JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

[somehiker]

Oroblanco had asked:

"Why would you think that someone would identify father Rojas in particular to be honored, whether by this statue in question or another?"

Perhaps because Roxas, unlike most of the other Jesuits who were released from custody after reaching Spain, was imprisoned at Cadiz until his death in 1773. This would make him a martyr of sorts IMO....or should.
The question is why ??

Regards:SH.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oroblanco]

Cactusjumper wrote

That was in the days when I still believed in Jesuit treasure.

Thank goodness you are all grown up now and don't believe in such fairy tales, since there were no Jesuit mines so therefore could not have been any gold and silver produced from them right?


The Jesuits were extremely wealthy as an Order, we know they were mining <among many business ventures> and there is little evidence of what happened to the silver and gold they certainly produced in their mines. I suppose I could post yet another documented Jesuit treasure found hidden in a cave but wonder if it will make a difference.

The Jesuits continued to teach in the dominions of the King of Sardinia after the express prohibition of the King VICTOR AMADEUS but his Son and Successor CHARLES EMANUEL finding that although the States of Piedmont had obeyed the law yet that the teaching still continued at Chamberry the Capital of Savoy perfected in 1731 what his Father had begun and positively interdicted them from teaching any more He went for this purpose in person to Chamberry and seized at the same time upon a large treasure which the Jesuits had concealed in a cave.*


The Missions of the Jesuits furnish abundant proof of the corrupt and worldly spirit by which they have been actuated at all periods and prove that in traversing the Seas they have been occupied in amassing wealth and acquiring power rather than in obtaining sincere worshippers of God. The author of the work entitled Jesuites Marchands establishes this fact beyond all doubt or contradiction on the authorities of the writings of the Foreign Missionaries VILLIERS Account of the Affairs of China especially the documents transmitted by M DE MONTIGNY contained in that Account the Memoirs of NORBERT the Letters of M FAVRE Sic. From these and a variety of other sources many of which are quoted in this History it will be seen that in Japan they only excited disturbances meddled with affairs of State brought down persecution upon all the Christians there and at length irreparably ruined the cause of Christianity itself in that vast empire that in China notwithstanding the Decrees of the Court of Rome they allied Christianity with the Idolatrous worship of CONFUCIUS that on the Coasts of Malabar they


*See the statement of this affiir in an account of it which appeared at thetlime entitled Relation des Evenemens &c

<from A History of the Jesuits, John Poynder, 1816, pp 150>


So do we say now that they never did find such a treasure hidden in a cave? Now remember the statements of father Kino hiding the "ornaments" of the Church in a cave during the 1695 uprising, or the similar incident in the 1751 Pima rebellion by a different padre, (Keller I think? Correction welcome) why should we believe there are NOT Jesuit treasures hidden in the southwest and Mexico, perhaps hidden in caves just as has been recorded by the Jesuits themselves and in at least one example found? Because Jesuit father Polzer ridiculed the idea, pointing to the personal vows of poverty as one type of "proof"?

What do you think the Jesuit silver mines were producing after all? Fillings for teeth?

Side thing here but I think the Procurators would be the Jesuits of most interest as they were management-level for all the various business enterprises they were engaged in. Segesser was a Procurator, and remember his complaint?


Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek. Or stay home, watch TV and never find any treasures, which ever is your pleasure!
Oroblanco

 

[deducer]

This is something I wrote about Father Rojas back in Feb. 2003:

"Father Carlos Rojas was appointed visitor General in 1764. These "Soldiers of God" were appointed for three years, normally. This was the same term served by California's (Baja) Padre Visitador. Father Rojas's job was to visit the missions, including the most remote, and bring back reports of their hardships and accomplishments. He was sick during the first two years of his appointment. The Vistadores Generals did not make regular or frequent visits so his absence from the missions was not something of note. As I have said before, he did manage to make one trip in 1766. Considering his health problems, it is amazing that he survived the forced march during the expulsion since only half of the Black Robes working in Pimeria Alta lived through it. Many of those who did survive the march and subsequent period of house arrest ended up in Russia and Brazil."

That was in the days when I still believed in Jesuit treasure. I think the dates are important.

Good luck,

Joe

Why would someone with known health problems be appointed VG, not once but twice?

 

[deducer]

I suppose I could post yet another documented Jesuit treasure found hidden in a cave but wonder if it will make a difference.

It would probably be of interest to the rest of us.

 

[cactusjumper]

Why would someone with known health problems be appointed VG, not once but twice?

deducer,

That's a very good question for 2014. Your about 250 years late for an answer.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[cactusjumper]

Cactusjumper wrote



Thank goodness you are all grown up now and don't believe in such fairy tales, since there were no Jesuit mines so therefore could not have been any gold and silver produced from them right?


The Jesuits were extremely wealthy as an Order, we know they were mining <among many business ventures> and there is little evidence of what happened to the silver and gold they certainly produced in their mines. I suppose I could post yet another documented Jesuit treasure found hidden in a cave but wonder if it will make a difference.



<from A History of the Jesuits, John Poynder, 1816, pp 150>


So do we say now that they never did find such a treasure hidden in a cave? Now remember the statements of father Kino hiding the "ornaments" of the Church in a cave during the 1695 uprising, or the similar incident in the 1751 Pima rebellion by a different padre, (Keller I think? Correction welcome) why should we believe there are NOT Jesuit treasures hidden in the southwest and Mexico, perhaps hidden in caves just as has been recorded by the Jesuits themselves and in at least one example found? Because Jesuit father Polzer ridiculed the idea, pointing to the personal vows of poverty as one type of "proof"?

What do you think the Jesuit silver mines were producing after all? Fillings for teeth?

Side thing here but I think the Procurators would be the Jesuits of most interest as they were management-level for all the various business enterprises they were engaged in. Segesser was a Procurator, and remember his complaint?


Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek. Or stay home, watch TV and never find any treasures, which ever is your pleasure!
Oroblanco

Roy,

Have you ever seen those fancy Mexican saddles Perhaps they need the silver for horse tack. You do realize there was a scarcity of silverware in Sonora, don't you? Would you expect the Jesuits to eat with their hands? They were trying to convert the natives to civilization, not join them in prehistorical manners. Seems obvious to me. On the other hand, I'm glad you asked the question.

They did a really good job of covering up their sins, not to mention hiding their ongoing work from all of the Spaniards and prospectors combing the country for said gold and silver. Can't help but wonder why the natives didn't spill the beans after the Jesuits were gone. Can't say they weren't interested in acquiring.....things, as they often went to work in the mines.

The Jesuits were only interested in mining, not preaching to the natives. They often wrote about becoming martyrs, and that became a fact for many of them.

Sorry Roy, you and deducer can denigrate my position as much as you like. What you call evidence has not moved me.....so far.

Take care my friend,

Joe

By the way, do you think John Poynder might have been just a touch anti-Jesuit?

 

[deducer]

deducer,

That's a very good question for 2014. Your about 250 years late for an answer.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo

Considering that the "ill" Rojas traveled extensively to the Gila, Salt River areas during his 2nd stint as VG, one has to question the extent of his "illness."

While officially stationed at Arizpe, Father Roxas was elected Visitor General twice. The second time in 1763-1764 (the perfect time to start to prep for hiding loot). Father Roxas extensively traveled through the area of the Gila, Colorado, and Salt Rivers.

Are you able to provide citation that prove Rojas was ill during the last few years prior to the expulsion, and additionally was too ill to travel?

Keeping in mind that the duties of a VG include inspecting missions which required extensive travel, it then just doesn't make sense to appoint someone with known health problems to take on responsibilities of this sort, as that would be a death sentence.

 

[cactusjumper]

Considering that the "ill" Rojas traveled extensively to the Gila, Salt River areas during his 2nd stint as VG, one has to question the extent of his "illness."



Are you able to provide citation that prove Rojas was ill during the last few years prior to the expulsion, and additionally was too ill to travel?

Keeping in mind that the duties of a VG include inspecting missions which required extensive travel, it then just doesn't make sense to appoint someone with known health problems to take on responsibilities of this sort, as that would be a death sentence.

deducer,

How many citations will be sufficient?

Thank you,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[deducer]

deducer,

How many citations will be sufficient?

Thank you,

Joe Ribaudo

I believe I wrote "citation," not "citations."

 

[cactusjumper]

I believe I wrote "citation," not "citations."

deducer,

OK. Just wanted to make sure you only require one (1).

Thanks,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Hio my friends on both sides. Here is the mision of Baroyeca, it was not just a mud hovel, but built from silver mining.

Don Jose de La Mancha


p.s click on image for a larger version.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

El Baaa herder guy from Dakota land: When I first came to Mexico a ranch hand earned $ 5 pesos a day, That was equqivelant to .40 cents US - then..

What do you think that they paid general labor when it was competing with free mission labor that had to maintain themselves also, in the 15 -1600's ??

A good riding mule, complete with saddle, went for about $ 1:00 a day. I also could buy a huge segment of Chihuahua (Monterrey Jack) cheese for $1:00 peso Enough for a weeks travel, along with coffee and occasionally a Stack of Tortilla.

In Fact, on my Yucatan exploration trip looking for Mayan ruins, in the Jungle, I often bought a huge stack of Tortillas for just a needle and 2 meters of coarse thread, or a single .22 round (bullet ) from the occasional Lacandon Indian family that I met.

Today snifffff. But in just that short time, Mexico hs gone from shoeless, raggedy school cildren to a parallel level of living in say a medium sized city in the US. Today all of the school children are neatly attired in clean, uniforms. many with cell phones or pads.

Under those conditions, if a bandido did steal a silver bar for example, he couldn't spend it because he couldn't account for that much money so he depended on good contacts with the upper social level to 'fence' it for him, and even so he couldn't live too opulent a life, nor was he prepared to do so, so the stolen bars accumulated in some hidden spot or cave for we modern treasure hunters. I met consistant rumors that some of the fathers were not above buying a silver bar or two at a substantial discount.

In a house here in Alamos, it was reported to me by an old house keeper that many times after dark seveal heavily loaded mules, or burros, would arrive, and be gone by daylight, durng which time he was pointedly give work to do that avoided the area.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[cactusjumper]

Hio my friends on both sides. Here is the mision of Baroyeca, it was not just a mud hovel, but built from silver mining.

Don Jose de La View attachment 978902 Mancha


p.s click on image for a larger version.

Don Jose,

Quite true. I assume you know that the mine was owned and run by Padre Valdez, a Franciscan. He is also the one who built the church in your picture.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Hola amigos,
This is a very long reply, but will be my last on this topic so you will not have to continue to wade through them forever.

Deducer I included that reference to the discovery of a Jesuit treasure hidden in a cave, dates to the 1730s well before their expulsions and suppression, I have not researched it farther as it occurred in the kingdom of Sardinia and no amount of evidence seems to make the slightest difference.


Cactusjumper wrote

Roy,


Have you ever seen those fancy Mexican saddles Perhaps they need the silver for horse tack. You do realize there was a scarcity of silverware in Sonora, don't you? Would you expect the Jesuits to eat with their hands? They were trying to convert the natives to civilization, not join them in prehistorical manners. Seems obvious to me. On the other hand, I'm glad you asked the question.

I have seen quite a few Mexican saddles fitted with "silver" for decoration, often worked in the most beautiful way, only the thing is that most of these "Mexican silver saddles" are decorated with "German silver" which is NICKEL, not silver. Silver tarnishes very readily, nickel not so much.


Second point - making silverware is more complicated than casting rude dore bars, would you not agree? Would you expect the missions to send their tithes in the form of silverware? Even casting bells and crosses, is less complicated than silverware, which is generally not cast in the form of spoons and forks but in a rod or bar, then worked by a silversmith very much the same way a blacksmith makes hinges, hammering the heated metal and working it with tools to get the desired product.


Your third point, that the Jesuits were trying to impress the natives into adopting "civilized" ways, is partly true and partly not - the Jesuits became infamous for their penchant for adopting the ways, dress, foods, even to the point of pretending to worship in the "heathen" or "pagan" religious rites, as happened in India and China to great scandal at Rome. Father Kino was famous for traveling while carrying nothing but parched corn for his food, which hardly required any utensils at all as it is similar to popcorn.


Cactusjumper also wrote

They did a really good job of covering up their sins, not to mention hiding their ongoing work from all of the Spaniards and prospectors combing the country for said gold and silver. Can't help but wonder why the natives didn't spill the beans after the Jesuits were gone. Can't say they weren't interested in acquiring.....things, as they often went to work in the mines.

I agree they did a good job of covering their sins, and as to "hiding" their ongoing work from the Spaniards, very true that they WERE trying to keep all Europeans OUT of their Mission Areas. How is it that you have missed this? Have you not notice the complaints, and how all troubles are always laid by the Jesuits at the feet of the Spanish, or Portuguese or French etc where ever they were operating as missionaries? In only one place were they very successful in keeping ALL Europeans out for some time, Paraguay, which is another story, but absolutely they tried to keep the Spanish out of "their" areas and that includes Pimeria Alta, where they were less than 100% successful.

A further point here but you SEEM to always approach this from the all-or-nothing method, as for instance in this point, either the Jesuits were keeping it ALL top-secret and unknown to the Spanish or else it should be not only fully known but fully documented. SOME of the Jesuit mines WERE KNOWN TO THE SPANISH - and owned openly and yet VERY QUIETLY. Others were NOT known openly, but were learned of and later investigated when the Spanish authorities threw out the Jesuits, as in the example in Baja, where the mines turned out to be too poor to work by ordinary methods, and yet they HAD been worked during the period of total Jesuit control. The obvious answer there is that the mines could be worked thanks to having free <as in forced> labor.


A big point here is that the Spanish authorities were NOT very concerned about the mines - despite the royal edicts banning priests of all religious Orders to STOP mining, it was openly flaunted virtually everywhere in Mexico. The Spanish authorities WERE interested in the product of those mines, and failed to find it, even though they knew it must exist and had not been shipped nor recorded as required by law.


One further point you have raised but the Indians DID "spill the beans" despite the reports we have of the padres impressing upon the natives that they must not reveal the locations to any but their confessors, namely the padres, though often long after the Jesuits had gone, and we find that most of the "legends" of lost Jesuit mines and treasures which you view so dimly as coming from treasure hunters, really came from the Indians themselves - "spilling the beans". Not that ALL Indians failed to keep things secret, nor that ALL told about the mines. Do you view the Indians as a single entity, incapable of individual variation of behaviors? The Jesuits are a far better example of such a group being monolithic in behaviors and beliefs, and even in this group there are wild variations.


Cactusjumper also wrote

The Jesuits were only interested in mining, not preaching to the natives. They often wrote about becoming martyrs, and that became a fact for many of them.

Where and whom EVER said or took that position you stated in your first sentence here? YOU seem to view things on that level, which is very far from accurate. I know that I have repeatedly stated that the Jesuits "temporal" interests covered virtually every brand of commerce available, NOT "only mining" by any stretch of the imagination - in the north where furs were the common money, they traded in furs, where sugar plantations were the main means of support, they ran sugar refineries and plantations, but you seem to allow that the Jesuits were involved in agricultural pursuits ONLY, even though their own records do not specify that, and I hate to keep repeating this one source the Catholic study of the Jesuit wealth in Mexico, documented evidence of the Jesuit Order owning MINES plural. Did father Polzer mention the mines owned by Jesuit colleges by the way? You already know the answer. Oh and to back up that statement about the Jesuits being involved in ALL kinds of commerce, which includes mining, quote

....Cardinal Saldanha, after investigation, made a report in which "the fathers of the society in Portugal and her dominions at the end of the earth are declared on the fullest information guilty of every crime of worldly traffic which could disgrace the ecclesiastical state. "

<from The Footprints of the Jesuits, pp 189, citing The Suppression of the Society of Jesus in the Portuguese Dominions By the Rev Alfred Weld of the Society of Jesus London,pp 131-132, Weld was a stout Jesuit apologist BTW>


Cactusjumper also wrote

Sorry Roy, you and deducer can denigrate my position as much as you like. What you call evidence has not moved me.....so far.

My "denigrating" post was stated IN JEST hence the smilies, just pointing out that you keep repeating how you formerly believed in Jesuit treasures in the same way that people say they used to believe in Santa Claus, which could be taken as very condescending or even sarcastic. We have posted evidence of some impressive Jesuit treasures like the seven TONS of gold in a Jesuit church for one example, which I am positive that the Jesuits would refer to as "ornaments of the Church" and yet this does not seem to you like it could be classed as a treasure? From the Jesuits own writings we have descriptions of the rich "ornaments" of the frontier missions, even in the little Visitas as Tumacacori certainly was, yet after the Jesuits departed, a year later almost none of it was to be seen by the Franciscan padres arriving. From the example of San Xavier del Bac, it was not the padres whom hid these "ornaments" but the Indians themselves, as it was they whom brought the treasures out for the returning Jesuits to see in 1860. From father Kino and another (I think possibly Keller) we have in their own words that they hid such "ornaments of the church" during periods of danger, and a report of the discovery of a "massive" Jesuit treasure hidden in a cave just as these padres wrote of having done, I think it is very unfair to keep implying that there never were such things and could not be today worthy of "believing" in.


To add to this point - you know that the so-called "roundup" of the Jesuits in Pimeria Alta was NOT run like a modern sting operation, they simply sent out word for the padres to come in and they came in. Considering that they must have known what was in the wind, having seen their Order thrown out of Portuguese dominions, French dominions, do you suppose that the padres might not have told their "helpers" and trusted Indians to protect the "ornaments" of the Church until their return? Would that not make sense? Or is it not possible that the Indians, on realizing that the padres were NOT returning, might not have taken these goods and concealed them, themselves? These Indians would have had nearly a year to fully conceal any and all mines and treasures.


Cactusjumper also wrote

By the way, do you think John Poynder might have been just a touch anti-Jesuit?

Absolutely - does that make his words false? If so, you could provide some proof that his statements which have been posted here are false, but having seen the multiple cases of Jesuits lying about their activities, including and especially the mining, I do not feel we can trust the Jesuits version of their history. By the way, why do you suppose so many of these "anti-Jesuits" published books warning of the excesses, and even dangerous political intrigues of the Jesuits, and thus became tagged as "anti-Jesuit"?

As we keep getting nowhere in this, as you seem to be willing to write off the production of multiple silver and gold mines of the Jesuits as possibly used for decorating saddles and similar trifles, despite the fact that one Catholic bishop (Palafox) was so alarmed at the massing wealth of the Jesuits he wrote to the Pope about it, I am going to let it go, and simply agree to disagree.


Thank you Joe and everyone for the long and very interesting debate, and to all whom have participated, my apologies for any and all statements which were offensive in any way. Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek. I will answer if someone directs a comment to me, but have bored my friends and tested patiences long enough.
Oroblanco

 

[releventchair]

Oro you never bore me and present your arguments well with out offence. I side with the curious and wobble on the fence when given the choice . Allows me to see farther.
That and a good mix of posters following Gollums original post have added lots for me to consider. Thanks all and good hunting out in them lonely places.

 

[sailaway]

Geronimo said he and his Indians wanted to wipe out all memories and sights of the Europeans. (he called them Mexicans) In his autobiography he stated that he and the tribesmen hid everything in the mines, and destroyed every building they knew of in 1858. This only two years before ORO said the Indians showed the Padres in 1860, hum two years to hide stuff. I wonder how much they took to the mines?

 

[cactusjumper]

Roy,

[Cactusjumper also wrote
By the way, do you think John Poynder might have been just a touch anti-Jesuit?



Absolutely - does that make his words false? If so, you could provide some proof that his statements which have been posted here are false, but having seen the multiple cases of Jesuits lying about their activities, including and especially the mining, I do not feel we can trust the Jesuits version of their history. By the way, why do you suppose so many of these "anti-Jesuits" published books warning of the excesses, and even dangerous political intrigues of the Jesuits, and thus became tagged as "anti-Jesuit"]

I don't have the answers for you. Are you aware of how many anti-Mormon or non-Jesuit anti-Catholic books have been written? I do have a number of both types of "anti" books.

Can you provide any proof that his statements are true?

This is a debate that neither of us seem to be able to win. Perhaps we should both bow out here. On the other hand, a good deal of real history is being exchanged in the fray.

Take care my friend,

Joe

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Hi spiny butt cactus , in fact one of the companies which my wife represents here in Mexico owns the mineral rights and is preparing to work the vein as soon as things pick up a bit As the Comisario, (basically accountant ) I had to do my research.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Oroblanco]

Cactusjumper wrote

Roy,

Cactusjumper also wrote
By the way, do you think John Poynder might have been just a touch anti-Jesuit?

<Oroblanco wrote>

Absolutely - does that make his words false? If so, you could provide some proof that his statements which have been posted here are false, <snip>

I don't have the answers for you. Are you aware of how many anti-Mormon or non-Jesuit anti-Catholic books have been written? I do have a number of both types of "anti" books.


Can you provide any proof that his statements are true?

Certainly, but will that make any difference? Poynder cited as his source of the discovery of a Jesuit treasure, "massive" (HIS term) in a cave in the kingdom of Sardinia is:


Observations Sur la Relation Des Événemens Qui Se Sont Passés en Bretagne, Publiée Au Nom Des Députés Du Clergé Et de la Noblesse, by Louis Jérôme GOHIER, published in 1789 and unfortunately for me, in French and I do not know of any English translation.


As to the proclamation from Cardinal Sandalha, I already provided the citation, which was:
<from The Footprints of the Jesuits, pp 189, citing The Suppression of the Society of Jesus in the Portuguese Dominions By the Rev Alfred Weld of the Society of Jesus London,pp 131-132>


I do not know the number of "anti-Jesuit" nor "anti-Mormon" type books have been published, nor accept that has any bearing on the debate. The Jesuits (and Mormons) have PLENTY of able defenders and apologists publishing a vast array of books, articles etc over the centuries. If we just dismiss all anti-Jesuits out of hand, as classed by the Jesuits shall we then also completely dismiss everything ever published by the pro-Jesuits as well? The "anti" source I cited, if you will note, was citing other sources NOT simply making nasty accusations. Hence the references to Weld and Gohier, not simply Poynder and Richard Wigginton Thompson <author of Footprints of the Jesuits> whom I am sure you would class as "anti-Jesuits".

Cactusjumper also wrote

This is a debate that neither of us seem to be able to win. Perhaps we should both bow out here. On the other hand, a good deal of real history is being exchanged in the fray.

I see no need for you to bow out of the discussion, if you do that will mean one less educated and able defender of the Jesuits. And as you pointed out, the research has turned up history which is always a good thing. In fact it has given me some new info that I intend to act on, the next time I am in California and also in Arizona as well, which I am not going to share.


Relevantchair - muchas gracias amigo and we must thank everyone for participating, many members ahve posted very interesting and helpful information in this thread, and the two previous in which this debate actually got started (the Molina document being one) heck when this started I did not realize there was even such a dispute over the topic.


Sailaway - I think Geronimo really did mean Mexicans in his autobiography, his family was treacherously attacked by Mexican soldiers while the warriors were trading in a Mexican village, which killed most members of his immediate family and made him an implacable enemy to them for most of his life. Even after his last surrender, he was quoted as saying he would still go and fight the Mexicans if he could. Also, the mission of San Xavier del Bac treasure is one that the Apaches did not manage to capture, which is why it was seen by visitors but your point is valid, during the long war with the Apaches more than one gold or silver mine was concealed by the Indians. In fact there are old newspaper accounts of the Apaches deliberately taking captured whites to show them rich gold or silver deposits, then letting them go, as they got some entertainment value out of it plus it could lead to future ambushes of un-suspecting prospectors - like the famous story of the Lost Adams diggings which is a bit different (the whites were allowed to mine the gold for a time).

Real de Tayopa, el mule admirer - I cannot address your own low pay rates (just kidding, but consider how high that pay was for an overseer in the time of Segesser - 700 to 800 dollars for a year, in the mid-1700s!) but concerning Bayoreca, Bancroft has it as a Jesuit mission until 1767, when a Curate was assigned there and promptly murdered, raising a flurry. However whether a mine or treasure was Franciscan or Jesuit or Dominican does not make it the less valuable IMHO.


Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[cactusjumper]

deducer,

"Are you able to provide citation that prove Rojas was ill during the last few years prior to the expulsion, and additionally was too ill to travel?"

[Rojas, Carlos (1702-1773) Born in Mexico City. Missionary at Arizpe, Sonora, for thirty years. Was appointed visitador general in 1764, but his rounds were delayed by illness.] "Antigua California......" by Harry W. Crosby, page 409

I have read that Father Rojas was delayed by two years.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo