JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

[cactusjumper]

[Joe Joe Joe,

I would think that since you just explained to me how you have had a copy of Father Polzer's Book in your possession for many years that you would not have had to ask some of those questions! You talk about the "wealth" of the Franciscans, but maybe you can show me evidence of that wealth during the Colonial Period?

Since you have had the book for so long you should have already seen the narrative of Father Don Pedro Tapis. Soon after he was Consecrated the Bishop of Durango in 1715, he set off on a tour of his Diocese. He was neither a Jesuit nor a Franciscan. Read these two pages (55-56) paying special attention to the highlighted areas.

Best-Mike]

Mike, Mike, Mike,

It's a well know fact that the missions of Northern Mexico "were manifestly in need throughout most of their history, the Society always expressed great concern that the missionaries observe a strict personal poverty." "Rules and Precepts" by Charles W. Polzer.

What you seem to be doing is taking the ebullient writings of the early Jesuits, as proof of "massive wealth". In truth they seemed to be seeing their rather mean existence, in most cases, through rose colored glasses.

"Kino and his associates had made history. But their bright dreams of a sparkling stream on the Contra Costa bordered by rich and cultivated Vegas went a-glimmering. The day after his return to San Bruno Atondo certified that none of the lands discovered were suitable for planting. Kino was more optimistic, and he told of the exhilarating exploit in a letter to his old friend, Father Wolfgang Leinberer, in Germany. He was blessed with rose-colored glasses."

"For food Father Jacob had mostly sun-dried beef (tasajo or jerky) and tortillas, which he described for his German friends as "'cakes made of Indian corn and warmed on a little piece of iron.... The so-called tamales are miserable stuff... They are nothing but Indian corn dampened and grated, then rolled up again like an unshucked ear of corn, wrapped in some of the corn husks and eventually eaten. During our journey I was once obliged from stern necessity to eat this stuff for ten days.'" It is too bad for Baegert that he did not have rose-hued glasses such as Kino always wore. The two men represented diametrically opposite types."
Both quotes are from "Rim Of Christendom" by Herbert Eugene Bolton.

As for individual church adornments, I would recommend that you read "The First Jesuits" by Father John W. O'Malley. Pay particular attention starting on page 295. While Father O'Malley has not done much research into the Jesuits of Mexico, IMHO, he knows the early history of the Order better than anyone alive.

I do know Father Polzer's work very well, and will be happy to discuss his personal opinions on the "Rules and Precepts...." anytime. Those opinion, in fact, lend some credence to the possibility that the Jesuits may have ignored both of those directives when they felt it was expedient.

That would follow the personal and published opinions of Father O'Malley closely.

Take care,

Joe

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[gollum]

Listen Lamar HAHAHA,

I see that you just choose to simply ignore the travel report of the Bishop of Durango. Is there a reason for that?

When you use the term "rose colored glasses" it refers to one's positive opinion of a subject based on personal biases. I somehow doubt Father Och's detailed description of the 1800 pounds of cast silver railings or that "colossally large" solid silver hanging lamp that was eight feet in circumference and large enough for a man to comfortably walk around, would fall under the meaning of your phrase.

As you know, I am quite familiar with both Father John O'Malley SJ personally, and his work. I agree that no public man I have found (so far) knows more about early Jesuits than he.

Those opinion, in fact, lend some credence to the possibility that the Jesuits may have ignored both of those directives when they felt it was expedient.

So, you are saying that if the Jesuits felt it would have been expedient to their cause, they would have participated in mining or refining?

See, I try and give the Jesuits the benefit of the doubt when it comes to following the rules. I don't think they out and out ignored them. I think they were constantly finding the loopholes.

the Society always expressed great concern that the missionaries observe a strict personal poverty.

There is a HUGE difference between "PERSONAL" poverty and Church Wealth. I don't understand how you can ignore that. Why would the Church want to accrue wealth when they so manifestly denied it to their Priests? Maybe this will explain:

Although in these miserable times opposing opinions have arisen among critics, some praising and others condemning the care and expense of adorning and maintaining the temples with all possible dignity and decency for the reverence due to the Supreme Maker of all creation, I will not enter into a dispute over the subject, but I believe in what Our Mother, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, has always praised, approved, practised, and in a certain fashion glorified in the lives of its Saints. One learns from the lessons of St Ignatius of Loyola, father and founder of the Society of Jesus, when he says in praise of that Holy Patriarch, “Templorum nitor, catechismi traditio, concionum ac Sacramentorum frequentia ab ipso incrementum accepere.”I shall say that my heart rejoices with delight, and I feel more inclined to worship and praise Our Lord when I enter any well adorned church. I must let the admiration argument prevail, a maiori ad minorem [from the highest to the lowest], for if we who are more rational than the Indians find incentive and devotion in temples that outshine others by their glowing adornments and will choose those in preference to the slovenly ones for Mass, Sermon, Confession, and Communion, how much more must the Indians be in need of such stimuli when nothing of what they hear takes hold upon them unless it enters through their eyes with some sort of demonstration of the Supreme Creator about whom the preacher is speaking? So, when they see that the house of God is well ordered, clean, and beautifully adorned, they perceive at once the magnificence of its Owner and Ruler. I praise the missionaries of Sonora for imitating their great Father St. Ignatius.

Father Johan Nentvig SJ

Best-Mike

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

I wrote:

"What you seem to be doing is taking the ebullient writings of the early Jesuits, as proof of "massive wealth". In truth they seemed to be seeing their rather mean existence, in most cases, through rose colored glasses."

A good deal of the Bishop's data came from the the writings of Jacobo Sedelmayr, S.J. Can you tell me where you have weeded out Father Sedelmayr's "facts" from the Bishop's? For that reason, I ignored the Bishop's report.

"So, you are saying that if the Jesuits felt it would have been expedient to their cause, they would have participated in mining or refining?"

This was my statement:

"Those opinion, in fact, lend some credence to the possibility that the Jesuits may have ignored both of those directives when they felt it was expedient."

To be clear, I believe it's possible that some Jesuits may have engaged in some form of "mining". I don't believe they ammased great treasures or enslaved their charges to work the mines. There is no...,ZERO, evidence of that.

"It's a well know fact that the missions of Northern Mexico "were manifestly in need throughout most of their history, the Society always expressed great concern that the missionaries observe a strict personal poverty."

I did not want to partially quote Father Polzer's statement. What you seemed to have missed is the portion I have highlighted to make it easier for you to get my point.

On your side is the fact that Ignatius often told the first Jesuits to forget his instructions and do what they thought best under the circumstances. While you may find some encouragement in that, you should keep in mind that the Society of Jesus was in constant flux.

"As you know, I am quite familiar with both Father John O'Malley SJ personally, and his work."

You are a lucky man to have a personal relationship with Father O'Malley. What did you make of the pages I suggested you read from "The First Jesuits"?

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

Mike,

I wrote:

"What you seem to be doing is taking the ebullient writings of the early Jesuits, as proof of "massive wealth". In truth they seemed to be seeing their rather mean existence, in most cases, through rose colored glasses."

A good deal of the Bishop's data came from the the writings of Jacobo Sedelmayr, S.J. Can you tell me where you have weeded out Father Sedelmayr's "facts" from the Bishop's? For that reason, I ignored the Bishop's report.

"So, you are saying that if the Jesuits felt it would have been expedient to their cause, they would have participated in mining or refining?"

This was my statement:

"Those opinion, in fact, lend some credence to the possibility that the Jesuits may have ignored both of those directives when they felt it was expedient."

To be clear, I believe it's possible that some Jesuits may have engaged in some form of "mining". I don't believe they ammased great treasures or enslaved their charges to work the mines. There is no...,ZERO, evidence of that.

"It's a well know fact that the missions of Northern Mexico "were manifestly in need throughout most of their history, the Society always expressed great concern that the missionaries observe a strict personal poverty."

I did not want to partially quote Father Polzer's statement. What you seemed to have missed is the portion I have highlighted to make it easier for you to get my point.

On your side is the fact that Ignatius often told the first Jesuits to forget his instructions and do what they thought best under the circumstances. While you may find some encouragement in that, you should keep in mind that the Society of Jesus was in constant flux.

"As you know, I am quite familiar with both Father John O'Malley SJ personally, and his work."

You are a lucky man to have a personal relationship with Father O'Malley. What did you make of the pages I suggested you read from "The First Jesuits"?

Take care,

Joe

Joe,

Can you tell me where you have weeded out Father Sedelmayr's "facts" from the Bishop's?

Maybe you should reread Polzer's Book. What I posted had nothing to do with Father Sedelmayr SJ. They were the PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS of the Bishop while on a tour of his Diocese. He personally witnessed:

"Writing the king from the Real of Santa Rosa de Cusiguriachic on August 26, THE TRAIL WEARY Bishop recounted the DIFFERENCES HE HAD WITNESSED DURING HIS JOURNEY OF NINE HUNDRED MILES THROUGH THE MISSIONS OF THE NORTH"

Please explain again how Sedelmayr had anything to do with that? Maybe you can tell us when Jacobo Sedelmayr SJ arrived in Pimeria (I'll give you a hint: 1736)? Could you also please tell us when Don Pedro Tapis died (I'll give you a hint: 1722)? Was Tapis a psychic? Could he see the future? This narrative was written in 1715 and was appointed Bishop of Guadalajara AFTER his death in 1722, while Sedelmayr didn't enter the picture until 1736. Please feel free to ignore his narrative because it doesn't fit in with your personal beliefs, but don't twist up history. Of course, I could be mistaken.

And yes, Jerome Nadal SJ was one of the driving forces behind the Jesuits' expansion worldwide, and behind their in your face "do whatever it takes" attitude to Apostolic Servitude, as opposed to many of the Catholic Orders' more monastic existence.

Best-Mike

 

[cactusjumper]

Sorry Mike,

My mistake. I should have read your earlier post more closely. I was thinking of a report from 1645.

Even so, the report you quoted does not show "massive wealth" and lists the sources of Jesuit income, and cites the fact that their missions were better run than the Franciscans.

To be honest, I am not that familiar with the Franciscan missions.

My apologies for the mistaken portion of my post.

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

Sorry Mike,

My mistake. I should have read your earlier post more closely. I was thinking of a report from 1645.

Even so, the report you quoted does not show "massive wealth" and lists the sources of Jesuit income, and cites the fact that their missions were better run than the Franciscans.

To be honest, I am not that familiar with the Franciscan missions.

My apologies for the mistaken portion of my post.

Take care,

Joe

Now wait a minute Joe,

If Tapis' death predated Sedelmayr by 14 years, and this narrative predated him by 21 years, then your report of 1645 would have predated Sedelmayr by 91 years! Don Pedro Tapis was not made Bishop of Durango until 1715 when this narrative was written.

Also, how could you be thinking of a report from 1645 when the pages I scanned and posted clearly stated that the date of the Bishop's travels was 1715?

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about your posts makes any sense whatsoever! There is absolutely no relationship between Tapis and Sedelmayr. Read the two pages I posted (or refer to your own copy of the book) again. I think that Tapis describes pretty clearly how well adorned the Jesuit Churches and Missions were, as opposed to how poor and badly managed the Franciscan Churches and Missions were.

...... and, all he knew as to the Jesuits' income was what they told him, and what he saw. Do you honestly think that if the Jesuits were involved in illegal mining, they would relate that information to a non Jesuit like Tapis?

This isn't like you Joe. Have you not been feeling well lately?

Best-Mike

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

Not as good as I would like to be.

The date was June 17, 1745. Memory ain't so good a it uster be.

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

Mike,

Not as good as I would like to be.

The date was June 17, 1745. Memory ain't so good a it uster be.

Take care,

Joe

Well, okay, as long as you're not on the pipe! HAHAHA

So, tell me about this report of yours? Who wrote it? What's it about? etc etc etc

So I guess Bishop Tapis' Report to the King of Spain is okay?

"What you seem to be doing is taking the ebullient writings of the early Jesuits, as proof of "massive wealth". In truth they seemed to be seeing their rather mean existence, in most cases, through rose colored glasses."

Early Jesuits? I don't understand how you can call them EARLY JESUITS? Fathers Och, Sedelmayr, Pfefferkorn, and Nentvig were all rounded up in 1767 and sent to Europe. That's about as late as you can get.

"It's a well know fact that the missions of Northern Mexico "were manifestly in need throughout most of their history, the Society always expressed great concern that the missionaries observe a strict personal poverty."

I can only say the exact same thing over and over. Joe, you are acting more and more like Lamar. Its not very becoming. There is a huge difference between "PERSONAL POVERTY" and acquiring wealth in the way of Church Adornments and monies for the Rectorates and Colegios. I will once again quote Father Och SJ onn the matter:

Although in these miserable times opposing opinions have arisen among critics, some praising and others condemning the care and expense of adorning and maintaining the temples with all possible dignity and decency for the reverence due to the Supreme Maker of all creation, I will not enter into a dispute over the subject, but I believe in what Our Mother, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, has always praised, approved, practised, and in a certain fashion glorified in the lives of its Saints. One learns from the lessons of St Ignatius of Loyola, father and founder of the Society of Jesus, when he says in praise of that Holy Patriarch, “Templorum nitor, catechismi traditio, concionum ac Sacramentorum frequentia ab ipso incrementum accepere.”I shall say that my heart rejoices with delight, and I feel more inclined to worship and praise Our Lord when I enter any well adorned church. I must let the admiration argument prevail, a maiori ad minorem [from the highest to the lowest], for if we who are more rational than the Indians find incentive and devotion in temples that outshine others by their glowing adornments and will choose those in preference to the slovenly ones for Mass, Sermon, Confession, and Communion, how much more must the Indians be in need of such stimuli when nothing of what they hear takes hold upon them unless it enters through their eyes with some sort of demonstration of the Supreme Creator about whom the preacher is speaking? So, when they see that the house of God is well ordered, clean, and beautifully adorned, they perceive at once the magnificence of its Owner and Ruler. I praise the missionaries of Sonora for imitating their great Father St. Ignatius.

The quest for acquiring wealth in the name of the Order/Church was very simply and elegantly stated by Father Och. Even so far as to quote the Founder of the Jesuit Order Saint Ignacious Loyola.

Best-Mike

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good morning Mike, Gollum: You seem to be skirting around the main fact regarding Jesuit accumulation of Precious metals from the Americas - POWER. If you are the named head of such a body then you obviously believe in it to the exclusion of the other competing Religious groups. You will wish to advance this as the 'TRUE' faith by whatever means available and necessary..

In such conditions anything and everything is fair and correct, such as the Inquisition, since you are doing so in the name of righteousness and the Glory of God. Any oaths to a king etc are secondary.

Beyond the ethics of Pure Religious belief, remember, we are speaking of Humans with their proven frailties, and as they say, Power begets the lust for more Power.

This can easily be seen here in TN in a small way among various posters on different subjects..

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[cactusjumper]

Don Jose,

An interesting thesis. Is it your contention that the Jesuits came to the new world with the express purpose of gaining wealth and power for the church? Is it just natural for man to do, primarily, those things which will gain him wealth and power?

Thanks in advance,

Joe

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

[There is a huge difference between "PERSONAL POVERTY" and acquiring wealth in the way of Church Adornments and monies for the Rectorates and Colegios. I will once again quote Father Och SJ onn the matter:]

I love the way you inject your own spin into historical quotes, in order to prove your unfounded theories. You also only quote the portion of what I have written that suites your argument, despite the fact I was trying to get across being highlighted in bold.

A simple statement about having a "well adorned church" becomes an all encompassing desire for excessive/massive wealth, which includes enslaving the people you consider your children, to work to their death in your mines. You have inserted " monies for the Rectorates and Colegios" which was not in the original quote. While it might be true, it might just as easily be false.

You ignore the fact that the Spanish, ever watchful for such things, never once discovered a single mine being operated by the Jesuits or their laymen. The Indians, who were not shy about voicing their grievances in the courts of the day, never accused the Jesuits of enslaving them to work in secret mines.

The natives were not afraid of the Jesuits. They knew it was the Spanish soldiers who enforced their edicts. They also knew that the Spanish authorities badly wanted such evidence to use against the Order. That evidence was never found, despite years of vigilance.

Eventually we found Father Kino's remains, even though the number of people searching was very small. Despite thousands upon thousands of people searching after the Jesuit Expulsion, for 234 years, no one has ever found a single, authenticated, Jesuit mine or treasure. Not even one ingot of gold or silver.

Each year I find myself making more and more mistakes when trying to quote historical documents. None of those mistakes are done with the intention of trying to color the facts, one way or another. When I am informed of my errors, I confirm them and apologize.

Calling me "Lamar" does not enhance your arguments in any way, except in your own mind. Let's stick to the historical facts and not make this debate personal. Until someone, perhaps Don Jose, shows me the money.....so to speak, I will not be convinced by stories.

Belief's or trust do not equal evidence.

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

Joe,

First of all, I NEVER "injected" anything into a quote. I used two words from your quote (and put them in QUOTES), and made a statement showing the difference between two entities (personal and Church).

A simple statement about having a "well adorned church" becomes an all encompassing desire for excessive/massive wealth, which includes enslaving the people you consider your children, to work to their death in your mines. You have inserted " monies for the Rectorates and Colegios" which was not in the original quote. While it might be true, it might just as easily be false.

As far as calling you Lamar, if you act like Lamar, I will tease you as such! Putting words into my mouth which I NEVER said, making false accusations against me (see your above quote). Where did I EVER post anything about enslaving the Indians to work in mines? NEVER! Others may have, but not me. It has (for quite a while now) been my contention that the Jesuit Priests themselves never did any of the actual mining. Seems you should be well aware of that by now. ALSO, I have NEVER said that what I believe is based on anything other than MY OWN INTERPRETATION of the words of the Jesuit Priests themselves and advice from two renowned Jesuit Historians. I have NEVER said that what I believe is absolute or that any other possibility is nonexistent.

You ignore the fact that the Spanish, ever watchful for such things, never once discovered a single mine being operated by the Jesuits or their laymen.

Since the Order of Jesus has NEVER published lists of names of their Coadjutors, I think it would be fairly difficult to know if any of them ever owned mines or not. Maybe you might have some insight I don't. Also, there were more than one instance of Jesuits being found owning mines that were documented even by Father Polzer (one inherited through debt and permitted and one illegal), so your premise of NEVER seems a bit "rose colored".

Best-Mike

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

good evening Joe, am a bit beat tonight so I will limit it to "Why not both? the Priests for the souls, the adjutors for the glory and advancement of the Order in Rome"?

Tayopa did have Jesuits there, for mining or strictly for saving souls and watching out for Rome's interest -- sabe ? And Jesuits were looking for It, which is why th Priest that was killed was in the area.

Don Jose de La Mancha
.

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

[I can only say the exact same thing over and over. Joe, you are acting more and more like Lamar. Its not very becoming. There is a huge difference between "PERSONAL POVERTY" and acquiring wealth in the way of Church Adornments and monies for the Rectorates and Colegios. I will once again quote Father Och SJ onn the matter:]

Don't believe I put any "words in your mouth". On the other hand, you don't seem to be able to understand what I am saying/writing, even when I make it easy for you. It may be all my fault, but I've had enough of your wisdom to last for quite awhile.

I think I will act even more like Lamar, who also had something to add to the conversation, and leave you to only your side of the debate.

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

Mike,

[I can only say the exact same thing over and over. Joe, you are acting more and more like Lamar. Its not very becoming. There is a huge difference between "PERSONAL POVERTY" and acquiring wealth in the way of Church Adornments and monies for the Rectorates and Colegios. I will once again quote Father Och SJ onn the matter:]

Don't believe I put any "words in your mouth". On the other hand, you don't seem to be able to understand what I am saying/writing, even when I make it easy for you. It may be all my fault, but I've had enough of your wisdom to last for quite awhile.

I think I will act even more like Lamar, who also had something to add to the conversation, and leave you to only your side of the debate.

Take care,

Joe

Really?

Don't believe I put any "words in your mouth"

well then:

I love the way you inject your own spin into historical quotes,

A simple statement about having a "well adorned church" becomes an all encompassing desire for excessive/massive wealth, which includes enslaving the people you consider your children, to work to their death in your mines.

You have inserted " monies for the Rectorates and Colegios" which was not in the original quote.

I didn't INSERT dick into the "ORIGINAL QUOTE." I simply took two words from the original quote and inserted them into my "unfounded theory" (funny how in one paragraph you call my theories unfounded and right after say that "While it might be true, it might just as easily be false."

Say what you want, but I believe that someone at one point here had posted a newspaper article that pretty much detailed a find of Jesuit Wealth that was massive. HHHHMMMMMM But I may be mistaken.

I also have several photos of both gold and silver bars, but I guess that ALL of them are fakes. Yes Joe, you and Lamar are correct in completely dismissing the writings of the Jesuit Fathers themselves as ramblings through "rose hued glasses" even though they are actual descriptions and not opinions.

I'm still waiting for the report that you mentioned that relied on the word of Sedelmayr? It was funny how you went to such great lengths to find those quote referring to "rose hued glasses" and telling me how you could so easily dismiss a third party report of how well adorned all the Durango Jesuit Missions and Churches were, and when shown you were wrong in every way, you ignored the report, and instead chose to attack me.

Sounding more and more like Lamar there Joe. Next thing, you will be feigning offense at something I post so you can conveniently ignore getting something wrong. Although, I do appreciate that when confronted with the impossibility of your post regarding the narrative of Bishop Tapis you did admit "mea culpa." Very UNLAMARLIKE! HAHAHA

Best-Mike

 

[gollum]

Joe,

Speaking of Lamar. At one point in time, Lamar might have added to the conversations, but when he started doing the following:

1. Getting things absolutely wrong and dodging the truth when confronted by acting offended by some little point that had nothing to do with the subject, picking gnat$hit out of pepper to change the subject, or just not posting for a page or so hoping that others would forget.


2. Making the exact same arguments over and over forcing others to repost the exact same evidence refuting whatever he had posted. exhausting

3. Completely ignoring things like Catholic/Jesuit Slaveholding, and arguing vehemently against it in any fashion (even though Jesuit Historian and Priest Father John O'Malley stated as much and showed me where to find the best evidence regarding the Pope keeping slaves on his Papal Barge).

4. And when he became personally insulting to me and people I know to be honest, I was COMPLETELY done, because at that point he had lost any little bit of credibility with me he had left.

Sorry Joe, but when the back and forths with Lamar got to be exercises in futility, it was IGNORE time.

 

[Cubfan64]

Got a question that's probably been asked and discussed before, but I can't find it.

I think most everyone agrees that the Jesuits were generally a very learned group of individuals - on numerous subjects. I've read here and elsewhere they members of the order were highly intelligent, creative and were often teachers in many disciplines.

For what reason would the order NOT want to be well educated in geology, mining and associated knowledge that went with it? My first thought was to "protect" the members from being tempted by the purely temporal sin of greed, however just about anything can lead to the sin of greed. For example, knowing all the ins and outs of raising crops and livestock - while it provides directly for the health of a person and a society, it can often be utilized as a means to sell the products for coin or wealth which could be used for the good of the church. If mining and making a profit from raw materials of the earth could provide that same coin and wealth for the good of the church, why was there a precept ever written to prevent that?

Thanks in advance.

Paul

 

[gollum]

Got a question that's probably been asked and discussed before, but I can't find it.

I think most everyone agrees that the Jesuits were generally a very learned group of individuals - on numerous subjects. I've read here and elsewhere they members of the order were highly intelligent, creative and were often teachers in many disciplines.

For what reason would the order NOT want to be well educated in geology, mining and associated knowledge that went with it? My first thought was to "protect" the members from being tempted by the purely temporal sin of greed, however just about anything can lead to the sin of greed. For example, knowing all the ins and outs of raising crops and livestock - while it provides directly for the health of a person and a society, it can often be utilized as a means to sell the products for coin or wealth which could be used for the good of the church. If mining and making a profit from raw materials of the earth could provide that same coin and wealth for the good of the church, why was there a precept ever written to prevent that?

Thanks in advance.

Paul

Hey Paul,

The single and solitary reason for the Jesuits to avoid mining knowledge was because of their agreement with the King of Spain. They were given free reign over the hearts and souls of Northern New Spain. In return, they agreed to leave all the mineral riches to the seculars, so the King could get his fifth. The missions were supposed to have been self sustaining by selling crops, tithing, etc. There was also a small stipend from the Royal Coffers for each Jesuit Father per year (I believe it was 200 pesos).

The rules against Jesuit Mining and knowledge of mining ONLY applied in the New World. Maybe even only in Northern New Spain. Since most of my research is concentrated on Pimeria, Apacheria, and Sonora, I can't say for certain about the rest of the Spanish New World. That rule absolutely didn't apply in Europe, especially since the Jesuits founded most of the Earth Sciences (Geology, Geography, etc), and taught mining in their European Schools.

Best-Mike

 

[Cubfan64]

Got a question that's probably been asked and discussed before, but I can't find it.

I think most everyone agrees that the Jesuits were generally a very learned group of individuals - on numerous subjects. I've read here and elsewhere they members of the order were highly intelligent, creative and were often teachers in many disciplines.

For what reason would the order NOT want to be well educated in geology, mining and associated knowledge that went with it? My first thought was to "protect" the members from being tempted by the purely temporal sin of greed, however just about anything can lead to the sin of greed. For example, knowing all the ins and outs of raising crops and livestock - while it provides directly for the health of a person and a society, it can often be utilized as a means to sell the products for coin or wealth which could be used for the good of the church. If mining and making a profit from raw materials of the earth could provide that same coin and wealth for the good of the church, why was there a precept ever written to prevent that?

Thanks in advance.

Paul

Hey Paul,

The single and solitary reason for the Jesuits to avoid mining knowledge was because of their agreement with the King of Spain. They were given free reign over the hearts and souls of Northern New Spain. In return, they agreed to leave all the mineral riches to the seculars, so the King could get his fifth. The missions were supposed to have been self sustaining by selling crops, tithing, etc. There was also a small stipend from the Royal Coffers for each Jesuit Father per year (I believe it was 200 pesos).

The rules against Jesuit Mining and knowledge of mining ONLY applied in the New World. Maybe even only in Northern New Spain. Since most of my research is concentrated on Pimeria, Apacheria, and Sonora, I can't say for certain about the rest of the Spanish New World. That rule absolutely didn't apply in Europe, especially since the Jesuits founded most of the Earth Sciences (Geology, Geography, etc), and taught mining in their European Schools.

Best-Mike

Thanks Mike,

Of course you knew I would have some follow-up questions

1) You mentioned that the rule only applied to the New World, and perhaps only New Spain - any ideas why that may have been? Was it because in Europe the King had simple means for "checking up on them" therefore there was no need for a rule like that whereas the New World was so far away and difficult to "rule?"

2) Did the Jesuits make certain that anyone who was sent to New Spain had no knowledge of mining, geology, etc..., or did they just set the rule in place in such a way that those who may have had that knowledge through previous training were not allowed to use any of it?

One of the things I have a difficult time believing is that should a situation arise where a Jesuit Father saw his mission dying due to draught, disease, etc... that he would allow it to completely fail and see all his work go for naught if there was an opportunity to keep it running by exploiting mineral resources which may have been close by and/or known about by the natives who were part of his mission.

I understand it's difficult for anyone today to put themselves in the shoes of a Jesuit Father back then, but as others have mentioned, these men were still human - at some point wouldn't at least a few of them have questioned whether the "end justified the means" and allowed mineral resources to keep them operating if that were the only option left? Could some of them not "turn a blind eye" or find some way to justify it without involving themselves directly?

I think as human beings we've certainly seen a number of situations where powerful organizations have been able to suppress evidence of wrongdoing for many many years - and quite often the reasoning behind it has to do with maintaining power/control as well as what I mentioned above about "the end justifies the means."

It's an interesting topic, and while it's not something I have even a hope of ever knowing what some of you folks have spent many years investigating and researching, I'll still ask questions now and then

 

[gollum]

I may be wrong, but I don't believe it was illegal for Jesuits to be in the mining business in Europe. Nothing to do with the king keeping an eye on them.

2) Did the Jesuits make certain that anyone who was sent to New Spain had no knowledge of mining, geology, etc..., or did they just set the rule in place in such a way that those who may have had that knowledge through previous training were not allowed to use any of it?

Not at all. Most of the German (Austrian, Bavarian, etc) Jesuits were accomplished miners. Just read Father Och SJ's journals and you will see how extensive his knowledge of mining was.

I have said it before, I don't believe the Mission Priests themselves had much to do with any mining. If you know all the things they were required to do normally, it doesn't leave much time for mining.

That's why I am fairly certain that temporal coadjutors handled most of the moneymaking needs of the Order.

Best-Mike