Our Catholic Heritage, Volume VII

The Church in Texas Since Independence, 1836-1950.

OUR CATHOLIC HERITAGE IN TEXAS 1519-1936

SUPPLEMENT

PREPARED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS OF TEXAS

REV. JAMES P. GIBDONS, c.s.c., A.B. RT. REV. WILLIAM H. OBERSTE, P.A. Editors

THE CHURCH IN TEXAS SINCE INDEPENDENCE 1836-1950

CARLOS E. CASTANEDA, Ph.D., LL.D., C.K.H.S.

VOLUME VII

AUSTIN, TEXAS VON BOECK!IIAN:O.•]ONES COMPANY 1958

I NIHIL OBSTAT

VERY REVEREND ANTON FRANK Houston

Censor Dep11tat11s

✓/ /1WPR/MATUR

+ ROBERT E. LUCEY, D.D., S.T.D., LL.D. Archbishop of San Antonio + WENDELIN J. NOLD, S.T.D. Bishop of Galveston + THOMAS K. GORMAN, D.D., D. Sc. H1sT. Bishop of Dallas + MARIANO s. GARRIGA, D.D., LL.D. Bishop of Corpus Christi + JOHN L. MORKOVSKY, D.D. Bishop of Amarillo + SIDNEY M. METZGER, S.T.D., J .C.D., LL.D. Bishop of El Paso

+. LOUIS J. REICHER, D.D., LL.D. Bishop of Austin

TEXAS KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS HISTORICAL COMMISSION

H<n1orary Clrairn1a11 of the Commissi-on

Tm: MosT REV. ROBERT E. LucEY, D.D., S.T.D., LL.D.

Exewtive Conimittee

0HE RT. REv. WILLIAM. H. OnERSTE, P.A., Chairman THE MosT REv. MARIANO S. GARRIGA, D.D., LL.D. THE MosT REv. LAURENCE J. FITzSn.t0N, D.D., PH.D., LL.D. (Deceased) THE HoN. N. A. QUINTANILLA, State Deputy THE HoN. R. CONROY ScoGGINS, Supreme Director

j 1 ! i I

Diocesan Representatives

. ?HE RT. RI!.v. ALOIS J. MoRKOVSKY, Archdiocese of San Antonio VTHE VERY REv. ANTON FRANK, Diocese of Galveston THE RT. REv. JOSEPH G. O'DoNOHOE, LL.D., P.A. Diocese of Dallas (Deceased) VTHE RT. REV. WILLIAM H. OBERSTE, P.A. Diocese of Corpus Christi THE REv. ARNOLD A. BOEDING, Diocese of Amarillo THE RT. REv. HENRY D. BucHANAN, Diocese of El Paso THE REv. J. J. O'BRIEN, C.S.C., Diocese of Austin

Historiographer

CARLOS E. CASTANEDA, PH.D., LL.D., C.K.H.S.

i\\-O ~rcserue 1 s.

llf1he f.iith

Otft\\\)tt;.

,..~ .

i)il~(>

I i j

I .

UCUTClllON or L~ICIITS or COLUMIIUS S'TATt COUNCIL OF TtXAJ

PREFACE

A reviewer of the sixth volume aptly said that OUR CATHOLIC HERITAGE IN TEXAS was in truth one of the most complete histories of the State from its earliest beginnings to the point reached by the sixth volume ( 1836) "with the Church included." When the author undertook this work years ago he resolved to write the complete history of the State from 1519, when Alvarez de Pineda first delineated the entire coastline of the Gulf of Mexico from Florida to Veracruz to the year 1936. With but few exceptions, historians have ignored the Church in the history of the State and the constant force it has been in the State's development and growth. Under Spain and Mexico the Church and the State were inextricably related to each other until 1836. It was impossible to separate one from the other without presenting an imperfect and incomplete pic- ture of its history. The first six volumes therefore present the full picture "with the Church included," as noted by the reviewer. This last volume, which covers the period since 1836 reflects the new status of the Church after the attainment of Texas independence and it is more strictly con- fined to the history of the Church itself, its growth and development, and its contribution to the State and its people in the fields of education and welfare, as well as in the preservation of the Faith. In its broad outline this volume was completed in 1954, four years after the publication of the sixth, but the process of putting the text in its final form has been unduly delayed through a series of untoward circumstances beyond the time generally required for this purpose. The author is greatly relieved to bring to a conclusion at last a task undertaken almost a quarter of a century ago. Planned as a cooperative enterprise under a general editor originally, each volume was to have been written by a different author in order to distribute the burden. But after the publication of the first two volumes in 1936 as the Knights of Columbus of Texas' contri- bution to the State centennial the author was prevailed upon to write one more volume in the series while other writers could be found to go on with the remaining five volumes. But as years passed the historical commission of the Texas Knights of Columbus argued that the writer continue with the remaining volumes to give the series uniformity of style and presen- tation. Reluctantly the author agreed to write each succeeding volume, prolonging a labor of love intended to be limited to the first two volumes of the series. Unavoidable interruptions caused by World War II prompted

. . n to make a special effort to have the last volume .

the comn11ss10

written

h by anot er pared. I the end the burden fell to the writer agam. For all these reasons th n 1· f · h e reader can well understand what a great re 1e 1t as been finally to reach the end, imperfect as the work may be. P erson at the same time that the sixth was being pre . . In this last volume the reader will find the story of the reorganization of the Church after the attainment of independence by the State in 1 8 3 6 first as a prefecture, then as a vicariate apostolic, and ultimately as the diocese of Galveston, which originally included within its jurisdiction the entire State of Texas; how this gigantic diocese was divided and sub- divided into new dioceses until there were six independent bishoprics under the ecclesiastical province of the Archdiocese of San Antonio; the heroic struggle to finance the growth and development of the Church with foreign and domestic aid until it became self supporting; the problems of creating a secular clergy; the work of religious orders and communities of men and women in education, hospitalization, and social welfare; and lastly, what Columbianism has meant to the people of Texas and the Church. As originally planned the history should have ended in the year of the centennial ( 1936). But the numerous and unavoidable delays that postponed the appearance of this last volume passed the mid century mark made it necessary to carry the story to 1950. In consultation with the Texas Knights of Columbus Historical Commission it was decided to include in the present volume the establishment of dioceses founded subsequent to 1936 and to carry the summary of the growth and develop- ment of those religious orders and communities of men and women that came to Texas prior to 1936 to 1950 also. We admit that other communities have come to labor in Texas since 1936, which are not mentioned, but which are contributing significantly in their respective fields of endeavor to the preservation of the Faith as well as to the social welfare of the State. To have included them would have lengthened this volume beyond reasonable bounds. As it is, the work of those that came to Texas prior to 193 5 has been greatly condensed and presented in proportion to the whole picture. Fortunately many religious orders, communities and oro-an- 'zations have begun to publish detailed accounts of their work i T~ 1 . • • n exa!- hich may be consulted by those des1rmg fuller data. The a f w h 1 . . f mount o d nsation made necessary by t e 1m1ts o this volume rnav b . d b con he eduction to one chapter of the recently published voi e JU ged y t e r . urne on the d . b'lee of the Texas Knights of Columbus in 1952 gol en JU 1 • • • blino- of source materials for this last volurn The assem ~ e proved much

more difficult than for the preceding ones. Record keeping by the Span- iards was a conscientious task meticulously observed and in spite of the ravages of time, weather and political strife in Mexico, abundant and complete records were found that made the reconstruction of the past much easier than that of more recent times. Not easy at any time, the work of gathering data for the modern period consumed much time and often proved more discouraging. The writer has persevered through anguished months during the last twenty-five years in his determination to complete the thankless task he assumed in the beginning as a labor of love. The encouragement of numerous friends and the firm belief that he was working for the greater honor and glory of God kept him at his job to which he has returned again and again after each interruption with renewed enthusiasm. Some readers may find omissions which they may consider serious and others may notice different shortcomings. To the first the author would pray their indulgence, assuring them that the first consideration has con- sistently been to give in each instance at least the highlights in the his- tory of the development of Catholicism in Texas; and to the second he would remind them th~t "to err is human, to forgive divine." Exact dates and details are difficult to ascertain from insufficient and conflicting data. The author's conscience is eased by the fact that he has made an honest and earnest effort in each instance to arrive at the truth and to maintain the high standards of scholarship and accuracy that have characterized the previous six volumes as recognized by most reviewers and critics. A debt of gratitude is due Father James P. Gibbons, CSC, who helped materially in the preparation of this volume in its early stages and who. if anything, was overzealous as editor .in helping to clear minor details. Thanks are likewise due to Rt. Rev. Monsignor WiJliam H. Oberste who subsequently assumed the responsibility as editor after Father Gibbons was recalled to Notre Dame by his superiors. In the middle of a crowded sche~-~,sms. Oberste has found time to read the entire manuscript in ntslinal form, to hold several consultations with the author and to see the 'l. volume through the press. 'f\)i~ Grateful acknowledgments are likewise made to the many persons who \,. furnished pertinent information to the author, too numerous to list indi- vidually~ Reference to their private communications with the author has been made in most instances in the footnotes. To all of them the author wishes to express his thanks and to assure them he will always remember kindly their many courtesies. He also wishes to give particular thanks to the Ch:mceries of the different dioceses. the Superiors of religious orders

'ti'es and to the parish priests for their valuable c

00 I>era.tion

and commum '

. f . h'ing information when called upon. m umis

In particular the au~hor wishes to ex~re_ss his. deep appreciation to Bishop Mariano S. Garnga_of Corpus ~hnstl for his constant encourage- ment and helpful suggestions; to Bishop Lawrence J. FitzSimon of Amarillo in whose care the Catholic Archives of Texas have been placed for his useful suggestions and his generous cooperation ; and to Arch- bishop Robert E. Lucey of San Antonio for his enduring interest and wholehearted support of the enterprise. Last but not least the State Council of the Knights of Columbus of Texas deserves more credit than anybody else for having initiated the vast project, consistently bent its efforts to its realization, generously financed the enterprise through twenty-five years, giving its money and its energy and lending its unwavering support and encouragement through all that time that the people of Texas, the lovers of the history of the State, and the generations yet unborn may be able to read the record of the glorious past that constitutes the proud heritage handed down to them through tears, sweat and suffering by the generations that have gone before.

The University of Texas July 31; 1957

Carlos E. Castaneda CKHS Historiographer

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I The Dawn of a New Era........................................................................ 1 CHAPTER II The Prefecture, 1840-1841...................................................................... 34 CHAPTER III The Vicariate, 1841-1847........................................................................ 68 CHAPTER IV Establishment of the Dioceses, 1847-1948................. ........................... 108 CHAPTER V Financial Support for the Church in Texas.......................................... 165 CHAPTER VI Religious Communities of Men in Texas.............................................. 206 CHAPTER VII Creation of a Secular Clergy...................... ................ ......................... .. 251 CHAPTER VIII Catholic Educational Endeavors............................................................ 285 CHAPTER IX Public Health and Social Welfare Work .............................................. 359 CHAPTER X Columbianism in Texas.. .......................................................................... 422

CHAPTER XI

;;; .

The Knights of Columbus Historical Commission................................ 455

-= •

Bibliography .......................................................................................... 491

Index ........................................................................................................ 507

MAPS

ILLUSTRATIONS AND

Portrait of Pope Pius XII

Holy Father's Letter of Commendation........... .. ........ .. .... ........ .Fron,tispiece

Escutcheon of Knights of Columbus State Council of Texas ............................................................................. .F·acing Preface

Mission Concepcion, San Antonio, Texas........ ...... ...... .. .. F acing page 34

Rt. Rev. John Mary Odin, First Bishop of Texas...... .. .. F acing page 108

Hierarchy of Texas .............. ..... .. .............. ...... .. ........ ... .... Facing page 250

Dr. Carlos Edwardo Castaneda....... .. ..... .... ......... ..... ....... .Facing page 284

First Catholic Academies of Texas... ... ....... .... .... ....... ..... . Facing page 330

First Catholic Hospitals of Texas..................... ...... ... ...... Facing page 374

Map Showing Division of Texas Dioceses............. ..... Following page 56 1

THE CHURCH IN TEXAS SINCE INDEPENDENCE

CHAPTER I

THE DAWN OF A NEW ERA

For victorious Texans the elation over San Jacinto soon passed. They found themselves faced with the inescapable problems of grim reality; independence had brought "grave responsibilities. As the situation was still precarious, there was no time for relaxation. Within a short distance from San Jacinto a Mexican army, greatly outnumbering the victors, was still encamped; thousands of Texan families, unaware of the sudden and unexpected triumph, were still abandoning their homes and hurrying to safety beyond the Red River; the new State was pen- niless; the Provisional Government needed to be replaced by regularly elected officials; and the Constitution had to be ratified by the people. The future still lay in the hands of Providence. More desperate still was the condition of the Church. The storm of political passions in Mexico had long since disposed of her leaders. The gentle, chilling snow of indifference had buried deep the mission field in Texas, and the drifts had piled high upon the scattered Catholics of the new colonies. Texas lay like a vast field in winter, without a sign of Catholic activity, without the least promise of an early spring. "At its close the outlook was gloomy indeed ... the majestic missions in crumbling ruin, spoke eloquently of past glory and ... the blood of martyrs, but there was no intimation of a re-awakening. There were church buildings at Refugio, Victoria and Nacogdoches, but the silence of their walls was never broken now by the solemnity of divine service. In San Antonio the once beautiful church of San Fernando told a sad story of neglect." 1 Nonetheless the Faith had taken deep root in the soil of Texas. Like the mellow song of the lark that heralds the approach of day, the murmur of prayer awakened at dawn a Victoria settler camped on the prairie some fifty miles from the Rio Grande in South Texas. Voices, young and old, were joined in praising God, singing an ancient hymn of thanksgiving. His curiosity aroused, the settler investigated and found not far away an old shepherd, his wife, and their three children reciting their morning prayers. "Here then," wrote this old pioneer in his diary, "were some of the fruits that had germinated from the sacred seed 1 Mary Angela Fitzmorris, C.D.P., Four D4cad4s of Catliolici.sm ;,. T4:ras, 1820-1860, 40-41. [1]

Our Catliolic Heritage i11, Texas

sown by the consecrated messengers of the Church in early T~xas. • • • How like the patriarchs this man appeared! What a glorious com- mentary upon the blessed work of the Church !"z It is contrary to fact to declare that "the Catholic religion was al- most nonexistent before 1840, there being practically no priests in Texas before that time." 3 It is true that in the closing years of the Mexican regime, as in the spreading gloom of parting day, the light of the true Faith dimmed, activity slackened until it came to a stop, and all but two unworthy representatives of the clergy were left in San Antonio by the time of the Revolution. This was the result of a series of circumstances that seemed to contrive to bring about the ap- parent end of the Church in Texas.' Catholic participation in tlze creation of the new Rep11,blic. Eight Catholics had signed the Declaration of Independence on that cheerless March 2, 1836. They were Lorenzo de Zavala, James Power, Michael B. Menard, Jose Antonio Navarro, Francisco Ruiz, Charles S. Taylor, John White Bower, and Edwin Conrad. Three other delegates failed to sign because tney were absent at the time helping their families: ohn J. Linn, Juan Antonio Padilla, and Dr. James Kerr. 5 Had all the Catholic de egates been present at the time, they would have made up twenty percent of the signers, greatly in excess of the proportion of Catholics in Texas. Catholics fell at the Alamo; others were victims of the Goliad massacre. Catholics, too, fought at San Jacinto-Irishmen from San Patricio and Refugio, settlers from N11ssoun and Kentucky, Texas-Mexicans from San Antonio, and Grays from New Orleans-all fighting for Texas- independence and the dignity of man. 6 It has been generally concluded without foundation that there were very few Catholics among the settlers before 1836. One of the colonists who came to Texas early in 1829 visited all the colonies in the next seven years. Having also been to Monclova, he was in a position to know conditions. He declared that one out of ten in the English-speaking settlements was a Catholic. At the time of the Revolution, accordingly, there were more than 2,500 Catholics in the colonies. Added to the 2 Jobn J. Linn, ReminiJcences of Fifty Years in Texas, 15-16. *Joseph William Schmitz, Tlius They lived, 67-68. •~rlos E. Castaneda, Our Catholic Heritage in Texas, Volume VI, Chapter XI. Details in the chapter indicate the Catholic activities from 1821 to 1836. 5 Wlllhm B. Ryan, Sl,amrock and Cactus, 33-38. •JbiJ.

. -

The Dawn of a New Era

3,000 to 4,000 in San Antonio, without including the so-called "Muldoon Catholics," they totalled more than 6,ooo. 7 Scattered over a vast area, these Catholics had been sadly neglected but not left entirely without guidance. In the early '2o's Fathers Francisco lVIaynes and Jose Antonio Valdez had worked in East Texas. Father Michael Muldoon had ministered to Austin's colonies in 1831- 1832; Father Miguel Muro had continued his apostolic labors in Refugio, Goliad, and San Patricio until 1833; and Father Antonio Diaz de Leon had persevered in his missionary endeavors in Nacogdoches, Liberty, and San Augustine until the day of his tragic death in November, 1834. "It was my good fortune," wrote Linn, "to meet the last remaining two of this pious band of devoted men in Texas, Father Diaz and Father Muro." 8 That the observance of the precepts of the Church was lax no one denies. As early as 1808 Zebulon M. Pike, in passing through Texas on his way back from Chihuahua, observed that Texas was Catholic but much relaxed. The "Anglo-American settlers' brand of Catholicism," writes a more recent historian, "was even more relaxed." 9 Such a state of affairs was inevitable under the circumstances. The Diocese of Monterrey, under whose jurisdiction Texas then was, lacked episcopal leadership from 1821 to 1832. Jose· Leon Lobo, the administrator of the Diocese, did everything in his power to provide for the spiritual ministration of the settlers, but he was seriously handi- capped by the scarcity of priests in general and of English-speaking clergymen in particularly. Although Jose Maria de Jesus Belaunzaran y Urefia was installed as Bishop in 1832, he was forced to flee because of religious persecution before he could do anything for his fast growing flock in Texas. Thus, on the eve of the struggle for independence the Catholics in Texas were again left without a shepherd, and the last missionary among the settlers was martyred in East Texas. Religiotts intolerance. In view of the facts just summarized, the charges of religious intolerance in the Declaration of Independence is amazing. No real foundation existed for the charges that every interest had been disregarded by Mexico in Texas "but that of the army and the priesthood," or that the only alternative left the settlers had been 7 Linn, op. cit., 283. For estimates of the population and its composition, see Samuel Hannan Lowrie, Culture Conflict in Texas, 1821-1835, pp. 31-38, 52-59, I 32-140. 8 Linn, op. cit., 58; Castaneda, op. cit., V:ol. VI, Chapter XI. 9 William R. Hogan, The Texas Rep11blic, A Social and Economic Histor31, 191.

■I

Ottr Catlwlic Heritage in Texas

"either to abandon our homes . . . or submit to the most intolerable of all tyranny the combined despotism of the sword and the priest- hood," or that they bad been denied "the right of ,vorshipping the Almighty according to the dictates of our conscience." Yoakum, a con- temporary of the Revolution in Texas, wrote, "It is due to truth to say that, among all their grievances, they had little complaint to make on the score of religious intolerance." 10 Religious toleration had, in fact, been granted to the colonists in 1834. In a decree passed by the Legislature of Coahuila and Texas that year in connection with the sale of public lands, it was provided under Article II that "No person shall be molested for political and religious opinions provided the public order is not disturbed." Two other decrees directed to curtail the power of the Church were adopted before the year ended. The first of these forbade the execution or publication of pastorals, decrees, or edicts issued by bishops or other ecclesiastical authorities "without permission from the government." The second prohibited the erection of buildings by any denomination whatsoever with funds derived from charitable donations. 11 Equally unfounded is the allegation that the country, insofar as it concerned Texas, was "priest-ridden." True to the tradition of Anglo-American Catholics established by the followers of Lord Calvert in Maryland when they adopted the first Act of Toleration in America, the framers of the Constitution appended a bill of rights. Article III provided that "No preference shall be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship over another, but every person shall be permitted to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience." More than a dozen of the delegates who adopted the Constitution on that anxious night of March 17, 1836, while the vanguard of Santa Anna thundered nearer and nearer, were Catholics-the same who had helped frame the Declaration of In- dependence. There was one other provision in the main body of the Constitution in regard to religion. Section I of Article V stated that "Ministers of the Gospel, being by their profession dedicated to God and the care of souls, ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions: therefore no minister of the gospel or priest of any other denomination whatever, shall be eligible to the office of the execu- 2 1 1836. Gammel, The Laws of Texas, I, 384-387; Henderson Yoakum, History of Texas from /ts First Settlement in 1685 to Its Annexation to tire UnUed Stales i,s 18 46, II, 220. llGammel, o'}. cu., I, 350, 358, 363. 10 Declaration of Independence, March

•

The Dawn of a New Era

tive of the republic; nor to a seat in either branch of the congress of the same. 12 Establisliment of the first constitutional government. Fortunately for the Texans, General Vicente Filisola, second in command'of the Mexican army, agreed to retreat beyond the Rio Grande as ordered by the im- prisoned Santa Anna. The two treaties of Velasco-one public and one secret-were signed on May 14, and provisional President David G. Burnet prepared to return Santa Anna to Mexico that he might, in accord with the secret treaty, use his influence with the government for the recognition of Texas' independence and her claims to the Rio Grande as the western boundary. An unexpected mutiny in the army, led by General Thomas J. Green, recently arrived with volunteers from the United States, however, upset the plans. Santa Anna, who had written a flowery farewell to the Texan army, was mercilessly dragged from the ship he had boarded, subjected to more than six months' mental torture and indignities in Texas prison camps, and finally allowed to go to Washington to talk with President Andrew Jackson. The President refused to treat with the fallen dictator, and ordered the United States frigate Pioneer to take him to Veracruz, whence the defeated General made his way unostentatiously to his country estate Manga de Clavo for a sorely needed rest. His usefulness had now passed. He was power- erless, quite unable to help himself or others. As the Texas Government began to function after the withdrawal of the Mexican troops, order and confidence returned in spite of the mutinous spirit of the Texan army. Many of those who had fled beyond the Sabine for safety crune back; the Government returned from Gal- veston to Velasco. In July President Burnet issued a call for a general election to be held on the first Monday in September in order that constitutional government might be established. At the opening of the campaign there were three candidates: Henry Smith, Stephen F. Austin, and Sam ·Houston. Smith withdrew from the race. Austin, the Father of Texas, who had devoted his whole life to its development, had lost his popularity. Houston was elected by an overwhelming majority of over eighty percent of the total vote cast. Mirabeau B. Lamar was unanimously elected vice president, after his only opponent, Thomas J. Rusk, had withdrawn his candidacy. The Constitution was ratified almost unanimously. Although the new officers were not to be installed until the second

12 John Sayles, Th4 Constitution of T4ras, 173; Gammel, o'ft. cit., I, 1075.

Our C atl1olic Heritage in Texas

Monday in December, they took office on October 22, 1836, upon the resianation of President Burnet and Vice President Zavala, who were 0 anxious to be relieved of their responsibilities. Under the able direc- tion of the veteran warrior and colorful statesman the Republic attained standing among the powers of the world during the next two years, established the framework of a government organization, and solved the more pressing problems of finance and defense. It was a period of consolidation and cautious administration in order to launch suc- cessfully the frail ship of state upon the uncharted ~ea of its unknown destiny. Renewed i11terest in religion. With the restoration of law and order the routine of daily life was resumed, and the people of Texas, rein- vigorated by a grateful heart, turned again to religion. Providence had given them victory and they were thankful. A pioneer historian of Texas rightfully observed, "No people can live without faith." As if to illustrate his point, he added, "What else was it that brought the Franciscan friars to the wilds of Texas, and caused them to devote days and years of peril ... to the instruction and culture of the savage mind?" Here is a spontaneous tribute from a non-Catholic to the unselfish sacrifice of the pioneers of religion in Texas. 15 The tolerant spirit of the easygoing Mexican officials had permitted many Protestant ministers to migrate to Texas. They had been active in spite of restrictions; -now that independence had been attained and toleration had been formally guaranteed by the Constitution of the new Repubtic, they redoubled their activities. To carry out their resolve more effectively, they organized an "Ecclesiastical Council of Vigilance for Texas" at a meeting held in Houston on March 8, 1837, in the office of the Reverend R. Marsh, a Baptist minister from Alabama. Their purpose was to guard against pseudo-ministers and to prevent the "ingress of rogues" under the guise of holy men. The Council, composed of representatives of four denominations, appointed a three- man Committee of Correspondence to keep in touch with all ministers in Texas and verify the affiliation of newcomers. 14 By a strange coincidence, a group of Texas Catholics were at the ve?' same time taking steps to secure the services of English-speaking priests to minister to their spiritual needs. While in New Orleans they drew up a petition in March, 1837, which they addressed to Bishop UHenderson Yoakum, History of Te:r:as f,-om !ts Fi,-st Settlement in r685 to Its A11111:r:aJio11 to the United States;,, 1846, pp. II, 219. 14 /l>id., 11, 223-224.

The Drnvn of a New Era

Antonio Blanc of that city to beg him to intercede in behalf of all the Catholics in Texas before the Provincial Council about to meet in Baltimore. They asserted that many Catholic families who lived in the western part of the country and on the frontiers, where the enemy had wrought the worst devastation the year before, had been forced to abandon their homes along with the rest of the settlers. But now that the United States had extended recognition to the new Republic, they felt it would be safe to return to their ruined homes. They were returning, however, with one regret-there would be no "Priest who speaks the English language to administer the blessings and instruction of our Holy Religion." They pleaded, therefore, for a missionary to be sent them as soon as possible. They expressed the feelings they would have to endure--pain, humiliation, and indignation-if they were forced to return to see numerous sectarian ministers "roaming about the country," trampling boldly and without regard upon the sacred vestiges of Catholicism, and found themselves without a "zealous pastor to let them know that we have missionaries [engaged] in the work of salvation as well as themselves." They extolled the beauty of the country as "beyond de- scription" with no equal for soil and climate, peopled with settlers from the "Western States," whose hospitality remained proverbial, but who all too frequently were ignorant of the most rudimentary teach- ings of Christianity, and many of whom professed no religion whatever. They gave fair warning that the task of bringing religion to the scattered Catholics and uninstructed settlers would be "fatiguing and arduous," for most of the colonists lived at considerable distance from each other, were poor in the goods of this world, and would continue in this reduced condition for several years. Having stated their case, the petitioners made bold to suggest the appointment of "two able and zealous Priests ... accustomed to the manners of the Western Missions" to keep the scattered flock together and make converts. There was a rich harvest waiting for the reaper. Some of the petitioners had come originally from Louisiana, Mis- souri, or Kentucky, where they had become acquainted with the un- selfish and exemplary missionaries from St. Mary-of-the-Barrens, founded a few years before in Perry County, Missouri. Having known the devotion of these men from the Barrens, as it was generally desig- nated, they were prompted to recommend for consideration some of their former acquaintances, who they knew would be welcome in Texas. They named as likely candidates Fathers J. J. Mullan. of New Orleans;

Ottr C at/1.olic Heritage in Texas

Robert A. Abel and Edward McMahan, from Kentucky; and John Timan [sic], of St. Louis. The petition was signed and dated in New Orleans on March 20, 1837, by John McMullen for the Catholics in San Antonio de Bejar; William R. C. Hays, Robert O'Boyle, and Andrew Boyle from San Patricio; Robert Hearn from Mission Refugio; and ohn Linn from Guadalupe Victoria. 15 Another proposal for renewing Cat o 1c activity in Texas was made four months later under very different circumstances. About the middle of July, a distinguished gentleman of courtly manners and cultured accent called on President Sam Houston and presented him a letter of introduction to acquaint him with his business. In the letter John C. Williams from Velasco informed the President that the bearer, Count Charles de Farnese, had come to Texas to offer his "fortune and personal influence to the glorious Texan cause." The Count was a man of high literary attainment, who had "his heart set on the establishment of institutions of learning in this country," Williams wrote. His sponsor added that the visitor's views on the subject and on the opening of correspondence with Rome in regard to the erection of a Texas bishopric independent of the Mexican hierarchy would, if successful, be productive of great benefits to the Republic, and would no doubt induce thousands of Catholics to immigrate to the country. This twofold plan had been presented to Dr. Branch T. Archer, General Thomas J. Green, and other prominent Texans in Velasco and had been thought highly commendable. 16 After a discussion with Houston, Farnese reduced his ideas to writing on July 28 for further consideration by the President. The Count began ISPetition addressed "To the Most Rev. Archbishop and Right Rev'd Bishops in Counsel Assembled in Baltimore," New Orleans, March 20, 1837. Copy secured from University of Notre Dame Archives, in Catholic Archives of Texas, Amarillo, hereafter designated as C. A. T. For a brief summary of the establishment of St. Mary-of-the Barrens and the early work of the Vincentians in Missouri, Ken- tucky, and Louisiana, see Ralph Bayard, Lo11e Star Vanguard: the Catholic Oc- cupation of TeraJ, 8-13. The Third Provincial Council of Baltimore met April 1 6, 183 7. Bishop Blanc could hardly have presented the Texan Memorial, as he had probably left New Orleans prior to the date of the Petition in order to arrive in Baltimore on time for the opening of the Council. 16 John C. Williams to His Excellency President Sam Houston, July 11, 1837. Text reproduced in Yoakum, op. cit., II, 224. This letter makes no mention of any colonization scheme; nor is there any evidence in his proposal to Houston or in Houston's reply that he contemplated a colony. The assumption (see Linn, pg. 331) that he was an empresario who planned a large colony of Catholics in Texas, is unfounded. Cf. Fitzmorris, F()Ur Decades of Catholicism in Texas, 39-40; Bayard, lone Star Va,,guard, 20.

The Dawn of a New Era

with a general statement on the importance of Christian education in giving the heart and mind proper direction, for they require cultivation "like a young plant." He then offered to discuss the matter of securing the cooperation of Rome in erecting an independent archbishopric. While in Velasco he had more modestly discussed the establishment of only a bishopric. Aware of the interest displayed in this proposal by his friends in Velasco and by Houston when conversing with him, he now asserted that this step "was the sure means of making peace with Mexico through the influence of the Roman court," as it would "break all communication with the bishop of Monterrey," under whose jurisdiction the Catholics of Texas still were. It would, furthermore, "remove all difficulty with other courts in acknowledging the independence of Texas." Having discussed in general terms the details of the selection of the new prelate and the locale of the episcopal residence, he proceeded to the matter nearest his heart, the establishment of a chain of parochial schools in connection with the reorganization of the Church. Five prin- cipal points were incorporated in his plan. He recommended first that Texas set aside in every city and village a convenient site for a church, rectory, and school. He maintained, secondly, that since the adminis- tration of the Church and particularly the schools was not to be a financial burden on the State, Texas should grant all parishes, without distinction, r,280 acres of land. His third proposal was that because the churches, rectories, and schools would be built without cost to the State, the Government should not have the right to use them for any other purpose without the consent of the Holy See. He, furthermore, asserted that the Church should be allowed to carry out all religious functions throughout Texas without interference from the Government. Last, he asked that the Church be given the ·protection of the State. 17 A week passed before Houston made formal reply. Fully cognizant of the significance that the establishment of an independent archbishopric would be to Texas, he unhesitatingly declared, "The snapping of the ties that still bind Texas to Mexico in religious as well as political matters meets with my entire approbation and could haYe none other than a salutary tendency to produce harmony among the Catholic citizens of Texas." He asserted that since the Constitution guaranteed the free exercise of religion, he could see no obstacles to the establish- 17 The summary of the letter and of the plan of Count Farnese is based on the excerpts given in Yoakum, op. cu., II, 224-226. The original documents have since been lost. Yoakum was the last to see and use the original. Note that no reference is made to any colonization scheme.

\ i

Our Catlwlic Heritage in Texas

ment of an archbishopric in Texas similar to that in the United States. The matter of granting either land or privileges of any kind was not within his power as President, he wrote, since those matters lay entirely within the province of Congress. In conclusion, he expressed his great reverence for religion and Christian education as invaluable influences in the formation of a new community. He assured the Count that "If the Holy See shall deem it fitting to employ your talents in the service of Texas, by so doing it will give genuine pleasure to your most respect- ful servant." 11 The Count apparently lost no time in transmitting to Rome copies of his plan and of Houston's reply. But his proposals raised a number of questions requiring the utmost tact at this time. Clearly it was unwise for the Papacy to take a stand on the international status of the new Republic. Relations between the Government of Mexico and the Vatican had been strained ever since independence, and the anti- clerical party, encouraged •by Masonry, constituted a constant threat to the precarious relations recently established with Rome. Nothing was to be gained by adding to the already difficult situation. As a recent his- torian has so aptly put it, ".. . the concern of Pope Gregory XVI for the Texans had to be tempered by the exactions of his prickly Mexican Church policy." 19 The time was not propitious for the erection of an independent bishopric, for such a measure would smack strongly of politics. The Vatican postponed action on the proposal, but declared that steps should be taken immediately to ascertain the true state of affairs in order that proper relief might be given to the shepherdless flock in Texas. Here was a challenge that could not be ignored. While waiting for a reply to his communication, the Count appears to have established himself near Houston, together with his family, who must have joined him shortly afterwards. A friend of his, William E. Bollaert, who had made the trip with him from England, visited him in 1840, and found the Count and his family in a sad plight, sick with chills and fever. Neither the soil nor the climate had been kind to the distinguished pioneer. Disillusioned and disheartened, he was ready to return to France at the first opportunity. "I fear that this instance of 11 Sam Houston to Count Farnese, Houston, Texas, August s, I 837. French text printed from original in Ashbel Smith Papers, University of Texas, in E. C. Barker and Amelia Williams, Tlte Writings of Sam HoustOff, II, 135~136. See also Fitzmorris, op. cit., 40; Bayard, o,;. cit., 21-22. English translations vary. The French text was probably written by Ashbel Smith at the request of Houston. 1 'Bayard, O'j. cit., 22.

The Dawn of a New Era

failure is [largely due to the fact] that my worthy friend," says Bollaert, "did not know how to choose his ground. The picture that presented itself was distressing, people brought up in the luxuries of Paris and full of intelligence were here seen utterly helpless. 1120 Ambitious and impolitic as his grandiose plan had been, it, neverthe• less, fixed the attention of Rome on Texas and impelled the Sacred Congregation de A·o,paganda Fide to ascertain the true facts, which were eventually to lead to the establishment of the dreamed-of bishopric. Bishop Blanc's astonishment in March, 1838, at the request from Car• dinal Fransoni, Prefect of the Sacred Congregation, to dispatch one of his priests to Texas without delay, and his bewilderment at the possible source of the Papal information leading to the request are explained by Farnese's report of the previous year. The Vatican had learned, the Cardinal wrote Bishop Blanc, of the sorry plight of the faithful in Texas, with no priest to minister to their wants and with conditions worsening because of the daily swelling of the number of immigrants. The President of the new Republic, His Eminence added, was known to be well disposed towards Catholicism. In order to' determine what was best for the permanent good of religion in the distant province, the Holy See was anxious to obtain a reliable report on actual conditions. 21 While yet bewildered as to the source of the Papal information, Bishop Blanc gave serious consideration to the means at his disposal for com- plying with the wishes of the Sacred Congregation. The one difficulty was the lack of priests; he had none to spare; the field in the Southwest was vast and the laborers were few indeed. After some thought the solution came to him like a flash. Father John Timon 1 rector of the seminary, president of the reorganized college at St. Mary-of-the-Bar- rens, and Visitor of the recently erected American Vincentian Province was the logical agent for the proposed undertaking. Well aware of the great zeal of this tireless missionary of Missouri, whose fame had already extended to Texas, as shown by the suggestion of his name in the Texan petition of the previous year, Blanc wrote Timon on March 20William E. B(1/laert Papers, The Newberry Library, Chica~o. I, 148, cited by Schmitz, Tims Tltey Lived: Social Life in the Retmblic of Te:r:as, 13-14. He either returned to France shortly afterwards or died a victim of the prevalent recurring waves of the plague and yellow fever, which often wiped out entire families.-Nothing more is heard about him. 21Cardinal Fransoni to The Most Reverend Antonio Blanc, Bishop of New Orleans, Rome, January 16, J 838. Latin text and English translation printed in Diamond Jubilee, 1847-1922, (If lite Diocese of Gal11es/<m and St. lllary's Catlwlral, 33-34.

Our Catltolic Heritage in Texas

30: "I have attentively reconsidered the subject; and viewing it as one of the highest importance for the restoration of religion in that now desolate country, I think that such a mission can suit only a religious order or congregation, and your own particularly." Timon could make the trip quickly to Texas by steam packet from New Orleans and ascertain, in a very short time "the present state of things and the prospects of religion," Blanc assured him. Shrewdly, he pointed out also that the time was propitious; that General Houston, who, it was rumored, had himself been affiliated with the Church, would probably second the efforts of a Papal envoy. The good Bishop closed his persuasive appeal with a warning and a prophetic word of encouragement. The strictest secrecy had to be main- tained, he cautioned. Publication of the solicitude felt by Rome for the untended flock in Texas might arouse deep resentment in Mexico. Fur- thermore, should it be voiced abroad that the Bishop of New Orleans could issue Faculties (permission to preach and confer the Sacraments) for the Texas ministry, he might be pestered endlessly by malcontent clergymen in the United States and Europe. Yet, "I sincerely think," urged Blanc, "it is in the designs of Providence that you should give a hand to this grand work . . . worthy of the sons of St. Vincent." 22 Tl,e Clmrcli sco1tt. Unknowingly John Timon had prepared himself well for leadership in the reconnaissance of Texas. Born of pioneer stock in 1797 near York, Pennsylvania, he, while very young, had been taken by his parents to Baltimore, where he attended St. Mary's College for a few months in 18n. This appears to be the only formal schooling he had had until he entered the seminary at St. Mary-of-the-Barrens in 1822. His family had moved with the endless stream of pioneers ever westward until they reached St. Louis. There the young man had come into close contact with Bishop Louis William Dubourg and Father Joseph Rosati, Vincentian superior of St. Mary-of-the Barrens, where on October 22, 1822, he had received the tonsure and minor orders from Bishop Dubourg. The following year he had entered the Vincentian novitiate, and four years later he had made his Profession on September 23, 1826, in the church at the Barrens. After ordination he had served in the lead-mine region of Missouri, where Moses Austin and his family had tried to mend their fortune and whence Austin had eventually set out for Texas. A few years later 22Blanc to John Timon, March 30, 1838, condensed in Bayard, op. cit., 22-23. Houston was baptized in 1834 in Nacogdoches by Father Diaz de Leon. See Carlos E. Castaneda, Our Catl1olic Heritage in Te:cas, Vol. VI.

------------------------

Tl,e Dawn of a New Era

Bishop Rosati of St. Louis was to write in a letter to Cardinal Fransoni de Propaganda Fide that the zealous young missionary had won back more Catholics to their religion and had made more converts in eight or ten years than all the other priests laboring in the Diocese of St. Louis. Three Bishops, Joseph Rosati of St. Louis, Simon Brute of Vincennes, and John Dubois of New York, each requested Timon as his own coadjutor, that is, a bishop assistant with the right of succession. Truly, John Timon was marked for great things. When the Missouri and Louisiana Vincentians were permitted to organize the independent Province of the United States of America in 1837 at the representation of Father John Odin, who was then visiting in Europe, Timon was named Provincial Superior, or Visitor of the new province. His vigor and energy infused new life into the Mission of the Barrens. The fresh impetus emphasized the great need of workers in the rapidly expanding activities of the Vincentians. Timon made his first trip to Europe in 1837 to recruit priests for America. When Timon received Bishop Blanc's urgent appeal in 1838 to make a reconnaissance of Texas, he was engaged in a program of expansion into Illinois, southern Missouri, and Louisiana. He had just established the core of a dozen missions on the upper Illinois Riv~r, had taken over the parish of St. Vincent at Cape Girardeau, Missouri, and had accepted three new foundations from Bishop Blanc in New Orleans. Small wonder that he showed some reluctance. in hurriedly answering the new call to Cl)mmit the Vincentians to labor in distant Texas." Preparations for tlte survey. Timon, undaunted by the magnitude of the undertaking because he had implicit faith in the Providence of the Lord, replied within a few days. He accepted the invitation and promised to set out as soon as his multiple obligations permitted. Nine months were to elapse before he started on his epoch-making trip to the new Republic. It was not his pressing duties, however, that delayed him. There were other serious considerations that soon crowded the mind of the enthusiastic and zealous missionary, causing him to restrain his impatience. Bishop Blanc had written that the work of the restoration of religion in Texas was a mission best suited to a religious order or congregation, "your own in particular." This hint meant that accepting the invitation would probably be committing the ne,vly organized Prov- ince of the Barrens to carry out whatever recommendations he made for the revival of the Faith in Texas. For this reason he considered it highly 23 Bayard, op. &it., 3-1 3.

I I ! i

Our Catlwlic Heritage in Texas

advisable to secure approval of his superiors before making a move. The undertaking he knew would require men and funds far beyond the means of the American Vincentian Province; these would have to be supplied through the Motherhouse in Paris. While Timon wrote to the Very Reverend C. M. Nozo, Superior Gen- eral, to acquaint him with the quandary in which he found himself, Bishop Blanc, to whom Timon had explained his dilemma, wrote directly to Cardinal Fransoni. The Bishop reported the steps he had taken to comply with the request of the Cardinal and asked him to urge the Motherhouse of the Vincentians in Paris to accept the new mission field· and commission Timon to make the survey of Texas as soon as possible.:u Rome appears to have lost no time in taking the matter up with Saint-Lazare, as suggested by Bishop Blanc; and Father Nozo, in view of the interest manifested by the Holy Father through the Sacred Con- gregation, gladly agreed to cooperate in the worthy undertaking for the reimplantation of the Faith in Texas. L' A mi de la Religion, the Parisian Catholic journal, published a brief notice of the agreement in the summer of 1838, which the impatient Timon read a month later with feelings of joy but mingled somewhat with anxiety. All through the summer he had waited for authorization from Saint-Lazare to start on his eventful trip. His eagerness had grown in intensity with time. Now he was glad to learn that the project had been approved, but he wondered why he had not been apprised of the details. Bishop Blanc, who had also read the news of the acceptance of the Papal proposals by Father Nozo, urged Timon not to delay his trip to Louisiana and Texas. Timon still held out, however, in hopes of hearing directly from Paris. Unaware that the Superior General had sent him the details of the agreement with Propaganda Fide as soon as it was concluded, Timon wrote Nozo reprovingly, "I have been waiting for a reply to my obser- vations on Texas ... to learn your will." 25 The Nozo dispatch, as a matter of fact, was never received. The impatient Vincentian learned on November 2i 6 that ten days before he penned his letter of October 30, there had arrived in New MThe details of Timon's appeal to Father Nozo, made probably early in April, and of Bishop Blanc's communication to Cardinal Fransoni are found in a letter of Blanc to Rosati, January .23, 1839, Archives of the St. Lo11is Archdiocesa11 C luu,cery, St. Louis, Mo., hereinafter referred to as A. S. L. C. UTimon to Nozo, October 30, 1838, Archives of the Vincentian Motherhouse, Paris, France, cited in Bayard, o,p. cit., 24. 26 Bayard, o,p. cit., 25.

. 1 l I I

I I , I

, i J f

I , I

j ....

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 Page 159 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Page 200