The new Catholic Near East Welfare Association was threatened almost immediately — by its friends, no less. In September 1924, the same month in which CNEWA was incorporated in Pennsylvania, Bishop Isaiah Papadopoulos, acting for Giovanni Cardinal Tacci, submitted to Pope Pius XI for his approval the statutes of the Catholica Unio, a society which had grown out of two others in postwar Europe — the Unio Ucrainica Religionis and the Unio Ecclesiastica. The purpose of the Catholic Union, as it would come to be known in the English-speaking world, was strictly evangelical: the reunion of schismatics with Rome. The priest assigned to promote it in the United States, Father Augustine von Galen, O.S.B., would be in part responsible for Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s resignation as CNEWA president and his departure to Australia.
A stubborn German of noble birth, von Galen was born 14 December 1870 in the district of Munster, and baptized Wilhelm Emanuel. After receiving a doctorate in civil law, he became a monk in the Benedictine abbey of Emmaus in Prague. He served as confessor in the royal household of Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria-Hungary and for twelve years exhausted himself fighting the Los von Rom movement. Father von Galen considered the refugees from Russia and the Eastern Europe countries he encountered in Vienna in 1922 “bereft of all spiritual assistance, besides being in great poverty,” and concluded that “only by bringing these people into the Catholic Church could they be given spiritual relief.”
In Vienna Father von Galen entered into collaboration with Father Mirone Hornykevyc, parish priest of the Church of St. Barbara, who in 1921 had founded the Unio Ucrainica Religionis for the return of Ukrainian Orthodox to the Catholic Church. In 1922, when Gustav Cardinal Piffl, archbishop of Vienna, recommended that Rumanian and Bulgarian Orthodox also be targeted, the title was changed in 1922 toUnio Ecclesiastica. The name was changed again to Catholica Unio when its statutes were approved in Rome in September 1924. At Cardinal Piffl’s behest, Father von Galen was assigned by his abbot to promote the Catholica Unio throughout Europe, and soon branches were opened in France, Germany, Holland, Spain and Switzerland.
In the spring of 1924, Cardinal Piffl sent Father von Galen to America, where he remained for about two months. He sent the money he collected ($360) to the Oriental Congregation, whereupon the congregation suggested to Cardinal Piffl that more American funds might be available to train priests to work for reunion if Father von Galen were to return there. Cardinal Piffl agreed. To strengthen Father von Galen’s hand, on 19 September 1924 the congregation delivered to the cardinal of Vienna Pope Pius XI’s decree that granted the Catholic Union (CU), as the organization came to be known in America, the right to offer indulgences to its benefactors.
For Monsignor Barry-Doyle and the infant CNEWA, Father von Galen’s arrival posed an interesting challenge. The monk did not speak English well, but his respect for authority and attention to protocol more than compensated for this deficiency. From Europe he informed Patrick Cardinal Hayes of his pending arrival and requested an audience at the cardinal’s convenience in November. Unlike Monsignor Barry-Doyle, moreover, he sent Cardinal Hayes the proper credentials — endorsements from the pope and the Oriental Congregation, a list of the indulgences granted to CU members and the names of cardinals and others in Europe who supported his work. In closing, Father von Galen observed that for the apostolate later among schismatics in America the Catholic Union planned to send two American seminarians to Rome for study — a gesture, he added, “that will impress Catholics in the United States.”
No record has been found of a meeting in November, but on 17 December 1924 Father von Galen asked Cardinal Hayes for a letter of recommendation, an archdiocesan collection and the appointment of a priest to act as director of the Catholic Union in the New York area. He also informed Cardinal Hayes that the editor of America magazine, Father Leonard H. Tierney, S.J., was permitting the CU to use the magazine’s address for mail and contributions. He mentioned almost incidentally that the CU’s ambition was to become a worldwide organization for the support of the Oriental Congregation, much as the Society for the Propagation of the Faith (S.P.F.) supported the Congregation of the Propaganda Fide.
A few days later, Cardinal Hayes’ auxiliary and archdiocesan chairman of the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, Bishop John J. Dunn, informed Father von Galen that although it was not His Eminence’s policy to endorse such appeals, because of the latter’s keenness to see the Catholic Union’s work succeed, he would authorize Father von Galen to ask pastors discreetly for permission to appeal in their parishes. Following this, Bishop Dunn offered some advice on his own: to determine whether or not it would be profitable to continue in America, he suggested that Father von Galen first approach the German-speaking pastors before approaching those who spoke only English. He then added, somewhat clandestinely, “Since His Eminence is in the mood to give this quasi-permission, you may do your utmost, and I hope with success.”
Bishop Dunn’s encouragement meant a great deal indeed, for he was close to Cardinal Hayes and devoted to the missions. In 1904 Bishop Dunn had reorganized the first New York office of the S.P.F., and later he had established the Catholic Students’ Foreign Mission League. For years he had directed the Catholic Charities of New York. During the war he had been Cardinal Hayes’ representative in the Catholic War Drive and the United War Work Campaign, and he knew intimately most of the influential Catholics in New York, including German-Americans like the Heide family.
Bishop Dunn knew that Henry Heide, the head of the family, on occasion asked favors of Cardinal Hayes and that, when he could, the cardinal responded gladly. It had been in reference to Mr. Heide’s request, for instance, that Cardinal Hayes recommended the appointment of Father William Quinn as general secretary of the S.P.F. and later, in September 1924, as its first national director in America. Father Quinn, in turn, was grateful to Bishop Dunn. As Father von Galen would learn, Father Quinn pledged to organize all S.P.F. offices throughout the country on the New York model, which had proved so successful because of what was described as “Bishop Dunn’s wonderful work.” It would have been surprising indeed if Bishop Dunn had not introduced Father von Galen to Henry Heide soon after the Benedictine’s arrival in New York. In any case, by 5 January 1925 the von Galen-Heide connection was firm and absolute. On that date, scarcely three months after CNEWA had been incorporated in Pennsylvania, the Catholic Union, Inc., was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York and a Heide name appeared on the certificate of incorporation.
Subtitled “A Society for the Propagation of the Faith in the Near East,” the CU’s purpose was “to establish and to maintain Roman Catholic missions in Eastern Europe” and “to create and sustain a friendly interest in the religious and moral life of the peoples of Eastern Europe.” Those attesting to the certificate were five in number: Martin Conboy, P. Augustine Galen, Daniel F. Cohalan, Stuart P. West (of the Catholic Converts League), and William F. Heide (Henry Heide’s eldest son).
Undoubtedly the Heide influence behind the scenes also helped, for Father von Galen learned by accident that Cardinal Hayes had not endorsed the Catholic Union because of a hope the Benedictine had expressed: that the CU would eventually become for the Oriental Congregation what the S.P.F. had become for the Propaganda Fide. A work of such worldwide magnitude, Cardinal Hayes believed, should not be private; it belonged in Rome, under the watchful eye of the Vatican. Father Von Galen at once assured the cardinal that the hope he had expressed in passing was a “secret” hope, and not one that he would ever divulge publicly. The Catholic Union, he insisted, was by statute a pious work for the erection and support of seminaries and for furthering the reunion idea, nothing more. Thereupon, on 15 January 1925, Cardinal Hayes wrote Father von Galen, “I recommend you to the courtesy and charity of any members of the archdiocesan clergy or the laity who may desire to assist your mission;” but again he said that an archdiocesan collection was inopportune because of the need to emphasize the S.P.F.
Soon afterwards, with Cardinal Hayes’ permission, Father von Galen opened an office in New York City, and among the new patrons he acquired were the Grand Duke and Duchess Boris, expatriates then in residence at the Ritz Carlton Hotel. Although Orthodox themselves, the duke and duchess undertook to help the Benedictine for the reason that nothing should be left untried to save Russia from the Soviets. Accordingly, they introduced him to social circles that represented, according to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, “an enormous amount of influence in this country.”
Before long, Bishop Calavassy had to be told that Father von Galen, who was about to set off on a lecture tour, had the backing of a substantial sampling of the American bishops. Monsignor Barry-Doyle explained that the Russian cause was simply more popular with Americans than that of the Greeks. Joseph Moore had his own explanation, however. He maintained that:
Dr. von Galen is an Austrian [sic] who speaks only broken English … the Bishops, of course, are able to see that Dr. von Galen would not do much financial injury to them by being permitted to speak in their dioceses and so he received permission. This allows the bishops an excuse for refusing Barry-Doyle permission to lecture in their dioceses for fear of him taking a large sum of money, and already we have lost several opportunities.
There was also bad news from the “City of Brotherly love.” In November 1925, Dennis Cardinal Dougherty, who only weeks before had not prevented CNEWA’s being incorporated in the State of Pennsylvania, refused to host CNEWA’s office in his city any longer. Why? In reporting it to Bishop Calavassy, Father Paul Wattson gave no explanation, but perhaps Cardinal Dougherty took umbrage when he saw the CNEWA charter.
CNEWA, as now incorporated, did not resemble what Cardinal Dougherty had endorsed in his letter to Monsignor Barry-Doyle in June 1925. The cardinal’s endorsement had been limited to making known “the needs of the Catholic Church in Greece, Turkey and adjoining countries…” and “to lend … support towards … the return of Greek schismatics to the one true Church,” but there was nothing about this in the new CNEWA. On the contrary, CNEWA’s purposes were now strictly humanitarian and non-sectarian; in fact, its board of directors included Protestants and Jews as well as Catholics. The Catholic Union, rather than CNEWA, fit the endorsement Cardinal Dougherty had given in his letter to Monsignor Barry-Doyle. It was not altogether surprising, therefore, that in a brochure published later by Father von Galen describing the Catholic Union as “A Society for the Reunion with the Holy Church of the Separated Brethren of the Near East Incorporated,” the archbishop of Philadelphia was prominently featured as the Catholic Union’s North American protector.
A second reason for the ouster may have been attributable to Bishop Francis Clement Kelley, Cardinal Dougherty’s close friend who only recently had left the Catholic Church Extension Society to become bishop of Oklahoma City and Tulsa. At the fifth annual meeting of the American Board of Catholic Missions, on 25 September 1924, Kelley had proposed to the hierarchy that, as the official mission-aid agency of the Catholic Church in the United States, the ABCM use the organization and machinery of the Catholic Church Extension Society. He suggested that the monthly collection for the missions be divided equally between the S.P.F. and Extension, and that the annual collection be divided “sixty-forty.” Indulgences available to benefactors of the S.P.F. and Extension were to be made available also to members of the A.B.C.M. Of special interest to Monsignor Barry-Doyle and Father Paul were the added proposals that the A.B.C.M. have the right to control the mission appeals, which were increasing in number as a result of mission appeals, and to adjudicate disputes among mission-aid societies.
Bishop Kelley’s request concerning mission magazines was aimed directly at The Lamp, which he had criticized earlier in the year. If his proposals were adopted it would be that much easier for Cardinal Dougherty, in his capacity as a member of the Oriental Congregation, to switch his support from CNEWA to the Catholic Union, since the CU also had received the Congregation’s approval. Indeed, the fact that the Congregation had moved so quickly to deliver the Holy Father’s endorsement in time for Father von Galen’s trip to America might indicate that Rome’s support of the Catholic Union was more enthusiastic than its support of CNEWA, which it had slowly, and perhaps hesitantly, approved.
A third reason, by no means the least compelling, for Cardinal Dougherty’s decision was probably Monsignor Barry-Doyle himself. The monsignor could mesmerize audiences and motivate individuals, but even his friends attested to the mounting criticism he attracted by his lifestyle and hauteur. His pretentiousness was more than the average cleric could bear. Bishop William Turner of Buffalo said it plainly when he told Bishop Calavassy in Rome that his agent was “too English in his manners,” and “wants to tell priests how to do.”
Characteristically, Monsignor Barry-Doyle refused to take any blame. Cardinal Dougherty’s reason for closing the office, the monsignor wrote to Bishop Calavassy, was based ostensibly on a policy of not allowing an organization not strictly archdiocesan to have an office or headquarters in the archdiocese of Philadelphia. However, the monsignor maintained that behind this, human weaknesses prevailed. Cardinal Dougherty was not “at all kind in his remarks about Orientals,” Monsignor Barry-Doyle reported, adding that the cardinal had denied any knowledge of the Greek representative or his mission. “Only that I know he forgets many things I should say he was not truthful,” Monsignor Barry-Doyle commented, and then went on to speculate that the real reason for the ouster was found in Cardinal Dougherty’s dislike for William Cardinal O’Connell of Boston, who had been so friendly to CNEWA. “There is a very dreadful spirit here amongst the Cardinals to each other,” he observed. He further noted that the chairman of CNEWA’s Board, Bishop Michael J. Hoban, also attributed the closing to Cardinal Dougherty’s dislike of Cardinal O’Connell and, himself little enamored of Cardinal Dougherty, Bishop Hoban suggested that CNEWA’s headquarters be transferred to his see city of Scranton. Monsignor Barry-Doyle declined on grounds that a more central location was needed, and at this point Joseph Moore asked Cardinal Hayes for permission to open a “small office” in Manhattan. Cardinal Hayes’ answer, in the affirmative, at first seems hard to comprehend.
To Monsignor Barry-Doyle, however, it was the result of prayer – God working through the intercession of St. Therese of Lisieux. Bishop Hoban’s intercession was also useful, however, for in reporting the change of address to Bishop Papadopoulos, Monsignor Barry-Doyle observed:
It is significant for us that Bishop Hoban is a personal friend of Cardinal Hayes. The Bishop desires me to suggest that you ask Cardinal Tacci to send without delay a letter of thanks to Cardinal Hayes for so graciously granting a location in New York for CNEWA.
Father Paul was delighted with the transfer and he assured Bishop Calavassy that “there is no place equal to New York for the purpose, and we are very happy about it.”
Bishop Calavassy did what he was asked to do. In February 1925, he wrote Cardinal Hayes to thank him for his goodness and, while reminding the cardinal that the Holy Father had blessed Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s efforts and that the Oriental Congregation had commended the work to the American bishops, he added, significantly, that he had instructed Monsignor Barry-Doyle to be “absolutely in order with local ecclesiastical regulations.“
At their first annual meeting three months later, CNEWA’s board of directors voted unanimously to transfer the headquarters from Philadelphia to New York City. The following month Cardinal Tacci thanked Cardinal Hayes profusely “for your interest, which you explained, in the Catholic Near East Welfare Association Incorporated, and for proving that interest by permitting its center to be maintained in your important Archdiocese.” Unfortunately, Cardinal Hayes’ further “interest,” if ever “explained” in writing, is not available.
Meanwhile, from his new base in Manhattan, Monsignor Barry-Doyle stepped up his lecture campaign. In November 1924, he “electrified” (according to one newspaper) a capacity crowd at the Lyric Theatre in Bridgeport, Connecticut, and collected approximately $5,000. The following January he was in Florida, where, again in his colonel’s uniform, he enthralled crowds at the Royal Palm Hotel and the Hotel Poinciana in Miami, raising another $5,000. One newspaper hailed him as “the most picturesque and fashionable figure in Palm Beach.”
Old antagonisms gave trouble elsewhere, however. An appointment scheduled in advance with Cardinal Mundelein of Chicago was canceled at the last minute, and through his auxiliary, Bishop Edward H. Hoban, the cardinal sent word to Monsignor Barry-Doyle that he had no sympathy with his appeal, that the large Peter’s Pence he sent each year to Rome should satisfy (overseas) charities and that he intended to devote all his energies to the work of the Catholic Church Extension Society. Off the record, the auxiliary told Monsignor Barry-Doyle that there were five appeals pending in the archdiocese, all German, and added, “He (Mundelein) is German too.”
The Catholic Union was German. Day by day it became increasingly clear that CNEWA and the Catholic Union were on a collision course, and panic set in. In a rush of letters and cablegrams, Joseph Moore and Monsignor Barry-Doyle implored Bishop Calavassy to use his influence in Rome to have Cardinals Hayes and O’Connell appointed CNEWA’s patrons or protectors, to secure more spiritual advantages for CNEWA members (to compete with the CU’s list of indulgences), to obtain a handwritten blessing from the pope and, not least, to have Monsignor Barry-Doyle made a bishop. If such support did not come from Rome, the monsignor warned, CNEWA would fail, there would be little money for the Greek mission and Mr. Moore would almost certainly resign.
Bishop Calavassy’s reply recommended patience. He had never heard of the Catholic Union, nor of Father von Galen, but he would make inquiries in Rome. As for the things Monsignor Barry-Doyle and Mr. Moore wanted him to request from Rome, these would be easier to obtain when they could point to better results in Greece – for example, more orphanages, or “a big and nice Church,” or maybe a settlement for Catholic refugees, etc.
Meanwhile, Father von Galen continued to press forward. With support from Rome and Vienna, he announced that henceforth the Catholic Union’s objectives would include reunion with all Orthodox Christians in the Near East, rather than just the Russians and the Slavs, and further seemed to use “the Near East” as much as possible in his publicity, which may have caused confusion in people’s minds. In Chicago, where Monsignor Barry-Doyle did not even get a hearing, Cardinal Mundelein had warmly received the Benedictine, permitted him to organize a women’s league to help with the fundraising and agreed that a spiritual director be appointed to organize the CU in the archdiocese. As his counterpart to Joseph Moore, Father von Galen hired a German-American, Mr. Werner Stenzel, who, according to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, “copied every single thing which we have done.” And then, to promote the CU nationwide, Father von Galen hired as his field secretary Mr. Floyd Keeler, a convert and former archdeacon in the Episcopal Church, who had worked for Bishop Dunn’s Catholic Students’ Foreign Mission League. Interestingly, Mr. Keeler had also edited a book on the Catholic Medical Missions, which for many years had as its treasurer Father William Quinn.
It seemed that Father von Galen was winning everyone to his cause. For several years the Catholic Converts League had been sponsoring a publication of the Benedictine Foundation, a small group near the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. that aimed to combine the monastic life with research and erudition for the purpose of discrediting what the Benedictine Foundation publication referred to as the “stupidity and bigotry preached blatantly by materialists and Modernists.” And since the Catholic Converts League also served as a fundraiser for the Benedictine Foundation, it was only natural that Father von Galen, like Monsignor Barry-Doyle before him, should be invited to lecture under the auspices of the League. Through this good connection he became closely acquainted with the wife of the League’s president, Mrs. Steward P. West, a socialite (née Eliza di Zerega), and through Mrs. West he met her Park Avenue neighbor, Louis Wetmore, one of Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s original supporters.
Writing to Wetmore on 10 February 1925, Father von Galen unveiled his plan to raise $75,000 a year through a Women’s League in every city, for the training of 300 theology students. He added, “I am looking forward to your return (from lecturing) with joyful expectation and the knowledge that your being here will help me greatly.” In reply, Mr. Wetmore promised to make up for lost time in aiding his “dear friend,” and noted, by way of encouragement, that “Monsignor Barry-Doyle was over a year in the country before he really got started at all.”
By March 1925 Father von Galen could count on the support of all four Cardinals (O’Connell, Dougherty, Hayes and Mundelein), several bishops (including Michael Hoban of Scranton), and original CNEWA stalwarts such as Father Paul and the Catholic Converts League. To Monsignor Barry-Doyle and Joseph Moore, there seemed only one thing to do. They proposed to Father von Galen that he merge the Catholic Union with CNEWA. The Benedictine monk said he was receptive to the idea, but that first he had to consult with his superiors.
In his report to Bishop Calavassy, Mr. Moore was optimistic. He remarked:
At our invitation Dr. von Galen and Father Paul have conferred with Monsignor Barry-Doyle and myself for the purpose of bringing about a consolidation so that, if possible, there would be one organization in America representing the reunion movement. That organization we believe should be the C.N.E.W.A. as we are already an established corporation. … The result of our first conference is that Dr. von Galen was favorably impressed and said that he thought it a splendid idea but must confer with Rome before giving an answer and that he will see us again before he goes to Rome in May.
Father Von Galen’s letter to Bishop Papadopoulos, however, qualified Mr. Moore’s account. According to Father von Galen, Father Paul had advanced the merger — fervently, in fact — and Monsignor Barry-Doyle too seemed in favor of it. “I have the feeling,” wrote Father von Galen, “that he [Monsignor Barry-Doyle] realizes that the scope of his present work is too limited for the free deployment of his oratorical powers.” As for his own feelings, Father von Galen said he was fully disposed to see the merger through, provided it was in the best interests of the reunion movement – a question only Rome and the Oriental Congregation could decide. Personally, he said, he thought the whole operation should be headquartered in Rome, with all donations entirely at the disposition of the Oriental Congregation. However, at the same time, duty compelled him to add a note of caution “tout confidentiellement:” Cardinal Hayes did not like Monsignor Barry-Doyle, and the former had told Father von Galen not to join with the CNEWA president. It went without saying, said the Benedictine, that he would have to follow this directive, for on the one hand his American success depended in large measure on the good will of His Eminence, and on the other hand he had learned there was much opposition to Monsignor Barry-Doyle on the part of Irish-American Catholics. A final paragraph summed up his position:
I know very well that collaboration with Monsignor Barry-Doyle could be of very great value for the Catholic Union; but if the merger of these two works could not be arranged conveniently within the framework of the proposal set forth in my memorandum here enclosed–either because of the obstacles indicated above or for other reasons–then it would be far better to let the two enterprises go their separate ways–the Catholic Union dependent at all times on the Sacred Congregation and sending there all money that it raises.
Cardinal Dougherty also opposed the merger. In a 3 April 1925 letter to Monsignor Enrico Benedetti of the Pontifical Oriental Institute, Father von Galen said that during a visit with the cardinal in Philadelphia, Cardinal Dougherty had spoken of the proposed merger in the “most negative” terms and he concluded: “As Cardinal Dougherty is the Protector of our work in the United States, it seems to me his decision settles the matter once and for all.”
The merger talks were to take place in Rome. Everyone understood that the talks would be crucial, and Father Paul, who would be in Rome anyway with a Holy Year pilgrimage, agreed to represent both sides. On 24 April, Bishop Calavassy wrote that he would meet Father Paul in Rome for the discussions, but no decision to merge would be taken before Father von Galen arrived. “I also think it would be an excellent thing,” the exarch wrote of the merger, “provided Rome takes more interest in it. I therefore shall not take any decision before making sure what the Authorities in Rome think about it.” Bishop Calavassy urged Monsignor Barry-Doyle to mail him any suggestions he might have, “unless you think (it) more expedient to come yourself to Rome with Dr. von Gallon [sic] or any how in the month of May, that we may meet there.” Monsignor Barry-Doyle and Mr. Moore both decided to go.
Events moved quickly. On 28 March 1925, Father Paul sailed for Europe aboard the SS Ohio; and at the pier to see him off were Father von Galen and Monsignor Barry-Doyle, both with their organizations’ managers, Messrs. Stenzel and Moore. In Rome Father Paul spoke with officials in the Curia, and on 5 May 1925, he was granted a private audience with the pope. As vice-president of CNEWA and a director of the Catholic Union, Paul favored the merger, as he believed Monsignor Barry-Doyle and Father von Galen also favored it. By his account, the Curia was led to understand that the merger was desired by all parties concerned for the good of all.
The impression was reinforced a week later when Bishop Calavassy arrived in Rome. Father Paul had gone from Rome to Athens to explain to the exarch the necessity of amalgamating the two agencies, and Bishop Calavassy now came to Rome to find out for himself how the authorities felt about Father von Galen’s association, and what arrangements could be made so that neither CNEWA nor the CU would suffer. En route he wrote to Joseph Moore:
You do not need me to tell you that while in Rome I shall do all I can to strengthen our Association, even if we do not succeed to amalgamate it with the Catholic Union. I am confident however that I shall succeed and even in a satisfactory way. By my next letter to you or to Msgr. Barry-Doyle I shall be able to give you the results of our meetings.
In New York, meanwhile, Father von Galen was making his own preparations. On 16 May 1925, he expressed to Louis Wetmore his hope “for splendid results in Rome,” and on 20 May, he contacted Joseph Moore and arranged to meet Monsignor Barry-Doyle in Rome. The following day he wrote to Cardinal Hayes, thanking him for his keen interest in the work of the Catholic Union and assuring him that his wonderful help would be made known to the Holy Father. “Your Eminence knows the importance of my mission in Rome,” the Benedictine concluded, “and I therefore beg Your Eminence’s blessing and prayers for the further success of the Catholic Union.” On 23 May, Father von Galen sailed for Le Havre, stopping in Paris en route to Rome; and somewhere on the Atlantic he would have passed Father Paul, returning from his pilgrimage. Bishop Calavassy had remained in Rome, to meet the CU president, and he was soon able to report cheerfully the following to Monsignor Barry-Doyle:
With regard to the Catholic Union of Father Galen do not be afraid of it at all. Father Galen is coming here next week. I am waiting for him hoping to succeed to arrange everything in the interest of both Associations. Father Galen has not got even any permission from the Sacred Congregation to collect. Nevertheless he is a very good man and he could be of some help to us, provided he accepts our conditions in the question of amalgamating the two Associations. His Association being canonically erected in Austria cannot continue to exist as such in the U.S. unless it is declared by the Holy See an international Association; but the Holy See, I am sure, will never do such a thing. Father Galen’s Association therefore must come in to ours and become entirely American without any relation to the “Catholic Union” of Vienna. But all this will be fixed up by the Congregation and you will know the results when you come to Rome. I am of your opinion however that the amalgamation of the two Associations will be more profitable to C.N.E.W.A. We must therefore rather favour it.
While awaiting Father von Galen in Rome, Bishop Calavassy, heartened by what he had learned, did not waste his time. He mollified Bishop William Turner of Buffalo, who had been critical of Monsignor Barry-Doyle, and arranged to have the Oriental Congregation send letters of thanks to Cardinal Hayes and Bishop Hoban, as well as all future CNEWA directors. He paid a visit to Cardinal Dougherty, who pledged his help and invited him to call again, and he scheduled other social calls in Rome with Archbishop Michael J. Curley of Baltimore, Bishop Joseph Schrembs of Cleveland and Bishop Dunn of New York. “I am convinced,” Bishop Calavassy wrote, following these conversations, “that with the time and with little patience from our part the C.N.E.W.A. will become an organization of great importance for the cause of reunion.”
One voice alone seemed at all ominous, and this Bishop Calavassy recorded at the end of his letter with strange nonchalance: “Mr. Louis Wetmore of the Converts League sent a telegram to Bishop Papadopoulos notifying to him that Father Galen is arriving on the 3rd of June ’avec informations et propositions tres importantes a propos Catholic Union and Barry-Doyle.’” The next sentence read: “I hope to make (it) in time to be in Athens for Pentecost.”
Bishop Calavassy was likely made privy to the informations, for three days later, 27 May 1925, he again wrote Monsignor Barry-Doyle. This time, he advised the monsignor not to come to Rome as planned on the 23rd of June, but to wait until July, when they could both “get together with Father Galen.” He and Bishop Papadopoulos both agreed, wrote Bishop Calavassy, that “your presence in Rome without me being here will be of no use; it may even be harmful…” Not that there was any reason to be afraid of Father Galen, the CNEWA president was assured: “He has no permission from Rome to collect in the U.S. and he will not get it unless he accepts the conditions which will be presented to him by the Sacred Congregation.”
From the Catholic Union’s archives more is learned of Louis Wetmore and the informations et propositions tres importantes accompanying Father von Galen. Two memoranda were involved: one a general history of the Catholic Union in America, the other, of which only one copy had been made, having to do with Monsignor Barry-Doyle. Both were prepared by Mr. Wetmore and served as guidelines for “certain letters to Rome” written by him on Father von Galen’s behalf. One such letter was to Monsignor Benedetti of the Oriental Institute. Because it contained the gist of the memoranda, it is cited here at length. 
Mr. Wetmore began by noting that his Catholic Converts League had placed itself at the service of the Catholic Union to do all in its power for Dr. von Galen, “one of the best priests I have ever had the pleasure to know in my whole life.” He then said that the idea of merging the Catholic Union with Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s group was ill conceived and would be fatal for Father von Galen’s association, a view also shared by Cardinals Hayes of New York and Dougherty of Philadelphia. Of Monsignor Barry-Doyle he wrote:
I can tell you very confidentially, and with regret, as I have worked for a long time for Monsignor Barry-Doyle, that his work has been impeded in America due to the fact that many members of the hierarchy are personally opposed to him. He has been refused admittance in many dioceses; Cardinal Dougherty has no longer permitted him to locate his bureau in Philadelphia, and Archbishop Curley of Baltimore has refused him permission to open a bureau in Washington, which Monsignor Barry-Doyle wanted to do. The result is that he has been forced to open his bureau in New York. The consequence of this feeling against Monsignor Barry-Doyle (and I regret this personally because he is one of my good friends) will be that, should Father von Galen unite his work with Barry-Doyle’s, he would not be able to enter many American dioceses, and a good deal of money would be lost for the task of preparing priests to labor among the schismatics. Moreover, Monsignor Barry-Doyle cannot return to those dioceses where he has already collected money (Philadelphia, Buffalo, Boston, etc.), and if Father Galen were to merge the Catholic Union with Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s organization, Father von Galen wouldn’t be able to take his turn in these dioceses, hence he would lose a lot of money for the great work of reunion.
There will be more about this memorandum later.
Meanwhile, Father von Galen arrived in Rome on 3 June 1925, and he and Bishop Calavassy met for the first time the following day. By all accounts the meeting was a grand success. Bishop Calavassy, indeed, felt more confident than ever. The Benedictine impressed him as “a very intelligent and able man, full of good will and the best intentions, a man of God.” More than that, Father von Galen told the exarch he was ready to do whatever the “Sacred Congregation for the Orientals” directed, “being entirely at the disposal of the Holy See for the cause of reunion.” A date was fixed, 15 July, for the formal merger.
Convinced of victory in Rome, and confronted by a sudden wave of anti-Catholic opposition in Athens, Bishop Calavassy left Rome for Athens on 5 June 1925.
On 13 June, Monsignor Barry-Doyle left New York for Rome aboard the SS Leviathan, and while at sea he wrote to Bishop Calavassy. He was pleased, he said, with the news that Father von Galen would have to go along with the merger, yet, he observed, “he certainly has a great deal of assurance if he has no more influence than what you state.” He informed the exarch that he was carrying with him recommendations from Cardinal O’Connell, addressed to the Secretary of State, and from Bishop Hoban for the Oriental Congregation, and then he mentioned that the constant strain on his nerves had made him very depressed, and at times rather downhearted. It could be that he had reason to be worried, for he probably knew of some forces at work against him.
On 24 June 1925, the National Catholic Converts League formally petitioned Cardinal Piffl of Vienna to have CNEWA absorbed by the Catholic Union and Monsignor Barry-Doyle ousted from the United States. The petition was signed by Louis Wetmore and read in part as follows:
Inasmuch as Greece forms a part of the field of the Catholic Union, we would strongly urge Your Eminence to recommend in Rome that Bishop Calavassy’s work The Catholic Near East Welfare Association be absorbed by the Catholic Union, that one single undertaking may work with so much greater success. Greece, of course, should form an integral part of the work for which the Catholic Union labors. On the other hand, however, the services of Msgr. Barry-Doyle should, because of the reasons above mentioned (Irish-American resentment), be employed outside of the United States.
From Vienna Cardinal Piffl wrote to Cardinal Tacci of the Oriental Congregation requesting that Monsignor Louis Hudal, rector of the German College of S. Maria dell’Anima and Cardinal Piffl’s representative in Rome, be permitted to represent him at the merger conference scheduled for 15 July. Father Von Galen, meanwhile, seemed contentedly optimistic. Writing to Father Paul, he complimented him on preparing everything so splendidly and added, “I think our wish to unite the two works will be accomplished in a way that the aims of both organizations will profit by it.” One wonders, therefore, whether Father von Galen suspected what Messrs. Wetmore and Stenzel were saying behind his back.
In a “personal and confidential” letter to Mr. Stenzel 1 July, Mr. Wetmore complained that in a recent letter he had received from Father von Galen, the Benedictine seemed hesitant about fighting more, or in carrying his cause to the Holy Father. The Holy Father, Father von Galen said, should not be involved in these controversies. Mr. Wetmore counseled:
As I said in my cable to you in Brussels Galen must, as it were, be kept up to the mark, and be made to see that as our cause is the best, he must use every resource to win. Since B.D. has letters from Cardinal O’Connell of Boston to Gasparri, etc., Galen must collect all the influence in Rome which he can. He simply must “mobilize his forces” before the battle commences. I told him this carefully before he left, but he does not seem to grasp the situation.
Mr. Wetmore next discussed the rumor in Rome that the Catholic Union and CNEWA might both be suppressed, with a new entity to be created under the presidency of a Benedictine abbot. He commented:
This is not at all a bad scheme from our point of view, if we can secure nothing better, since a Benedictine Abbot in charge will suppress B.D. fairly well–in case that obstreperous gentleman returns here! If Calavassy agrees to the elimination of B.D. in America, with a Benedictine Abbot in charge, Father von Galen should be able to return here, and we shall have the whole affairs in our hands. [emphasis added]
The point is, to prevent B.D. from having any control of the new society, in case he should be sent back. I firmly believe that it can be arranged for B.D. to go to Australia, England, etc., to raise funds for Calavassy, etc….
Then Mr. Wetmore referred to his memorandum regarding Monsignor Barry-Doyle mentioned above. It needs no comment:
As I said in my cable to Brussels we have decided not to use the papers regarding B.D. for many reasons, among them (1) That this affair will have to be fought on purely ecclesiastical and not personal grounds, as the situation has now developed (2) Also that Rome, etc., might question an attack on B.D. in this manner as devious methods on our part (3) the fact that the matter might become public property and cause trouble for us, since people could say that if we knew this of B.D. why did we, the League, continue to support him after we had this knowledge, as we did during his campaign here (4) The possible innocence of Monsignor (5) The fact that I have consulted with an eminent authority (a priest) on the matter, confidentially, of course, and that he informs me that from the ecclesiastical point of view the evidence is not sufficient, etc. etc.
In the same letter, dated 1 July, Louis Wetmore authorized Werner Stenzel to represent the Catholic Converts League in Rome in support of Father von Galen and the Catholic Union. The following day, Mr. Wetmore sent Father von Galen a letter of introduction to Monsignor Mariano Ugolini, the prefect of the Vatican archives and a friend of Cardinal Francis Gasquet, the English Benedictine. “This,” wrote Mr. Wetmore, accords “with the idea of the Benedictine end of the game.” Other letters of introduction were enclosed for Father Gabriel Horn, O.P., prior of the Collegio Angelico and friend of a Dominican cardinal “much interested in Russia” and for Father Alfred, a Passionist and acquaintance of Cardinal Camillus Laurenti, prefect of the Congregation for Religious. 
Monsignor Richard Barry-Doyle, meanwhile, arrived in Rome 12 July, having visited Lourdes and Lisieux on pilgrimage. Bishop Calavassy and Joseph Moore had preceded him, and they were ready for the meeting three days hence. On 13 July, Mr. Wetmore received from Mr. Stenzel the following cable:
Augustine had few friends Rome stop Believe Calavassy tricky Tacci deranged soon to be replaced stop Piffl has appointed Hudal special representative for conference fifteenth stop Pope having directed Sincero organize Russian seminary we plan give our building fund to Pope at audience Sincero shall arrange propitious moment stop Shall marshal several cardinals our camp stop wish had thousand stipends for distribution stop Hope you sent me strong League letter Rome where we arrive Monday stop.
That same day, 13 July, Mr. Wetmore cabled Mr. Stenzel all the stipends he had on hand, $600 worth. The forces were mobilized, as Mr. Wetmore would say, and the meeting could be called to order.
(Click numbers to return to text.)
 Bishop Papadopoulos to Cardinal Gustav Piffl, 19 September 1924, Catholica Unio, Archv — USA — Korrespondenz, Fribourg, Switzerland: henceforth ACUF. It was Cardinal Tacci who had approved the statutes and indulgences which Cardinal Piffl of Vienna had submitted. Cardinal Tacci was not in good health, and he may have been out of Rome. Bishop Papadopoulos, as next in authority, submitted the petition to Pius XI. See also Father von Galen’s account in Father von Galen to Monsignor Philip Giobbe, 9 November 1926 (SOC) Prot. No. 21076.
 Geoealogisches Taschenbuch der Graflichen Hauser (Gotha: Justus Perthes, 1920), p. 311. His father was Count Mathias von Galen, and his mother, also of noble birth, was Lady Anna von Ketteler. Wilhelm was nine years older than this brother Clement.
 See New Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v., “Galen, Clemens Augustinus von,” VI, 247-248.
 Mentioned by John Donnelly, Secretary of the Catholic Club of New York City, in a letter to club members 9 April 1925 (ACNEWA) notifying them of a lecture by Father von Galen.
 Father von Galen to Giobbe, 9 November 1926 (SOC) p.2. The Los von Rom movement was a vigorous anti-Catholic political movement begun in Austria in 1897 and spearheaded by the Pan-German party, which wanted to incorporate Austria into Germany under the protection of the Protestant Hohenzollern Emperors. Its influence was abetted by the troublesome condition of the Austrian church, its unwieldy dioceses, its dearth of German priests and, especially, the anticlerical spirit of its secondary schools. While most who left the Catholic Church became nominal Protestants, the movement was essentially anti-Christian, the Pan-Germans favoring a neo-pagan “German” religion — an aim later realized on a larger scale by the Nazis. See New Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. “Los-von-Rom movement”, VIII, 1003.
 father von Galen, “Memorandum to His Eminence Cardinal Hayes: The Catholilc Union,” 16 July 1926 (Hayes Papers).
 An Augustinian, Gustav Piffl (1864-1932) was known as the “people’s bishop” because of his pastoral interests. See New Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. “Piffl, Friedrich Gusav,” VII, 358.
 Oriental Congregation, Nel Cinquantesimo della Fondazione, pp. 210-211.
 Father von Galen, “Memorandum,” p. 1.
 Father von Galen to Hayes, 20 October 1924. Hayes Papers, U-13, P-2.
 Father von Galen to Hayes, 17 December 1924 (ACUF) USA/59.
 Bishop Dunn to Father von Galen, 22 December 1924 (ACUF) USA/60.
 New York Catholic News, 2 September 1933.
 Born in Germany, Mr. Heide (1846-1931) was sometimes called the “dean of American candy manufacturers.” See obituary in The New York Times, 14 December 1931, p. 19.
 In reply to an earlier favor which Mr. Heide had sought on behalf of Father Quinn, Cardinal Hayes wrote: “You know that nothing would give me greater pleasure than to follow any suggestion you make, as I have such high regard for you.” See Cardinal Hayes to Mr. Heide, 11 May 1922, Hayes Papers.
 Father Quinn to Cardinal Hayes, 3 October 1924, Hayes papers. Here Father Quinn thanks the cardinal for bringing about the appointment for him. Cardinal Hayes had written to the apostolic delegate, Fumasoni-Biondi, on 29 September 1924, highly recommending Father Quinn, after which Father Quinn became the first native-born American to head the national SPF office. His predecessor was a naturalized American.
 Father Quinn to Cardinal Hayes, 15 July 1924, Hayes Papers. Father Quinn again wrote to Cardinal Hayes on 28 August 1924 assuring His Eminence that he would labor always to keep relations between the NY archdiocesan office SPF and the national office most friendly, “to the end that working in harmonious cooperation we may advance the cause of the Missions.”
 Certificate of Incorporation of the Catholic Union, 5 January 1925 (ACUF) USA/61. This name was legally changed on 21 January 1925 from Catholic Union, a Society for the Propagation of the Faith in the Near East, Inc. to Catholic Union, A Society for the Reunion with the Holy Church of the Separated Brethren of the Near East, Inc. See certificate of change of name (ACUF) USA/63. A probable reason for the change was the obvious confusion the former title would have created with the SPF.
 Father von Galen to Cardinal Hayes, 1 January 1925 (ACUF) USA/65. Father von Galen had heard of Cardinal Hayes’ doubts from Monsignor Michael Lavelle, rector of St. Patrick’s Cathedral. Lavelle’s decision to confide in the Austrian may have sprung, in part, from the Rector’s expressed opposition to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, because of the latter’s British mannerisms.
 Ibid. Father von Galen did not disavow his secret hope: “If some day the Holy See itself should take the work in hand, it would be one of the happiest days in my life. In the meantime I shall try to do my utmost for propagating the CU within the modest limits given by the Statutes. Only if it grows and prospers, my secret hopes may be fulfilled. The “Propagation de La Foi” in Lyons had to work more than 50 years before Rome took the work unto its own care.”
 Cardinal Hayes to Father von Galen, 15 January 1925 (ACUF) USA/66.
 Father von Galen to Cardinal Hayes, 21 January 1925, Hayes Papers, Z-15, G-L. See also Father von Galen’s “Memorandum,” p. 2.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 14 April 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/80. Wrote the monsignor: “The Russian cause is one of intense interest to all Americans because there is money to be made in Russia as her resources are almost infinite. The Greek cause on the hand is, unfortunately, most unpopular. Poor Greece has nothing to give in return and the American mind is material.”
 Joseph Moore to Bishop Calavassy, 27 March 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D1a/136.
 Father Paul to Bishop Calavassy, 8 December 1924 (F.P.R.C.).
 Catholic Union Ind., Catholic Union (brochure), 14 November 1925. (ACNEWA).
 Bishop Kelley was appointed in June 1924, and installed 15 October 1924; see J.J. Quinn, “Forward to Memorial Edition,” in Kelley, The Bishop.
 Minutes of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Hierarchy, 24 September, 1924, p. 14. U.S.C.C. Archival Holdings.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle fits the expression “West British,” which was used in Ireland to describe the Irish who cultivated the mannerisms, and preferred the society, of the English who lived in Ireland. To these Irish, family ties, decorations, etc., were very important. This “West British” characteristic would help to explain, as he admitted later, why Monsignor Barry-Doyle would find it almost impossible to return to Ireland to work there as a priest with the “native” Irish.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle said he wore his British uniform when he lectured because it helped him to gain entry with the wealthy Anglo-Protestant elite. In fact, he did receive healthy contributions from Protestant admirers. For example, through Protestant friends he was invited to speak at the “most exclusive” Protestant school in America, the Westover School in Middlebury, Conn., where he raised enough money to support, feed and clothe five orphans in Bishop Calavassy’s orphanage for as long as there was a need. See Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 4 March 1923 (AGCE) D2/13; 31 December 1924 (A.G.C.E.) D2/73; and Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 24 May 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/84.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 30 December 1924 (A.G.C.E.) D2/71.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 5 January 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/74. Later Bishop Calavassy came to accept this explanation, i.e. Cardinal Dougherty’s displeasure with Cardinal O’Connell, as the real reason for the eviction from Philadelphia. See Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 18 February 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/76.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 24 February 1926 (A.G.C.E.) D2/111. Wrote the monsignor: “He [Bishop Hoban] is hated by Cardinal Dougherty, and he in turn despises the Cardinal.”
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Papadopoulos, 5 January 1925 (ASOC) Prot. No. 15076.
 Mr. Moore to Cardinal Donahue, 13 November 1924 (ACNEWA).
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Papadopoulos, 5 January 1925 (ASOC) Prot. No. 15076.
 Father Paul to Bishop Calavassy, 8 December 1924 (F.P.R.C.).
 Bishop Calavassy to Cardinal Hayes, 26 February 1925. Hayes Papers, U-5, N-Q. Monsignor Barry-Doyle wrote the cardinal 10 March 1925 requesting permission to live with his mother during his tour of New York, a permission Cardinal Hayes granted. Hayes papers, 1925.
 Cardinal Tacci to Cardinal Hayes, 17 June 1925, Hayes papers, Prot. No. 16115/25. The meeting was held in the Hotel Willard, Washington, D.C. 5 May 1925. The only business conducted was the approval of a motion made by Joseph Moore to move the CNEWA from Philadelphia to New York, while retaining, for legal purposes, an office in Philadelphia at the office of CNEWA’s general counsel, room 1326, Land Title Building. (ACNEWA).
 In addition to Bishop Hoban’s interest, it should not be overlooked that Monsignor Barry-Doyle had the support of lay organizations, such as the Catholic Converts League and the Knights of Columbus, and of prominent individuals among the laity.
 Bridgeport (Conn.) Times, 1 November 1924.
 Palm Beach Daily News, 29 January 1925; also Miami Herald, 21 January 1925.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 12 January 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/75.
 See Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 12 March 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/78; 14 April 1925, D2/80; Mr. Moore to Bishop Calavassy, 27 March 1925, D1a/136.
 Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 2 April 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/79.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 14 April 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/80.
 Ibid. This use of “sThe Near East” on CU’s literature and its public utterances was not only confusing, charged Monsignor Barry-Doyle, but an outright misstatement of facts.
 From a report sent by Father von Galen to Cardinal Fruhwirth in Rome, n.d. (ACUF) USA/71. Father von Galen also met with a cordial reception in St. Louis, where he established another ladies committee and was given a diocesan director for the Catholic Union.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 12 January 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/75.
 Father von Galen to Cardinal Hayes, 21 May 1925 (ACUF) USA/81. Mr. Keeler had increased membership in the Student’s Foreign Mission League from a negligible number to more than 400,000 in less than four years.
 See copy of publication in CU archives, Fribourg, USA/91.
 Louis Wetmore to Father von Galen, 18 March 1925 (ACUF) USA/73. Mr. Wetmore cautioned Father von Galen not to depend too much on the financial returns from the lecture which was scheduled for 16 April 1925. Not surprisingly the League’s president, Stuart West, was one of the original five directors of the Catholic Union.
 In all her correspondence, the League president’s wife signed her name Eliza di Zerega West; see her letters to Hayes inviting him to various League lectures, Hayes papers. By 22 February 1925, Mr. Wetmore could write Father von Galen: “I hear from Mrs. West that you are seeing much of her, and I hope that she is proving of great value. I am sure that she will do anything for you that she is able to do, tho’ you must remember that none of us can, are able to do, all that we would wish to do for you.” See Mr. Wetmore to Father von Galen (ACUF) USA/69.
 Father von Galen to Mr. Wetmore, 10 February 1925 (ACUF) USA/68.
 Mr. Wetmore to Father von Galen, 22 February 1925 (ACUF) USA/69. Other reasons for this shift in allegiance from Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Father von Galen would surface as time went on.
 Father von Galen to Bishop Papadopoulos, 31 March 1925 (ACUF) USA/75.
 Ibid. An obvious reason for Father von Galen’s interest in CNEWA would be the substantial amounts of money being collected by Monsignor Barry-Doyle
 Joseph Moore to Bishop Calavassy, 27 March 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D1a/126.
 Most probably Father von Galen had been told this by Mr. Wetmore, who was trying surreptitiously to undermine Monsignor Barry-Doyle and Joseph Moore.
 Father von Galen to Bishop Papdopoulos, 31 March 1925 (ACUF) USA/75.
 Father von Galen to Monsignor Benedetti, 3 April 1925 (ACUF) USA/76. Interestingly, Father von Galen explains Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s success by claiming that Americans are less interested in purely spiritual causes, while they are far more generous when it comes to an appeal for relieving material misery.
 Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 24 April 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/81. Because of a lecture engagement in Rochester, N.Y., Monsignor Barry-Doyle was unable to go to Rome in May, but said he would go there in July.
 LaFontaine, “Role of Father Paul,” p. 28.
 Cranny, Words of Father Paul, VII, p. 159. From a sermon delivered by Father Paul, 30 January 1930. Just before he left Rome, Father Paul wrote Cardinal Tacci that in their conversations he had failed to bring up a matter “of more than ordinary importance.” Explained Father Paul: “I believe it would be a fitting recognition of Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s indefatigable efforts and his brilliant success, if on the occasion of his personal visit to Rome in July he could at Your Eminence’s intercession with the Holy Father be made a Protonotary Apostolic. Some such recognition at this stage of development of the Catholic Near East Welfare Association and its President would mean greater success for the Monsignor’s work and probably add thousands of dollars to the income of Bishop Calavassy — as a result of Monsignor Barry-Doyle’s labors such a mark of approval and esteem from the Holy Father would have an immense moral effect not alone with the bishops in America, but also with those wealthy and influential laymen whom we are trying to interest in the new association, founded by the Monsignor.” See Father Paul to Tacci, 18 May 1925. (A.O.C.).
 Bishop Calavassy to Moore, 7 May 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D1a/145. Bishop Calavassy also wrote that he was perfectly convinced that if Monsignor Barry-Doyle were a bishop he would have far greater success, but that “in the interest of the association it is better not to speak about it for the present, lest we spoil everything.”
 Father von Galen to Wetmore, 16 May 1925 (ACUF) USA/83.
 Joseph Moore to Bishop Calavassy, 20 May 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D1a/150.
 Father von Galen to Cardinal Hayes, 21 May 1925 (ACUF) USA/81. Father von Galen also reported that Father Joseph Kreuter, OSB, of St. Cloud, Minnesota, had been appointed Executive Secretary of the Catholic Union.
 Father Paul set sail from Naples on 19 May 1925; see Mr. Moore to Bishop Calavassy, 20 May 1925, (A.G.C.E.) D1a/150.
 Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 24 May 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/84.
 See note #30 above.
 Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 24 May 1925, (A.G.C.E.) D2/84.
 Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 27 May 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/85.
 Werner Stenzel to Louis Wetmore, 2 June 1925 (ACUF) USA/85.
 Mr. Wetmore to Mr. Stenzel, 2 June 1925 (ACUF) USA/84.
 Mr. Wetmore to Monsignor Benedetti, 5 June 1925 (ACUF) USA/86.
 Bishop Calavassy to Monsignor Barry-Doyle, 8 June 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/86.
 Monsignor Barry-Doyle to Bishop Calavassy, 16 June 1925 (A.G.C.E.) D2/87.
 Mr. Wetmore to Cardinal Piffl, 24 June 1925 (ACUF) USA/89.
 Cardinal Piffl to Cardinal Tacci, 26 June 1925 (ACUF) USA/90.
 Father von Galen to Father Paul, 26 June 1925 (F.P.R.C.).
 Mr. Wetmore to Mr. Stenzel, 1 July 1925 (ACUF) USA/93.
 Mr. Wetmore to Father von Galen, 2 July 1925, (ACUF) USA/97.
 Mr. Stenzel (cablegram) to Mr. Wetmore, quoted verbatim by Mr. Wetmore in letter to Mr. Stenzel, 16 July 1925 (ACUF) USA/101.
 Mr. Wetmore to Mr. Stenzel, 16 July 1925 (ACUF) USA/101.