JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

Father Ignacio Maria de Retana - 1603, cast 4 bells, 1 - 28 arrobas and 17 pounds.

One bell inscribed "Piedad", one bell inscribed "Remedios" (ring a bell?) :D One carved silver cross, from Tayopa, a hammered cross crucifix, from the "Paramo", silver candle holders and 6 hammered silver bars, from the Santo Nino mine, silver and gold from the Cristo Mine.

Oh, wait, you just wanted one.

B
 

I see that Mrs O has already posted a reply to Cactusjumper's request, but here was my answer -

Cactusjumper wrote
Is there some reason why my question can't be answered? Perhaps it is not specific enough. Can you give me the name of one Jesuit, his mission and the years he had a working mine? If possible, I would like to stick to Northern Mexico.
Click to expand...

The problem was in my failure to understand what it was you were asking for. For one example of a Jesuit priest in Northern Mexico and the years he was responsible for the mines of his mission,

Father Juan Bautista Grazhoffer, arrived in Pimeria in June 1731, with responsibility for Guevavi, Sonoita, Arivaca, Tumacacori and Tubac. Died May 1733, believed poisoned by his own Indians.

Can you provide a list of the names of the Jesuit Lay Brothers whom were active in Pimeria Alta say from 1687 to 1767? These are the fellows whom would have had direct responsibility for the mines in most cases, and I do not have such a list nor the various years in which they were present.
Oroblanco
 

Hi Oro,

You stated,
"Father Juan Bautista Grazhoffer, arrived in Pimeria in June 1731, with responsibility for Guevavi, Sonoita, Arivaca, Tumacacori and Tubac. Died May 1733, believed poisoned by his own Indians."

Was he poisoned by his Indians, or were him and his Indians victims of heavy metal poisoning?

Sincerely,

Infosponge
 

I could not say for certain Infosponge, however the fact that he suddenly sickened and died with signs of poisoning, while his Indians did not - at least not so quickly - I have to say he was poisoned by the Indians.

The processing of many silver ores which are rich in lead, plus the use of mercury in certain processes of silver recovery (and gold for that matter) would quite possibly lead to contaminations in the blood of Indians working with it. Is there enough evidence to make any conclusions on this particular angle? Thank you in advance,
Oroblanco
 

good ,rmi h swr: you posted -->

A) You posted --> All of the physical evidence seemed to had vanished into thin air, as it were
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From recent official gov't data, I am reminded for some reason of the clinton era. Important data just somehow became lost, along with important memory loss, as stated before congress and judicial authorities..
*****************************************************************

Where did SWR say that? Oh...he didn't
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

why not?

Don Jose deLa Mancha
 

cactusjumper said:
Roy,

Is there some reason why my question can't be answered? Perhaps it is not specific enough. Can you give me the name of one Jesuit, his mission and the years he had a working mine? If possible, I would like to stick to Northern Mexico.

Take care,

Joe
Click to expand...

Hey Joe,

Even Father Polzer SJ's admission of two Jesuit Priests engaged in mining did not mention any names.

My belief is that most Jesuit Mining was accomplished through Coadjutors (men who professed their allegiance to the Jesuit Order while never intending to become Priests (men who will never have to take a Vow of Poverty). Men who are free to work for profit.

You have to remember that every Mission was part of a larger Rectorate (Nuestra Senora de los Dolores, Nuestro Padre San Francisco Javier, Los Santos Martires Del Japon, etc). Each Rectorate had a Jesuit College/Headquarters that every Mission in it was answerable to. Material wealth went straight to the Colegios, while some was spent at the Mission Level for Church Adornments.

Some people believe that the Jesuits had/have a secret branch that do all the dirty work so that the Main Branch of Missionaries have what we call plausible denial. I think that it is much more simple than that; Jesuits simply used their Coadjutors to take care of all the things the Jesuit Priests could not do (due to vows, precepts, Spanish Rules, etc). Coadjutors were free to run businesses for profit. They were free to obtain political office, and as such, see to it that the Jesuit Order were granted privileges and exemptions they could not ordinarily get. Coadjutors were free to own and operate mines, and send the profits to the Colegios of whatever Rectorate they operated in.

We have provided examples time and again of how people who helped the Jesuit Order came to have power and wealth. People who made statements adverse to the Order were thrown in prison on trumped up charges (Capt. Manje) at the whim of the Jesuit Heirarchy.

There are no rules prior to 1710 (that I have found) that prevent the Jesuits from owning or operating mines. That gives them over 100 years of freedom in that regard. The only thing that MAY have prevented Jesuit Mining prior to 1710 was their Vow of Poverty. While that may have been the rule, we have also seen time and again the Jesuit Fathers' propensity for finding loopholes in both their Vows and Precepts (if the wealth their mines provided had been sent to the Colegios, then their Vows of Poverty would have been unsullied).

Best-Mike
 

I guess I should restate that evidence of Jesuit Mining activity is mostly circumstantial. While we have the words of some of the Jesuit Fathers themselves discussing intimate and direct mining knowledge (which was clearly illegal) the only thing that can be stated with 100% surety is that.

Guevavi and (to a lesser extent) Tumacacori I believe to have been centers for refining and smelting as evidenced by the large slag puts noted in Reports to Congress in 1866 and 1867 at Tumacacori and reports mentioned by Infosponge regarding Guevavi.

Mostly circumstantial, but strong. Also finds that I know to be true (my avatar), but I ask nobody to take my word for anything. The two major finds consisting of 1. 82 pounds of gold bars and 2. 1028 silver bars (both finds bearing the Cross and "V" of the Jesuit Order. There are many other finds, but I can not vouch for their veracity and make no claims to such.

Best-Mike
 

Mike mi buddy, Your post on coadjutors rates *****. I have been preaching this for a no of years. They are the ones that managed the string of small missions from Tayopa to just below Matamorros. However I never had found the exact name for them.

Thanks for filling in another missing link on Tayopa

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

Thanks Jose, but usually asterisks are stand-ins for a curse word!HAHAHA

I should add my other belief that some of the Missions may have been founded for specific purposes (Foundries, Smelting, Refining, Cattle, Crops, etc). It is also my belief (and only my belief) that several Missions were founded in some of the most remote locations (Sonoita for instance) as way stations for Jesuit Mule Trains carrying secret wealth to either the Gulf of Mexico or the Pacific for transport to Jesuit Coffers in either Rome or the Far East (Japan, Philippines, China, etc).

Best-Mike
 

Gollum wrote
usually asterisks are stand-ins for a curse word
Click to expand...

What the ****? You mean that when you said Oroblanco is **** and ******* etc it wasn't meant to say "fine" or "smartie"? Now I AM ******* crestfallen! :'(
Oroblanco

*** **** it anyway, ******* **** the *********** ****!
:o ::) ;D
 

Gollum you are right on the money (AGAIN) about those odd locations for some missions, in fact one of the arguments they used for citing Jesuit missions in Baja California was so as to have a 'safe haven' where the Manila galleons coming from the orient could stop and get fresh food and water - also to help establish the Spanish claims to the areas which were under very real threats from the French, British and Russians.

Yes any skeptic, this can be backed up with documentation, but I am tired tonight so if you can't wait until I find time you can go look it up for yourself.

There is also a very important point which seems to be missed by our skeptics and apologists - that the Jesuits (and Franciscans for sure) were casting silver into BELLS, candlesticks and plates, bowls etc, gold into crosses, cups etc - these were items which could be shipped OPENLY right in Spanish military transport galleons and would not cause the blinking of an eyelid. A 500 pound silver bell, such as the one found in Argentina, would be 500 pounds of silver bullion wealth for the Society. This is a key reason why they were "so" keen to be making bells for their churches, candlesticks etc far in excess of what would really be necessary for the number of churches they owned.

Wishing you all a very happy new year,
Oroblanco
 

Mike,


"Maybe if you posted a higher resolution copy of that page, I could tell.

The first page you posted is actually the page referenced in Infosponge's Scan. The fourth paragraph begins 19 Febrero 1741."

I am aware that I posted a picture of the original 1741 page that was posted earlier.

Are you unable to make out the 1732 date in the center of the last document I posted?

Take care,

Joe
 

Dear Cactusjumper,

Being you post a scan so small that no one could read anything but the date, would you be so kind as to tell us if the date is an actual dated entry or just a reference to the year 1732?

Thank you in advance,

Infosponge
 

Infosponge,

The document is filed under the year "1732", just as the rest of the documents are filed under the year they were written.

That being said, I believe this particular document could be filed under 1731 & 1732. As I read it, the 1732 in the center of the page, denotes a new year of records. I believe some of the entries prior to the visible date, are made in Dec. of 1731 and those that come after the date begin in Jan. of 1732.

I am in the same boat as the rest of you in my efforts to read the page. I trust that the people reading the original document were in a better position to determine the dates. I have no problem with accepting their assessment, but can understand how others might discount it.

Take care,

Joe
 

Beth,

Thank you for your reply.

[Father Ignacio Maria de Retana - 1603, cast 4 bells, 1 - 28 arrobas and 17 pounds.

One bell inscribed "Piedad", one bell inscribed "Remedios" (ring a bell?) One carved silver cross, from Tayopa, a hammered cross crucifix, from the "Paramo", silver candle holders and 6 hammered silver bars, from the Santo Nino mine, silver and gold from the Cristo Mine.]

As I understand you, the Jesuit Priest is named "Ignacio Maria de Retana", the mission is Tayopa and the year that he was there working the mine or mines was 1603. Correct?

Thank you in advance,

Joe
 

1603 is when the bells were cast, so, I would have to think that the metal was already there. You gotta have the raw materials to even start.
And, as you know, Tayopa is one of 17 mines.

B
 

gollum said:
cactusjumper said:
Roy,

Is there some reason why my question can't be answered? Perhaps it is not specific enough. Can you give me the name of one Jesuit, his mission and the years he had a working mine? If possible, I would like to stick to Northern Mexico.

Take care,

Joe
Click to expand...

Hey Joe,

Even Father Polzer SJ's admission of two Jesuit Priests engaged in mining did not mention any names.

My belief is that most Jesuit Mining was accomplished through Coadjutors (men who professed their allegiance to the Jesuit Order while never intending to become Priests (men who will never have to take a Vow of Poverty). Men who are free to work for profit.

You have to remember that every Mission was part of a larger Rectorate (Nuestra Senora de los Dolores, Nuestro Padre San Francisco Javier, Los Santos Martires Del Japon, etc). Each Rectorate had a Jesuit College/Headquarters that every Mission in it was answerable to. Material wealth went straight to the Colegios, while some was spent at the Mission Level for Church Adornments.

Some people believe that the Jesuits had/have a secret branch that do all the dirty work so that the Main Branch of Missionaries have what we call plausible denial. I think that it is much more simple than that; Jesuits simply used their Coadjutors to take care of all the things the Jesuit Priests could not do (due to vows, precepts, Spanish Rules, etc). Coadjutors were free to run businesses for profit. They were free to obtain political office, and as such, see to it that the Jesuit Order were granted privileges and exemptions they could not ordinarily get. Coadjutors were free to own and operate mines, and send the profits to the Colegios of whatever Rectorate they operated in.

We have provided examples time and again of how people who helped the Jesuit Order came to have power and wealth. People who made statements adverse to the Order were thrown in prison on trumped up charges (Capt. Manje) at the whim of the Jesuit Heirarchy.

There are no rules prior to 1710 (that I have found) that prevent the Jesuits from owning or operating mines. That gives them over 100 years of freedom in that regard. The only thing that MAY have prevented Jesuit Mining prior to 1710 was their Vow of Poverty. While that may have been the rule, we have also seen time and again the Jesuit Fathers' propensity for finding loopholes in both their Vows and Precepts (if the wealth their mines provided had been sent to the Colegios, then their Vows of Poverty would have been unsullied).

Best-Mike
Click to expand...
Dear Gollum;
Not wishing to seem argumentive, but your statement is false. A coadjutor ( I can't stand that title, therefore I am going to use the commonly used title of *Brother* if this alright with everyone) does in fact take a vow of poverty. First off, the title *coadjutor* is a very misleading one, especially in regards to our most Holy Roman Catholic Church. There are co-adjutor Bishops, co-adjutor priests, co-adjutor cathedrals, and so on. The Chruchs' definition of *coadjutor* is *assistant* or *supporter* and that would include practically EVERYTHING, so it's of little surprise that word can get confusing very quickly..

I much prefer the title *Lay Brother* because that is what Jesuit non-ordained monks are, in fact, although the title *temporal coadjutor* is very correct and proper, but it's also very confusing and formal. All Jesuits, and this encompasses everyone in the Order, first take *simple vows* of poverty, chastity and obedience. Please note that the special *Jesuit only* vow of alliegence is not taken at this time, and the vows are NOT *solemn* vows. Also, they reserve the right to take solemn vows in the future. This is mainly for the Jesuits who continue with their education in theology and are considering being a part of the ordained ministry.

These simple vows are are taken when the Jesuit is still a noviate and the notivate period usually takes around two years, HOWEVER before a Jesuit becomes a noviate, first he study as a *candiate* and this period usually lasts for one year, therefore the Jesuit generally has about three years of intensive training and study before he takes his first *simple vows*.

After the noviate period, the Jesuit either continues with his education and is classified as a scholastic or he becomes a brother, in which case his education is different, although many of the study courses are identical. In fact, many Jesuit lay brothers are professors, teachers, scientists, engineers, etc. Please note that merely because a Jesuit does not embark on becoming an ordained priest and chooses to remain an unordained Brother, this does not make him ineligible for higher education. The Jesuits truly love education as you've most likely gathered already. This type of brother is known a scholastic Brother.

Also, please note that prior to the Vatican II Council of 1968, Jesuit Lay Brothers almost always lived and worked inside of Jesuit communities and it was only in extremely rare circumstances that Jesuit Lay Brothers lived among themselves without being guided and led by an an ordained Superior General. Nowdays, however, properly trained and instructed Jesuit Lay Brothers may live in communities with only other Lay Brothers or even alone, doing God's work (Opus Dei!) within secular communities.

Now, the problem arises in the definition of simple vows versus solemn ones and the current Code of Canon Law does not aid matters even one little bit in this regard. The applicable reference for defining vows can be found in Can. 1192 of the current Code and it reads (translated from latin into English, of course) as follows:
Can. 1192 §1. A vow is public if a legitimate superior accepts it in the name of the Church; otherwise, it is private.

§2. A vow is solemn if the Church has recognized it as such; otherwise, it is simple.

§3. A vow is personal if the person making the vow promises an action; real if the person making the vow promises some thing; mixed if it shares the nature of a personal and a real vow


OK, now obviously that does not help very much, however what most people do not realize is that the 1983 Code of Canon Law is NOT all-encompassing, it merely defines and clarifies EXISTING Canons, therefore we must go back to the 1917 Code of Canon Law in order to better understand what the differences are between simple and solemn vows.

Without going into a lot detail and Canonical mumbo-jumbo, the difference between simple and solemn vows lies in the vow of poverty. This does NOT mean that a person can amass a personal fortune however. To sum up, if I take a simple vow, then I am permitted to retain my personal wealth yet at the same time I give up the right to manage that same personal wealth.

For example, if I had a cool million in the bank and I decided to take simple vows and become a Jesuit I would be able to retain POSSESSION of that 1,000,000 dollars yet the Superior General would tell me how,when and where I could spend it and what I could spend it on.

My simple vows would NOT give me the right to open up a 7-11 somewhere and place all of the proceeds into my private account! I would have still taken that vow of poverty and so I have therefore vowed to live a life of humble and modest means from the moment I took the simple vows.

When a person takes a solemn vow, he forsakes ALL worldly goods and this includes his family's personal wealth. He also gives up the right to inheritance and all future wealth. Incidentially, there was never an issue of simple versus solemn vows until the Crusades. Prior to the Crusades, all vows were considered as solemn without exception.

With the rise of the Roman Catholic military religious Orders there was a HUGE influx of lay Brothers. These men were soldiers, either professionally trained combatants of noble blood and birth, their underlings or professional footmen. As these Orders grew in size, those most notably being the Hospitallers, Templars and Tuetonics, there also arose a need for families to guard and maintain their wealth in secular possession. In other words, they did not want the Roman Catholic church to get their hands on their sons' inheritances.

Therefore, as the Crusades grew, so did the enlistments of the class of secular knights. These men had little or no prior theological training and they enlisted in one of the military Orders as a form of mutual protection and to have access to the Orders' soldiery in order to further their own secular plans. The most usual deal was for the knight to swear alliegance to one of the military Orders and in doing so he tithes 10% of his wealth to the cause, thereby retaining possession AND administration of his personal wealth.

Naturally, the Orders soon realized there existed all sorts of interesting possibilites that they exploited for all they were worth, now that they were firmly in control of their own wealth and their simple vows soon permitted them to embark upon full-fledged business ventures, with the Templars being the biggest participants as they had the wealthiest knights and supporters.

It was not until the Vatican finally stepped in and disbanded the Templars, along with remodelling the existing Orders that the practices were finally halted. The religious Orders slowly evolved for being strictly religious Orders into a purely secular, profit driven Orders. They were charging pilgrams for armed escorts, handling the pilgrams funds, settling the pilgrams lodging, food, clothing, medical care and stablage. They were also in trading with the enemies of the Church, you name the crime and undoubtedly one of the Orders was involved in it.

It was at the same time the Vatican disbanded the Templars that they started to overhaul the concept of simple vows and they concluded that while a person could retain the wealth which they had accquired prior to taking their vows, that person could no longer manipulate that wealth for their own gains.

I hope this explanation helps.
Your friend;
LAMAR
 

Dear group;
As an observation, when this discussion has run it's course, no one will be richer in regards to discovering Jesuit treasure troves, but we will most assuredly become better Roman Catholics in the process! So, it's not ALL bad, everyone... :icon_thumright:
Your friend;
LAMAR
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

TALES OF LOST JESUIT MINES

⬅️ Previous Thread

Molina Maps

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
We Dig Metal Detectors

Latest Discussions

Back
Top