lamar
Bronze Member
- Aug 30, 2004
- 1,341
- 46
Dear agave;
For the record, I happen to concur with your assessment.
Your friend;
LAMAR
For the record, I happen to concur with your assessment.
Your friend;
LAMAR
True Spelling
- Thread starter cptbild
- Start date
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Agave,
For the most part, I also agree with your assessment.
"The Churches were not just there by accident. They were in areas that had some
population via Indians, workers in the mines (whether it was Indians or Mexicans)
and other people be it ranchers, farmers, etc. Not even the Jesuits would put a Church in the middle of NOWHERE with no body to come and be saved.
The mines come first then the Churches. IMHO the mines added the most to the Church attendence. Look at the way the Churches were built (as the mining was established on each side of the Santa Cruz (Santa Maria) the Churches were added".
The Jesuits arrived in Mexico in 1527. They were the last of four orders in Mexico. For the first 20 years, they remained in urban Mexico. Most of Mexico had already been monopolized by the Franciscans, Dominicans and Augustinians.
"Finally, in 1587, the Crown granted Jesuits permission to pass to the still unpacified parts of the northern frontier, namely, the northwest and remote sections of the northeast." The Franciscans were there before them, but had "decided to concentrate their limited energies on the major mining zones of the northeast, thereby leaving the northwest wide open."
In truth, the Franciscans were always more interested in treasures and mines. Cibola comes to mind.
The Jesuits did not go to mining areas, but to the Yaqui. Their success with that tribe is well known. The results of their work allowed the Yaqui to survive and prosper after the expulsion.
While some of your statement was true, the Jesuits did not look for mines, miners and commerce first. They looked for souls to save. Perhaps what came later is another story.
Specifically, the Jesuits were allowed to tend to the Spaniards, but not if it meant pulling them away from the Indians. The Indian soul was their main job.....period.
Nice post!
Welcome to the fray,
Joe Ribaudo
For the most part, I also agree with your assessment.
"The Churches were not just there by accident. They were in areas that had some
population via Indians, workers in the mines (whether it was Indians or Mexicans)
and other people be it ranchers, farmers, etc. Not even the Jesuits would put a Church in the middle of NOWHERE with no body to come and be saved.
The mines come first then the Churches. IMHO the mines added the most to the Church attendence. Look at the way the Churches were built (as the mining was established on each side of the Santa Cruz (Santa Maria) the Churches were added".
The Jesuits arrived in Mexico in 1527. They were the last of four orders in Mexico. For the first 20 years, they remained in urban Mexico. Most of Mexico had already been monopolized by the Franciscans, Dominicans and Augustinians.
"Finally, in 1587, the Crown granted Jesuits permission to pass to the still unpacified parts of the northern frontier, namely, the northwest and remote sections of the northeast." The Franciscans were there before them, but had "decided to concentrate their limited energies on the major mining zones of the northeast, thereby leaving the northwest wide open."
In truth, the Franciscans were always more interested in treasures and mines. Cibola comes to mind.
The Jesuits did not go to mining areas, but to the Yaqui. Their success with that tribe is well known. The results of their work allowed the Yaqui to survive and prosper after the expulsion.
While some of your statement was true, the Jesuits did not look for mines, miners and commerce first. They looked for souls to save. Perhaps what came later is another story.
Specifically, the Jesuits were allowed to tend to the Spaniards, but not if it meant pulling them away from the Indians. The Indian soul was their main job.....period.
Nice post!
Welcome to the fray,
Joe Ribaudo
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
Gentlemen: I will drop a hint which establishes that TAYOPA, for example, does exist and was run by the shadow Jesuits.
When I first became interested in Tayopa, I asked the indians around here if they knew anything about it, All agreed that it did exist, but being a church operation, it was protected by GOD and only the Jesuit Priests could touch it.
Later one of them and I became good friends. He told me that his friend was the mayor Domo for Mr Yeager. Mr Yeager was reworking the old mine dumps at Aduana, specifically LA Quintera. The Mayor Domo told me in confidence that his patron, Yeager, had just purchased a small altar hand bell with "Guadalupe de TAYOPA" cast on the rim.
I immediatley tried to visit Yeager but he was gone. When he returned, before I could meet withhim, he became sick and died. During the confusion of settleing his estate / personal belongings, somehow the Altar bell disappeared. I later tracked it to his family in LA, but there it came to a dead end, no-one knew where or who had it, but yes, it did exist.
I also found that there were 7 mines in bonanza at the same time, that were associated with TAYOPA. I cannot say that they were definitely Jesuit operations, but to finish up the search of TAYOPA I dedicated myself to proving that they also exisrted in which case by default, Tayopa also existed.
I was sucessful with 4 of them besides Tayopa. No, I have never entered any of them, but I can teke you to within 100 metres of each of them. I have a reason for not trying to open them at that time, not the least was limited financing. They are on hold heheheh.
They are the Gloria Pan, La Tarasca, Las Pmas, and Tepoca. Incidentally, none are in the mining registers as such, the same as with TAYOPA. Yet I have proven that they exist also.
Lot's of tidbits hehehehehh
Don Jose de La Mancha
p.s I lived with the Yaquis for 3-4 years. i know their land and the Bacatetes better than they do .
When I first became interested in Tayopa, I asked the indians around here if they knew anything about it, All agreed that it did exist, but being a church operation, it was protected by GOD and only the Jesuit Priests could touch it.
Later one of them and I became good friends. He told me that his friend was the mayor Domo for Mr Yeager. Mr Yeager was reworking the old mine dumps at Aduana, specifically LA Quintera. The Mayor Domo told me in confidence that his patron, Yeager, had just purchased a small altar hand bell with "Guadalupe de TAYOPA" cast on the rim.
I immediatley tried to visit Yeager but he was gone. When he returned, before I could meet withhim, he became sick and died. During the confusion of settleing his estate / personal belongings, somehow the Altar bell disappeared. I later tracked it to his family in LA, but there it came to a dead end, no-one knew where or who had it, but yes, it did exist.
I also found that there were 7 mines in bonanza at the same time, that were associated with TAYOPA. I cannot say that they were definitely Jesuit operations, but to finish up the search of TAYOPA I dedicated myself to proving that they also exisrted in which case by default, Tayopa also existed.
I was sucessful with 4 of them besides Tayopa. No, I have never entered any of them, but I can teke you to within 100 metres of each of them. I have a reason for not trying to open them at that time, not the least was limited financing. They are on hold heheheh.
They are the Gloria Pan, La Tarasca, Las Pmas, and Tepoca. Incidentally, none are in the mining registers as such, the same as with TAYOPA. Yet I have proven that they exist also.
Lot's of tidbits hehehehehh
Don Jose de La Mancha
p.s I lived with the Yaquis for 3-4 years. i know their land and the Bacatetes better than they do .
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,841
- 9,848
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Greetings Cactusjumper and everyone,
Cactusjumper wrote:
Perhaps you misread my statement, which said "virtually demand" which was only my way of stating that you had asked for documents which would be absolute and undeniable proof. "Demand" not as in putting down a fist and shouting "gimme" but as in asking.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
I have repeatedly stated as clearly as I can put it, that I am NOT saying the Jesuit order practiced mining, but that INDIVIDUALS did. So perhaps I have labored (and publicly posted information I would prefer NOT to have) under the mis-conception that the debate was that ANY and ALL Jesuits NEVER did any kind of mining. As to hiding a vast treasure, I would expect this would be in Rome, not Arizona. However, if there were proceeds being accumulated while awaiting trans-shipment to Rome, it makes sense to conceal them from the danger of Apache/Seri attack as well as robbers; such shipments would not necessarily be revealed to Spanish authorities, especially considering the treatment Spanish colonists gave Amerindians. I do not see this as some kind of "evil" on the part of the Jesuits, even IF it were under the direction of the Order, in fact it might have been to prevent even more evil from being committed by the Spanish.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
I have seen nothing that convinces me of ANY Jesuit presence or activity in the Superstition mountains of Arizona, nor in fact of any other Order. As this discussion is actually within the Tayopa sub-board, I think we can trace this 'transferral' into the Superstitions to one of our mutual friends here, as it appears that anything that might be connectable MUST be connected in the minds of some researchers.
IF the mining activity was under the direction of the Society of Jesus, it stands to reason this was under direction of the Pope. It is not proven (in my eyes) that the mining activity was under the direction of the Society, but IF it were, it is reasonable to assume that the Pope had need of the proceeds. The period we are speaking of was not one of static peace everywhere, but of violent upheavals and threats from Islam, which required vast financial assets to fight and protect Christianity.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
Again, as a GROUP I would state NO, they did not enslave the natives, in fact the Jesuits are famous for having defended and protected Amerindians from slavers. However, making use of Amerindian labor to work on the rancherias owned by the missions is well documented, and of their labor (in at least one case) for mining, in a mine owned by a Jesuit. To the Amerindian having to do this work, it may have SEEMED the same thing as slavery, and we do know that the Jesuits made use of the Spanish army to bring Amerindians in to the missions. Many are aware of the explorations of the Jesuits such as father Kino, but few are aware that in almost every case, they were accompanied by a military escort. How do you suppose this was viewed by the native peoples? It does appear (to me) that some INDIVIDUAL Jesuits mistreated the Amerindians under their charge (resulting in the death of a pregnant Amerindian woman in one case) and this was a direct cause of the bloody uprising(s).
Cactusjumper also wrote:
It is apparent from the evidence that smelting was indeed done directly adjacent to the mission churches. Were they stupid men? Obviously this would vary greatly between INDIVIDUALS, as it does in any group to be found. Probably some were highly intelligent, while some might have been of lessor intellectual abilities.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
One can 'explain away' virtually ANYTHING that could be produced concerning activities which took place well over 200 years ago, through re-interpretation and alternative theories, and failing that, through sophistry. (I once put forth an argument that the Amerindians actually WON the so-called "Indian wars" as can be pointed to by the numerous language adaptations, food products, our form of government, even the percentage of Americans today who claim to be of Amerindian ancestry.
)
Cactusjumper also wrote:
You have included yet another indirect request for more documentation to challenge, in this same post:
I expect I will continue to test/question each and every document, story/legend......etc
I do in fact have "more" and possibly it would be exactly what you desire, but I can not and will not post everything I have; this information was obtained with some difficulty and many hours of diligent research. It is also "sensitive" in details, concerning the location of certain 'lost' mines which have been as yet undiscovered. Therefore, I must plead 'fifth amendment' for several reasons, one of which being how easily such information would be misconstrued by some of our fellow treasure hunters, into a very distorted idea of the Jesuits and mining activity.
I would also point out that some of the documents from the Spanish colonial era, and specifically from the Jesuit period, have been lost. For example, in an 1891 article in the New York Times newspaper, writing about the sad state of Mission San Xavier, the reporter said, quote:
What we have TODAY is only a FRACTION of what documents actually existed in the 1700s, so for us to find ANY remaining is actually surprising.
Don Jose de La Mancha wrote:
You have confirmed my suspicion about you, mi amigo. I do not doubt what you say. Good luck and good hunting to you Cactusjumper and everyone, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
your friend,
Oroblanco
Cactusjumper wrote:
Perhaps you misread my statement, which said "virtually demand" which was only my way of stating that you had asked for documents which would be absolute and undeniable proof. "Demand" not as in putting down a fist and shouting "gimme" but as in asking.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
I have repeatedly stated as clearly as I can put it, that I am NOT saying the Jesuit order practiced mining, but that INDIVIDUALS did. So perhaps I have labored (and publicly posted information I would prefer NOT to have) under the mis-conception that the debate was that ANY and ALL Jesuits NEVER did any kind of mining. As to hiding a vast treasure, I would expect this would be in Rome, not Arizona. However, if there were proceeds being accumulated while awaiting trans-shipment to Rome, it makes sense to conceal them from the danger of Apache/Seri attack as well as robbers; such shipments would not necessarily be revealed to Spanish authorities, especially considering the treatment Spanish colonists gave Amerindians. I do not see this as some kind of "evil" on the part of the Jesuits, even IF it were under the direction of the Order, in fact it might have been to prevent even more evil from being committed by the Spanish.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
I have seen nothing that convinces me of ANY Jesuit presence or activity in the Superstition mountains of Arizona, nor in fact of any other Order. As this discussion is actually within the Tayopa sub-board, I think we can trace this 'transferral' into the Superstitions to one of our mutual friends here, as it appears that anything that might be connectable MUST be connected in the minds of some researchers.
IF the mining activity was under the direction of the Society of Jesus, it stands to reason this was under direction of the Pope. It is not proven (in my eyes) that the mining activity was under the direction of the Society, but IF it were, it is reasonable to assume that the Pope had need of the proceeds. The period we are speaking of was not one of static peace everywhere, but of violent upheavals and threats from Islam, which required vast financial assets to fight and protect Christianity.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
Again, as a GROUP I would state NO, they did not enslave the natives, in fact the Jesuits are famous for having defended and protected Amerindians from slavers. However, making use of Amerindian labor to work on the rancherias owned by the missions is well documented, and of their labor (in at least one case) for mining, in a mine owned by a Jesuit. To the Amerindian having to do this work, it may have SEEMED the same thing as slavery, and we do know that the Jesuits made use of the Spanish army to bring Amerindians in to the missions. Many are aware of the explorations of the Jesuits such as father Kino, but few are aware that in almost every case, they were accompanied by a military escort. How do you suppose this was viewed by the native peoples? It does appear (to me) that some INDIVIDUAL Jesuits mistreated the Amerindians under their charge (resulting in the death of a pregnant Amerindian woman in one case) and this was a direct cause of the bloody uprising(s).
Cactusjumper also wrote:
It is apparent from the evidence that smelting was indeed done directly adjacent to the mission churches. Were they stupid men? Obviously this would vary greatly between INDIVIDUALS, as it does in any group to be found. Probably some were highly intelligent, while some might have been of lessor intellectual abilities.
Cactusjumper also wrote:
One can 'explain away' virtually ANYTHING that could be produced concerning activities which took place well over 200 years ago, through re-interpretation and alternative theories, and failing that, through sophistry. (I once put forth an argument that the Amerindians actually WON the so-called "Indian wars" as can be pointed to by the numerous language adaptations, food products, our form of government, even the percentage of Americans today who claim to be of Amerindian ancestry.
) Cactusjumper also wrote:
You have included yet another indirect request for more documentation to challenge, in this same post:
I expect I will continue to test/question each and every document, story/legend......etc
I do in fact have "more" and possibly it would be exactly what you desire, but I can not and will not post everything I have; this information was obtained with some difficulty and many hours of diligent research. It is also "sensitive" in details, concerning the location of certain 'lost' mines which have been as yet undiscovered. Therefore, I must plead 'fifth amendment' for several reasons, one of which being how easily such information would be misconstrued by some of our fellow treasure hunters, into a very distorted idea of the Jesuits and mining activity.
I would also point out that some of the documents from the Spanish colonial era, and specifically from the Jesuit period, have been lost. For example, in an 1891 article in the New York Times newspaper, writing about the sad state of Mission San Xavier, the reporter said, quote:
(WHOOPS forgot to cite source: March 1, 1891 - BEN C. TRUMAN, NY Times later edit)
What we have TODAY is only a FRACTION of what documents actually existed in the 1700s, so for us to find ANY remaining is actually surprising.
Don Jose de La Mancha wrote:
You have confirmed my suspicion about you, mi amigo. I do not doubt what you say. Good luck and good hunting to you Cactusjumper and everyone, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
your friend,
Oroblanco
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Oro,
[A statement was made that no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America, and I stated this is untrue - if you are in doubt, check out:
Title JOSEPH BASARTE TO THE VICEROY. REVIEW OF CHARGES AGAINST JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA FRAUD AND MISUSE OF FUNDS FOR MISSIONS IN SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT.
Author(s) BASARTE, JOSEPH
Date 00-00-1730 00-00-1770
Documentation MEXICO CITY. MAY 12, 1770. 20P. INFORME. ORIGINAL. DCT 1730-1770.
Summary REVIEW OF FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING ABUSES OF JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA, SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT. CONTAINS A NUMBER OF SPECIFIC ACCUSATIONS AGAINST JESUITS FOR FRAUD AND STATES THAT OVER A PERIOD OF 70 YEARS THEY EMBEZZLED MORE THAN ONE MILLION PESOS FROM THE REAL HACIENDA. BASARTE BASES MANY OF HIS ACCUSATIONS ON THE LETTERS OF PADRE BALTHASAR (OR BALTASAR) TO PADRE GENERAL RETZ WHICH STRONGLY INDICATE FRAUD WITHIN THE JESUIT HIEARCHY. (D. MILLER) (1978)]
I did not see where anyone stated that "no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America".
The above is just one of many prime examples that the comment is untrue. The Society of Jesus was buried in accusations. In the end, it caused their expulsion. The operative word here, is "accusations".
You have presented a nice one. Can you tell us what the legal outcome of this one was? Did the person who provided the accusation also provied the letters mentioned? Let me guess.......NO. Before quoting an accusation as evidence of wrongdoing, shouldn't you look at the evidence?
Take care,
Joe
[A statement was made that no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America, and I stated this is untrue - if you are in doubt, check out:
Title JOSEPH BASARTE TO THE VICEROY. REVIEW OF CHARGES AGAINST JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA FRAUD AND MISUSE OF FUNDS FOR MISSIONS IN SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT.
Author(s) BASARTE, JOSEPH
Date 00-00-1730 00-00-1770
Documentation MEXICO CITY. MAY 12, 1770. 20P. INFORME. ORIGINAL. DCT 1730-1770.
Summary REVIEW OF FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING ABUSES OF JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA, SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT. CONTAINS A NUMBER OF SPECIFIC ACCUSATIONS AGAINST JESUITS FOR FRAUD AND STATES THAT OVER A PERIOD OF 70 YEARS THEY EMBEZZLED MORE THAN ONE MILLION PESOS FROM THE REAL HACIENDA. BASARTE BASES MANY OF HIS ACCUSATIONS ON THE LETTERS OF PADRE BALTHASAR (OR BALTASAR) TO PADRE GENERAL RETZ WHICH STRONGLY INDICATE FRAUD WITHIN THE JESUIT HIEARCHY. (D. MILLER) (1978)]
I did not see where anyone stated that "no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America".
The above is just one of many prime examples that the comment is untrue. The Society of Jesus was buried in accusations. In the end, it caused their expulsion. The operative word here, is "accusations".
You have presented a nice one. Can you tell us what the legal outcome of this one was? Did the person who provided the accusation also provied the letters mentioned? Let me guess.......NO. Before quoting an accusation as evidence of wrongdoing, shouldn't you look at the evidence?
Take care,
Joe
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,841
- 9,848
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Greetings Cactusjumper,
Cactusjumper responded to Oroblanco's post of:
A statement was made that no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America, and I stated this is untrue -
with:
Perhaps you missed Lamar's post and my own response, I will repost Lamar's statement here:
Lamar wrote:
Cactusjumper also wrote:
Why don't YOU go research this matter yourself mi amigo Cactusjumper, after all it is a far shorter drive to Mexico City for you from Arizona, than it is from South Dakota, if your curiosity is so inclined and finances allow? I have neither the time nor the resources to go and do this research FOR you. The findings and evidence from this particular accusation are not of any great importance to myself.
I think the problem arises from the fact that you have assumed that this particular post was put forth as evidence PROVING the Jesuits of wrongdoing, while in fact it was put forth as proof that the Jesuits had been accused of wrongdoing IN WRITING in response to Lamar's statement, repeated above.
Good luck and good hunting, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Your friend,
Oroblanco
Cactusjumper responded to Oroblanco's post of:
A statement was made that no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America, and I stated this is untrue -
with:
Perhaps you missed Lamar's post and my own response, I will repost Lamar's statement here:
Lamar wrote:
Cactusjumper also wrote:
Why don't YOU go research this matter yourself mi amigo Cactusjumper, after all it is a far shorter drive to Mexico City for you from Arizona, than it is from South Dakota, if your curiosity is so inclined and finances allow? I have neither the time nor the resources to go and do this research FOR you. The findings and evidence from this particular accusation are not of any great importance to myself.
I think the problem arises from the fact that you have assumed that this particular post was put forth as evidence PROVING the Jesuits of wrongdoing, while in fact it was put forth as proof that the Jesuits had been accused of wrongdoing IN WRITING in response to Lamar's statement, repeated above.
Good luck and good hunting, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Your friend,
Oroblanco
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Oro,
[Dear Oroblanco;
Since there seems to be some confusion as to my previous statements, let me put it this way:
There has yet to come to light any actual proof, either in the form of archived documentation or reliable witness accounts that neither the Society of Jesus nor the Holy Roman Catholic Church, has ever owned, in part or in whole, nor has either organization acted as agents of or recieved a comission for their participation in, nor has either organization been officially accused of in writing, for either organizations' participation, in the removal, exploitation, stockpiling or vending of, minerals in the New World.]
Not sure how you can put both statements in the same post, and still misquote Lamar.
His statement was this: "......neither the Society of Jesus nor the Holy Roman Catholic Church, has ever owned, in part or in whole, nor has either organization acted as agents of or recieved a comission for their participation in, nor has either organization been officially accused of in writing, for either organizations' participation, in the removal, exploitation, stockpiling or vending of, minerals in the New World.
Your statement was this: "A statement was made that no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America, and I stated this is untrue".
Here is your evidence: Title JOSEPH BASARTE TO THE VICEROY. REVIEW OF CHARGES AGAINST JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA FRAUD AND MISUSE OF FUNDS FOR MISSIONS IN SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT.
Author(s) BASARTE, JOSEPH
Date 00-00-1730 00-00-1770
Documentation MEXICO CITY. MAY 12, 1770. 20P. INFORME. ORIGINAL. DCT 1730-1770.
Summary REVIEW OF FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING ABUSES OF JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA, SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT. CONTAINS A NUMBER OF SPECIFIC ACCUSATIONS AGAINST JESUITS FOR FRAUD AND STATES THAT OVER A PERIOD OF 70 YEARS THEY EMBEZZLED MORE THAN ONE MILLION PESOS FROM THE REAL HACIENDA. BASARTE BASES MANY OF HIS ACCUSATIONS ON THE LETTERS OF PADRE BALTHASAR (OR BALTASAR) TO PADRE GENERAL RETZ WHICH STRONGLY INDICATE FRAUD WITHIN THE JESUIT HIEARCHY. (D. MILLER) (1978)]
When you reread both quotes, I'm sure you will agree that the accusation above, does not apply to Lamar's post. I took the liberty of placing the important parts of both posts in bold.
In closing, Lamar did not say that "no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America". What he did say was "neither the Society of Jesus nor the Holy Roman Catholic Church....officially accused of in writing, for either organizations' participation, in the removal, exploitation, stockpiling or vending of, minerals in the New World.[/b]
I don't disagrree that it's very possible that some Jesuits may have crossed that line. I believe, if it was done at all, it was very limited in scope. I don't believe any Indians were enslaved to work Jesuit mines.
The Jesuits did not have the means/arms to keep the Indians enslaved. The records show, that many Indians would walk away from any work for the missions, whenever they felt like it.
I know that many of my arguments come across as personal and are abrasive. I still love you like a brother......who, by the way, I treat the same way.
Take care,
Joe
[Dear Oroblanco;
Since there seems to be some confusion as to my previous statements, let me put it this way:
There has yet to come to light any actual proof, either in the form of archived documentation or reliable witness accounts that neither the Society of Jesus nor the Holy Roman Catholic Church, has ever owned, in part or in whole, nor has either organization acted as agents of or recieved a comission for their participation in, nor has either organization been officially accused of in writing, for either organizations' participation, in the removal, exploitation, stockpiling or vending of, minerals in the New World.]
Not sure how you can put both statements in the same post, and still misquote Lamar.
His statement was this: "......neither the Society of Jesus nor the Holy Roman Catholic Church, has ever owned, in part or in whole, nor has either organization acted as agents of or recieved a comission for their participation in, nor has either organization been officially accused of in writing, for either organizations' participation, in the removal, exploitation, stockpiling or vending of, minerals in the New World.
Your statement was this: "A statement was made that no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America, and I stated this is untrue".
Here is your evidence: Title JOSEPH BASARTE TO THE VICEROY. REVIEW OF CHARGES AGAINST JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA FRAUD AND MISUSE OF FUNDS FOR MISSIONS IN SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT.
Author(s) BASARTE, JOSEPH
Date 00-00-1730 00-00-1770
Documentation MEXICO CITY. MAY 12, 1770. 20P. INFORME. ORIGINAL. DCT 1730-1770.
Summary REVIEW OF FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING ABUSES OF JESUITS IN CALIFORNIA, SONORA, PIMERIA AND NAYARIT. CONTAINS A NUMBER OF SPECIFIC ACCUSATIONS AGAINST JESUITS FOR FRAUD AND STATES THAT OVER A PERIOD OF 70 YEARS THEY EMBEZZLED MORE THAN ONE MILLION PESOS FROM THE REAL HACIENDA. BASARTE BASES MANY OF HIS ACCUSATIONS ON THE LETTERS OF PADRE BALTHASAR (OR BALTASAR) TO PADRE GENERAL RETZ WHICH STRONGLY INDICATE FRAUD WITHIN THE JESUIT HIEARCHY. (D. MILLER) (1978)]
When you reread both quotes, I'm sure you will agree that the accusation above, does not apply to Lamar's post. I took the liberty of placing the important parts of both posts in bold.
In closing, Lamar did not say that "no accusations IN WRITING exist of any Jesuit wrongdoings in Spanish America". What he did say was "neither the Society of Jesus nor the Holy Roman Catholic Church....officially accused of in writing, for either organizations' participation, in the removal, exploitation, stockpiling or vending of, minerals in the New World.[/b]
I don't disagrree that it's very possible that some Jesuits may have crossed that line. I believe, if it was done at all, it was very limited in scope. I don't believe any Indians were enslaved to work Jesuit mines.
The Jesuits did not have the means/arms to keep the Indians enslaved. The records show, that many Indians would walk away from any work for the missions, whenever they felt like it.
I know that many of my arguments come across as personal and are abrasive. I still love you like a brother......who, by the way, I treat the same way.
Take care,
Joe
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
HOLA I suspect that Lamar may enjoy this. This Bible was given to me by the Yaqui's for services rendered and friendship. I helped save a large amount of their land that the gov't was trying to take away and instigated an irrigation system for them. We had number of talks on the combining of Catholicism and their native beliefs. Some day, in another room, I may get into this.
Don Jose de La Mancha
Don Jose de La Mancha
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,841
- 9,848
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Greetings Cactusjumper and everyone,
Cactusjumper wrote:
Must I now go back through our posts and RE-post the several statements made by Lamar which are what I was responding to, as he had posted statements portraying the Jesuits in an entirely altruistic light, with NO accusations "in writing" of any kind of wrongdoing? Yeesh Joe.
Oh well, for the 'record', such as it is...
Lamar wrote:
Lamar wrote:
Lamar wrote:
Lamar wrote:
Lamar wrote:
Lamar wrote:
Ooops almost forgot this one:
Lamar wrote:
Am I now clear, in what my post of those particular accusations was in reply to? Those accusations were and are not, absolute proof of Jesuit wrongdoing. It is evidence of accusations of wrongdoing by the Jesuits, IN WRITING.
Cactusjumper wrote:
I think you may be assuming that the body of documents remaining, available to research TODAY is nearly everything that was documented, which is very mistaken. The documentary evidence we do have does contain circumstantial evidence pointing to Jesuit involvement in mining, though not on a vast scale.
Cactusjumper wrote:
Cactusjumper wrote:
Cactusjumper wrote:
Ditto mi amigo, and yes you remind me VERY much of my (older) brother, and we have very similar debates. I take no offense - and intend NONE to you or anyone else. How dull a discussion would be, if everyone held the identical views.
Ed T wrote:
Would you care to elaborate, which of these mines you suspect your discovery(ies) to be? Thank you in advance,
your friend,
Oroblanco
Postscript:
I do not wish to give the impression that ALL of the stories as we have received them from "treasure" authors such as Dobie, Mitchell &c are "gospel" in fact SOME of these authors are very guilty of adding in fiction and fantasy to their works, however this is not the case with every author or every work.
Cactusjumper wrote:
Must I now go back through our posts and RE-post the several statements made by Lamar which are what I was responding to, as he had posted statements portraying the Jesuits in an entirely altruistic light, with NO accusations "in writing" of any kind of wrongdoing? Yeesh Joe.
Oh well, for the 'record', such as it is...Lamar wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,121911.msg891656.html#msg891656
Lamar wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,121911.msg890831.html#msg890831
Lamar wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,121911.msg890314.html#msg890314Dear group;
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that someone has the audacity to speak out against the greed and thievery of the Roman Catholic Church on a TREASURE HUNTING FORUM
Lamar wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,121911.msg890267.html#msg890267
Lamar wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,121911.msg889758.html#msg889758
Lamar wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,121911.msg889458.html#msg889458
Ooops almost forgot this one:
Lamar wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,121911.msg888732.html#msg888732 (added to this post later, sorry about that)
Am I now clear, in what my post of those particular accusations was in reply to? Those accusations were and are not, absolute proof of Jesuit wrongdoing. It is evidence of accusations of wrongdoing by the Jesuits, IN WRITING.
Cactusjumper wrote:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,69966.msg893625.html#msg893625
I think you may be assuming that the body of documents remaining, available to research TODAY is nearly everything that was documented, which is very mistaken. The documentary evidence we do have does contain circumstantial evidence pointing to Jesuit involvement in mining, though not on a vast scale.
Cactusjumper wrote:
The fact that you have not seen what you desire as "real evidence" is not absolute proof that such evidence does not exist. I refer to my earlier post, a good deal of evidence no longer exists or would be nearly impossible to trace at this point in history.
Cactusjumper wrote:
I remind you of the letter link posted earlier. In at least ONE case this was happening, which the Jesuit father was complaining about in his letter. Remember Lamar said:
It seems doubtful that Amerindians would see this as an obvious distinction.
Cactusjumper wrote:
Ditto mi amigo, and yes you remind me VERY much of my (older) brother, and we have very similar debates. I take no offense - and intend NONE to you or anyone else. How dull a discussion would be, if everyone held the identical views.
Ed T wrote:
Would you care to elaborate, which of these mines you suspect your discovery(ies) to be? Thank you in advance,
your friend,
Oroblanco
Postscript:
I do not wish to give the impression that ALL of the stories as we have received them from "treasure" authors such as Dobie, Mitchell &c are "gospel" in fact SOME of these authors are very guilty of adding in fiction and fantasy to their works, however this is not the case with every author or every work.
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
ED: I will try to check again at the mining office in Mexico city Monday on that data. I need to know myself.
Like these assay reports?
Don Jose de La Mancha
Like these assay reports?
Don Jose de La Mancha
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Oro,
Thanks for your reply.
Considering all of the evidence you have just posted, I believe you must be correct.
Take care,
joe
Thanks for your reply.
Considering all of the evidence you have just posted, I believe you must be correct.
Take care,
joe
lamar
Bronze Member
- Aug 30, 2004
- 1,341
- 46
Dear oroblanco;
As yet, there is no positive factual proof that Jesuits or any other religious Order mined gold or silver in the New World with the blessings of both Spain and Rome and until such irrefutable proof comes to light I shall stand by all of my prior statements on the matter that the Jesuits did NOT mine for gold or silver or direct others to do so for the benefit of the Society of Jesus in an illegal manner.
By my latest entries on this subject, I was merely entertaining the notion that there is a possibility the Jesuits did in fact mine valuable valuable minerals and as such, I was playing the Devils' Advocate. I, do however stand by ALL of my prior statements until such time as the Jesuits can be clearly be shown to have had an active part in any illicit mining activity. I cannot stress this point to you or to anyone else firmly enough.
Once more, since yOu seem to suffer some confusion on my position in this regard, let me CLEARLY state that THERE IS NO FACTUAL PROOF THAT THE JESUITS DID ANYTHING ILLEGAL, ILLICIT OR IMMORAL WHILE IN THE NEW WORLD
Please do NOT turn this discussion into a personal attack against me or others. I feel that we are all seekers of the truth, therefore attempting to throw something in someones' face shows a decided lack of good manners, IMVHO. Please, as a personal favor to me, try and keep the subject on course and headed in a bountiful and fruitful direction. Thank you.
Your friend;
LAMAR
P.S. Strictly as an aside, I do not seem to recall you having contributed any information in the form of archival material.
As yet, there is no positive factual proof that Jesuits or any other religious Order mined gold or silver in the New World with the blessings of both Spain and Rome and until such irrefutable proof comes to light I shall stand by all of my prior statements on the matter that the Jesuits did NOT mine for gold or silver or direct others to do so for the benefit of the Society of Jesus in an illegal manner.
By my latest entries on this subject, I was merely entertaining the notion that there is a possibility the Jesuits did in fact mine valuable valuable minerals and as such, I was playing the Devils' Advocate. I, do however stand by ALL of my prior statements until such time as the Jesuits can be clearly be shown to have had an active part in any illicit mining activity. I cannot stress this point to you or to anyone else firmly enough.
Once more, since yOu seem to suffer some confusion on my position in this regard, let me CLEARLY state that THERE IS NO FACTUAL PROOF THAT THE JESUITS DID ANYTHING ILLEGAL, ILLICIT OR IMMORAL WHILE IN THE NEW WORLD
Please do NOT turn this discussion into a personal attack against me or others. I feel that we are all seekers of the truth, therefore attempting to throw something in someones' face shows a decided lack of good manners, IMVHO. Please, as a personal favor to me, try and keep the subject on course and headed in a bountiful and fruitful direction. Thank you.
Your friend;
LAMAR
P.S. Strictly as an aside, I do not seem to recall you having contributed any information in the form of archival material.
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
OhIO ED, Naranjal IS in Durango. If yu had over an ounce in your assay, relax and go dig up a fortune then invite all of us for a month of debauchery in the Bahamas or Rio..
Since my very good friend Lamar isn't of the Clergy, he can come with us. ( get him drunk and we can pry many of his secrets out of him)
Oro of course, will have to ask permission, but we can bribe BETH. As a matter of fact, she might try to bribe US to get rid of him for a while.
May I Invite Gollum also? If neccessary, I wlll pay his expenses.
Don Jose de La Mancha
Since my very good friend Lamar isn't of the Clergy, he can come with us. ( get him drunk and we can pry many of his secrets out of him)
Oro of course, will have to ask permission, but we can bribe BETH. As a matter of fact, she might try to bribe US to get rid of him for a while.
May I Invite Gollum also? If neccessary, I wlll pay his expenses.
Don Jose de La Mancha
To those of you who directed me to "De Re Metallica", thankyou. I have spent most of the day reading thru this fascinating book, and the illustrations are wonderful. Basic prospecting hasn't really changed that much.
Thanks,Bill
Thanks,Bill
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
HI bill: It IS fascinating . and, as you said, the pictures are the clearest that I have ever seen and this is in the years of the 1500??
As for the rest you are correct. Emjoy it.
Dom Jose de La Mancha
As for the rest you are correct. Emjoy it.
Dom Jose de La Mancha
lamar
Bronze Member
- Aug 30, 2004
- 1,341
- 46
Dear Real de Tayopa;
I do not drink much, however there are no set rules against Catholic clergy drinking. I've known lots of priests who used to twist off every now and again. I do enjoy an ice cold cereveza Sol, or two, or three, or......
That's about the only beer that I'll drink and it is GREAT! Not the only Mexican beer, but the only beer, period!
Your friend;
LAMAR
I do not drink much, however there are no set rules against Catholic clergy drinking. I've known lots of priests who used to twist off every now and again. I do enjoy an ice cold cereveza Sol, or two, or three, or......
That's about the only beer that I'll drink and it is GREAT! Not the only Mexican beer, but the only beer, period!
Your friend;
LAMAR
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Mike,
"Actually the term "peseta" just means "little bit" or "little piece". The bar bearing the word Peseta is the smaller of the two. Has nothing to do with the Spanish Monetary Unit you mention. Most of the cast gold ingots of this type, are in two sizes; 2" X 4" and 2" X 2". Look at the B&W pics of the other ingots found in the mid1980s. These bear the Cross and "V" of the Jesuits. I know more than a couple of people who have known the man in the pictures for many years. You can take my word that he would not have had the funds to fabricate 287 pounds of gold bars."
Actually peseta means:
Pe·se·at [ pə sáytə ] (plural pe·se·tas)
Noun
Definition:
Unit of former Spanish currency: the main unit of the former Spanish currency
[Early 19th century. < Spanish, "small peso" < peso (see peso)]
The word itself has no meaning in Spanish......other than "small peso".
Where did you come up with your defination
Take care,
Joe
"Actually the term "peseta" just means "little bit" or "little piece". The bar bearing the word Peseta is the smaller of the two. Has nothing to do with the Spanish Monetary Unit you mention. Most of the cast gold ingots of this type, are in two sizes; 2" X 4" and 2" X 2". Look at the B&W pics of the other ingots found in the mid1980s. These bear the Cross and "V" of the Jesuits. I know more than a couple of people who have known the man in the pictures for many years. You can take my word that he would not have had the funds to fabricate 287 pounds of gold bars."
Actually peseta means:
Pe·se·at [ pə sáytə ] (plural pe·se·tas)
Noun
Definition:
Unit of former Spanish currency: the main unit of the former Spanish currency
[Early 19th century. < Spanish, "small peso" < peso (see peso)]
The word itself has no meaning in Spanish......other than "small peso".
Where did you come up with your defination
Take care,
Joe
lamar
Bronze Member
- Aug 30, 2004
- 1,341
- 46
Dear cactusjumper;
I happened to get my definition from the official Castillian Spanish Theosaurus. I know what the word means, becuase it was originally a Catalan word, spelled Peceta( but pronounced the same way). My parents came from Catalunya and that's why I am fluent in that particular dialect. I also had the ORIGIN of the word researched and it was not known to be in existence in Castillian Spanish until 1867. I cannot possibly fathom why this fact is so difficult for someone to grasp. The word was completely unknown in Castillian Spanish until 1867, when Spain entered the Latin Monetary Union. The word was then coined to mean the new Spanish monetary unit. That's a fact. That's written. The word will NOT be found in ANY Castillian literature until after 1867. Is this fact clear enough for all parties concerned?
Your friend;
LAMAR
I happened to get my definition from the official Castillian Spanish Theosaurus. I know what the word means, becuase it was originally a Catalan word, spelled Peceta( but pronounced the same way). My parents came from Catalunya and that's why I am fluent in that particular dialect. I also had the ORIGIN of the word researched and it was not known to be in existence in Castillian Spanish until 1867. I cannot possibly fathom why this fact is so difficult for someone to grasp. The word was completely unknown in Castillian Spanish until 1867, when Spain entered the Latin Monetary Union. The word was then coined to mean the new Spanish monetary unit. That's a fact. That's written. The word will NOT be found in ANY Castillian literature until after 1867. Is this fact clear enough for all parties concerned?
Your friend;
LAMAR
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Lamar,
"I do not drink much, however there are no set rules against Catholic clergy drinking. I've known lots of priests who used to twist off every now and again. I do enjoy an ice cold cereveza Sol, or two, or three, or......
That's about the only beer that I'll drink and it is GREAT! Not the only Mexican beer, but the only beer, period!"
A Catholic Lay Priest.......Why didn't you just say so??
Joe
"I do not drink much, however there are no set rules against Catholic clergy drinking. I've known lots of priests who used to twist off every now and again. I do enjoy an ice cold cereveza Sol, or two, or three, or......
That's about the only beer that I'll drink and it is GREAT! Not the only Mexican beer, but the only beer, period!"
A Catholic Lay Priest.......Why didn't you just say so
??Joe
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Lamar,
That's pretty much what I just said......just said it in fewer words.
Take care,
Joe
That's pretty much what I just said......just said it in fewer words.
Take care,
Joe
Top Member Reactions
-
3663 -
1992 -
1881 -
1488 -
1248 -
1092 -
1078 -
985 -
856 -
727 -
659 -
574 -
476 -
472 -
440 -
E
429
-
399 -
397 -
390 -
381
