Re: True Spelling (LONG WINDED REPLY extra coffee-beer alert)
Greetings friends,
This grew into a VERY long reply, so I beg your indulgence;
Lamar wrote:
Therefore, the Papal decree posed no immediate to the Society, therefore the Jesuits continued as before, without any official recognition from the Holy See. The Pope NEVER stated that the Jesuits could not continue with their Holy works, merely that they no longer enjoyed the protection of the Holy See, and as such, they were on their own in regards to local governments. This action in fact, increased the political strengths of the Jesuits instead of reducing them.
Do you deny that Pope Benedict XIV ordered the Society of Jesus to be
DISBANDED FOREVER? His command on this is hardly equivocal. The fact that the SJ was continuing with their activities (including founding the aforementioned Georgetown MD University, 1789) years AFTER they had been ordered to DISBAND FOREVER by the Pope, to whom they swear an oath of obedience, can only mean that either the Pope was being dishonest/disingenuous, or that the Society of Jesus was being dishonest/disingenuous. Do you also deny that
the Pope ordered ALL of the properties of the Society of Jesus to be seized and taken from them?
Lamar wrote:
As with all sovereign entities, the Vatican has it's secrets, in the same manner as MI-6 and the CIA. If the Vatican did not have the secret archives, then it would not be known as an all-powerful, mysterious organization. So, just in keeping up with apearances, the secret archives serve a distinct purpose.
Your words only serve to prove that the SJ is more likely than NOT to have not only had a very “secret” element, but that it served in functions more like our modern CIA or the KGB. This makes the chances of finding the documentation which you (and Cactusjumper and others) continue to call for as “proof” of Jesuits having had a hand in mining so unlikely as to be nearly impossible. It would be as likely to find documents which showed the CIA involved in the Hungarian uprising of ’56. Actually I think this would be MUCH easier.
Real de Tayopa wrote:
Precisely, and the Jesuits also had / have theirs. Under these conditions how can one logically argue against a shadow group of Jesuits dedicated to the advancement of the society, it would not be against Rome, but simply furthering the advancement of sacred works through the Society.
Precisely, sire.
Lamar wrote:
Many people seem to think that the Jeusits have vast resources of hidden wealth, when, in all truth, they do not.
We (public) are so frequently pointed to the Jesuit constitutions and oath of PERSONAL poverty, which in
no way precludes the Society from owning all sorts of properties. I have no doubt that nearly ALL of the SJ members were PERSONALLY quite poor, but to claim that the Society of Jesus is equally poverty stricken is, to quote our friend Cactusjumper, “LUDICROUS”. Or are we now going to claim that the Roman Catholic Church is also poverty stricken? I remind you, of the vast number of BEQUESTS to said Society and Church, through the agencies of WILLS. I also remind you of what particular type of DOCUMENTS are so glaringly MISSING from our current archive of Colonial Sonora/Pimeria Alta? Probates, that is the official executions of WILLS. Also MISSING are any great number of property transfers. Are we then to presume, based on the MISSING documents, that there WERE NO PROBATES or property transfers, since we have such a paucity of these documents? This is the style of argument the defenders of the SJ have continually put forward, and is patently false. I would also like to point out, that
the only probate we have in our archive is that of Don Gregrorio Álvarez Tuñón y Quirós, a man whom the Jesuits identify
as an enemy of the Society of Jesus.
Cactusjumper wrote:
Let me put it another way. The evidence I have seen for Jesuit treasure at Tumacacori, is weak and more than ludicrous. What I have seen for other locations is weak and often manufactured.
You are making the very error of which you are accusing myself as well as the others who claim the Jesuits were in fact involved, that of MIS-identification. You point out that the mission we see TODAY is the Franciscan version, and there are few legends of any Franciscan ‘treasures’ involved with their mission; the slag piles mentioned as being close to the Tumacacori mission were close to the original Jesuit mission, NOT close to the Franciscan. Often enough, treasure researchers DO make the mistake of assuming anything of “missionary” origins MUST needs be then Jesuit, when in fact a good deal is actually Franciscan. Too many ignore the fact that the Franciscans had entered Arizona much earlier than the Jesuits and had founded some five missions in NE Arizona more than a century ahead of the Jesuits; that there were even complaints made by both the Franciscans and Jesuits of the ‘poaching’ of their ecclesiastical territories by the other Order.
In the modern view of colonial missionaries, in particular the Jesuits, we are given a portrayal of courageous, hard-working and pious men, braving the dangers of the wild frontiers and trying to bring the enlightenment and advantages of Christianity to the heathens. We are NOT often reminded of just how those “heathens” were rounded up to be brought to these wild-frontier missions; for this might cast a slightly different color on our good and gentle SJ padres. The fact of the matter is that in many cases, the Amerindians were rounded up by Spanish soldiers as well as Spanish-allied Amerindians, literally at gunpoint. We find the remarkable successes in baptizing large numbers of heathens in Goa (India) by the Jesuit fathers, but nowhere in their own reports do we find any mention of the Portuguese soldiers who were lined up with their guns aimed at the crowd, clearly demonstrating the alternative to choosing to “convert” to Christianity. How do we suppose native Amerindians viewed the arrival of our Jesuit padres, with armed Spanish soldiers at their sides, herding them onto the missions?
I have no doubt there is virtually nothing of “treasure” in or around the current mission at Tumacacori, and I would discourage anyone from bothering to search there, and not simply because it is illegal – there is no reason to believe there IS anything of value there.
Some of the Jesuit-treasure legends can be readily understood, if we learn some of the facts of the Spanish colonial period. For instance, let me ask you folks, a seemingly UN-related question:
How were the Spanish troops paid?
Would you be shocked to learn that the payrolls for many of the smaller and more remote locations, were handed by the Jesuit padres? Can you imagine any scenario in which this might lead to a treasure-legend? What if I were to also tell you that in the larger, LESS remote settlements, it was often the practice to have the Jesuit padre keep the strongbox holding the municipal treasury, including the payroll for the garrison in his possession? In many cases, the Jesuit padre was given ONE key to one of three locks placed on the strongbox, the Alcalde/mayordomo having another, the garrison commander having the third. The idea being, that no one of them could embezzle the funds since all three had to be present when the strongbox was opened.
For those of limited imagination (not you, mi amigos) let me give an example. It is easy to postulate just how a “Jesuit” treasure story could be engendered, just on the bald facts of how military payrolls were handled. Let us suppose that a Jesuit padre, stationed at some mission, were to suddenly get word of an Amerindian uprising – he holds the payroll money in a strongbox, which is NOT actually “his” money, nor does it belong to the Society of Jesus, but he IS responsible for it. Is it hard to imagine that the padre, in his concern for the safe-keeping of these funds and in such an emergency, might choose to bury them in some secret place, where they could be recovered when the danger has passed? How do we suppose an un-educated Amerindian, happening to be in the vicinity, would view and remember such an activity on the part of the Jesuit padre?
Cactusjumper wrote:
My guess is that Azmula may be the first to provide that kind of evidence. Even so, it has taken him years to dig it up. If any of you come with a pile of Franciscan slag to prove your point, and I am still alive, I won't be nodding my head in sheepish approval. If you come with the goods, my applause will be as loud as anyone's.
Is any of that unreasonable?
Your prediction re: Azmula may well be correct; it is not my own mission in life to “prove” the Jesuits involvement, beyond our discussion here, perhaps Azmula has taken this as a ‘mission’. Your example of a pile of
Franciscan slag is not a good one to make the point, for no one can PROVE the slag found near the Guevavi nor the Tumacacor (original, NOT the later Franciscan) is of Franciscan OR Jesuit origins. No one can prove just who/whom left those slag piles, however in the case of the Guevavi mission, we know that the Franciscans were only occupying the mission for a period of two years, compared with nearly
76 years it was possessed by the Jesuit order. The slag is circumstantial evidence, not incontrovertible evidence. Or are you now saying that the slag is DEFINTELY of Franciscan origins?
Lamar wrote:
In the Year of Our Lord, 1538, Sr. Francisco Vasquez de Coronado penned a document to the Spanish Viceroy Mendoza and wrote, "the natives of Topira {as recorded in early accounts but better known by the name Tayopa} wear gold, emeralds and other precious stones. In covering their houses they make common usage of gold and silver. Their chiefs wear from their necks finely crafted gold chains."
The letter is real enough, however Coronados' description of the jewelry worn by the locals is an utter fabrication. The *emeralds and other precious stones* which he wrote about simply did not exist, except his own mind.
My friend it appears that you are mistaken on several points here. For one, Topira is not and never was Tayopa, it is a mistake to identify them as one and the same. Topira is located considerably further south in Mexico than Tayopa, and included gemstone mines which have not yet been re-located. Coronado’s report of having seen emeralds should not be the least surprising, since among the treasures recovered from some of the Spanish shipwrecks of the same period are some of the most beautiful emeralds ever seen. How could local Amerindians have had emeralds, when (supposedly) none occur locally? Very simply through trade – trade routes were well established through the Americas long before the arrival of the Europeans; further, rich emerald deposits are known in North Carolina and in Colombia, those in Colombia were discovered by Spanish conquistadores in the colonial period and these are among the richest in the world. Your dismissal of Coronado’s report as a figment of his own mind only shows what could be a personal bias, for Coronado was certainly honest in his reports of everything ELSE he found, even though Cibola turned out to be nothing but a group of poor pueblos. Why should he LIE about having seen the gems, when he told the TRUTH about how poor Cibola really was? This makes no sense to me.
To recap:
*We have shown that the Society of Jesus was to
communicate in code for secret purposes, as stated by Jesuit father Polzer;
*We have shown that the Society of Jesus, though supposedly barred from having slaves,
did in fact own and sell slaves; (Georgetown MD University study, and remember Georgetown University
is a Jesuit college!)
*We have shown that in at least one instance,
a Jesuit was in fact working a mine, and using Indians as a labor force, as complained of by a Jesuit padre to his provincial;
this person was also gambling, which is also supposedly forbidden;
*We know that several of the earliest
American historians attributed several of the silver mines were first discovered by Jesuits;
*We can show that
the Society of Jesus was financially successful, as exampled by the capture of a single ship of products that resulted in a loss of 2 million livres, and this led to the expulsion of the SJ from France;
*We can show that
some INDIVIDUALS who were members of the Society of Jesus were not above accepting donations of the proceeds of piracy and privateers, nor of performing religious services for pirates/privateers, nor of providing goods in trade to same;
*We can show that
the SJ was accused of many illicit and immoral activities by the governments of Spain, Portugal, France, Naples, Russia and others, resulting in their expulsion; these accusations are wholly denied by the SJ today; however it might be helpful to point out that Pope Benedict listed many of the accusations in his brief, suppressing the Society of Jesus and ordering them to DISBAND FOREVER; this command clearly was NOT obeyed and can be proven;
*We can show that the SJ was involved in creating a
virtual “state” of their own in what is today Paraguay, training and arming local Amerindians to resist Portuguese slave-raiders, and actively participating in combat in Bolivia against same; these activities were a part of the reason for the SJ being expelled from Portuguese colonial possessions.;
*We can show that a
bishop confirmed the accusations of the Jesuits in Paraguay owning "secret" silver mines; these mines have not been rediscovered to this day as far as I know;
*We can show that de Anza, on investigating the reported finding of native silver in masses at Arizonac,
first went to see Jesuit padres to learn about silver ores; this would be a ridiculous step to take if the Jesuit padres were NOT knowledgeable of mineral ores and mining as well;
*We know that
the Society of Jesus operated Mining Schools in the Americas;
*We know that
slag, a by product usually associated with smelting operations, was found near at least two missions founded by Jesuits; this cannot be proven to be absolute proof of Jesuit mining activities, but is supportive of the contention;
Now this set of “points” might not be enough to convince our friends Cactusjumper, Lamar and others, but it is certainly not of a nature to be described as “ludicrous” nor is it so little evidence as to absolve all suspicions.
Based on my own research, of the somewhat more than 200 mines located in pre-US Arizona,
I believe only sixteen are Jesuit, at least four are Franciscan, the rest being owned and operated by Spanish, Mexicans, or even Amerindians – oops almost forgot, and one by Frenchmen. This means (
in my own calculation) that
90% of Colonial mines, the owners and operators were NOT the Jesuits or any other religious order. This hardly qualifies as some kind of massive SJ conspiracy, but in order to provide for the peoples of their parishes, and to further the aims of the Church, it makes perfect sense for them to have been involved. I do not see
this as any kind of “evil” on the part of the Jesuits, in fact quite the reverse.
Good luck and good hunting to you all, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Your friend,
Oroblanco
, it leaves a little doubt. You have quoted an "Historical Note on Amalgamation", which are the words of the Hoovers, not Georgius Agricola.....just to make that clear.
![:-\](https://www.treasurenet.com/smilies/undecided.gif "Undecided :-\")
there are many documents in the Vatican which are not available to most of the Preist hood or to researchers such as your self, or me. WHY?
?? hehheeh
