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

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Metropolitan Chapter 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

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.
4
Content available remote

Modification of the Statutes of the Metropolitan Chapter of Olomouc and the Appointment of the Vacant Canons in Connection with the Issue of the 1917 Code of Canon Law

72%
Jonová J.
Kościół i Prawo
|
2018
|
issue 7 (20) nr 2
9-24
EN
During the episcopate of Archbishop Stojan the Czechoslovak government very strongly interfered in the resolution of the so-called question of the Olomouc Chapter. Afterwards the issue was perceived primarily as an internal affair of the Church, and negotiations took place between the Archbishop of Olomouc together with the Chapter and the Holy See. The Chapter could not ignore the provisions of the new Code of Canon Law, but did not want to renounce its existing privileges, also because the canons “had sworn by the old statutes”. On the other hand, the number of vacant canonical posts had increased and Prečan, the archbishop of Olomous, managed to effect the appointment of new canons according to the provisions of the Code. The State did not influence those appointment. The nationality of the Chapter members was an important issue. The issue of new statutes for the Chapter remained unsolved. The requirement of the Holy See from 1923 to review the Statutes in accordance with the new Code was not fulfilled even in the next 70 years. The Chapter, in colaboration with the Archbishop, drafted revised statutes in 1933, but ultimately they were not approved. Also, Archbishop Josef Karel Matocha called the Chapter to submit new statutes for approval after World War II, but yetagain the Chapter argued that the time was “inopportune”. The onset of the Communist regime in 1948 made the situation so difficult that the Olomouc Chapter did not have its new approved Statutes until 1994.
PL
W okresie episkopatu arcybiskupa ołomunieckiego Stojana, rząd czechosłowacki bardzo mocno interweniował w rozwiązywaniu tzw. kwestii Kapituły Ołomunieckiej. Następnie kwestia ta była postrzegana przede wszystkim jako wewnętrzna sprawa Kościoła, a negocjacje odbywały się między arcybiskupem ołomunieckim, Kapitułą a Stolicą Apostolską. Kapituła nie mogła zignorować postanowień nowego Kodeksu Prawa Kanonicznego, ale równocześnie nie chciała zrezygnować z dawnych przywilejów, tym więcej z racji faktu, że kanonicy „przysięgali na dawne statuty”. Z drugiej strony liczba pustych kanonikatów wzrosła i następny arcybiskup ołomuniecki Prečan zdołał osiągnąć nominacje nowych kanoników według Kodeksu. Państwo nie wpływało na powyższe nominacje. Ważną sprawą była przynależność narodowa członków Kapituły. Kwestia nowych statutów Kapituły pozostała nierozwiązana. Wymóg Stolicy Apostolskiej z 1923 r. dotyczący rewizji statutów Kapituły zgodnie z postanowieniami nowego Kodeksu nie został spełniony nawet w ciągu najbliższych 70 lat. Kapituła we współpracy z arcybiskupem przygotowała rewidowane statuty w 1933 r., ale ostatecznie nie zostały one zatwierdzone. Również kolejny arcybiskup Josef Karel Matocha wezwał po II wojnie światowej Kapitułę do przedłożenia statutów do zatwierdzenia, ale Kapituła ponownie prezentowała argument „niewłaściwej pory”. Początek komunistycznego reżimu w 1948 r. utrudnił sytuację w takim stopniu, że Kapituła Ołomuniecka otrzymała nowe zatwierdzone statuty dopiero w 1994 r.
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.