Affichage de 56 résultats

Anglo-Belgian (St. Joseph's) Province: Ist Provincial Chapter 27/08 - 02/09/1851; Acta (Proceedings): The English translation of the proceedings of the Chapter. This copy was brought to Mount Argus by Salvian Nardocci.

St. Joeph's Province 1st Provincial Chapter; 21-08/ 02-09-1851 : Decrees

Holy Cross Retreat, Ardoyne, Belfast; Dispute with Bishop McAllister: Letter from Bishop McAlister to the Provincial, Fr. Vincent Grogan in answer to his letter of 32 January (see item under serial number 1959). The privileges claimed by Vincent are those of "ORDERS". Passionists are only a congregation. By Vincent's commands the Passionists have broken diocesan regulations in claiming to be able to send as many priests as the provincial thinks fit. The Passionists came 19 years before of their own option, entered into an agreement and kept it until Vincent broke it without the consent of the other party. He mentions the scandal caused by an errant Passionist. The present disagreement has arisen from Vincent's actions so bishop refuses to accede to his demands.

Holy Cross Retreat, Ardoyne, Belfast; Dispute with Bishop McAllister: Letter from Bishop McAllister to Fr. Vincent Grogan, Provincial, in reply to his letter of 24 February (see copy located under serial number 1965. , Says Vincent started this row by threatening to appeal to the Holy See in his very first letter and has repeated this in every letter since. So incorrest to say that bishop obliged him to go to Holy See. Passionists came to Down and Connor of their own free will and have accepted the position for 19 years. Vincent appears blind to the intersts of the Diocese. Bishop would need authenticated certificate of Passionists having privileges of Regulars (Orders).

Holy Cross Retreat, Ardoyne, Belfast; Dispute with Bishop McAllister: Copy of answer from Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, Rome, to Bishop McAllister. Says it
was necessary for them to consult with Passionists. This being done, they now suggest that the bishop build the church with the assistance of the rector, ownership of the church to belong to the diocese, use of it to belong to the Passionists as long as they are there; with all the details of the Constitution Romanus Pontifices being observed. The bishop to decide on the site, but congregation suggests the one near the retreat becuse of easier access, the fact that the Passioinist are donating the site and helping with the building. For translation of this document see item under serial number 1988.

Holy Cross Retreat, Ardoyne: Belfast,: a report to the Provincial, Fr. Alphonsus O'Neill on Fr. Raphael's agreement of 25 September, 1868 - five heads of agreement. Reporter also quotes from Administration Year that the date of the arrival of the Passionists in Belfast was 3 August, 1868. [N.B. This particular item is attached to a later item, which quotes from it.]

Anglo-Hibernian (St. Joseph's) Province 3rdd (1863) Provincial Chapter Acta Official Record of procedings

Holy Cross Retreat, Ardoyne, Belfast; Dispute with Bishop McAllister: Copy letter from Arthur Devine to the Consultor General, Thomas, Rome. Thinks ruling re faculties from Propaganda (referred to by Thoms in his letter of 14inst - see item located under serial number 1981)) is mistaken and quotes from an approved author to back him up. Is his interpretation wrong? He needs to know as it is important for him and his students. English, Scots and most of Irish bishops think what Arthur thinks. He would like a copy of the ruling which was given to the Dominicans in this metter, as he is making a file on this case.

Holy Cross Retreat, Ardoyne, Belfast; Dispute with Bishop McAllister: Copy letter (2 versions) from Arthur Devine to Fr. Thomas, Consultor General, in which he enlarges on the points he has previously made, quoting from Dr. Hedley, OSB.

Holy Cross Retreat, Ardoyne, Belfast; Dispute with Bishop McAllister: Arthur Devine: Letter to Arthur Devine from the Consultor General, Thoms, Rome. Informs Arthur that the bishop has aked Propaganda for a copy of the charges against him. Thomas offered to translate into English for transmission to the bishop the paper he (Thomas) had presented to Propaganda. Permission was given and also that he might make any modification he thought fit. Encloses a copy (which was not to hand at date of computerisation). Comments in the document are deliberatly mild in the hope that the bishop will give in good-naturedly.

He mentions that the provincial will have alrady shown to Arthur the General's reasons for not agreeing to Arthur's proposed translation to Australia, namely that robust health is required for that country.