally" of religion, unless, it be clear that they contain nothing contrary to Catholic faith. There is every good reason to ,hold suspect the religious writings of. non-Catholics,'wl~ose very segregation from the Church is ~itse.lf religious error and creates strong presumption against, the "cukacy' of ahy religious doctrine they would hold' 6r fea~h. Heh~e 3'5 JOHN J. LYNCH Reoieto t:or Religious the Church forbids us to read such literature until we have ascer-tained through some reliable source that it contains no substantial theological error. Religion must here be understood in" its widest sense as includ-ing whatever pertains to the relation of man to God. Every branch of theology, therefore, is included--dogma,, morals,~ ascetics, scrip-ture, litu'rgy, Church history, canon law, etc. Even many philosophi-cal works would fall into this category insofar as they deal either with God as an absolute entity or with rational creatures in their relationship to God, or treat of those truths and principles which constitute the rational foundations of religion. By "formal" treatment (the Code uses the term ex professo) is meant something substantially more than religious obiter dicta. Either the entire work, or a notable section of it, must .designedly express religious beliefs substantiated by logical evidence, real or alleged. The author must, in other words, be intent upon discussing a religious topic at sufficient length to establish the particular pro-position or thesis which he has in mind. Confronted with such a publication, a Catholic is forbidden to read it unless he is certain that it contains nothing of any import-ance contrary to Catholic faith. That assurance should ordinarily be sought from someone who is competent to judge such matters and who is familiar with the content of the work in question. If it should, for instance, be recommended in established Catholic papers or periodicals, one may safely assume that the permissive clause of the canon has been verified. To cite but one possible example of this type of literature, C. S. Lewis, an Anglican, has written both The Screwtape ,Letters and Beyond Personality. Both unquestionably deal formally with matters religious, and hence qualify immediately as suspect under this pro-vision of the law. (3ust a little reflection will suffice to make one realize how comprehensive this phase of the law is.) Since Catholic scholars seem to have found nothing substantially erroneous in the former, it may legitimately be read. But several theologians have pointed 6ut dangerous theological errors in Beyond Personalit~ , and hence this book may not be read ,without permission from proper authority. C. WRITINGS CONTRARY TO MORALS It should be noted at the very beginning that immorality is a term. which is not properly restricted to violations of the Sixth 36 Januar~l, 1956 FORBIDDEN READING Commandment. Impurity is but one species of immorality, a word which is intended to include also whatever else is contrary to the law of God. Therefore, when canon 1399 proscribes writings which of set purpose attack good morals, it is stating a universal prohibition against publications which would tend to weaken us in any virtue or to attract us to any vice. Later on in the same canon explicit mention is made of several species of immoral themes. But since that comparatively brief catalogue does not pretend to be ex-haustive, it is the universal principle which constitutes the ultimate norm in every case. As was true in matters of faith, so too on this question of moral-ity the prohibition is intended to affect publications which make a calculated and determined effort to discredit virtue or to justify or commend what is objectively evil. Whethe~ directly by means of formal argumentation, or indirectly by recourse to derisive tactics, this impugning of virtue or commendation of vice which is pro-scribed must be something substantially more than passing reference. To be included under this automatic prohibition, it must Constitute at least a notable part of the author's intention and literary~'effort. One such book which would seem certainly to fulfill those requirements would be Joseph F. Fletcher's Morals and Medicine (Princeton University Press, 1954), devoted almost entirely to a defense of contraception, artificial insemination, sterilization, and° euthanasia, and to an attempted refutation of Church teaching in that regard. Much of the literature of the Planned Parenthood As-sociation would likewise fall under this ban, since its avowed pur-pose is to counsel birth control as a means of limiting the size of families. Judging merely from pre-publication announcements, ad-vertisements, and reviews, The Stor~/ of Margaret Sanger by Law-rence Lader (New York: Doubleday, 1955) is likely to qualify as forbidden reading under this beading since apparently it is laudatory of the morality which she advocates. Among the immoralities which are more commonly defended or recommended in writing, and which the Code therefore sees fit to mention specifically by name, are (a) (~arious forms of super-stition such as fortunetelling, divination, black magic, spiritism, and the like; (b) dueling, suicide, and divorce; (c) Freemasonry and similar societies, if they are represented as beneficial organizations harmless to Church and state; and finally (d) obscenity, which may be defined as the deliberate presentation of sexually-exciting matter in a manner calculated to be attractive and to stimulate the sexual 37 JOHN,~J., LYNCH Review for, Religiou, s passions. It should be noted that. in every one of the ab6ve cases, and especially in the last, it is not the subject matter which merits condemnation, but the manner in which the subject is treated. '!t is the impugning of virtue and the approval of vice which consti-tute, the threat to individual, good morals. D. PUBLICATIONS LACKING ECCLESIASTICAL .APPROVAL a) Absolutd Prohibitions Canon i385 6f the Code enumerates various classes of litera-ture which Catholic authors-~even laymen--are obliged to submit for diocesan cen.s.orship and approval prior to publication. The list is quite comprehensive, but may be summed up briefly in the con-cluding words of the canon itself as including "all writings which contain anything having a notable bearing on religion or morals." Should it happen that an author fail to comply with this law and publish without approbation a type of work specified therein, it does not.necessarily follow in every case that the publication is forbidden reading for .Catholics. But there are some such works whose very lack of approval does alone suffice to forbid their being read. One such category has already been mentioned, above under "Script~ural Works" (A, 2). The remain~der comprise books and PamPhlets u;bich relate neu; apparitions, revelations, visions, prophe-cies, or miracles, or u~hich introduce novel devotions. The Church by no means denies the possibility of the miraculous even in our own day, nor is her attitude towards them one of skep-ticism~ But she knows from experience the wisdom of extreme cau-tion in these matters because of the dangers to genuine faith involved. in the excess which is credulity. Many, too,.are easily led astray by the novel and the bizarre in the matter o.f devotions. Hence the Church rightfully reserves to herself the prerogative of examining for theological flaw any innovations in this regard and is unwilling that the faithful be exposed to ~heir influence until her own scrutiny has proven them sound. The lack of an Imprimatur on books and pamphlets of this kind is an indication that they are forbidden reading. Regardless of their actual conformity or disconformity with historical and theological fact, they inay not be read unless officially approved. b) Conditioned Prohibitions This final category includes three' classes of publications which likewise ,call for ecclesiastical approval, but which, if published in 38 danuaG/, 1956 FORBIDDEN READING neglect of that requirement, are proscribed only in the e, vent that their content is at variance with Church teaching on the subject. Strictly speaking, much of this type of forbidden literature is al-r~ eady included implicitly under the prohibition of works which are dangerous to faith. But because the Code sees fit to specify, s6 too shall we. 1) . Editions of approved liturgical books in which ang alter-ations have been made. in such a wag that theft no longer agree with the authentic editions approved b~t the Hol~l See. Our liturgical books include the Roman Missal and. Breviary, with both of which the Roman Martyrology and the Roman Calendar or Ordo are closely relatedi the Roman Ritual and the Memoriale Rituum which contain the prayers and ceremonies used in the administration of the Sacra-ments and in other liturgical functions; the Roman Pontifical and the Ceremonial of Bishops, both concerned with episcopal functions only; and the Roman Ceremonial which contains exclusively pap_~l ceremonies. All new editions,of these books must conform exactly tO the authentic texts published by the Holy See, else they are pro~ hibited. 2) Works which spread a knowledge of indulgences which are spurious or which have been condemned or revoked bg the Holg See. An indulgence is termed spurious if it was never validly granted; condemned, if because of abuses it was proscribed by the Holy See; revoked, if withdrawn or abrogated for some reason after having been once granted. The best way to ascertain the authenticity of indulgences is by reference to the Encbiridion Indulgentiarum: Preces et Pia Opera, which is the official collection of .indulgenced prayers and good works. 3) Pictures, printed in ang manner whaisoever, of our Lord," the Blessed Mother~ the angels, the saints and other servants of God, . if tbeq depart From the s#irit and decrees of the Church. The reason for this precaution was expressed long ago by the Council of Trent when that synod pointed out that many of the faithful acquire and retain knowledge of the faith largely through artistic' representa-tions of its mysteries. Therefore the Council warned explicitly against all images which would be suggestive of false doctrine and occasion theological" error. Thus, for example, we are expres,sly forbidden by the Holy Office to represent our Lady in priestly vest-ments, or the Holy Spirit in human form, either with the Father and Son or separately. This preseht legislation concerns only pictures Which are ira- 39 JOHN J. LYNCH Review for Religious pressed upon paper or other material suitable for publication and does not explicitly refer to medals, statues, paintings, and the like. "Since the Code~ in this section is-cohcerned with;printed publicatio.ns, it.does not legislate here with regard to other sacred images. But by its omission it does not mean to deny that those other representa-tions of religious mysteries can also be at variance with the spirit and letter of Catholic doctrine. A previous canon (1279) covers that more generic question quite thoroughly. Perhaps this outline of Code legislation could best be concluded with a practical suggestion. A good rule to follow when in doubt about a publication of manifestly religious nature is to look for an Imprimatur or some other indication of episcopal approbation. If it is'lacking, and, if one is without permission to read forbidden matter, a prudent conscience will advise inquiry before proceeding further. II. THE INDI~X OF FORBIDDI~N BOOKS It may now be apparent how all-inclusive is canon 1399 in its specification of dangerous reading, and why therefore the Index of Forbidden Books is really of secondary importance as a guiding norm. The Index in substance is merely an alphabetical catalogue-- according to authors where possible, otherwise according to titles-- of those works which Rome has seen fit to proscribe by name. As a rule titles explicitly contained in the Indix are already implicitly condemned by virtue of Code legislation; but only a small fraction of those works to which canon 1399 would apply will be accorded express mention in the Index. It would be manifestly impossible .for the Holy See to know of the existence, to say not.hing of the detailed content, of every potentially dangerous work which is published--and equally impossible to catalogue them in manage-able form even if they could be known. Hence, the Index is reserved for those works which are of special importance, either because of their subject matter or because of circumstances of time, current trends, or ingenious approximation of error to truth. But the very great majority of writings which are correctly classified as forbidden owe their condemnation to the generic provisions of canon law alone. Placing a book on the Index is now usually a matter of underlining an already established fact. Since 1897, when under Leo XIII our modern version was first cdmpiled, the Index has gone through a number of editions, the latest in 1948. Interim condemnations are published periodically in 40 January/, 1956 FORBIDDEN READING Acta Apbstolicae Sedis, and these addenda are eventually incorpor-ated into the next subsequent Index whe.never a new edition seems feasible. Occasionally certain titles are deleted when, for example, a book for one reason or another is judged no longer to represent a serious 'universal danger. It would appear to be the present policy of the Church to restrict to a minimum the number of books explicitly condemned and to depend more and more on the general principles of canon law to guide the faithful in their recognition of forbidden matter. The 1948 Index contains 4126 entries, of which only 255 represent publications of this twentieth century. For the benefit of those who may have occasion t~ consult the Index itself, a brief explanation of some of its terminology and sym-bols may be helpful. Solemn Condemnations. Usually it is the Congregation of the Holy Office which now issues the condemnation of specific publica-tions. In exceptional cases, however, the pope himself may choose to exercise his supreme authority and proscribe a work in even more solemn manner. These papal pronouncements are rare (only 144 books in the current Index are so condemned) and are reserved for writings which are considered to be especially pernicious. In the Index books proscribed by solemn papal decree are designated by the cross or dagger (~'). The practical significance of that symbol is to remind us of the severe penalty of excommunication imposed by the Church on those who would knowingly read or retain such literature without permission. Conditioned Condemnations. The asterisk (*) which precedes other titles in the Index indicates that the work is condemned in its present form until it be corrected ("donec corrigatur"). The im-plication, therefore, is that its errors are not beyond correction and that a revised edition, if submitted to proper ecclesiastical authority, may yet merit approval. The work in its original condemned form, however, remains forbidden reading. "Opera Omnia." Since 1940 the preface of the Index contains this authentic explanation of the phrase opera omnia whereby the complete works ~)f some authors are now prohibited: "According to practice' now in force, when the complete works of a certain writer are condemned by the term topera omnia," each and every work of that author is to be understood as proscribed without exception." If an author has shown himself to be invariably at odds with faith or morals, this sweeping condemnation of all his works is employed is the surest means of protecting the unwary. 41 JOHN J. LYNC~ Review [or Religious "'Omnes Fabulae Amatoriae." This phrase is appended to the names of eleven, of the novelists listed in the Index (Stendhal, George .Sand, 'Balzac, Eugene Sue, Alexandre Dumas, St. and Jr:, Champ-fleury, Faydeau, Henry Murger, Frederic Souli~, and Gabriele O'An-nunzio). In literal English translation the expression dmerges as "all love stories," a concept which is perhaps more accurately ex-pressed by the circumlocution, "all novels which emphasize impure love.'.' In the absence of any authentic interpretation, commentators generally have attached that meaning to the term as employed in the Index. For practical purposes, the expression is intended to ban literally all the novels of the author named but allows for.the pos-sible exception of one or several which may be shown certainly not to offend against canon 1399 and which ha'~e not been forbidden by particular decree. It is, therefore, a somewhat less rigorous con-demnation tba~a is the term .opera omnia which prohibits all an author's works without qualification. Needless to say, however, it ,creates a very strong presumption against any novel which that author may have written and commands extreme caution on the part of any would-be reader. Actually the great majority of titles contained in the Index would be of very little interest to the average modern reader nor does their proscription in any notable way restrict the literary preferences of most. Usually it is only the professional scholars in a specialized field who would have either need or desire to consult them. Another popular misconception of the Church's prohibition of books is that it concerns itself chiefly, if not exclusively, with the risqu~ and the salacious. That impression, too, bespeaks almost total unfamiliarity with both Code .legislation and the Index. As a preferred list of potential best sellers, our ecclesiastical blacklist would be a colossal hoax. III. PERMISSION q~O READ CONDEMNED LITERATURE As has already been mentioned, ecclesiastical legislation against the reading of certain literature is not so absolute as to deny Catho-lics without exception all access to publications condemned by posi-tive law. The Church's prohibition in this regard is basically a pre-cautionary measure intended to restrict such reading to thdse only who in bet judgment can safely survive exposure without con-tamination. Hence she reserves to" herself, in the person' of qualified delegates, the exclusive right to judge each individual case. But she expressly provides for those circumstafices in which neces~sity or genuine utility requires the reading of condemned matter by those 42 ,lanuary, 1956 o FORBIDDEN READING whose ~olidity of faith and morals she recognizes as promising them immunity from harm.' Ordinary Permission ' .Except in the case of exempt clerical institutes, whose members may refer this matter to thei'r major superior, it is one's local ordinary alone who may grant religious, either directly or through a delegate, permission to read literature which" is otherwise forbidden. (It need scarcely be said that the Holy See could likewise grant the same per-mission.) But unless he has acquired special powers beyond tboze which the Code concedes him directly, the ordinary may give that permission only to specified individuals and for specified titles. He would not, for example, allow "all the Sister graduate students to read whatever is prescribed for their course in the history of litera-ture." Those who request permissions under this law will ordinarily find that chancery requires the names of those who want the per-mission, the titles of those works which they wish to read, and the reason which makes that reading necessary. It is usually advisable to channel requests of this nature through someone whose position and personal knowledge make it possible to testify to the reasonable-ness of the petition--a parish priest, chaplain, one's superior, or the dean or head of a department if one is enrblled in a Catholic coll'ege or university. The practice of individual chanceries may vary in this regard and Ioc~aI custom should be as&trained and observed. (A specimen petition may be found on p. 70 of What Is the Index? included ~among the suggested, readings at the end of this article.) Permission to read forbidden matter is granted with the express 'understanding that adequate precautions will be taken to prevent the literature in question from falling into the hands of others un-authorized to read it. And no permission, however broad, can ever release us from the obligation under natural law to protect our-selves from danger. None of us is confirmed in grace simply by complying with the requisites of positive law. It may happen that one's own theological background is not always sufficient to solve every difficulty alleged against our faith and to dispel all doubts which may be lodged against our religious convictions. One's first and urgent obligation in that case is to seek explanation and en-lightenment from some other who is qualified to expo.se the error behind the doubt. And it may sometimes happen that decision to abandon that type of reading will prove a prudent additional course of actioni I 43 JOHN J. LYNCH Reuieto for Reli~t'ous Extraordinary Permission There are some exceptional situations which cannot be pro-vided for adequately or ~xpeditiously with the restricted power granted by the Code to ordinaries in favor of their respective sub-jects. Professional scholars engaged in prolonged research, librarians responsible for the disposition of numerous books, editors and staff members of religious papers and periodicals, college and university professors.-~tbese and others in similar walks of life must often, in order to do their work effectively, have somewhat greater latitude in the matter of probibityd reading. To cope with circumstances such as these, bishops in this country by virtue of their quinquennial faculties, and at least some major religious superiors by virtue of special privilege, may at their prudent discretion allow certain indi-viduals greater liberty. Perhaps the briefest possible way of ex-plaining the limits of this power is to quote from the formula used by the Holy Office itself: "The faculty of granting for not more than three years permission to read or keep, with precautions, how-ever, lest they fall into the hands of other persons, forbidden books and papers, excepting works which professedly advocate heresy or schism, or which attempt to undermine the very foundations of religion, or which are professedly obscene; the permission to be granted to their own subjects individually, and only with dis:rim-ination and for-just and reasonable cause; that is, to such persons only as really need to read the said books and papers, either in order to refute them, or in the exercise of their own lawful func-tions, or in the pursuit, of a lawful course of studies." An official note appended to the above faculty further advises that it "is granted to Bishops to be exercised by them personally; hence not ¯ to be delegated to anyone; and moreover with a grave responsibility in conscience upon the Bishops as regards the real concurrence of all the above-named conditions." It should be clear without further comment that this type of general permission cannot be granted at random or automatically upon request. Admittedly there are times when ecclesiastical restrictions on reading impose a considerable inconvenience, perhaps even handicap, upon Catholic scholars. Unfortunately, that sometimes is an un-avoidable incidental by-product of Church legislation in this regard. But we simply must, recognize and respect the fact that the direct intent of these laws, formulated in obedience to Christ's own man-date to His Church, is the protection of the faithful as a whole ;.n the essentials of faith and morals. If the individual good of acom- ,lanuarg, 1956 " FORBIDDEN. READING parative few must occasionally suffer, it does so out of deference tO the greater good. -~ IV. SUGGESTED READINGS 1. Joseph M. Pernicone, The Ecclesiastical Prohibition Books, Washington, D. C.:, Catholic University of America Press, 1932. Written as a doctorate thesis when the author, presently auxiliary bishop of New York, was in. graduate studies in cation law at Catholic University, this book provides an exhaustive and most competent analysis of those canons of the Code which pertain to forbidden literature. Technical rather than popular in presen-tation, it would nevertheless serve most effectively as an occasional reference book for those who may want more minute explanation of the finer points of the law. \ 2. T.L. Bouscaren, S.J., and A. C. Ellis, S.J., Canon Law: A Text and Commentary, Milwaukee: Bruce, 1951 (ed.2), pp. 778-91. Father Bouscaren is aconsultor to the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith; Father Ellis is a consultor to the Congregation of Religious. Both were professors of canon law at the Gregorian University, Rome. Although their excellent com-mentary is intended primarily for students of ecclesiastical juris-prudence, )eligious in general would find in the pages devoted to forbidden literature much that would help to a fuller understanding of the intricacies of this law. 3. Redmond A. Burke, C.S.V., What Is the Index?, Mil-waukee: Bruce, 1952. Whereas most literature on the subject is directed to theologians or theological students, this presentation, as interesting as it is informative, is addressed "to intelligent laity, whether Catholic or non-Catholic." The author is at present di-rector of libraries at De Paul University in Chicago. Eminently readable, the book provides in addition to the standard treatment of the subject several convenient and instructive appendixes. Samples: better known authors of forbidden works grouped according to subject matter; a complete list of the books written by the eleven novelists condemned with the term omnes fabulae amatoriae; for-bidden titles from the English literature; applications of tfiis law to the readings recommended by the Great Books Program. Father Burke's book would be a highly useful addition to the library of any religious house. .4. Edwin F. Healy, S.J., Moral Guidance, Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1942; ch. XIII, pp. 276-85. Previously profes.- FOR YOUR INFORMATION Review [or Religious sot of moral theology at West Baden College, Father Healy now lectures on the same subject at the Gregorian University in Rome. His college texts in moral theology, of which this is but one, are familiar to many who.have taken or taught such a course in recent years. The chapter devoted to forbidden books is presented, of course, in textbook style and provides a conveni'ent outline of the law's main content together with the most practical of its applica-tions. The corresponding section in the companion volume, Teacher's Manual For Moral Guidance, gives further insight into the purpose of this legislation and provides telling answers to several objections commonly leveled against the ecclesiastical prohibition of books. 5. Malachi J. Donnelly, S.J., "Church Law and Non-Cath-olic Books" in American Ecclesiastical Review, 114 (1"946), pp. 403-9. Although this article is restricted to but one category of forbidden literature, viz., the religious writings of non-Catholics, its practical value is perhaps thereby enhanced. Religion has become a most popular topic even among non-Catholic authors, and there are numerous books of this kind on the market which win almost universal applause for their sincere and perhaps novel approach to spiritual problems. It may be an fiye-opening experience for some to see how Father Donnelly applies canon 1399 to one such book, Be~/ond Personality/ by C. S. Lewis, and demonstrates the caution we must exercise at times when selecting even our spiritual reading. For Your Int:ormation Concernincj Summer Sessions We are happy to be of service to ~eligious by publishing in our March :and May numbers announcements of summer-session courses that are of special interest or value to religious. We are willing to do this for any summer-session directors who] send us the proper information. But it seems to be asking too much "merely to send us a summer-session bulletin and to leave to us the work of select-ing the courses to be announced. Deans who ~vish us to publish an announcement should compose it themsel'ves. The announcement should contain only brief references to the spedat courses for re-ligious, and all the information should be in one paragraph. The material should be. typed double- or (preferably) triple-spaced. 46 January, 1956 FOR YOUR INFORMATION Moreover, it would be helpful if.~opitalization, punctuation, and other mechanics were in conformity with the rules given in our "Notes for Contributors," as published in REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, XIV (March, ,July),- 104 ff., 194 ff. Our Addresses It will help ve.ry much if those who write to us will note the following addresses : 1. Business correspondence should be sefit to: The Coliege Press, 606 Harrison, Topeka, Kansas. 2. Books for review should be sent to: The Book Review Editor, REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, West Baden College, West Baden Springs, Indiana. 3. Questions on canon law and liturgy should be addressed to: The Reverend Joseph F. Gallen, S.J., Woodstock College, Wood-stock, Maryland. 4. Other questions and editorial correspondence should be ad-dressed to: The Editors, REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, St. Mary's Col-lege, St. Marys, Kansas. New Holy Week Rubrics Of interest to many of our readers is the appearance in the "win-ter issue of Theology Digest (Vol. IV, No. 1) of a concise summary of the new Holy Week order to be observed in the celebration of the sacred ceremonies and the recitation of the Divine Office. Ad-dress: Theology Digest, 1015 Central, Kansas City 5, Missouri. $2.00 per year; foreign, $2.25. Breviary Changes A decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, dated March 23, 1955, made some radical changes in the rubrics for celebrating Mass and reciting the Divine Office. A pamphlet entitled Otffcial Changes in the Breviary, by T. Lincoln Bouscaren, S.J., gives the back-ground of the decree, an English translation of the parts that concern the recitation of the'Breviary, and a brief commentary on these parts. The material concernirig the new rubrics for Holy Week, which was contained in the decree of November 15, 1955, i;, not included in the pamphlet. The price of the pamphlet is ten cents. It is pub-lished by The Queen's Work, 3115 South Grand Boulevard, St. Louis 18, Missouri. (Material for this department should be sent to Book Review Editor, REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, West Baden College, West Baden Springs, Indiana.) THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL. Vol I and Vol. II, By Giuseppe Ri¢c~otti. "Translated by Clement della Penta, O.P., and Richard A. Murphy, O.P. Pp. 430 and 476. The Bruce Publishing Co., Milwaukee I. 1955. ~ $15.00 the set. For those Who have enjoyed Ricciotti's Life of Christ in Eng-lish, a similar treat awaits them in the new translation of his two-volume History of Israel. Detailing the dramatic story of God's chosen people from the call of Abraham to the final catastrophe at Jerusalem in 130 A.D., the author gives rich background and a vivid i~resentation of the trials and triumphs of Israel. The Do-. minican translator~ have captured Ricciotti's pleasant style, pre'- senting an engaging history which has already seen four Italian editions and four European translations. In his preface Father Murphy points out that the book "fills a lamentable gap in the field of Catholic,scriptural literature in Eng-lish." One plies library shelves in vain to find so adequate a Cath-olic treatment of Israelite history within a single work. With Ricciotti's training in oriental languages, his years lived in the Holy ¯ Land, and his wide acquaintance with non-Catholic literature, his history is more than "just another book." It does not seek merely to' answer non-Catholic objections, but to present a positive, clear exposition of the Catholic approach to complex Biblical questions. Ricciotti's appreciation of recent discoveries of historians and arche-ologists is evident in a lengthy chapter concern_ing late excavations and surveys, evidence from which he faithfully evaluates and as-similates into his work. The translators supplement this section of his book with findings of the past two years at Qumram and Murabba'at, and they have changed some dates to conform better with the new evidence. Ricciotti's explicit intent is to write history. He avoids long discussions of critical theories. Cautious, especially in the face of recent discoveries in Palestine, he presents his readers with facts and leaves to them the formation of personal' judgments. His one thrust at modern criticism is~to point out that "any critical history must take into account the basic outlines of history as they are sketched in the Bible." The Bible is a historical source par excellence. At-tempts to discredit it on arguments drawn from philology an;:l liter- 48 BOOK REVIEWS' ary criticism are based on false philosophic presfippositions.The fundamental supposition of "impossibility" of Israelite tradition' 'by Wellhausen and others is being shaken and weakened by the spade of the archaeologist. Recent discoveries tend to confirm the tradi- 'tional position, both as to events and their chronology. Where the Bible and other sources are mute, as, for instance~ during the period of Greek domination and after the Romafi seizure of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., Ricciotti reconstructs Jewish h~istory and attempts to fill in, the silent pages of Israel's tragic story. In his role of historian he maintains a steady progression. Any pause, such as to explain prophetism or the importance of an archaeological discovery, is only to enrich the reader's background for a deeper ap-preciation of the history at hand. Because references in the original are principally to German and French sources, the editor thought it "unnecessary to burden Eng-lish- speaking readers with a bibliography" in the English edition. Some may regret this lack, even though the footnotes in the text are more than sufficient, to indicate the author's wealth of source material. The scholar will find this History a helpful reference. It presents a readable and engrossing story for those wishing to learn more of Israelite history and serves as excellent background for an intelligent reading of the Bible.--ROBERT C. DRESSMAN, S.J. THE LIFE OF ST. DOMINIC SAVI'O. By Sf. John Bosco. Transla'red by: Paul Aronica, S.D~B. Pp. 112. Salesiana Publishers, Pafferson New Jersey. 1955. $2.75. In 1857, Dominic Savio, after spending two and a half years under the guidance of St. John Bosco at the Oratory of St. Francis of Sales in Turin, died at the age of fifteen. Two years later, Don Bosco wrote an account of the life of this youth whose sanctity he held in high esteem. Short and unpretentious, this biography was published largely with a view to the spiritual profit of youthful readers. Translated from the fifth Italian edition, The Life of St. Dom-inic Savio has been prepared for American boys,, their parents and teachers. Hence the translator has added to the original text some background on the ,biography itself, a biographical sketch df St. John Bosco, and two appendices. After the author's preface and after seventeen of the twenty-six chapters, all of them 'brief, the translato~ has inserted notes gathered' from the latest .Italian edition of ii}he, work. 49 BOOK REVIi~WS Review [or Religious In the opening chapters, Don Bosco sketches Dominic's life prior to his arrival at the Oratory late in" 1854. Abandoning chron-ological order, he then proceeds to treat of Dominic's stay at the Oratory in topical fashion. Thus he sets forth the boy's deter-mination to avoid sin, his constant efforts' to strive for sanctity, his spiritual practices, his attitude toward studies, his friendships and relations with his associates, his special graces. The final chapters resume chronological sequence in telling of Dominic's final sick-ness and death. In many ways this is an admirable little book. In its small compass we are given the picture of a young saint sharply and sym-pathetically drawn by another saint, a much older and more experi-enced man. The boy's high ideals, his cheerfulness, and general likeableness, so much in evidence throughout, constitute a most appealing element. The attractive biographical sketch of Don Bosco himself sets the stage, as it were, for Dominic's days at the Oratory and puts the reader in a better position to grasp the relation of Don Bosco to his subject matter. One, however, may be inclined to question the complete suitability of the book for today's American boy. For at times, the viewpoint of the author, both because of time and mentality, discernibly differs from that calculated to be easily and properly understood by the modern American.boy. The notes occasionally rectify this matter. On the other hand, the notes them-selves do introduce a comment on Dominic's m(~desty which the average American boy might find difficult to grasp (p. 55). Fur-thermore, there are several passages of St. John's text which seem to call for notes to clarify theological implications contained therein. For example, his reflections on the force of a good First Communion' on a person's life appear to be a somewhat sweeping generalization which might be difficult to substantiate and need, at least, to be set against a proper historical background (p. 8). Again, Dominic's remarks on merit require distinctions (p. 78). The language of the book runs along simply and smoothly for the most part. One, however, does encounter an occasional awk-~ wardly turned phrase as well as several lapses of grammar and Eng-lish idiom. In place of the illustrations taken from the fifth Italian edition, more modern drawings would perhaps be more effective in catching the eye of young people. While this book, then, has many good points to recommend it,- it is not without its drawbacks, especially for young readers. ~EDMUND F. MILLER, S.J. 50 ,lanuary, 1956 BOOK REVIEWS DAYS OF JOY. By William S÷ephenson, S.J. Pp. 176. The Newman Press, Westmins÷er,Maryland. 19SS. $2.S0. In his preface the author tells us that it is his purpose "to set forth as fully and plainly as possible the meaning of this [the Easter] message ." This is indeed no small task, and yet he succeeds admirably. A full understanding of the meaning of Easter and 'the cause of our joy in it demands a mature faith and an understanding en-riched and deepened by all that the Church can tell us about it. It is no small merit of this work that the author makes free use of the wealth that Holy Church has found for us in this mystery. A step-by- step account of the sacred history from Easter to Pentecost is ac-companied by explanations of dogmatic truths, prayers from the Mass and hymns from the breviary, quotations from devotional writers and instructions in prayer. Theresult is not a heavy treatise, but a book which is devotional and inspiring with its piety deeply rooted in dogmatic theology and the" liturgy. Each stage of events in the story of the Resurrection is treated in this way. First there is an account of the event, e.g., the meeting of our Lord and Mary Magdalen; then there is a series of reflections on the mystery in,which the author explains the truths it shows and their meaning for us. The reflections are concluded with a col-loquy in which some liturgical prayer, hymn from the breviary, or devotional poem is read prayerfully. Along with the text, some-times in the form of notes, are explanations of liturgical practices, the account of the beginning of a devotion or suggestions on methods of prayer drawn from the Exercises oF St. Ignatius. With justice the book is subtitled Thoughts for All Times, because the author's handling of his subject relates this central truth of our faith to other truths and to our daily needs. The com-bination of the gospel narrative and the light thrown on it by theology and the warmth of the liturgy is a happy one. Finally, the method of prayer woven into this pattern gives these sublime thoughts and truths a personal and particular meaning. Thus, the