Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 4 Studia theologica

Authors help

  1. 3 Jonová J.

  2. 1 Menke M.

Years help

  1. 1 2019

  2. 2 2017

  3. 1 2013

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Archdiocese of Olomouc
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Otázka obsazování uprázdněných kanonikátů olomoucké kapituly v době episkopátu arcibiskupa Antonína Cyrila Stojana

100%
Jonová J.
Studia theologica
|
2017
|
vol. 1
21-44
EN
As of the late eighteenth century, free canons were occupied in the even months by the Chapter and in the odd months by the Emperor. The Emperor also occupied so­called Royal canons (stricte regius). A noble status was a condition for applicants to the canon in the Chapter Statutes as well. After extensive effort, a decision was made that the Emperor might designate a non-noble priest to the canons (1880). After the end of the monarchy, the Olomouc Chapter sought to obtain the right to designate all the canons. This was in conflict, however, with the provisions of the newly issued Code of Canon Law (1917). The Czechoslovak government claimed that it had assumed the privileges of the House of Habsburg including the filling of ecclesiastical benefices. This was rejected by the Holy See. The government and the chapter surrendered their requirements "only for this case" (1922) and the Archbishop could accept the appointment of new canons to add to the chapter. He did not succeed in resolving the issue of the appointments, but the noble origin ceased to be required for the applicants of canons.
2
Content available remote

Kauza Grimmenstein: rezignace olomouckého kanovníka a preláta Grimmensteina na kanonikát a jeho další působení

86%
Jonová J.
Studia theologica
|
2019
|
vol. 2
97-121
EN
Josef Grimmenstein, thanks to his noble origin and the favor of the Habsburg­‑Lorraine ruling family, became a canon of the Metropolitan Capital of Olomouc, although he never worked pastorally in the Archdiocese. He neglected his duties as a canon, and was mostly outside the Archdiocese. He justified his absence (his neglect of residence obligations) by health problems. In addition, reports appeared from time to time about his debts or non­‑priestly behavior. Archbishops Cardinal Skrbenský and Stojan urged him to adhere to the residence, but the change did not occur. Archbishop Leopold Prečan did not want to continue to tolerate Grimmenstein’s neglect of the discipline when Grimmenstein asked for a two­‑year dispensation from the duty of residence for health reasons (1924), Prečan refused to grant the dispensation, stating that Rome would have to decide. Rome, in light of Grimmenstein´s previous deliberations, ordered a resignation and a proposed retirement. Grimmenstein tried to defend himself and did not hesitate to use various means including a number of influential friends. The Congregation confirmed their decision, however, and he finally received a raise of pension from 10,000 CZK to 20,000 CZK, thanks to the generosity of the Chapter which paid the pension (due, however, to outstanding debts part of his pension was confiscated by the bank). He also asked for further financial help in the following years, arguing for his poor financial status (he did not add, however, that he had incurred it himself). He stayed in Paris and then in Rome, where Prečan regularly sent him not only confirmation of his priesthood (celebret), but especially financial help. After the onset of Nazism and the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, he travelled more likely to the Protectorate or the Nazi Reich and did not hesitate to engage in negotiations with the Nazi authorities.
3
Content available remote

Výkon soudní moci v olomoucké arcidiecézi v letech 1917–1948

72%
Menke M.
Studia theologica
|
2013
|
vol. 15
|
issue 4
87-102
EN
This article deals with issues related to the activities of the ecclesiastical court in Olomouc in the canonic-legal, historical, religious-political context over the years 1917–1948. The Ecclesiastical Court is the institution through which the diocesan bishop (in this case, the Archbishop of Olomouc) habitually carries out his judicial power. Judicial power is this part of the power of governance in the Church by which the rights of physical or juridic persons are vindicated, juridic facts are declared and the penalty for delicts are imposed or declared. The judicial power, which judges judicial trials, must therefore be exercised in the manner prescribed by the law. The most frequent causes, which are decided by the ecclesiastical court of the diocese, consist of marriage trials. The Church court of Olomouc underwent numerous changes over the period of its existence which reflected not only the legislative changes in the Church, but also the actual situation within the Bohemian and Moravian Church at this time. The article summarizes not only the execution of the judicial power of the Church in general, but also the personal situation at the court. Tracing the individual types of the cases is more difficult because many archival materials have not been preserved.
4
Content available remote

Jednání o obsazení uvolněných kanonikátů olomoucké kapituly ve 30. letech 20. století a úsilí o schválení nových kapitulních stanov

72%
Jonová J.
Studia theologica
|
2017
|
vol. 4
283-302
EN
The Appointment of the Vacant Canons in the metropolitan chapter of Olomouc, according to the statutes of 1826, included the Metropolitan Chapter and the Emperor. This type of occupation was abolished by the new Code of Canon Law (1917) and in 1918 the monarchy ceased to exist. While at the time of the episcopate of Archbishop Stojan the controversy over the Appointment of Vacant Canons took place especially with the newly established Czechoslovak state, which had forfeited the privileges of the "Habsburg Monarchy". Stojan was able to appoint new Canons in 1923. His successor Leopold Prečan also had to deal with the issue of vacant Canons as well as the question of the approval of the new statutes of the Olomouc metropolitan chapter, which would be in accordance with the new Code of Canon Law. While the appointment of the vacant canons was achieved in 1933 and 1938, the approval of the recalculated chapter statutes was not achieved until the end of his episcopate. Precan’s successor, Archbishop Matocha, also called for the chapter to present revised statutes, but due to the emergence of the Communist totalitarian system in Czechoslovakia, it was not the appropriate time to approve the statutes. The capital statutes of 1826 thus applied until 1994, when new statutes were approved by Archbishop Jan Graubner, which were modified to be in accordance with the Code of Canon Law.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.