JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

[Springfield]

...Lamar,
Is it at all possible in your mind, that the Jesuits could have been mining with the permission of the church? ....

Of course, Ritchie, this is the veritable 800 pound gorilla in the room. If the SJ was mining in the New World, who authorized the activity? This is, IMHO, by far the most intriguing aspect of the entire mystery.

Most 'Jesuit Treasure' believers, even the good catholics, are quite comfortable speculating on the SJ's participation in the conspiracy due to the significent circumstantial evidence that exists, but moving the accountability up the chain of command to Rome may be too much to bite off. We'll let Lamar respond for himself, but my guess is that if he's unwilling to throw the foot soldiers under the bus, he's certainly not going to consider sullying the brass either.

Great question, Ritchie.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[lamar]

I have been following this thread from the beginning and found the debate very interesting. The information provided by both Oroblanco and Lamar supporting their sides of the subject has been impressive to say the least! I am sure that I am not the only one that has concluded that there has to be both truth and fiction in all of the arguments presented. I have a question fo Lamar.

Lamar,

Is it at all possible in your mind, that the Jesuits could have been mining with the permission of the church? If the church owned everything said mining produced, would the Jesuits be guilty of breaking their vows? I do not see anything in the history presented in this thread that any Jesuit himself ever owned ANYTHING. Even the riches that were hidden away during the troubled times with the Indians were "Church Treasures" not "Jesuit Treasures". Nothing on either side of the argument suggests that any Jesuit personally "owned" anything more than the clothes on his back.

There is far too much evidence that the Jesuits were somehow involved in mining operations to ignore. Somewhere there has to be an explanation for this which allows for it to be true, without forming the conclusion that they were breaking their vows in the process.

As we all know. All Governments and Religions have Exceptions to the rules under certain circumstances. Could it be that certain exceptions were made by the church, to allow the Jesuits to involve themselves in mining operations, without breaking their vows, and these "exceptions" were the things that were not to be discussed in writing, and the things that already had, were to be destroyed?

In the belief that both sides of the argument contain more truth than fiction, the only thing missing is some kind of BRIDGE that spans the gap between the opposing views. That missing bridge HAS to be somewhere in the documents that were destroyed, possibly when the time came that the "Exceptions to the Rules" became "awkward" and difficult to explain due to changing times or seats of power.

If anyone can find that bridge, or form a scenario that would provide a "hypothetical bridge", I believe Lamar would be the man who could do it best!

Please give it a try Lamar.

Ritchie

Dear Ritchie;
It's an intriquing theory and one which I've thought about many times. At the time, there were many verbal directives given and of course, the Jesuits would have followed those directives, be they oral or written. One of the big problems which faces us in the determination of exactly what their directives consisted of, my friend.

On one hand, we have the reductions (called congregaciones in the northern colonies) of the Jesuits, which were, for all practical purposes, automonious governements, situated within the boundaries of the establishment. These automonious zones were governed by the Jesuits and within these reductions the Jesuits reigned supreme and most of the time, without outside interference or directives from the local secular representitives.

In the beginning, the reductions worked out well for all parties. The Jesuits had their own little empires where they were free to convert natives and conduct enterprises on behalf of those same natives. The secular colonists also benefited because they could purchase products and produce from the reductions and they also recieved the benefits of the Jesuit's knowledge and educations.

The royality benefited because the Jesuits helped settle huge areas and they were instrumental in quelling revolts and resolving disputes, which meant that the nobility did not need to pay for, equip and house a large standing military force. Outside of the reductions, we know that the Jesuits were very careful to not overstep their bounds and as such, they followed the rules of the secular government were closely.

Inside the reductions? Who knows for sure? There is some physical evidence which suggests that mining may have, or may not have, been attributed to the Jesuits, or more precisely, to the natives under their charge. The issue at stake is whether or not the Jesuits had the right to exploit the minerals that were located within the boundaries of their reductions. We do know that the Jesuit missionaries were highly adept at exploiting all natural resources, and this includes agriculture, animal husbandry, forestry, arts and crafts, all manner of skilled trades, medicine and engineering.

What we do know is that there was never any rule which stated that the Jesuits COULD NOT mine gold or silver within their respective reductions, therefore we may only assume that IF they were overseeing or encouraging their native charges to mine gold and/or silver, then they did so with the King's tactic blessing.

We also know, that according to their charter granted to them by the King of Spain, that the reductions were supposed to pay taxes after being in existence for seven years, the same as any other secular enterprise was supposed to do. We also know that in areas were natural resources were situated that all the reductions in withing zones paid their taxes after the seven year exemption, whether the individual reduction in question was turning a profit or not. In other words, it may be surmised that the wealthy reductions were sharing the tax burden with the poverty stricken ones.

A large part of the problem in establishing rules regarding them is that they were such a novel idea that no one had previously anything even remotely similiar before that time, therefore there were no real rules regarding the formation of them, nor their operating parameters. Even the Jesuit Superior Generals seemed to do precious little more than to send the Jesuits overseas, where they made to *swim or drown* in the New World.

The reduction system grew out of necessity in 1609 AD with the first reduction having been established in present-day Paraguay. From this single *model* more reductions followed and the basic reduction infra-structure would soon become the norm for all Jesuit missions in the New World colonies.

Once again, the issue at stake is not whether the Jesuits allowed their native charges the right to mine for gold and/or silver with the bounds of the reductions, but whether mining gold and/or silver on the reductions was legal in accordance to the current Spanish laws of the day.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Ritchie,

"There is far too much evidence that the Jesuits were somehow involved in mining operations to ignore. Somewhere there has to be an explanation for this which allows for it to be true, without forming the conclusion that they were breaking their vows in the process."

As has been mentioned before, some of the missions were dirt poor, while others were highly successful and would have been considered to have great wealth in that era. As Lamar has written, the Franciscans were a very wealthy Order, and had very rich vestments in their missions.

That may be one of the problems, as the Franciscans took over the Jesuit missions when the expulsion took place. Could it be that some confusion has taken place between the melding of the Jesuit stories and the Franciscan realities?

The rumors of Jesuit treasure and mines are over 242 years old. Not ONE mission possessed the treasures the soldiers were looking for. That means either the Jesuits had ample warning of what was coming, or there was no true treasure in the first place. Not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found. One wonders just how much time they had to hide all evidence of mining.

One of the Jesuit priests actually went mad when the order of expulsion was read. It seems unlikely that he knew in advance. No advance of soldiers on the missions would have gone unnoticed by the Indians. Assuming that is true, it seems natural that the Jesuits would have gone out to meet them. I would like to reread that particular event.

Are we to believe everything that Father Nentvig wrote, or should we assume that some of it was fiction. It would seem that each person will draw the line, depending on their own interests. He was not the only priest who tended to exagerate and expand on his stories. Some of them even......lied.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Ritchie]

Lamar,

Thank You very much for your detailed reply. It is right along the lines of what I had hoped for, because it allows room for speculation about certain Grey areas. These Grey areas almost certainly contain the "Bridge" between yourself and Oroblanco that I am searching for.

You use a lot of words in your posts that (Not being Catholic myself) I do not understand. I need to look up the meanings of some of your words and digest what you wrote.

I refuse to believe that the Jesuit Fathers participated in anything that they felt was wrong by any definition. But at the same time one cannot dismiss the evidence that they were involved in mining operations that Oroblanco, Mike and others have provided.

I am in hopes that we can utilize the combined talents, and passions of both sides of this issue, to find the missing bridge that allows the Jesuit Priests to have participated in the mining operations in one way ot another without having done anything wrong. I have a scenario in my mind that may explain it, but it is not completely focused yet. I want to see how the conversation progresses forward from this point, before finalizing it and posting it.

When I do, you can use your vast knowledge base to dissect it and point out the strengths and weaknesses in it. We have to somehow bridge this Grey area, and I believe it is possible to do it to everyone's satisfaction, with a minimal amount of concessions on either side.

Ritchie

 

[Ritchie]

Joe wrote - "The rumors of Jesuit treasure and mines are over 242 years old. Not ONE mission possessed the treasures the soldiers were looking for. That means either the Jesuits had ample warning of what was coming, or there was no true treasure in the first place. Not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found. One wonders just how much time they had to hide all evidence of mining.

One of the Jesuit priests actually went mad when the order of expulsion was read. It seems unlikely that he knew in advance. No advance of soldiers on the missions would have gone unnoticed by the Indians. Assuming that is true, it seems natural that the Jesuits would have gone out to meet them. I would like to reread that particular event".

Joe,

You do not know any of this to be fact. You are forming conclusions based on assumptions that everything you have read is true. This is the type of attitude that turns this kind of discussion into an argument.

ie: Not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found. Where did you read that? From what source did you learn it if you did not read it somewhere? How can you conclude it to be true, when more likely than not, any mines that were found were kept secret by the finders? It is you my friend that that will destroy an effort to build a bridge across the Grey area, if you do not stop making these kind of posts.

If you do not wish to participate in the effort to build the bridge, please do not disrrupt the rest of us from trying.

Ritchie

 

[Kentucky Kache]

...a tarantula which is able to bite off the hoof of a horse [or rot it off due to a poisonous infection]

I think it's South America where the have spiders that kill and drag off full grown chickens. I don't think a spider like that would have too much trouble gnawing off a horse hoof.

 

[lamar]

Joe wrote - "The rumors of Jesuit treasure and mines are over 242 years old. Not ONE mission possessed the treasures the soldiers were looking for. That means either the Jesuits had ample warning of what was coming, or there was no true treasure in the first place. Not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found. One wonders just how much time they had to hide all evidence of mining.

One of the Jesuit priests actually went mad when the order of expulsion was read. It seems unlikely that he knew in advance. No advance of soldiers on the missions would have gone unnoticed by the Indians. Assuming that is true, it seems natural that the Jesuits would have gone out to meet them. I would like to reread that particular event".

Joe,

You do not know any of this to be fact. You are forming conclusions based on assumptions that everything you have read is true. This is the type of attitude that turns this kind of discussion into an argument.

ie: Not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found. Where did you read that? From what source did you learn it if you did not read it somewhere? How can you conclude it to be true, when more likely than not, any mines that were found were kept secret by the finders? It is you my friend that that will destroy an effort to build a bridge across the Grey area, if you do not stop making these kind of posts.

If you do not wish to participate in the effort to build the bridge, please do not disrrupt the rest of us from trying.

Ritchie

Dear Ritchie:
Unfortunately, it's all true my friend. No verifible treasures have yet been recovered and no verifible hidden Jesuit mines have yet been re-discovered. Also, there exists no evidence that the Jesuit missionaries had any advance warning of the impending expulsion. After all, it was not like the Superior General could have just phoned ahead to all of the missions. There were great distances which needed to have been crossed, through some very rough country and journeys from Mexico City to the outlying missions of Sonora took months.

We know from the existing paper trail that the Superior General in Rome was shocked, the Pope showed serious misgivings and the College of Cardinals went to great pangs to specify that the Jesuits were not to have been harmed, abused or mistreated in any way, to include prohibitions against foul language and insults. In fact, nothing was to have been mentioned to the Jesuits why they were expelled.

Even the suppression order itself, written as the Papal Bull Dominus ac Redemptor signed by Pope Clement XIV on 21 July 1773 described in only the most broad and general terms under which the Jesuits were suppressed. In this particular Bull, we may read in the following excerpt:
"It is beyond a doubt, that among the things which contribute to the good and happiness of the Christian republic, the religious orders hold, as it were, the first place. It was for this reason that the Apostolic See, which owes its lustre and support to these orders, has not only approved, but endowed them with many exemptions, privileges, and faculties, in order that they might be so much the more excited to the cultivation of piety and religion; to the direction of the manners of the people, both by their instructions and their examples; to the preservation and confirmation of the unity of the faith among the believers. But if, at any time, any of these religious orders did not cause these abundant fruits to prosper among the Christian people, did not produce those advantages which were hoped for at their institution; if at any time they seemed disposed rather to trouble than maintain the public tranquility; the same Apostolic See, which had availed itself of its own authority to establish these orders, did not hesitate to reform them by new laws, to recall them to their primitive institution, or even totally to abolish them where it has seemed necessary.

From that excerpt we may understand the jesuits did enjoy certain exemptions and privileges, yet the Vatican never states what those exemptions and privileges are. In the next excerpt we may read that:

Among the princes who have thus appealed, is Philip II., King of Spain, of glorious memory, who laid before Sixtus V. not only the reasons of complaint which he had, but also those alleged by the inquisitors of his kingdom, against the excessive privileges of the Society, and the form of their government. He desired likewise that the Pope should be acquainted with the heads of accusation laid against the Society, and confirmed by some of its own members remarkable for their learning and piety, and demanded that the Society should undergo an apostolic visitation. Sixtus V., convinced that these demands and solicitations of Philip were just and well founded, did, without hesitation, comply therewith; and, in consequence, named a bishop of distinguished prudence, virtue, and learning, to be apostolical visitor, and at the same time deputed a congregation of cardinals to examine this matter.

From that excerpt, we are to understand that the preceeding Pope, Sixtus V, thought that at least SOME of the accusations and complaints of King Phillip II of spain were true, however, once more Pope Clement XIV does not go into any details about which parts of Phillip II accusations were thought to be true.

Next, we may study the accusations and political wranglings were taking place throughout the courts of Western Europe at the time in the following excerpt:
After so many storms, troubles, and divisions, every good man looked forward with impatience to the happy day which was to restore peace and tranquility. But under the reign of this same Clement XIII. the times became more difficult and tempestuous; complaints and quarrels were multiplied on every side; in some places dangerous sedition arose, tumults, discords, dissension, scandals, which, weakening or entirely breaking the bonds of Christian charity, excited the faithful to all the rage of party hatreds and enmities. Desolation and danger grew to such a height, that the very sovereigns, whose piety and liberality towards the Company were so well known as to be looked upon as hereditary in their families—we mean our dearly beloved sons in Christ, the Kings of France, Spain, Portugal, and Sicily found themselves reduced to the necessity of expelling and driving from their states, kingdoms, and provinces, these very Companions of Jesus persuaded that there remained no other remedy to so great evils; and that this step was necessary in order to prevent the Christians from rising one against another, and from massacring each other in the very bosom of our common mother the Holy Church. The said our dear sons in Jesus Christ having since considered that even this remedy would not be sufficient towards reconciling the whole Christian world, unless the said Society was absolutely abolished and suppressed, made known their demands and wills in this matter to our said predecessor Clement VIII. They united their common prayers and authority to obtain that this last method might be put in practice, as the only one capable of assuring the constant repose of their subjects, and the good of the Catholic Church in general. But the unexpected death of the aforesaid pontiff rendered this project abortive

Here Pope Clement XIV expresses the belief of the Vatican that had the Jesuits been allowed to remain in the colonies of Spain, Portugal, France and Sicily, there would have been revolts between the Christians of those realms. In other words, the political climate of the time was very highly charged and it seems that the Jesuits were right in the middle of it all. In order to diffuse the situation, Pope Clement XIV suppressed the Jesuits.

Pope Clement XIV may have succeeded in suppressing the Jesuits for 41 years, but he did not have the power at his disposal to blow out the candle which the Jesuits had lit and had left burning in Rome. After their suppression, they congregated in Russia, Prussia and the USA, where they continued as though nothing had happened, and it was in these three places that the Jesuits became more powerful than ever before and increased their sphere of influence to beyond that of their pre-suppression days. Because of their increased influence, the Jesuits were able to keep the Vatican divided into two camps, those who were on the side of the Jesuits and those who were against them, until finally they were completely restored.

In being purposely vague and glib, Pope Clement XIV wisely removed a venue in which the Papal Bull could have been attacked and disputed. Had he included the details of any claims and accusations, the Jesuits and other Roman Catholic ecclesical lawyers could have attacked the document on the grounds as being unfounded and their following suppression as persecution.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Ritchie,

Thank you for your reply and critique of my knowledge. I am sure, you believe, you are correct.

"You do not know any of this to be fact. You are forming conclusions based on assumptions that everything you have read is true. This is the type of attitude that turns this kind of discussion into an argument."

Your own attitude seems a bit aggressive and argumentative for someone who has been in this discussion for such a short time. Despite that, I am more than happy to address your points.

You are assuming that you know all of my sources. You are also assuming that I only get my information from books. While that is a major source for me, another that I rely on heavily is personal contact with a number of archaeologists and historians, who are kind enough to reply when I have a question.

Since none of us were there when these events took place, we are all assuming that our sources are as good as it gets. That would, of course, include Ritchie.

Since you have denigrated books as a viable source for historical facts, perhaps you can name something that you feel is a better source for the "best evidence". Please make sure that any source that you use did not use books, manuscripts or historical documents as a source.

Many of the books I have read were written by the people who lived the events we are debating. You can assume they are lying if you like, but without some kind of compelling proof, I will continue to accept them as the "best evidence" available.

On the other hand, I know that everything I have read is demonstrably not true. That is why I read and own so many books. I look for corroborating stories from the other writers from that era. That is how I form my opinions and in some cases my conclusions.

How do you arrive at such things?

[I.e.: Not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found. Where did you read that? From what source did you learn it if you did not read it somewhere? How can you conclude it to be true, when more likely than not, any mines that were found were kept secret by the finders? It is you my friend that that will destroy an effort to build a bridge across the Grey area, if you do not stop making these kind of posts.]

Reread what I have written above.

Let's get something else straight, while we're at it: This building of bridges across grey areas is your baby, not mine. It may be grey, and it may need a bridge, but I will continue to carry on the conversation as I see fit. If someone, like you, wants to build a bridge to an area that is not supported by the existing historical facts, count me out.

I don't believe in changing history one word at a time or entire bridges.........without facts. Now if you want to continue in this debate, get off your high horse and bring some facts, rather than conjecture, to the table.

"If you do not wish to participate in the effort to build the bridge, please do not disrrupt the rest of us from trying."

As soon as you are put in charge here, you can start dictating how the conversations will be shaped and who will be allowed to participate.

Your friend,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[cactusjumper]

Springfield,

This is the passage from "Rudo Ensayo" concerning the tarantula. I found it online:

"There is a large black spider with a few yellowish hairs on its back: the tarantula [Lycosa or Mygale tarantula], mariguasoco in Opata. Its sting is said to be fatal. Yet as many as there are here, I have not known of anyone who has died from its venom, although a soldier from the Fronteras presidio assured me that the steed he was riding, having stepped upon one, stopped suddenly. Upon looking for the cause, he found the trampled tarantula dead and his horse's hoof fallen off."

I don't remember it this way from my own copy of the book. I will check it when I get home.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Springfield]

Springfield,

This is the passage from "Rudo Ensayo" concerning the tarantula. I found it online:

"There is a large black spider with a few yellowish hairs on its back: the tarantula [Lycosa or Mygale tarantula], mariguasoco in Opata. Its sting is said to be fatal. Yet as many as there are here, I have not known of anyone who has died from its venom, although a soldier from the Fronteras presidio assured me that the steed he was riding, having stepped upon one, stopped suddenly. Upon looking for the cause, he found the trampled tarantula dead and his horse's hoof fallen off."

I don't remember it this way from my own copy of the book. I will check it when I get home.

Take care,

Joe

Joe, thanks for the additional information. This event sounds more like a roadside accident rather than a spider bite.

 

[cactusjumper]

Springfield,

No problem. I remembered that the book could be found online and just looked it up.

I am really interested in seeing if my book has a different translation of the original manuscript.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Re: JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL? <LONG reply>

Seasons greetings amigos,

Quite a few points have been raised and to respond requires another very long post. I must beg your indulgence.

Lamar wrote

Dear Yammy Elf;
I would not place too much faith in Fr. Nentvig's account, my friend.

Of course not, since Father Nentvig provides us with some very 'dammin' testimonies, we must not trust it whatsoever - heck why not just say the whole of his work is a complete forgery? What an attitude. How do you ever hope to find the truth?

Lamar also wrote

a tarantula which is able to bite off the hoof of a horse

Springfield responded

[or rot it off due to a poisonous infection],

I had not thought of that possibility, the scenario I proposed was a witnessing of an accident; a horse steps into a gopher or prairie dog hole, breaking off the foot (this happens even today and is pretty horrible to see) the witness runs to the horse, sees the hole with a large tarantula living in it and makes a mistaken conclusion that the spider had actually done the damage to the horse rather than the hole itself. Spider bites can lead to very nasty infections, and Springfield's proposed answer really makes sense here.

Ritchie wrote

If anyone can find that bridge, or form a scenario that would provide a "hypothetical bridge", I believe Lamar would be the man who could do it best!

Ritchie WELCOME TO TREASURENET and happy holidays! I have to agree with you here, Lamar has stated he has access to Jesuit archives and ought to be able to locate the official permission. Our amigo Don Jose has suggested the instrument which likely gave this permission - the council of the Indies held in Mexico, in which the padres were even exempted from having to register their mines. We know that they were exempt from paying taxes for a period of seven (according to Lamar) or ten (according to the Catholic Encyclopedia) years from the founding of the missions known as "reductions". The various edicts against the padres mining all seem to date after that early council of the indies, <1600's> so it is quite possible that they WERE legally allowed to mine, using the natives for labor, with an eye to getting the "wild" frontier regions settled and developed, and of course soon to be paying the royal quinto to enrich the Crown.

I am prevented, by time restraints and sheer distance, from being able to locate this "bridge" which would clear up this whole issue once and for all, but we can hope that Lamar may be able to locate it. We are faced with the problem of were these mining 'padres' or monks, really breaking their vows, and we can point to human nature with all of our mutual weaknesses and fallibilities, or were they simply following orders from on high? I think we can not link the mining to the Popes, based on their actions and reactions, in fact the Jesuit Generals may also have had no knowledge or no tacit approval of these activities; rather the "Provincials" would be the "brass" most likely to have knowledge of it. In support of this, we may note that Bishop Palafox found many of the Orders were quite active in areas they had no business in and reported it to the Pope (Innocent X). If he had known of these commercial activities prior to his arrival, perhaps it would not have been such a "shock"? I would say (and this is speculation on my part) that this suggests that the Catholic church officials in Europe had very little knowledge of what the various Orders (including the Jesuits, Franciscans and other) were really doing over in the colonies. The flow of tithes and profits certainly would have been appreciated, but why should an official in Spain, for example, even feel any requirement to investigate just "how" those profits came to be in the possession of the Church?

Lamar wrote

In the beginning, the reductions worked out well for all parties. The Jesuits had their own little empires where they were free to convert natives and conduct enterprises on behalf of those same natives. The secular colonists also benefited because they could purchase products and produce from the reductions and they also recieved the benefits of the Jesuit's knowledge and educations.

The royality benefited because the Jesuits helped settle huge areas and they were instrumental in quelling revolts and resolving disputes, which meant that the nobility did not need to pay for, equip and house a large standing military force. Outside of the reductions, we know that the Jesuits were very careful to not overstep their bounds and as such, they followed the rules of the secular government were closely <snip>

We ought to take note, that these same Jesuits, "accused" of operating mines, were also a huge roadblock to those who wished to literally enslave the Indians under their care. The 'secular' or lay people near these frontiers, seeing the beautiful adornments in the Jesuit mission churches (as well as Franciscan) and with some knowledge of the mining activities, had good reason to make their accusations - for if they could get the padres thrown out, they could "swoop in" and seize those mines, along with the Indians they would use to work them. No longer would the mines be worked in order to simply provide food and clothing for the dirt-poor Indians along with some decorations for the churches, they had in mind to fully develop the mineral deposits for their own (private) enrichment. What they did not take into account was that many of the Indians had a genuine love for the padres, and knew only too well how the Spanish were - so they refused to help them locate the mines they so eagerly sought to take away from the missions.

Of course a fair amount of what I just wrote is pure speculation on my part, based on the known history of Spanish colonization and resulting disastrous effects on the native populations. Our skeptics insist there never were any mines at all, and dismiss the charges raised against the padres out of hand, but the truth lay 'betwixt and between' those extreme charges of the laity, whose greed for the possessions of the missions could scarcely be restrained (and remember that the various missions also often had the "best" crop lands and pastures, not just a smattering of rather small mines) and the modern claims of the missions never having had a single mine of any kind or treasure in the hands of the padres.

Cactusjumper wrote

The rumors of Jesuit treasure and mines are over 242 years old. Not ONE mission possessed the treasures the soldiers were looking for. That means either the Jesuits had ample warning of what was coming, or there was no true treasure in the first place. Not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found. One wonders just how much time they had to hide all evidence of mining.

Well I must respectfully disagree with several of these statements and agree in part. Not ONE mission was FOUND to be in possession of the treasures that the Spanish military authorities, which is not the same as saying the missions never had them whatsoever - read those Jesuit descriptions of the beautiful silver and gold implements and decorations which were not only in the major churches but even in the small visitas. Are we to now say that those descriptions were a pack of lies? Would you say that a Jesuit monk, working at a mission in Mexico, hearing of the crackdown in Portugal, France and elsewhere, would presume that no such thing would ever happen in Mexico?

As for your statement that not ONE of the Jesuit mines was found, this is in error. The Salero mine is one example, another you can easily find but I will not name here for my own reasons; in that mine were found plenty of evidence that it had been formerly worked by the padres. They had almost nine YEARS of advance warning, certainly enough time to conceal the mines. Do you doubt, that a mine could be so well-hidden, with even one year of time to conceal it? There are a few other examples, such as the Tayopa mine complex in Mexico, or the Santa Brigitta mine also in Mexico.

Cactusjumper also wrote

One of the Jesuit priests actually went mad when the order of expulsion was read. It seems unlikely that he knew in advance. No advance of soldiers on the missions would have gone unnoticed by the Indians. Assuming that is true, it seems natural that the Jesuits would have gone out to meet them. I would like to reread that particular event.

You have the very account I mentioned, it is in one of the books you have listed as owning. Give me one moment here I will see if I can find it online, so everyone can read it.......well I hoped I could locate it but I am confident you have it. Some of the military authorities were quite empathetic to the plight of the Jesuit padres, such as Captain Urrea, and we may note that Urrea did not physically march out with his troops to each and every outlying mission of Guevavi, rather he had the padre in charge there send out letters to them in order to call them in. Still think that Spanish "roundup" of the Jesuits was so efficient as to go without advance warning?

We know that the Jesuit missions were found not to have in their possession the treasures which the Spanish authorities were seeking - but they were far from being destitute. Here is one account of what was seized from Pimeria Alta;

"One overall inventory of the Pimería Alta missions’ wealth, drawn up in 1767, presumably at about the time of the expulsion, showed Guevavi to have been one of the least affluent, though by no means destitute. Its temporal resources consisted of 21 pesos 6 reales under the heading “Reales,” 2 pesos 3 reales of gold, 11 pesos 4 reales of silver, 700 cattle, 24 oxen, 24 ewes, 420 rams, 88 goats, 6 gentle mules, 18 gentle he-mules, 52 gentle horses, 24 colts, and 39 mares. Listed separately for Tumacácori were 24 oxen, 23 rams, and 17 goats. San Xavier had no money, 387 cattle, 38 oxen, 330 ewes, 70 rams, 41 goats, 3 unbroken mules, 10 unbroken he-mules, 22 gentle horses, 24 colts, and 114 mares. Captain Anza owed Guevavi 200 pesos. “Apunte particular, de los bienes y efectos, que existen en cada Mission, y Pueblos de Visita de ellas”; BNMex, 54/732."
<source http://www.nps.gov/tuma/historyculture/custudio-ximeno.htm>

What does a beef cow sell for today? What value does a gold coin have today? The actual CASH found is miniscule, but we have reason to believe that the money was safe from the hands of the Spanish authorities well before they opened the sealed orders which sent them out to arrest the Jesuits.

Cactusjumper wrote

Are we to believe everything that Father Nentvig wrote, or should we assume that some of it was fiction. It would seem that each person will draw the line, depending on their own interests. He was not the only priest who tended to exagerate and expand on his stories. Some of them even......lied.

So are you implying that Father Nentvig was lying, when he said that an Indian had given him silver nuggets the size of acorns, that he was lying when he reported the Indian who had a secret silver mine and refused to tell the missionary, even after the missionary had given him promises? This attitude that we should either accept everything or discard everything is not useful; the examples of Nentvig reporting things which few credit as believable are quite possibly just his reporting what he was told. Even if we thus dismiss his report of the spiders that bit off horses feet, are we supposed to classify such a report as the silver gift, or the missionary asking where the sources of the silver could be found? Just my opinion, but this seems an attempt to deny the truth. Our Jesuit apologists wish us to disbelieve and discard everything that testifies of their having had mines and possession, at the other extreme are the so-called "conspiracy theorists" who want us to believe there are vast treasures hidden everywhere, and a massive mining complex run by the same padres. The truth of the matter is again, between these extremes - not "NO" mines but a smattering, not "NO" treasures but largely the silver and gold ornaments and implements of the Church, and even the mines themselves were hardly anything impressively large.

Lamar also wrote

Dear Ritchie:
Unfortunately, it's all true my friend. No verifible treasures have yet been recovered and no verifible hidden Jesuit mines have yet been re-discovered. Also, there exists no evidence that the Jesuit missionaries had any advance warning of the impending expulsion.

Several false statements here, *I wish to raise a point here in a moment Lamar* first yes several huge silver bells have been found which can be directly tied to the Jesuit missions, so that portion is in error; next several Jesuit mines have been re-discovered over the years, we have mentioned some of them; and it is patently obvious that virtually all Jesuits MUST have seen the looming black cloud on the horizon, in the nine years between the Portuguese expulsion and the Spanish following suit.

*This has the hallmarks of blatant dishonesty Lamar, I recall you mentioned that you are supposed to be totally honest. I have no such vow to keep amigo, yet it appears that it is you making the false and misleading statements here.*
Wishing you all a very Merry Christmas,
Oroblanco

 

[Oroblanco]

Thank you Joe for posting the actual translation of the horse-biting spider incident, now I am convinced this was a simple roadside accident in which erroneous conclusions were reached based on seeing the spider - actually DEAD spider, which may have resulted in a "greasy spot" making the horse lose his footing and fall disastrously.
Oroblanco

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Kentucky Kache wrote

All this time our History has been wrong.

Lucky thing we have our amigo Lamar and his confederates here to re-write history FOR US huh.

The good thing is, no matter how much you change what's on the books, you'll never change the real history. And Lamar has 2000 years of real history against him.

 

[Ritchie]

Friend Lamar and Joe,

For the two of you to conclude that the possibility of a lost Jesuit mine or treasure is non existent, because you have never heard of one being found, is like someone in the 1400’s telling Christopher Columbus that the earth cannot be round because nobody has ever been around it. Completely ignoring the fact that nobody has ever fallen of the edge of it either.

Joe, I did not make any demands for you to do anything. I asked you in a nice way to “Please” not disrupt the line of discussion I was going to attempt to pursue.

To which you replied:
“Let's get something else straight, while we're at it: This building of bridges across grey areas is your baby, not mine. It may be grey, and it may need a bridge, but I will continue to carry on the conversation as I see fit. If someone, like you, wants to build a bridge to an area that is not supported by the existing historical facts, count me out.”

Apparently you do not understand that a grey area, is grey because there are not any currently known historical facts to make it black or white.

In my opinion, Lamar has made a huge concession in his previous stand when he said – “There is some physical evidence which suggests that mining may have, or may not have, been attributed to the Jesuits, or more precisely, to the natives under their charge.

I see it as an attempt on his part to begin to bridge the grey area. The only thing I see in your post, is an attempt to derail any possibility of peace and cooperation, between the two sides of the discussion that may result in a conclusion, that you would not agree with.

If you are determined to pursue with this attitude, then the rest of us might as well let you think you have won, and let the matter drop, for as I am sure you know. Nobody can tell what is in the soup, while someone is constantly stirring it up, and adding more to it with every opportunity.

Ritchie

 

[Ritchie]

Mike,

When you started this thread you stated:

Okay,
For those who wish to debate Jesuit Treasures, I have completed the first part of the thread:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,286969.msg2055760.html#msg2055760
I will say this, if there is any insane posts regarding Jesuit Illuminati, New World Orders, Anti_Catholic or Anti-Jesuit Slanders, or Jewish conspiracy nuts, I will make sure all those posts get whacked!
I also am saving the debate about Jesuit Mining Activities for a different thread, so no need to post about it there.
Best-Mike

Would it be better if I waited for the thread about "Jesuit Mining Activities" to discuss the possibility of bridging the grey area between the opposing sides? I am beginning to get the feeling that I will not be able to do it here.

Ritchie

 

[Oroblanco]

Seasons greetings,

I would only point out that Lamar made sure to shift responsibility for any mining activities to the Indians, which is a bit disingenuous. The Indians work at the missions was under the direction of the padres and the lay brothers, and they also had trusted "natives" which were also assigned to be overseers of the Indians work. Several of these (Opatas in fact) were specifically targeted by the Pimas during the rebellion of 1695. That Indians could and did work their own mines is a fact, but this work was done before the arrival of the missionaries - once the missionaries arrived, they certainly inquired of the natives where the silver could be found.

I will hold off "adding more to the soup" <more testimony on Jesuit mining activities> for a while. One point I would raise though is that labor assigned by the padres to the Indians was mandatory, anyone unwilling or "too lazy" to pull his or her weight would not simply see his rations reduced, in severe cases whipping the or the stocks were the order of the day. According to one witness, the victim thus punished was expected to kiss the hand of the man who just finished administering the lashes, and thank him for the "light punishment" which served to "save his soul". Our apologists don't want to examine this part of our history either, but it is factual. So while some of the Indians had a genuine love for their padres, not all of them were filled with the same emotion.

"The missionary dictated the punishment which was ever tempered with mercy. When simple reproof availed nothing, the whip was applied. This was the only correction, besides fasting, which affected the lower class natives of the Pacific Coast. This manner of punishment had been introduced by the Jesuit founder of the Lower California missions, Father Juan María Salvatierra, about seventy years before, as the only means to make the rude creatures grasp the wickedness of a deed. The number of lashes to be administered was governed by law, and might never exceed twenty-five for one offense, nor more than once a day. The chastisement was not applied by the missionary, but by an Indian chief or other native official, ..."
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03177b.htm>
This is a Catholic source, and strangely we find no mention of the stocks.

Note that the missionary himself never applied the whip, at least in theory, and no more than 25 lashes were the prescribed limit. The apologists very apparently fail to understand how this might have been viewed by those natives who had to receive them.

Wishing you all a very Merry Christmas,
Oroblanco

 

[cactusjumper]

I went back and reread my very first post to you, just to make sure I was respectful, non confrontational and non disruptive. I believe that was how it reads.

These are your very first statements to me:
_________________________________

"You do not know any of this to be fact. You are forming conclusions based on assumptions that everything you have read is true. This is the type of attitude that turns this kind of discussion into an argument."

"Where did you read that? From what source did you learn it if you did not read it somewhere? How can you conclude it to be true, when more likely than not, any mines that were found were kept secret by the finders? It is you my friend that that will destroy an effort to build a bridge across the Grey area, if you do not stop making these kind of posts."

"If you do not wish to participate in the effort to build the bridge, please do not disrrupt the rest of us from trying."
__________________________________

Now perhaps "disrrupt" has a different meaning for you, than how I understand the word. I have seen this kind of reasoning going on in some quarters for a long time now. It's something like.......If you agree with me, we can talk forever. If you disagree with me, conversation over.

If you want me to talk nice, you will need to give me the same respect you expect for yourself. Putting "please" in your denigrating post is like writing "please" kiss my brass. If you want to force your "bridge" down my throat, you're in for a bumpy ride. I have nothing against your theory, whatsoever. It seems like an excellent idea, but you are the one who has disrupted the topic we are now posting on. That topic is: "JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?", Not Richie's Bridge.

The very title breeds debate. That means there will be at least two opinions concerning the reality of Jesuit Treasures. That reality requires the written word/historical record. To build your bridge to a middle ground will require evidence from both sides, that somehow convinces both sides of the others point of view.

If you don't have the patience or courtesy to read my side, I would suggest that you will find it easier to start your own topic and run it the way you see fit.

This is a very simple concept. When your posts, to me, are respectful, I will pay you the same respect. I will, however, continue to debate the topic as it was outlined by Mike, not by how it is re-focused by you.

Thanks for your reply,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[cactusjumper]

Ritchie,

Just for the record, "mining" was injected into this thread in the ninth post. It was posted on Dec. 6th. which was two days before you decided to register and start posting. You may want to take a little time and let us get used to you before you start making intellectual waves.

Here is that post:

[Simple. The same way the rest of the Catholic Church gets much of its' great wealth; through tithing, donations, and through properties willed to the Church. There are always people who think that they can buy their way into Heaven.

Even if I were to concede the mining aspect of the Jesuit Order argument (which I don't), the fact that the Jesuits had, in some cases, enormous herds of cattle, horses, mules, burros, and sheep. They also raised large amounts of crops. All of these they sold to the miners and settlers of the New World. I remember reading a quote about the 49'ers gold rush which basically stated that "The guy who sold the shovels made many times the money of 99% of the people that used them to dig for gold."

Sorry about the lack of references, but the subject is so well known and taught it is pretty much a given. The only activities of the Jesuit Order that require in depth digging to find the truth are:

1. Jesuit Treasures
2. Jesuit Mining
3. Jesuit Political Intrigues
4. Jesuit Slaveholding and Trading]
___________________________

That post was done by.......Mike. As this is his topic, he had a perfect right to take it in this direction. The rest of us, realizing that, followed the thread that he created.

Take care,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Ritchie]

Oroblanco,

I did not mean to suggest that YOU were stirring the soup and tossing more into it every chance you got. You have remained steadfast in your side of the discussion, and have undoubtedly done a lot of research into the subject. Your point of view remains consistent, and on the same track at all times. Just as Lamar has on the other side.

I commend you both for your diligence and patience with each other.

If this discussion were only between the two of you, I believe it would not become so inflamed at times, but there are “people” who sit in the middle, and fan the flames of one side, and then the other, as if their only interest is to keep the discussion in a constant state of disagreement and as hysterical as possible.

The bridge over the grey area I have spoken of is purely between Lamar and yourself.

Indeed Lamar did shift responsibility for any mining activities to the Indians, but in your wildest dreams did you ever imagine the Priests themselves out there digging? It matters NOT who actually dug it up, but who possessed it in he end. All that is needed to bridge the grey area, is for everyone to agree that there was mining done that the Jesuits (Church) profited from, and therefore those profits could have, at one time been buried away somewhere for safekeeping.

The subject of this thread being JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?. The agreement spoken of above will at least establish that they COULD have been real. Then we can move on to the next step.

Joe, I just read your last post and hereby notify you that I consider you to be nothing more than a distraction to this conversation. For the purpose of maintaining my own sanity, I have put you on ignore so that I will no longer be distracted by your posts.

Ritchie