Your search
Results 161 resources
-
This 1905 official correspondence, dated 20 April and originating from the Vatican Chambers (No. 11206), constitutes a formal ecclesiastical response to a petition submitted by the Municipal Council of Bardez concerning the liturgical status of the feast of Saint Francis Xavier. The document, authored by the Cardinal Secretary of State, confirms receipt of a prior communication from a high-ranking civil or ecclesiastical official (referred to as "Your Excellency") dated 7 April 1905. It records that the matter—namely, the elevation of Saint Francis Xavier’s feast day to the status of *festa de pequeno* (lesser festival) across the Eastern Indies—was promptly presented to Pope Pius X. The Pope, expressing satisfaction with the initiative, granted approval in view of the support shown by both the Most Reverend Archbishop of Goa and the Government of His Most Faithful Majesty (the Portuguese Crown). The Holy See accordingly authorised the issuance of an Apostolic Brief to formalise the concession. The text reflects the interplay between colonial ecclesiastical administration, local municipal authority in Portuguese India, and the centralised doctrinal and ceremonial power of the Vatican at the turn of the twentieth century. This document is a primary source for the study of religious culture, colonial governance, and Catholic liturgical policy in the Portuguese Empire during the late imperial period.
-
This 1905 confidential diplomatic dispatch, originating from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Lisbon and addressed to the Secretary of State for Indian and Overseas Affairs, transmits a formal request—endorsed by the Government of Portuguese India—for the elevation of 3 December, the feast day of Saint Francis Xavier, to a Holy Day of Obligation across Portuguese India (Goa, Daman, and Diu). The document comprises official correspondence from the Most Reverend Archbishop-Primate of the East and an extract from the Municipal Council of Bardez’s session of 23 December 1904, both advocating the religious and cultural significance of the saint, revered as the Apostle of the Indies. The council underscores his foundational role in the region’s spiritual and historical identity, arguing that the feast, already marked by state-funded celebrations in Goa, should be universally observed to strengthen Catholic unity and affirm Portugal’s colonial and religious legacy. Despite anticipated economic objections related to work suspension, moral and symbolic imperatives are prioritised. The request reflects broader efforts to reinforce the *Padroado Real* and Catholic continuity amid perceived imperial decline. Endorsed by the Governor-General and the Patriarch of the West Indies, the petition exemplifies church-state collaboration in late colonial governance. This primary source offers critical insight into religious policy, colonial identity, and ecclesiastical authority in early 20th-century Portuguese India.
-
This 1903 diplomatic and ecclesiastical correspondence, originating from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Portugal and addressed to the Secretary of State, concerns the contested implementation of a Holy See decree dated 3 February 1903 regarding the reorganisation of ecclesiastical jurisdictions in southern China. The document details negotiations between the Portuguese and French governments, with papal assent, to transfer jurisdiction of Hainan Island from the Diocese of Macau to the Apostolic Prefecture of Canton, in exchange for granting the Bishop of Macau authority over the Shao-King district. A dispute arises due to a perceived geographical error in the decree, which asserts territorial contiguity between Shao-King and Heung-Shan, despite intervening sub-districts—San-Ning, San-Ui, and Shum-Tak—belonging to Kwang-Chow. The Bishop of Macau, João Paulino de Azevedo e Castro, argues that the Holy See’s intention included these sub-districts and the island of Shan-Chau (St John’s Island), a site of religious significance. He attributes resistance from the Apostolic Prefecture of Canton to strategic opposition by French missionaries rather than genuine clerical concern. The text underscores Portugal’s determination to assert its ecclesiastical rights under the Concordats of 1857 and 1886, secure missionary access, and prevent further delays detrimental to spiritual and colonial interests. The document is accompanied by a map and urgent recommendations for clarification from the Holy See to ensure unambiguous jurisdictional transfer.
-
This 1902 diplomatic correspondence, originating from the Portuguese Government of Macau and transmitted through the Embassy of Portugal to the Holy See, documents a sensitive territorial and political dispute involving French missionary land acquisitions near Macau. The primary subject is a series of purchases by the French Catholic mission of three parcels of land—Sai-kua-pu, Sai-mai-kong, and Bac-mai-Kong—at the foot of Mount Catae, approximately five kilometres from Macau, officially registered under the authority of the Xiangshan mandarin. The reports, authored by Acting Governor Alfredo Lello and addressed to the Secretary of State for Naval and Overseas Affairs in Lisbon, argue that these acquisitions, conducted under the provisions of the 1860 Franco-Chinese Treaty, served strategic political rather than religious or medical purposes, despite the stated pretext of establishing a sanatorium. The documents detail an incident in which Chinese agents attempted to serve a summons on Ip-lin-san, a naturalised Portuguese subject and Macau resident, over allegations of unlawful burial on contested land, prompting protests regarding violations of Portuguese territorial jurisdiction. Internal investigations concluded that the burial claims were unfounded and likely a pretext to clear access to French-held plots. The correspondence further highlights British concern in Hong Kong over perceived French expansionist ambitions in southern China, particularly given the strategic vantage of the acquired lands overlooking key maritime routes. The material provides critical insight into colonial rivalries, ecclesiastical politics under the Padroado system, and the use of missionary activity as an instrument of imperial influence in late Qing China.
-
This 1902 diplomatic correspondence, originating from the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and addressed to an ecclesiastical authority, documents the formal transmission of a Royal Charter appointing Reverend João Paulino de Azevedo e Castro as Bishop of Macau. The document, dated 10 June 1902 and issued by Counsellor Miguel Martins d’Antas in Lisbon, includes a copy of the canonical process (*processus inaugurationis*) compiled at the Apostolic Nunciature in Lisbon, which accompanied the nomination to the Holy See. A parallel communication from the Vatican Secretariat, dated 21 June 1902 and referencing an earlier note from January of that year, confirms receipt of the nomination materials sent by His Excellency, including a letter from Pedelizzi sirna concerning Monsignor Giovanni Paolino de Sjavedo’s appointment to the Petrine See of Macao. The Vatican response, signed by the Cardinal Secretary of State, acknowledges the delivery of the pontifical autograph to the Pope and the forwarding of documents to Miguel Martins d’Artes, expressing formal gratitude and reaffirming esteem for the recipient. The file, registered on 6 February 1902 after arrival in Caracas on 19 February, forms part of administrative records held in Lisbon under Division R.7, File 35 3/. This dual bureaucratic and ecclesiastical documentation reflects the procedural interplay between state and Church in Portuguese colonial ecclesiastical appointments during the early 20th century, offering insight into diplomatic protocols and the governance of Catholic sees in overseas territories.
-
This 1902 diplomatic correspondence, originating from the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and addressed to an ecclesiastical authority, documents the formal transmission of a Royal Charter appointing Reverend João Paulino de Azevedo e Castro as Bishop of Macau. The document, dated 10 June 1902 and issued by Counsellor Miguel Martins d’Antas in Lisbon, includes a copy of the canonical process (*processus inaugurationis*) compiled at the Apostolic Nunciature in Lisbon, which accompanied the nomination to the Holy See. A parallel communication from the Vatican Secretariat, dated 21 June 1902 and referencing an earlier note from January of that year, confirms receipt of the nomination materials sent by His Excellency, including a letter from Pedelizzi sirna concerning Monsignor Giovanni Paolino de Sjavedo’s appointment to the Petrine See of Macao. The Vatican response, signed by the Cardinal Secretary of State, acknowledges the delivery of the pontifical autograph to the Pope and the forwarding of documents to Miguel Martins d’Artes, expressing formal gratitude and reaffirming esteem for the recipient. The file, registered on 6 February 1902 after arrival in Caracas on 19 February, forms part of administrative records held in Lisbon under Division R.7, File 35 3/. This dual bureaucratic and ecclesiastical documentation reflects the procedural interplay between state and Church in Portuguese colonial ecclesiastical appointments during the early 20th century, offering insight into diplomatic protocols and the governance of Catholic sees in overseas territories.
-
This is a confidential diplomatic despatch dated 17 June 1920, sent from Rome by J. P. Martins to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, concerning ecclesiastical affairs in Macau. The document, classified as No. 26 and marked “Confidential”, serves as a supplementary communication to earlier correspondence (Despatch No. 42 of 10 June 1920) regarding the appointment of the Bishop of Macau. It reports allegations about Father Gomes, a figure involved in ecclesiastical activities in Macau, asserting that he lacks extensive literary knowledge and that questions have been raised about the financial management of a subscription he organised several years prior for the benefit of the local seminary. Despite reported construction works at the institution, doubts persist among certain individuals regarding the proper allocation of the collected funds, though the author neither verifies nor endorses these claims. J. P. Martins explicitly states his inability to assess the validity of the information and transmits it solely for official consideration and potential investigation. The despatch reflects concerns over clerical competence and financial accountability within a colonial ecclesiastical context during the early 20th century. As an official record from the Portuguese diplomatic corps, this document offers valuable insight into church-state relations, administrative oversight, and the governance of religious institutions under Portuguese influence in Macau.
-
This is a confidential diplomatic despatch dated 17 June 1920, sent from Rome by J. P. Martins to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, concerning ecclesiastical affairs in Macau. The document, classified as No. 26 and marked “Confidential”, serves as a supplementary communication to earlier correspondence (Despatch No. 42 of 10 June 1920) regarding the appointment of the Bishop of Macau. It reports allegations about Father Gomes, a figure involved in ecclesiastical activities in Macau, asserting that he lacks extensive literary knowledge and that questions have been raised about the financial management of a subscription he organised several years prior for the benefit of the local seminary. Despite reported construction works at the institution, doubts persist among certain individuals regarding the proper allocation of the collected funds, though the author neither verifies nor endorses these claims. J. P. Martins explicitly states his inability to assess the validity of the information and transmits it solely for official consideration and potential investigation. The despatch reflects concerns over clerical competence and financial accountability within a colonial ecclesiastical context during the early 20th century. As an official record from the Portuguese diplomatic corps, this document offers valuable insight into church-state relations, administrative oversight, and the governance of religious institutions under Portuguese influence in Macau.
-
This 1901 diplomatic correspondence, originating from the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ General Directorate of Political and Diplomatic Affairs, concerns ecclesiastical jurisdictional negotiations between Portugal and France regarding territories in China. Dated 16 February 1901 and addressed to a high-ranking official, the document records an agreement reached between the Portuguese and French governments on the reassignment of ecclesiastical authority over Hainan Island, previously under the Diocese of Canton prior to the 1876 arrangement between the Vicar General of Macau and the Apostolic Prefect. The agreement stipulates that, in exchange for returning Hainan to the Diocese of Canton, the Bishop of Macau would gain jurisdiction over the Chao-Shing district adjacent to Shean-Chau, where he already exercised ecclesiastical authority. Two key conditions are noted: the necessity of initiating territorial demarcation procedures pending formal approval by the Holy See, and the provisional nature (provisoria tantum ratione) of the jurisdictional transfer. The French Legation in Lisbon communicated its government’s assent to these terms on 20 December 1900 and again on 13 February 1901. The document further references a communication from the Apostolic Nuncio dated 6 October 1900, conveying the Holy See’s requirement for formal ratification and canonical title before final confirmation. This file, part of Section No. 2, File 51, reflects the intersection of colonial diplomacy, Catholic ecclesiastical administration, and international agreements at the turn of the twentieth century.
-
This 1900 diplomatic memorandum, originating from the Portuguese Embassy to the Holy See in Rome, documents negotiations between the governments of Portugal and France concerning the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Hainan Island in southern China. The text records that Hainan had been provisionally placed under the Diocese of Macau by the Holy See in 1875–76, but due to limited clergy and logistical challenges, the Bishop of Macau had not effectively evangelised the island. In light of the Paris Foreign Missions Society’s growing capacity within the Apostolic Prefecture of Guangdong, the French government proposed transferring Hainan back to Cantonese ecclesiastical authority. Portugal conditionally assented, requiring in exchange the extension of the Bishop of Macau’s jurisdiction over the district of Chao Hing (Gao Hing), adjacent to existing territories under his spiritual control. The agreement was to be implemented *provisoria tantum ratione*—on a provisional basis only—with territorial delimitations subject to prior approval by the Holy See. The document includes multiple memoranda from 1898–1900 exchanged between diplomatic representatives in Lisbon, Paris, and Rome, including communications involving Mr Avoye, Mr Delcassé, and the Apostolic Nuncio. It reflects the intersection of colonial diplomacy, ecclesiastical administration, and imperial interests in late 19th-century China, illustrating how religious jurisdiction served as both a spiritual and political instrument in Sino-European relations.
Explore
Primary Sources
-
Location
-
Portugal
-
Arquivo Diplomático e Biblioteca do Ministerio dos Negocios Estrangeiros
-
Arquivo da Embaixada de Portugal junto da Santa Sé até 1930
- Caixa 1 and 6 (4)
- Caixa 33 (21)
- Caixa 34 (23)
-
Caixa 35
(48)
- Maço 2 (33)
- Caixa 36 (8)
- Caixa 38 (13)
- Caixa 43 (15)
- Caixa 44 (14)
- Cx. 35 FP (1)
- Cx. 36 - Mç. 01 FP (8)
- Cx. 38 FP (1)
- Cx. 43, mç. 2 FP (5)
- Cx. 44 FP (1)
-
Arquivo da Embaixada de Portugal junto da Santa Sé até 1930
-
Arquivo Diplomático e Biblioteca do Ministerio dos Negocios Estrangeiros
-
Portugal
-
Full-text online
(38)
- Transcriptions (38)
Subject Headings
Resource type
- Document (145)
- Letter (1)
- Manuscript (15)
Publication year
-
Between 1500 and 1599
(1)
-
Between 1560 and 1569
(1)
- 1567 (1)
-
Between 1560 and 1569
(1)
-
Between 1700 and 1799
(11)
- Between 1740 and 1749 (5)
-
Between 1750 and 1759
(1)
- 1755 (1)
- Between 1770 and 1779 (3)
-
Between 1780 and 1789
(1)
- 1782 (1)
-
Between 1790 and 1799
(1)
- 1799 (1)
-
Between 1800 and 1899
(88)
- Between 1800 and 1809 (4)
-
Between 1810 and 1819
(1)
- 1819 (1)
- Between 1820 and 1829 (2)
-
Between 1830 and 1839
(1)
- 1836 (1)
- Between 1840 and 1849 (39)
-
Between 1850 and 1859
(1)
- 1854 (1)
- Between 1860 and 1869 (14)
-
Between 1870 and 1879
(1)
- 1870 (1)
- Between 1880 and 1889 (6)
- Between 1890 and 1899 (19)
- Between 1900 and 1999 (61)