Skip to main content

Kenrick, Father Francis Patrick, Bardstown, Kentucky, to Father Frederick Rese, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1825 December 16

 Item
Identifier: CDET III-2-f

Scope and Contents

Kenrick sends the following observations to Rese to be submitted to Bishop Edward Dominic Fenwick and Father Augustine Hill, O.P. concerning the Ohio church property. The first question is whether it is proper for the bishop to allow the church of Canton, Ohio and the house and land attached to be given to the Dominicans. If this were an institution free of the care of souls, the problem would be whether the bishop could make the grant without the consent of the Holy See. The Council of Trent in insisting on the assent of bishops does not take away the necessity of the consent of the Holy See as required in the Constitution of Boniface VIII. Kenrick expatiates on this point, though not asked, to protect the conscience of the bishop and the interests of the diocese and to screen Fenwick from the reproaches of his successor who might not be Dominican. But even though this consent be understood in the powers given to the ecclesiastical authorities, the intention of the donors is rather to provide for a parochial church not a convent of secluded religious, not to promote the Dominicans but to enjoy the benefit of the present Dominicans. The question then resolves into one of the right of the bishop to grant a parochial church and property to be incorporated in a monastery, giving the order to property as well as the obligation to care for the parish. In this matter Kenrick cites the decision of Urban II in which grants without episcopal approval were held null and in which priests were forbidden to exercise the parochial functions without the consent of the bishop. The Council of Trent apparently continues this rule. Benedict XIV also distinguishes between the church attached to a monastery and one dependent on the monastery. In the present case, Kenrick is of the opinion that the bishop can sanction the creation of such curacies, but should include a condition whereby in case of neglect he can appoint a priest not of the Order to care for the parish. This he regards as essential to the notions of the donor as well as the maintenance of church discipline. A clause should be inserted to prevent alienation, lest the land or church be sold and the bishop be left with the obligation without the mean thereto. This matter leads Kenrick to refer to the giving of 300 acres of land to the Dominicans near Somerset, which he regards as invalid or at least questionable. Even though Fenwick received the land as a Dominican before he was a bishop and what is given to a religious belongs to the order, yet Kenrick maintains that the donation was given not to the order but to the church for the establishing of religion in the state. Since no convent was erected before Fenwick became bishop, Kenrick thinks the donation should be regarded as in favor of the bishop who might sometime have to send a priest to care for the parish, who would be deprived of the support from the 300 acres. With regard to the church at Zanesville, built on land belonging to the Dominicans without the permission of the bishop or his vicar general, not even the right of presentation is acquired since the consent of the bishop is required for that. He makes these observations because he has been asked and because he is backed by the canons of the church. His affection for Father Hill does not appear in his observations because he feels that the public good must come before private feeling. He hopes that Hill's love of the general good will prevail over his love for his Order. Great are the benefits of religious orders to the church and he is not opposed to the diffusion of the Dominican order, but he thinks that the first good to be sought is the establishment of a bishop in Ohio and he is afraid the proposals made would ruin both the bishop and the church in Ohio should Hill's successor not be of the proper spirit. To guard against every danger, however, Kenrick advises a statement to Rome and a cordial submission to her decision, even though the grants are good in the civil courts. He ends his letter with an appeal to Rese to support the rights of the bishop within the bounds of charity., P.S. He asks that his salutations be presented to Fenwick. In Detroit collection. :: III-2-f A.L.S. 7pp. 8vo., 7

Dates

  • Creation: 1825 December 16

Language of Materials

English.

Conditions Governing Access

Contractual restrictions may apply.

Repository Details

Part of the University of Notre Dame Archives Repository

Contact:
607 Hesburgh Library
Notre Dame Indiana 46556 United States
(574) 631-6448