JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

[lamar]

Is it just me, or does it seem like this thread is rapidly deteriorating into a theological "Catholic vs. Protestant" and religion discussion/argument?

While it may be difficult to separate the thread topic from a theology debate, absolutely nothing (imho) will be accomplished by straying too far down that path. I would hazard a guess that few if any folks posting here will ever be "converted" to the other side's way of thinking anyways.

Either way, I'd at least rather see the discussion head back towards the initial subject matter.

Dear cubfan64:
The reality is that you cannot discuss the Jesuits in the New World colonies without discussing the Catholic vs. Protestant problem, because that discussion is inter-twined to the discussion of the Jesuits, my friend. There were many reasons why the Jesuits lost favor, and because of their staunchily opposed views of the Reformation, they made enemies within the various Protestant communities.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Cubfan64]

Is it just me, or does it seem like this thread is rapidly deteriorating into a theological "Catholic vs. Protestant" and religion discussion/argument?

While it may be difficult to separate the thread topic from a theology debate, absolutely nothing (imho) will be accomplished by straying too far down that path. I would hazard a guess that few if any folks posting here will ever be "converted" to the other side's way of thinking anyways.

Either way, I'd at least rather see the discussion head back towards the initial subject matter.

Dear cubfan64:
The reality is that you cannot discuss the Jesuits in the New World colonies without discussing the Catholic vs. Protestant problem, because that discussion is inter-twined to the discussion of the Jesuits, my friend. There were many reasons why the Jesuits lost favor, and because of their staunchily opposed views of the Reformation, they made enemies within the various Protestant communities.
Your friend;
LAMAR

Well, if that's honestly the case lamar, then I predict this thread will deteriorate into a mess of name calling, harsh accusations and arguments rather than discussion and eventually simply be moved by the moderators to the religion discussion section.

Unfortunately, alot of the interesting evidence on both sides will be pushed to the background because of it.

 

[cactusjumper]

Beth & Paul,

So are we saying that if I came along a small pile of ore, like this:

lying alongside a remote trail in the Superstitions and picked them up, I would be mining?

Thanks in advance,

Joe

 

[lamar]

Dear cactusjumper;
No, that would be prospecting, my friend. Collecting specimens could in no way be construed as mining, unless of course you happened to have a Jesuit or two with you, then yes, if one of you accidentally kicked a rock whilst walking down a trail, then you'd most definitely be MINING!
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Dear Lamar,

I believe prospecting would be searching/looking for, rather than simply finding.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Cubfan64]

Beth & Paul,

So are we saying that if I came along a small pile of ore, like this:

lying alongside a remote trail in the Superstitions and picked them up, I would be mining?

Thanks in advance,

Joe

I can't answer that question Joe. Common sense and logic would suggest to me that NO, I wouldn't consider it mining - however re-read that definition above, and questions begin to arise don't they? Is that a "small grab sample?" What if I found enough of it that I could load up a backpack or more - would that still be considered small or would it be termed mining at that point even if the only "extraction" step was to pick it up off the ground.

The only point I was trying to make and agree with is that some of this may be a matter of semantics and definitions - what was considered mining back when the missions were established?

 

[mrs.oroblanco]

If you are doing it on MY claim, and it had gold or silver in it - you would be guilty of mineral trespass.

If you are doing it in the Superstitions, since it is impossible to every file a claim, you are prospecting or looking for a treasure trove - which you cannot take. You prospect to find a mineable site - if you are not allowed to mine, (as in the Jesuit discussion) whyever would you prospect?

In Tonto, it specifically says:

MINING

Mining is any activity that attempts to extract minerals (which are valuable and locatable) from their natural setting. No mining of any type (whether for recreation and/or profit) is allowed except with an approved Notice of Intent and/or Plan of Operations for activity on a legal claim with valid existing rights. New mining claims can no longer be filed on designated Wilderness Areas. The Wilderness Act of 1964 allowed mining claims to be filed until January 1, 1984, at which time all Wilderness Areas were closed to new mineral entry. Subsequently- designated Wilderness Areas were closed to mineral entry upon enactment of the law creating them.


PROSPECTING

Prospecting is the gathering of information on mineral resources. Prospecting is allowed within a designated Wilderness Area, but an approved Plan of Operations is required. No person can acquire any right of interest to mineral resources discovered by prospecting or other information-gathering activity. Extraction of minerals (except a small grab sample) is a type of mining, and must comply with all related laws and regulations; see "Mining" below. If the search is for precious worked metal or other treasure, see "Treasure Trove Hunting" below
Now, you may take a "grab sample", but they are still specific about that, too:
Extraction of minerals (except a small grab sample) is a type of mining - BUT - you need a plan of operations FIRST. So, if you didn't have a plan of operations - for the prospecting - you are mining.


B

 

[Oroblanco]

Seasons greetings amigos,
There has been a lot of comment to address, so this is of necessity a very long post. I must beg your indulgence.

SWR aka Yammy Elf wrote

There is no historical facts saying the Jesuits were involved in gold/silver mining here in the New World, or they hide huge amounts of gold/silver to be recovered at a latter date. Jesuit treasure legends are just that...legends and folklore.

For the benefit of our readers, I will point out that SWR's remarks here are false. The Jesuits were involved in mining in the New World, they did hide treasures - though here I need to emphasize his use of the description of "huge amounts of gold/silver" which is what the Jesuit apologists keep repeating is misleading. The treasures hidden by Jesuits were, at least by some folks' standards, fairly small yet are respectable. Jesuit treasure legends are very far from being "legends and folklore". I have no doubt that Yammy Elf believes what he has posted, and in this belief he has the support of Lamar. I for one do not share that belief.

Yammy Elf aka SWR also wrote

Hum...prove something doesn't exist. That's kind of a stretch, ain't it?

In discussions/conversations that is called trying to prove a negative

I would suggest you (or another member here) may wish to look for any investigations done during the colonial period, which might lend some credence to "proving the negative". For example, with the Salero mine, if you could find a record where some NON-Jesuit actually first discovered and worked the mine, (many Spanish colonists did record their claims, though many also did not) you would have evidence against Jesuit discovery and ownership.

Lamar wrote

Inquisitions

I would rather not discuss the Inquisition, as it is not the subject matter of this thread, but have no dispute with you whom wish to discuss it. I won't indulge you though with any further comment on it.

Lamar also wrote

Dear oroblanco;
Would you care to wager 20 dollars that the person who write that particular passage was NOT a Roman Catholic?

So? Your point is....what? That this person, as a witness, can be trusted since he was not a Roman Catholic? What are you trying to say about Roman Catholics amigo? Are you saying that ONLY a Roman Catholic source can be trusted to tell the truth? What about Catholic Bishop Palafox? You don't want anyone to believe a word he uttered concerning your Jesuits.

Lamar also wrote

We read accounts such as this ALL THE TIME and they are simply untrue, unresearched and show a distinct anti-Catholic bias,

Ring that bell! We have a winner there amigos - Lamar our ever-vigilant Jesuit defender has finally resorted to that catch-all excuse for those "ugly" reports of Jesuits having mines and treasures - that it is anti-Catholic! Your apparent definition of what amounts to "anti-Catholic" is quite narrow though amigo, funny how that seems to work. Sorry but no cigar this time.

Lamar also wrote

We may ask God to aid us in striking down our enemies <snip>

Hmm are you giving away your own prayers here amigo? Whom exactly is/are "our enemies" anyway, are we not all God's children?

Lamar also wrote

We may conclude that the statement is untrue simply because there has NEVER been ONE account of an indigenous person EVER stating such nonsense,

You may conclude whatever you wish amigo, that is your predetermined conclusion. Don't expect that everyone who reads this is going to agree with you. I might just as easily state that all the Jesuit claims of utter innocence concerning mining AND treasure are all so much Jesuit propaganda, and in fact more and more I am becoming convinced this IS THE CASE.

Kentucky Kache wrote

All this time our History has been wrong.

Lucky thing we have our amigo Lamar and his confederates here to re-write history FOR US huh.

Cubfan wrote

Either way, I'd at least rather see the discussion head back towards the initial subject matter.

I second that motion, these obvious attempts to derail the thread or "hijack" it into some kind of quasi-religious battle are only too apparent. Some folks don't want our readers to see the evidence and judge for themselves!

Cubfan also wrote

(other than a small grab sample - now THAT'S open to interpretation - hehe).<snip>

I was told <via email> that an ore sample the size of a walnut would not be considered in violation of Forest Service rules, and while this is in fact likely TOO small for a proper fire assay (four ounces being required by every assayer I have ever dealt with) it is large enough for a geologist to make some determinations. I could be mistaken on this, and the rules are ever-changing to the detriment of all prospectors and treasure hunters so please dear readers check with the rangers FIRST. <EDIT you need to file for and obtain a an approved Plan of Operations even for a walnut sized sample.>

Lamar wrote

No, actually it was the Protestant reformers who butchered about the same amount

Oh please stop with the clearly anti-Protestant remarks, and I ask you to return to our subject matter - I remind you our topic here is "Jesuit Treasures - Are They Real?" and our thread owner has allowed us to expand the subject matter to include MINING as well. You don't really want to start down the road you have started on, anyway.

Lamar also wrote, in response to our fellow amigo Cubfan,

Dear cubfan64:
The reality is that you cannot discuss the Jesuits in the New World colonies without discussing the Catholic vs. Protestant problem

This is patently FALSE, although it certainly appears that Lamar can NOT discuss the Jesuits in the New World colonies without degenerating into some in depth discussion of the worst religious conflicts.

I am a little surprised that even the testimony of Jesuits themselves and a Catholic Bishop do not convince our skeptics, but as things have progressed I now see that -nothing- ever will. Jesuits did hide and/or conceal treasures during periods of emergency. They had almost nine YEARS of advanced warning that they would be driven out of the Spanish colonial lands. To expect that they would have been caught "red handed" with so much advanced warning is a wee bit naive, even for the Spanish king.

To show evidence that the Jesuits knew in advance that the Spanish authorities were coming, we need only look at Baja California. There, in at least one instance, the Padres actually went out to meet the authorities.
'
Wishing you all a very Merry Christmas,
Oroblanco

 

[mrs.oroblanco]

I am as Roman Catholic as they come, Lamar, the baptism, the communion, the confirmation, the whole bit.

And yet, I am AGAINST Catholic priests who molest children.

But not anti-Catholic.

I am AGAINST Catholic priests who live the high life.

But not anti-Catholic.

The same applies here - just because you are against an illegal or denegrating activity, does not mean anti-Catholicism.

Saying it is being anti-Catholic - is a cop-out - you're trying to get the thread pulled.

B

 

[lamar]

I am as Roman Catholic as they come, Lamar, the baptism, the communion, the confirmation, the whole bit.

And yet, I am AGAINST Catholic priests who molest children.

But not anti-Catholic.

I am AGAINST Catholic priests who live the high life.

But not anti-Catholic.

The same applies here - just because you are against an illegal or denegrating activity, does not mean anti-Catholicism.

Saying it is being anti-Catholic - is a cop-out - you're trying to get the thread pulled.

B

Dear mrs.oroblanco;
First, I did not accuse you of being anti-Catholic. Next, consider yourself as making my IGNORE list as well.
LAMAR

 

[lamar]

Dear Yammy Elf, Cactusjumper and others;
The fact of the matter is simple. The non-believers have nothing. They have no treasure caches, no vast church treasures, not even a decent treasure map where X marks the spot. They can't produce so much as a discovered candlestick among the entire lot of them. They have zilch. Zippo. Nada. Nothing at all. What they do have is a bunch of unfounded accusations.

The one good question which any of these people have never asked is :
If the Jesuits were so successful at mining, then what was to stop the REST of the Orders from doing exactly the same thing? Offhandedly I can think of the Franciscans, which had a headstart on the Jesuits and the number of their missions outstripped the Jesuits total missions and never did the Jesuits have a numerical advantage over the Franciscans, either in missionaries or in missions.

So, what would have stopped THEM from mining for gold? After all, it's a monkey see, monkey do, world and if the Franciscans would have thought, even for a minute, that the Jesuits were getting rich from mining, then they would have done one of two things.
1) Started passing out the picks and shovels
2) Reported the Jesuits to the authorities
Neither of these events happened, my friends. It seems that the Franciscans' skirts remained clean, yet they were a wealthier Order in the New World colonies than the Jesuits, yet they were never accused of mining.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Hi Paul,

"Is that a "small grab sample?"

I don't believe my little scenario falls under the heading or meaning of "grab sample".

Beth,

"If you are doing it on MY claim, and it had gold or silver in it - you would be guilty of mineral trespass."

A valid point, but I don't follow how it has anything to do with what I said.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Seasons greetings amigos,

Some of this testimony has been posted previously here on T-net in other threads, but as this thread is intended to discuss (or even settle the issue) of Jesuit treasures and mines, I am re-posting it.

Near the western end of this river and a short distance from the north bank there is an abundant hot water spring where, according to a corporal in Father Sedelmayr's escort during the father's entry into the land of the Yumas in 1748, an Indian gave the missionary nuggets of pure silver as large as acorns, and when asked where they were found, the native pointed to a hill not far from Tumac, the last hamlet of the tribe.

<from Rudo Ensayo, A Description of Sonora 1764 by father Juan Nentvig, SJ>

In this one paragraph, we have confirmation of what we find in those oh-so-fictional treasure stories; namely,

1: The Indians were showing the Jesuit padres where to get silver (and we can infer, gold as well)
2: The padre accepted the silver and went so far as to ask where he might find more;

If the Jesuits were never involved with any mines in the New World, why on Earth would the padre bother to ask his Indian friend where he got the silver? Remember the other passage we have cited, in which the missionary admitted to making promises to yet another Indian, in order to learn where his secret mine was located? Use your own common sense amigos, and judge for yourselves - including the "flood of refutations" we get from our Jesuit apologists. Of course then we might well wonder, why the apologists make such efforts to deny everything, when we see no such effort on the part of OTHER religious orders who operated in colonial America.

Most of the information we can find on the Jesuits activities in Spanish America are in fact from the Jesuits themselves, and one could not honestly expect to find masses of written documentation in which they openly admit to having illegally been mining. Yet even within the Jesuits' own writings, we DO find some hints that prove that they were active prospectors, that they were very interested in all the mineral deposits within their area, that they would make use of the Indians to locate these mines. Is it so fantastical to then accept what we find in so many non-Jesuit sources, which state that these courageous and intrepid Jesuit padres were in fact mining, and using the Indians to work those mines?

Our Jesuit apologists wish us to believe this; that we would have men trained in geology and mining engineering, with the "mission" of Christianizing the wild Indians and making these missions financially independent, despite all the written records we have in their own words describing in fair detail the various mines of these frontier areas, NEVER once ever actually did any mining. Our amigo Mike (Gollum) has shown us in Father Och's <SJ> own words how he had his Indians gather raw native copper FOR him, which he then used to cast bells for his mission church. We have the words of Father Nentvig SJ telling us not only were the missionaries getting the Indians to show them where they could find valuable silver deposits, even making promises of heavenly benefits, but that they were accepting these precious metals directly from the hands of the Indians.

The Jesuits also sometimes administered the mines. quote

Ecclesiastically all reales de minas were administered by diocesan ministers. Occasionally, and by request of the priest, members of the Jesuit order performed the rites, turning over the revenues or tithes to the diocesan minister. About 1664 the twenty-fifth vice-roy of New Spain, Antonio Alvaro Sebastian de Toledo, Marquis of Mancera, decreed that reales de minas must be administered by the regular or secular priests. This meant that Jesuits in Sonora could not attend to them except by request as stated above.

end quote
<ibid>
One might well be tempted to ask, why the viceroy issued the decree excluding our Jesuits in 1664? Just more of that mean, "anti-Catholic bias" flaring up in the Spanish I suppose...

We have shown several incidents in which Jesuits hid treasures, including good Father Kino SJ himself. The Jesuit apologists almost always point to the records of what was found in the Jesuit missions on the moment of their expulsion, as the missions were practically devoid of anything of value. We have Jesuit-written descriptions of those very same missions, written before their expulsion, pointing out the very valuable silver ornamentations and equipment. Are we supposed to believe that the earlier Jesuit-written descriptions are all a pack of LIES, for when the Spanish authorities effected their arrests, the same missions were discovered to be so poor? Use your logic here dear readers, we know that the Jesuit padres would hide the valuables in time of emergency; we have Jesuit authored descriptions of their missions which state they were richly ornamented with silver, we know that their expulsions were not instantaneous everywhere and even in Baja California they received advance warning, and that the Spanish authorities found those Jesuit missions practically stripped bare of all valuables. Is it so far-fetched to conclude that these Jesuits, with the news of their explusions from Portuguese and French colonies in their ears, would have taken steps to save their treasures from the Spanish authorities seizing them?

Lamar wrote

Dear Yammy Elf, Cactusjumper and others;
The fact of the matter is simple. The non-believers have nothing. They have no treasure caches, no vast church treasures, not even a decent treasure map where X marks the spot. They can't produce so much as a discovered candlestick among the entire lot of them. They have zilch. Zippo. Nada. Nothing at all. What they do have is a bunch of unfounded accusations.

What a lot of nonsense.

Lamar also wrote

If the Jesuits were so successful at mining, then what was to stop the REST of the Orders from doing exactly the same thing?

Are you now saying that the Franciscans, Castilians, Dominicans and several others ALSO never, ever did any mining? I will mention a SINGLE example, out of MANY. Look up Father Manuel Lopez <Castilian>, Quijotoa mountains, "placer gold" and 1774.


And yes, there is still more to come....wishing you all a very Merry Christmas,
Oroblanco

 

[whitt459]

this has become a very interesting thread, lamar sent me a warning by pm so i had to put him on ignore, no problem as i do not care to read his sarcastic posts , i have a interest in the subject discussed here as i may be on to a location in texas where church treasure may be buried, please carry on with the discussion and dont let lamar shut it down, thank you all for posting information and have a very merry Christmas. whitt459

 

[Saturna]

Sheesh, too much ignoring going on.

 

[lamar]

Dear Yammy Elf;
I would not place too much faith in Fr. Nentvig's account, my friend. When the opposing parties write of Fr. Nentvig, they seem to do so in a manner which we would calling *snipping*. It seems that they enjoy taking snippets of documents and applying those same snippets wherever they deem it necessary in order to add weight to their otherwise baseless accusations.

If one were to read the entire original work of Fr. Nentvig, Rudo Ensayo, we may read of exciting accounts of eagles with two heads, a tarantula which is able to bite off the hoof of a horse, rocks with mysterious liquids in the middle, and the miraclous curative powers of the root from the jaramatraca tree. He goes into some detail about this miracelous root, explaining that a certain vaquero was trampled when he fell from a horse and said mount thereby proceeded to trample the unfortunate vaquero, which had trampled the man so badly that his facial bones were exposed.

A poultice was then made from the jaramatraca roots and applied to the hapless vaqueros' visage, whereby the vaquero was completely healed by the following morning! Of course, Fr. Nentvig also tells the gentle (and naive) reader of vast quantities of silver, of which a certain indigenous had located such a large vein that he merely needed to cut off as much as he needed with a knife.

Looking at the ENTIRE document, I would hazard a guess that Fr. Nentvig may been slightly prone to exaggerating here and there.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Cubfan64]

Hi Paul,

"Is that a "small grab sample?"

I don't believe my little scenario falls under the heading or meaning of "grab sample".

Joe

Joe, if that's the case, then I would have to say based on the USFS and Tonto guidelines that yes that would be considered mining. I'm not saying I agree with the definition at all here - just stating that my interpretation of the USFS document would define that as mining ("Extraction of minerals (except a small grab sample) is a type of mining.")

I assume you wouldn't interpret it the same way?

 

[Cubfan64]

Is it just me, or does it seem like this thread is rapidly deteriorating into a theological "Catholic vs. Protestant" and religion discussion/argument?

While it may be difficult to separate the thread topic from a theology debate, absolutely nothing (imho) will be accomplished by straying too far down that path. I would hazard a guess that few if any folks posting here will ever be "converted" to the other side's way of thinking anyways.

Either way, I'd at least rather see the discussion head back towards the initial subject matter.

Dear cubfan64:
The reality is that you cannot discuss the Jesuits in the New World colonies without discussing the Catholic vs. Protestant problem, because that discussion is inter-twined to the discussion of the Jesuits, my friend. There were many reasons why the Jesuits lost favor, and because of their staunchily opposed views of the Reformation, they made enemies within the various Protestant communities.
Your friend;
LAMAR

Well, if that's honestly the case lamar, then I predict this thread will deteriorate into a mess of name calling, harsh accusations and arguments rather than discussion and eventually simply be moved by the moderators to the religion discussion section.

Unfortunately, alot of the interesting evidence on both sides will be pushed to the background because of it.

Wow - actually happened more quickly than I expected. Only one more step left *sigh*

 

[Springfield]

....If one were to read the entire original work of Fr. Nentvig, Rudo Ensayo, we may read of exciting accounts of eagles with two heads [Uncommon, yes, but many examples of two-headed birds exist. Maybe its rarity is why it was mentioned], a tarantula which is able to bite off the hoof of a horse [or rot it off due to a poisonous infection], rocks with mysterious liquids in the middle [They're called enhydros], and the miraclous curative powers of the root from the jaramatraca tree. He goes into some detail about this miracelous root, explaining that a certain vaquero was trampled when he fell from a horse and said mount thereby proceeded to trample the unfortunate vaquero, which had trampled the man so badly that his facial bones were exposed.

A poultice was then made from the jaramatraca roots and applied to the hapless vaqueros' visage, whereby the vaquero was completely healed by the following morning! [Interesting to the herbalists I'm sure- maybe a misidentification? Maybe a faith healing?] Of course, Fr. Nentvig also tells the gentle (and naive) reader of vast quantities of silver, of which a certain indigenous had located such a large vein that he merely needed to cut off as much as he needed with a knife. [It's called horn silver (chlorargyrite). A 20-foot solid cube of it was located at Lake Valley, NM, in 1878, and parts of it was harvested with axes, saws and knives]

Looking at the ENTIRE document, I would hazard a guess that Fr. Nentvig may been slightly prone to exaggerating here and there. [Maybe - maybe not. Perhaps he was a credible observer.]
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Ritchie]

I have been following this thread from the beginning and found the debate very interesting. The information provided by both Oroblanco and Lamar supporting their sides of the subject has been impressive to say the least! I am sure that I am not the only one that has concluded that there has to be both truth and fiction in all of the arguments presented. I have a question fo Lamar.

Lamar,

Is it at all possible in your mind, that the Jesuits could have been mining with the permission of the church? If the church owned everything said mining produced, would the Jesuits be guilty of breaking their vows? I do not see anything in the history presented in this thread that any Jesuit himself ever owned ANYTHING. Even the riches that were hidden away during the troubled times with the Indians were "Church Treasures" not "Jesuit Treasures". Nothing on either side of the argument suggests that any Jesuit personally "owned" anything more than the clothes on his back.

There is far too much evidence that the Jesuits were somehow involved in mining operations to ignore. Somewhere there has to be an explanation for this which allows for it to be true, without forming the conclusion that they were breaking their vows in the process.

As we all know. All Governments and Religions have Exceptions to the rules under certain circumstances. Could it be that certain exceptions were made by the church, to allow the Jesuits to involve themselves in mining operations, without breaking their vows, and these "exceptions" were the things that were not to be discussed in writing, and the things that already had, were to be destroyed?

In the belief that both sides of the argument contain more truth than fiction, the only thing missing is some kind of BRIDGE that spans the gap between the opposing views. That missing bridge HAS to be somewhere in the documents that were destroyed, possibly when the time came that the "Exceptions to the Rules" became "awkward" and difficult to explain due to changing times or seats of power.

If anyone can find that bridge, or form a scenario that would provide a "hypothetical bridge", I believe Lamar would be the man who could do it best!

Please give it a try Lamar.

Ritchie