APAC102 - Revision history

Merv at 06:00, 21 June 2009

2009-06-21T06:00:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:00, 21 June 2009
Line 118:		Line 118:
	\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise		\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
	\|[[APAC155\|'''excursus F''']]		\|[[APAC155\|'''excursus F''']]
			\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
			\|[[APAC157\|'''chapter eight]]
			\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
			\|[[APAC183\|'''excursus G''']]
	\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise		\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
	\|[[APAC:Epilogue\|'''epilogue''']]		\|[[APAC:Epilogue\|'''epilogue''']]

Merv at 07:10, 15 December 2008

2008-12-15T07:10:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:10, 15 December 2008
Line 116:		Line 116:
	\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise		\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
	\|[[APAC142\|'''excursus E''']]		\|[[APAC142\|'''excursus E''']]
			\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
			\|[[APAC155\|'''excursus F''']]
	\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise		\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
	\|[[APAC:Epilogue\|'''epilogue''']]		\|[[APAC:Epilogue\|'''epilogue''']]

Merv at 02:54, 20 September 2008

2008-09-20T02:54:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:54, 20 September 2008
Line 110:		Line 110:
	\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise		\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
	\|[[APAC116\|'''excursus C''']]		\|[[APAC116\|'''excursus C''']]
			\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
			\|[[APAC119\|'''chapter seven]]
			\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
			\|[[APAC140\|'''excursus D''']]
			\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
			\|[[APAC142\|'''excursus E''']]
	\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise		\|-bgcolor=PaleTurquoise
	\|[[APAC:Epilogue\|'''epilogue''']]		\|[[APAC:Epilogue\|'''epilogue''']]

Jan: /* Also in France: a frustrated superior */

2008-08-06T14:39:45Z

Also in France: a frustrated superior

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:39, 7 August 2008
Line 22:		Line 22:


	:A few months later, in April, he received the letters sent in September 1838,<ref> Pompallier to Colin, 04.09.38 & 14.09.38, LRO, docs [[Girard0029\|29]] & [[Girard0030\|30]], and Servant to Colin , 16.09.38, [[Girard0031\|LRO, doc. 31]]. That these letters arrived in April is clear from Colin to Fransoni, 26.04.39, CS, doc. 63. </ref> and at about the same time those from the missionaries of the second group in Valparaiso.<ref>25.01.39. [[APAC103\|Cf. above, p. 103f.]]</ref> This time he did not send them as such to the Propagation of the Faith but asked his trusted friend Gabriel-Claude Mayet to edit them for publication. It was probably when instructing him on what to take out and what to leave, that Colin showed his irritation, and Mayet ~~took note of~~ his remarks.<ref> MM I, pp. 186 – 189, printed in full in CS, doc.64. </ref>		:A few months later, in April, he received the letters sent in September 1838,<ref> Pompallier to Colin, 04.09.38 & 14.09.38, LRO, docs [[Girard0029\|29]] & [[Girard0030\|30]], and Servant to Colin , 16.09.38, [[Girard0031\|LRO, doc. 31]]. That these letters arrived in April is clear from Colin to Fransoni, 26.04.39, CS, doc. 63. </ref> and at about the same time those from the missionaries of the second group in Valparaiso.<ref>25.01.39. [[APAC103\|Cf. above, p. 103f.]]</ref> This time he did not send them as such to the Propagation of the Faith but asked his trusted friend Gabriel-Claude Mayet to edit them for publication. It was probably when instructing him on what to take out and what to leave, that Colin showed his irritation, and Mayet noted down his remarks.<ref> MM I, pp. 186 – 189, printed in full in CS, doc.64. </ref>

Jan: /* Also in France: a frustrated superior */

2008-08-04T20:28:23Z

Also in France: a frustrated superior

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:28, 5 August 2008
Line 28:		Line 28:


	:Another thing Colin missed was piety! ‘Where is Our Lady in all of this? The Picpus Fathers put a statue of Our Lady in the pagan temple’, he said, and ‘when we took possession of Puylata we went on our knees and put an image of Our Lady in every room. ''Mais eux rien!'' Nothing of that with them! The history of our mission must be edifying!’<ref> This is not mentioned in Pompallier’s account of the visit to the Gambier Islands. The nearest he gets to it is that a pagan temple was turned into a rural chapel ([[Girard0021\|LRO, doc. 21]] [4]). Did Colin’s imagination supply the statue? Or is this another trace of Caret’s visit (cf. above p. 69)? </ref>		:Another thing Colin missed was piety! ‘Where is Our Lady in all of this? The Picpus Fathers put a statue of Our Lady in the pagan temple’, he said, and ‘when we took possession of Puylata we went on our knees and put an image of Our Lady in every room. ''Mais eux rien!'' Nothing of that with them! The history of our mission must be edifying!’<ref> This is not mentioned in Pompallier’s account of the visit to the Gambier Islands. The nearest he gets to it is that a pagan temple was turned into a rural chapel ([[Girard0021\|LRO, doc. 21]] [4]). Did Colin’s imagination supply the statue? Or is this another trace of Caret’s visit (cf. above p. 69)? As he was on his way from Rome when they met, he may have carried the statue of Our Lady that Pope Gregory XVI had donated for the Gambier Islands. Cf. ''Annales'', January 1840, LXVIII, p. 89.</ref>


Line 34:		Line 34:


	:In short, what he wanted to see in the letters was ‘modesty, simplicity, devotion to Our Lady and a manly nerve that rallies the readers with the courage of lions!’ In the end he had Mayet cut out the offending bits but he refrained from entering phrases of his own. In any case, the ''Annales'' did not publish the censored version! We do not know why and the amended text has not survived.<ref> Colinian language:'' une mâle intrépidité proper à aguerrir les lecteurs et à les remplir d’un courage de lions.''</ref>		:In short, what he wanted to see in the letters was ‘modesty, simplicity, devotion to Our Lady and a manly nerve that rallies the readers with the courage of lions!’ In the end he had Mayet cut out the offending bits but he refrained from entering phrases of his own. In any case, the ''Annales'' did not publish the censored version! We do not know why and the amended text has not survived.<ref> Colinian language:'' une mâle intrépidité proper à aguerrir les lecteurs et à les remplir d’un courage de lions.''</ref> Only a year later the ''Annales'' published again something of the Marist missions: Baty’s letter from Tahiti. It was published without substantial changes.<ref> ''Annales'' January 1840, LXVIII, p. 86ff. The letter is dated 15 April 1839. It reached Lyon in early December, cf. CS, doc. 114 [6].</ref>

Jan: /* And the cream of the nation */

2008-08-04T19:57:01Z

And the cream of the nation

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:57, 5 August 2008
Line 12:		Line 12:
	=== And the cream of the nation ===		=== And the cream of the nation ===

	: Given the image that the Society of Mary was quickly acquiring in France, and the massive support of the laity, it is no wonder that she attracted men of great quality. In the year after the founding chapter of September 1836 no less than sixteen diocesan priests entered the novitiate. By September 1839<ref> Cf. CS I, pp. 652ff </ref> twenty-seven new Marists had joined the Society, among whom were (Saint) Julien Eymard who would later found the Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament, two future bishops (Épalle and Viard), one future superior general (Favre), men like Poupinel and Rocher who would soon put the administration of the missions on a solid base and several others who will for ever be venerated as ''founders of Churches'',<ref> Although coined much later, the expression ‘founding new churches’ applied to religious, is so appropriate here that we allow ourselves the anachronism. Cf. the ''Directives for the mutual relations between Bishops and Religious in the Church'', of 14 May 1978, AAS, LXX, 1978, p. 478: ''sollicitudo in novis fundandis ecclesiis''.</ref> such as Petitjean in Christchurch<ref> Mary Catherine Goulter, ''Sons of France'', pp. 35ff. </ref> and Chevron in Tonga.<ref> Jean Coste, ''Lectures on Society of Mary History'', p. 242</ref> In assigning the missionaries Colin could maintain the high standards of generosity and commitment that he considered essential.		:Given the image that the Society of Mary was quickly acquiring in France, and the massive support of the laity, it is no wonder that she attracted men of great quality. In the year after the founding chapter of September 1836 no less than sixteen diocesan priests entered the novitiate. By September 1839<ref> Cf. CS I, pp. 652ff </ref> twenty-seven new Marists had joined the Society, among whom were (Saint) Julien Eymard who would later found the Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament, two future bishops (Épalle and Viard), one future superior general (Favre), men like Poupinel and Rocher who would soon put the administration of the missions on a solid base and several others who will for ever be venerated as ''founders of Churches'',<ref> Although coined much later, the expression ‘founding new churches’ applied to religious, is so appropriate here that we allow ourselves the anachronism. Cf. the ''Directives for the mutual relations between Bishops and Religious in the Church'', of 14 May 1978, AAS, LXX, 1978, p. 478: ''sollicitudo in novis fundandis ecclesiis''.</ref> such as Petitjean in Christchurch<ref> Mary Catherine Goulter, ''Sons of France'', pp. 35ff. </ref> and Chevron in Tonga.<ref> Jean Coste, ''Lectures on Society of Mary History'', p. 242</ref> In assigning the missionaries Colin could maintain the high standards of generosity and commitment that he considered essential.


			:The Marist Brothers too attracted many candidates. During 1839 seventy-one postulants took the religious habit and twenty novices made their first vows. The Brothers took on six more schools, bringing the total to fifty-two. It was the year that Marcellin Champagnat formally resigned as superior general and Brother François was elected to take his place as ''directeur général''.<ref> LC, p. 459ff.</ref>

	=== Also in France: a frustrated superior ===		=== Also in France: a frustrated superior ===

Jan: /* Also in France: financial support */

2008-08-04T19:49:32Z

Also in France: financial support

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:49, 5 August 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<div style="float:left; width:70%;"> <!-- This width added to the margin below to equal 99%-->		<div style="float:left; width:70%;"> <!-- This width added to the margin below to equal 99%-->

	: The young Society of Mary did not have the means to finance the missions entrusted to it. Archbishop de Pins had from the beginning involved the Propagation of the Faith, founded and well established in the archdiocese. It gave the Marist missions impressive support: in the four years 1836, 1837, 1838 and 1839 they donated respectively 25.000, 33.200, 52.181 and 78.000 francs, whereby, in today’s money, we must think of amounts in the order of 250.000, 332.000, 521.810 and 780.000 Euro.<ref> In my estimate of comparative values, cf. [[APAC100\| Excursus B, above, p. 100.]] </ref>		:The young Society of Mary did not have the means to finance the missions entrusted to it. Archbishop de Pins had from the beginning involved the Propagation of the Faith, founded and well established in the archdiocese. It gave the Marist missions impressive support: in the four years 1836, 1837, 1838 and 1839 they donated respectively 25.000, 33.200, 52.181 and 78.000 francs, whereby, in today’s money, we must think of amounts in the order of 250.000, 332.000, 521.810 and 780.000 Euro.<ref> In my estimate of comparative values, cf. [[APAC100\| Excursus B, above, p. 100.]] </ref>


			:The 78.000 for 1839 were made up of 40.000 handed to the third group of missionaries, Petitjean and companions, that left in May. A sum of 20.000 for the schooner Pompallier was allowed to buy and the refund to Captain Bernard for the loan he had given to the bishop in March 1838.<ref> For the loan from Captain Bernard, cf. below, p. 113.</ref> The difference may lie in the fact that the amount for 1838 had been in part an advance on 1839, or in money set aside for another group of missionaries expected to leave towards the end of 1839.

Jan: /* Also in France: financial support */

2008-07-02T19:13:49Z

Also in France: financial support

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:13, 3 July 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<div style="float:left; width:70%;"> <!-- This width added to the margin below to equal 99%-->		<div style="float:left; width:70%;"> <!-- This width added to the margin below to equal 99%-->

	: The young Society of Mary did not have the means to finance the missions entrusted to it. Archbishop de Pins had from the beginning involved the Propagation of the Faith, founded and well established in the archdiocese. It gave the Marist missions impressive support: in the four years 1836, 1837, 1838 and 1839 they donated respectively 25.000, 33.200, 52.181 and 78.000 francs, whereby, in today’s money, we must think of amounts in the order of ~~200~~.000, ~~265~~.~~600~~, ~~417~~.~~448~~ and ~~624~~.000 Euro.<ref> ~~Bernard Bourtot~~, ~~op. cit. p. 28~~. [[APAC100\|~~Cf.~~ Excursus B, above, p. 100.]] </ref>		: The young Society of Mary did not have the means to finance the missions entrusted to it. Archbishop de Pins had from the beginning involved the Propagation of the Faith, founded and well established in the archdiocese. It gave the Marist missions impressive support: in the four years 1836, 1837, 1838 and 1839 they donated respectively 25.000, 33.200, 52.181 and 78.000 francs, whereby, in today’s money, we must think of amounts in the order of 250.000, 332.000, 521.810 and 780.000 Euro.<ref> In my estimate of comparative values, cf. [[APAC100\| Excursus B, above, p. 100.]] </ref>

Jan: /* Also in France: a frustrated superior */

2008-06-28T08:36:05Z

Also in France: a frustrated superior

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:36, 28 June 2008
Line 13:		Line 13:
	=== Also in France: a frustrated superior ===		=== Also in France: a frustrated superior ===

	:When, in October 1838, Colin had received Pompallier’s letter of 14 May and the letters that Servant had sent to his two friends,<ref>[[Girard0024\|LRO, doc. 24.]] Servant to Buffard, 22.05.38 & to Thiollière du Treuil, 22.05.38, LRO, docs [[Girard0026\|26]] & [[Girard0027\|27]]. </ref> he had simply passed them to the Propagation of the Faith. They were published – nearly in full - in January 1839. <ref>''Annales'', LXII, January 1839, pp. 140 – 157. On 1 December he wrote to Pompallier, and 2 December the novices at Puylata also wrote. Both letters are lost. [[Girard0035\|Cf. Pompallier to Colin, 20.08.39, LRO, 35]] [1].</ref> Once Colin saw them in print, and possibly because of reactions he picked up from Marists or other readers, he made up his mind not to let that happen again.		:When, in October 1838, Colin had received Pompallier’s letter of 14 May and the letters that Servant had sent to his two friends,<ref>[[Girard0024\|LRO, doc. 24.]] Servant to Buffard, 22.05.38 & to Thiollière du Treuil, 22.05.38, LRO, docs [[Girard0026\|26]] & [[Girard0027\|27]]. </ref> he had simply passed them to the Propagation of the Faith. They were published – nearly in full - in January 1839. <ref>''Annales'', LXII, January 1839, pp. 140 – 157. On 1 December he wrote to Pompallier, and 2 December the novices at Puylata also wrote. Both letters are lost. [[Girard0035\|Cf. Pompallier to Colin, 20.08.39, LRO, doc. 35]] [1].</ref> Once Colin saw them in print, and possibly because of reactions he picked up from Marists or other readers, he made up his mind not to let that happen again.


	:A few months later, in April, he received the letters sent in September 1838,<ref> Pompallier to Colin, 04.09 & 14.09, LRO, docs [[Girard0029\|29]] & [[Girard0030\|30]], and Servant to Colin , 16.09, [[Girard0031\|LRO, doc. 31]]. That these letters arrived in April is clear from Colin to Fransoni, 26.04.39, CS, doc. 63. </ref> and at about the same time those from the missionaries of the second group in Valparaiso.<ref>25.01.39. [[APAC103\|Cf. above, p. 103f.]]</ref> This time he did not send them as such to the Propagation of the Faith but asked his trusted friend Gabriel-Claude Mayet to edit them for publication. It was probably when instructing him on what to take out and what to leave, that Colin showed his irritation, and Mayet took note of his remarks.<ref> MM I, pp. 186 – 189, printed in full in CS, doc.64. </ref>		:A few months later, in April, he received the letters sent in September 1838,<ref> Pompallier to Colin, 04.09.38 & 14.09.38, LRO, docs [[Girard0029\|29]] & [[Girard0030\|30]], and Servant to Colin , 16.09.38, [[Girard0031\|LRO, doc. 31]]. That these letters arrived in April is clear from Colin to Fransoni, 26.04.39, CS, doc. 63. </ref> and at about the same time those from the missionaries of the second group in Valparaiso.<ref>25.01.39. [[APAC103\|Cf. above, p. 103f.]]</ref> This time he did not send them as such to the Propagation of the Faith but asked his trusted friend Gabriel-Claude Mayet to edit them for publication. It was probably when instructing him on what to take out and what to leave, that Colin showed his irritation, and Mayet took note of his remarks.<ref> MM I, pp. 186 – 189, printed in full in CS, doc.64. </ref>


Line 31:		Line 31:


	:Colin’s annoyance is understandable but a bit unfair on Servant who, with Brother Michel ~~Colomb~~, suffered most under Pompallier’s bad temper. Of course, Colin did not know then that Pompallier insisted on reading all of Servant’s letters. Nor did he realize that Pompallier expected the pompous language to the point that he told off his hosts in Valparaiso for failing to comply. Also, his anger gets the better of him when ~~Colin~~ does not see that the remark on the ‘episcopal palace’ was ironically meant. In the end his magnanimity carries the day. He praises Pompallier as a ‘man of vision, of a truly evangelical vision; he takes long strides, towards his goal, sees nothing but his goal, and even if makes a wrong step or two, he achieves what he set out to do’.<ref> CS, doc. 64 [6].</ref>		:Colin’s annoyance is understandable but a bit unfair on Servant who, with Brother Michel Colombon, suffered most under Pompallier’s bad temper. Of course, Colin did not know then that Pompallier insisted on reading all of Servant’s letters. Nor did he realize that Pompallier expected the pompous language to the point that he told off his hosts in Valparaiso for failing to comply. Also, his anger gets the better of him when he does not see that the remark on the ‘episcopal palace’ was ironically meant. In the end his magnanimity carries the day. He praises Pompallier as a ‘man of vision, of a truly evangelical vision; he takes long strides, towards his goal, sees nothing but his goal, and even if he makes a wrong step or two, he achieves what he set out to do’.<ref> CS, doc. 64 [6].</ref>

	=== Notes ===		=== Notes ===

Jan: /* Also in France: a frustrated superior */

2008-06-28T07:58:49Z

Also in France: a frustrated superior

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:58, 28 June 2008
Line 29:		Line 29:

	:In short, what he wanted to see in the letters was ‘modesty, simplicity, devotion to Our Lady and a manly nerve that rallies the readers with the courage of lions!’ In the end he had Mayet cut out the offending bits but he refrained from entering phrases of his own. In any case, the ''Annales'' did not publish the censored version! We do not know why and the amended text has not survived.<ref> Colinian language:'' une mâle intrépidité proper à aguerrir les lecteurs et à les remplir d’un courage de lions.''</ref>		:In short, what he wanted to see in the letters was ‘modesty, simplicity, devotion to Our Lady and a manly nerve that rallies the readers with the courage of lions!’ In the end he had Mayet cut out the offending bits but he refrained from entering phrases of his own. In any case, the ''Annales'' did not publish the censored version! We do not know why and the amended text has not survived.<ref> Colinian language:'' une mâle intrépidité proper à aguerrir les lecteurs et à les remplir d’un courage de lions.''</ref>


	:Colin’s annoyance is understandable but a bit unfair on Servant who, with Brother Michel Colomb, suffered most under Pompallier’s bad temper. Of course, Colin did not know then that Pompallier insisted on reading all of Servant’s letters. Nor did he realize that Pompallier expected the pompous language to the point that he told off his hosts in Valparaiso for failing to comply. Also, his anger gets the better of him when Colin does not see that the remark on the ‘episcopal palace’ was ironically meant. In the end his magnanimity carries the day. He praises Pompallier as a ‘man of vision, of a truly evangelical vision; he takes long strides, towards his goal, sees nothing but his goal, and even if makes a wrong step or two, he achieves what he set out to do’.<ref> CS, doc. 64 [6].</ref>		:Colin’s annoyance is understandable but a bit unfair on Servant who, with Brother Michel Colomb, suffered most under Pompallier’s bad temper. Of course, Colin did not know then that Pompallier insisted on reading all of Servant’s letters. Nor did he realize that Pompallier expected the pompous language to the point that he told off his hosts in Valparaiso for failing to comply. Also, his anger gets the better of him when Colin does not see that the remark on the ‘episcopal palace’ was ironically meant. In the end his magnanimity carries the day. He praises Pompallier as a ‘man of vision, of a truly evangelical vision; he takes long strides, towards his goal, sees nothing but his goal, and even if makes a wrong step or two, he achieves what he set out to do’.<ref> CS, doc. 64 [6].</ref>