BajaNomad - new book on California missions

Well, we still have a racist majority white rule over ethnic classes, and many living Indians have memory of their forced separation of children and their parents,... The list goes on,...
The reality is many of you white people like to say you are not bigoted, but you all know many people that are bigoted,.... So is it not too much for you white majority to admit racism still exists and holds back non-whites?

mtgoat666 - 3-27-2015 at 08:03 PM

The things white people say!

monoloco - 3-27-2015 at 09:04 PM

I can understand and feel for those treated badly by the padres and the whiteman later but really now are the affects from a hundred years ago affecting the tribe members today. I find that hard to believe.

From the letter to the pope:

["I also discussed how our current Tribal members continue to suffer from the impact of cumulative emotional and psychological wounding, which is otherwise known as historic trauma. This trauma resulted from the generations of physical and emotional brutality as well as the attempted cultural and spiritual genocide of all California native people. Our ancestors endured this brutality not only during mission times but this legacy continued during the Mexican and American periods. Historic trauma also results from the fact that from mission times to the present our legitimate past and our humanity as indigenous people have never been truly acknowledged by any governmental or religious organization."]

That seems fairly self-explanatory, we see the same thing with the tribes in the US. When a race of people are systematically displaced, brutalized, and marginalized over a span of centuries, it has a lasting effect on their culture. Ask yourself why else a once proud people, who had a successful culture that lasted thousands of years, ended up with many of the survivors mired in poverty, alcoholism, and despair. Their culture was stolen from them and replaced by hundreds of years of servitude and abuse that lasted well into the 20th century, and in many ways continues to this day. That can take a while to get over.

[Edited on 3-28-2015 by monoloco]

elbeau - 3-27-2015 at 09:44 PM

I grew up in Utah and we would often drive through Brigham city on our way to Cache valley to visit relatives. The road took us past the large, recently-abandoned Indian boarding school. The schools would force Native American children to live away from their families and were systematically taught to abandon their native heritage.

This is not ancient history. It wasn't until 1978 that Native American parents gained the legal right to refuse to send their children to these boarding schools.

You ask: "are the affects from a hundred years ago affecting the tribe members today? I find that hard to believe."

I don't find that hard to believe. It's not ancient history.

monoloco - 3-27-2015 at 09:50 PM

Quote: Originally posted by elbeau

Exactly, and the racism and stereotyping of native Americans continues to this day, both in the US and Mexico.

güéribo - 3-28-2015 at 07:33 AM

Thank you for the news of a new history book. It will be interesting to see if the title is designed to create sales. Some and not all Indians, and some not all missions this happened. Also, not until the arrival of the Franciscans and Dominicans who replaced the removed Jesuits by the government of Spain.

Hello, David. I do appreciate your study and all the resources you share. I've benefited quite a bit from your help and information! But here, I must respectfully disagree. There are many documented instances of whippings, executions with bodies put on display, campaigns against natives who resisted (even in response to the rape of women by soldiers), shackles, subjugation . . . under Jesuit rule.

Robert H. Jackson outlines quite a few examples in his book, "From Savages to Subjects." (Chapter 4: Indigenous Resistance and Social Control)

David K - 3-28-2015 at 07:52 AM

No worries, I want to be correct... are these documented events by Jesuits in California (Baja)?

Perhaps I don't recall the incidents, but it seems the California project was so special to the Jesuits that they did all they could to learn the native language, honor their nations, named mission sites with the native name included, and allowed the natives to move about to collect food, etc. It was what happened after the Jesuits that was like night and day and so devastating to native freedom.

As you may know, Robert Jackson is a Nomad (academicanarchist) and has worked with me on various mission studies, and reviewed the Spanish edition of our Old Missions book. I have two of his books...

TMW - 3-28-2015 at 09:43 AM

I don't see how anyone in today's world can not understand that an education is the key to success. The casinos have given the Indian a steady stream of income even to the point of fighting over control as they are in Fresno. The tribe I quote above has been accused of wanting to be recognized by the US government so they can build a casino which they is not true. But they want to build a hotel as an income source which in my opinion is the first step toward a casino.

But then as goat says I'm just an old white racist.

güéribo - 3-28-2015 at 10:05 AM

Hi, again, David! Yes, I remember academic anarchist. A great scholarly researcher.

Physical and emotional strategies of abuse were employed by the Jesuits throughout the Spanish colonial empire to maintain control. Examples involving the Jesuit punishment of Yaqui on the mainland are described in The Oxford History of Mexico (ed. William Beezley, Michael Meyer), in The Ópatas: In Search of a Sonoran People (David A. Yetman), and several examples in Baja are outlined in the Jackson book mentioned above.

Yetman writes: "Jesuit rules and regulations of 1662 had cautioned that 'in those regions where flogging has been introduced as a punishment for being absent from the doctrine or some similar offense, it will be done only with notable moderation lest the Indians lose their love for their pastors.' It is difficult to imagine the nature of 'moderate' flogging. In additional Jesuit regulations, probably from 1681-1684, the author issued an order that 'if by some chance one of them [natives] deserves whipping, it will not exceed eight lashes.' This restriction was altered by Padre Andres Xavier Garcia who ordered that 'if an Indian is to be punished for an ordinary fault, he will not receive more than six lashes. A more serious fault, twelve, and the most serious, twenty-five. In case they are women, never more than eight.' The Law of the Indies of 1681 prescribed a penalty of twenty lashes for Indians who moved from one town to another without authorization."

Most of the Jesuit violence directed at Indians had to do with the widespread resistance of the tribes to the colonizing force in their midst which was wiping out their lifeways and very population. The tribes made attempts on the lives of the Jesuit priests, resisted work, performed slow work, destroyed mission property, or fled.

Jackson writes of one response to native resistance: "In the 1730s a shaman shot an arrow at Jesuit Franz Wagner, missing the missionary by inches. The shaman was executed and his body hung in public as an example to others, and other Indians involved in the assassination attempt were whipped."

Baegert, a Jesuit who served in Baja, gives his own account of the response to one form of native resistance:

"[The native] talent for feigning a sudden and severe illness and letting themselves be carried over many miles to the mission could almost be called a custom. A good whipping, however, would quickly restore most of them to health . . . the reason for such make-believe and disgusting lies is either to escape work . . . or to escape punishment which they may incur for their villainous actions . . . for all other misdeeds the culprit is either given a number of lashes with a leather whip on his bare skin, or his feet are put into irons for some days, weeks, or months."

David K - 3-28-2015 at 10:41 AM

Thanks... not giving them a pass mind you, but compared to the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Jesuits in Baja (1697-1768) were quite 'nice' to the Californians. Of course there are exceptions, but attempted murder of Wagner would naturally be punished, as it is today. The Jesuits did as much as they could to gain the friendship and trust of the natives. They wanted to add to their numbers of neophytes, not chase them away with punishments, however life even in Europe was not a bowl of cherries, and harsh, public punishments were the norm for people.

Of course I want the facts, but to paint the mission program as solely one of torture and death was not its purpose. We should study the past to increase our knowledge of what happened and why.

I can tell you from visiting many California missions and gift shops to promote our book, Junípero Serra is already a saint in their eyes! Max and I kindly attempt to counter the Serra myths that each mission seems to support. Because our book dares to show the whole California mission system and not begin the story at San Diego, we have only gotten our book in a few missions gift shops. I doubt you will see Castillo's book anywhere near a mission for what it claims!

Serra did not walk the Camino Real, Serra did not begin at San Diego, San Diego was not Serra's first mission, etc.

sargentodiaz - 3-28-2015 at 12:50 PM

I've read the referenced letter from that particular tribe and a couple of others that claim similar things about the friars and their activities.

I have literally hundreds plus links and references to this period of California history. Therefore, it would take me an extensive period of time to try to find the particular instance when Father Serra wrote to Governor Rivera about "whipping" four "runaway converts".

It sounds horrible. But, if I remember correctly, there is far more to the story than was raised. The four "runaways" did so after stealing from other converts, trying to rape and young girl, and then rustling cattle. Mission soldiers managed to track them down - with the help of other tribal members. Because the punishment required by Spanish decree was beyond what Father Serra and the friars considered "spanking" as fathers did their children, he asked Governor Serra to do it for them.\

There are many other similar instances of reported "cruelty" which are reported without giving all the facts.

If one wishes a clearer picture of life in 18th Century California, I recommend the two following books:

THE Missions and Missionaries OF CALIFORNIA
BY, FR. ZEPHYRIN ENGELHARDT. O. F. M.

and

Hispanic California Revisited by Francis F. Guest, O.F.M.

Both are quite detailed and have numerous citations to back up their claims.

As for the referenced book, the title clearly is designed to gain sales by exaggerating the true situation of the California Indians and their treatment by the friars.

Has anyone bothered to refer to the time Father Serra EXCOMMUNICATED Governor (then Captain) Rivera for removing two runaway Indians from a place of worship to punish them for an infraction against a soldier?

Does it state anywhere where Serra and the other friars would bare their backs and flagellate themselves to repent for their believed sins - while enforcing a strict rule that no convert should ever be bruised and have blood flood while spanking them?

The book is pure hype and an effort to gain sympathy. Nothing more. :fire:

güéribo - 3-28-2015 at 05:14 PM

Hello, Sargento. The books you mentioned are quite detailed. The only difficulty is that the authors are both priests. So used alone, those texts don't provide a complete picture. For myself, I think it's important to hear the voices of the less powerful in addition to the conquerors. Sometimes that is difficult. I know that many do disregard the native oral tradition passed down through the generations, but I consider oral tradition a valid source of history.

academicanarchist - 3-29-2015 at 08:08 AM

Good morning. . The views and interpretations I published 20 years ago have not changed. In recent years I have written about 16th century missions in central Mexico, and my next book to be released next month deals with Jesuit missions in Paraguay and the CHiquitos region of eastern Bolivia. THe frontier mission was first and foremost a colonial institution, and the missionaries came with intellectual baggage and were steeped in a eurocentric belief in cultural superiority. Mistreatment of natives who did not tow the line was part and parcel of tof mission program, and was authorized by Spanish law. In my recently published book VIsualizing the Miraculous, VIsualizing the Sacred, I reproduced an illustration from the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (c. 1580) showing the execution of a group of indigenous leaders in Tlaxcala accused of practiocing their traditional religious beliefs. Martin de Valencia, O.F.M., one of the first group of Franciscan missionaries in Mexico, orchestrated the executions, done by hanging or being burned at the stake. One of those executed was an indigenous noble woman. In 1539, Juan de Zumarraga, O.F.M., culminated his inquisition campaign with the execution of Don Carlos, an indigenous leader from Texcoco, who was burned at the stake in Tlatelolco. After the execution of Don Carlos, the Crown stripped Zumarraga of his authority, and prohibited the execution of natives, and particularly native leaders. The Crown realized that the tactics the Franciscans employed would cause more damage than good. However, despite backtracking on the issue of the execution of natives, the same eurocentric view undeerlay all mission on all frontiers.

Engelhardt and Guest are useful sources of information, and I have used data from Engelhardt. I met Guest years ago. Engelhardt and Guest were extremeely biased, and in particular Engelhardt was a racist and Guest was not too far from that. Many did not like my views on the missions, but one Franciscan who wrote a review of Indian Population Decline said that the numbers speak for themselves, and people had to deal with that reality. Not all Franciscans were or are biased. I had a very good personal relationship with the late Kiernan McCarty, who was very supportive of my research despite being a Franciscan. Antonine Tibesar, O.F.M. was alsso more open minded, and invited this heretical historian to participate in a conference in 1984 dedicated to Serra-the papers from the conference were later published in The Americas, the journal of the Academy of American Franciscan History.

In my personal view, Serra was not a saint. The facts speak for themselves. The whole issue needs to be placed within the context of the larger colonial agenda. Serra and his group of Franciscans from the Apostolic College of San Fernando were particularly harsh towards natives, and there is evidence of this from the Sierra Gorda missions as well as from the Baja California missions. Natives congregated on the five Sierra GOrda missions Serra administered fled because of conditions on the missions. Franciscans from the Apostolic College of Pachuca administered missions in the same area, and used a different approach that was not as disruptive of native life ways. Natives who fled from the Fernandino missions chose to go to the missions administered by the Franciscans from Pachuca.

academicanarchist - 3-29-2015 at 08:34 AM

In 1748, a group of Jonaces living on San Joose de Viarron mission )Queretaro= fled because of the way the Franciscans adminiistered the mission. This was before Serra arrived in the Sierra Gorda. Soldiers recaptured the fugitive Jonaces, and placed them in forced labor in textile mills in Queretaro City, which is a short distance away. Some Jonaces went to Pacula mission in what today is Hidalgo state. The Franciscans from Pachuca administered thiis mission, and did things differently. Serra pioneered the methods later employed in Baja California and California during his period in the Sierra Gorda. Two key eleemnts were to convert the natives into a disciplined labor force to support the colonial economic system, and to enhance econoomic depeendeence on the missions as sources of food. The episode with the Guaycuros in southern Baja Californiia exemplified the approach Serra and his colleagues took in the administration of the missions.

güéribo - 3-29-2015 at 09:14 AM

Hello, academicanarchist. I'm glad you weighed in. I was hoping you would. Always appreciate your scholarship.

David K - 3-29-2015 at 10:20 AM

Thank you Robert!

sargentodiaz - 3-29-2015 at 10:34 AM

And the controversy continues. I was very impressed with the detailed posts on the Sierra Gorda missions and was most surprised to read that the Apostolic College of San Fernando had such a policy.

That leads to one question - if Father Serra and his fellow friars were so harsh, why did hundreds, even thousands flock to the missions - and willingly stay there?

I am no fan of Bancroft but he, even as anti-Papist as he was, had nothing but glowing things to say about the friars and their efforts with the Indians he claimed to be little more than animals.

I simply cannot image that 2 friars and no more than 5 soldiers could cow and maltreat all the Indians at each mission.

David K - 3-29-2015 at 04:20 PM

Good questions indeed... they were attracted to the missions for the food (at least in Baja, where the ones inland ate most anything, so the mush "pozole" the Spanish made had to be much better). Curiosity was the other... horses, mules, farm animals, cattle... obviously the Spanish were advance beings.

As I reported before, the missionaries also stopped the tribal killings, abortions, cruelty to elders, etc. all performed by the 'peaceful' natives... so perhaps that was attractive to some. Women joined the mission often without the men, who naturally followed them later. Perhaps they felt safe from rape, starvation, or hostility in the mission?

The bad thing that came and was not desired or intentional, was the sickness and disease introduced to the natives. If not from the missionaries or soldiers, then it would come from sailors and pirates. There was no escape from that, rather it came during the mission period or at another time.

academicanarchist - 3-29-2015 at 05:55 PM

A very complex question that I have discussed in my publications, as have others including Randy Milliken in his study "A Time of Little Choice," which sums up the problem in the California missions. One factor was the rapid proliferation of mission livestock (talking about the California missions) that consumed food sources previously exploited by the indigenous populations. The Franciscans consciously had livestock placed to native communities, in part, to have a food source. Thousands of cattle and sheep destroyed seed producing grasses, and ate acorns. By the first years of the 19th century the environment in California had changed, especially in the coastal areas, and it independent native communities could no longer survive outside of the missions.

güéribo - 3-29-2015 at 06:35 PM

It is indeed a complex question.

In the book, "Kiliwa Texts: When I Have Donned My Crest of Stars," Rufino Ochurte, a Kiliwa, shares oral tradition that presents the mixed reactions of the tribe to the priests. I sense in his narrative how some were curious and drawn, and others fearful and repulsed. He tells the story in a manner common in some indigenous cultures--rather than a linear order of events, it progresses in a more circular way, with repetition of ideas.

Ochurte relates (in his native language, translated in the text):

There were people-not-washed (ie. unbaptized) in this land. In the mountains, there were the Kiliwa people. A friar came. No one drew near. Because of that, he'd just lash out and grab them. He did that once or twice. He'd do it to all the people that way. He'd catch them; when they'd get used to him, they wouldn't flee. 'Well, the way I am, it's really fine' they say. That was the way that, one or two at a time, they would arrive. Until there were many people at the mission. They made people work, whipping them when they were uncooperative. They gave them gruel to drink so that they'd work. They constructed houses as best they could. Although they didn't earn anything, they did eat. To those with a family, they gave a sackful of corn. They'd eat at the mission. If someone was disobedient, they'd grab him and whip him. They would dunk people to baptize them: 'This is a good thing I'm doing!' he (the priest) declared when he was finished. 'You might tell the others,' he would say. They'd come and tell about it: 'This man is going to do that to us!' 'No indeed! One never knows what might happen,' they'd answer. No one at all would come near. And so it continued for some time. Slowly they took hold of the people. In the end, the people came to the friar. They all became docile. There was no one who would decide for himself where to go anymore. There weren't many who went to the mission. They'd come around very little. While the friar was about his things, they'd watch and comment. They slowly began to draw closer. Yet, though they approached, they really didn't hang around very much. They'd say, 'It's alien! It's evil!' 'You never know,' they'd say. They'd remain yonder (at a distance). By proselytizing he kept the people away. Eventually however the friar lulled the people completely . . . they would be sponsored (as godchildren). And so they gathered the people up . . .

----

In the next account, Ochurte describes how the tribes attacked and burned the mission (Santa Catarina, 1840).

academicanarchist - 3-30-2015 at 03:59 AM

Manuel Rojo also recorded accounts by indigenous people from northern Baja California, including one named Jatinil who described being brought to the mission by force and later being whipped for breaking a hoe.

Jatiñil vs. Janitín ?? Same or different persons??

David K - 3-30-2015 at 09:03 AM

Quote: Originally posted by academicanarchist

Manuel Rojo also recorded accounts by indigenous people from northern Baja California, including one named Jatinil who described being brought to the mission by force and later being whipped for breaking a hoe.

This is #26 of the Dawson Baja California Traveler's Series..

Jatiñil (Jatñil) was the chief (1822-1870+) of a band of Indians from Nejí who originally helped the missionary Felix Caballero build El Descanso (1830) and Guadalupe (1834). Jatiñil also sided with the Mexican soldiers against the Indians who attacked Mission Santa Catalina in 1834. In 1840*, Jatñil turned against Padre Caballero at Guadalupe in anger for forcing baptism on his tribe's females. Caballero hid in the mission choir loft under the skirt of an Indian woman (María Garcia) after he begged her to not turn him in. Caballero fled to San Ignacio where he died mysteriously a few months later, after drinking his morning cup of chocolate.
(*some accounts say 1839)

Janitín was interviewed as an old man and related a story of being captured on the beach of Rosarito while digging clams with two relatives. Janitín was captured, tied and dragged while his relatives escaped and hid. They forced him to keep up with them on horseback all the way back to Mission San Miguel (today's La Misión), whipping him when he didn't keep up. At the mission, the priest forced conversion upon him and gave him the name 'Jesús'. Later, while forced to work the fields with a hoe, he cut his foot and couldn't stand, so he used his hands instead to pull weeds. That afternoon he was whipped for not finishing his job, and this repeated daily until he was able to escape. He was caught at La Zorra and when returned to San Miguel was whipped and those scars remained with him to old age. Janitín escaped again and remained in the mountains for many years and didn't return to the coast until after the missions were finished.

Notes in the translated edition of Rojo's papers indicate that Janitín is a misspelled version of Jatiñil. However, the story does not match the events:

The northern missions of San Miguel, Descanso, Santa Catalina, and Guadalupe were all closed between 1834 and 1840 and their priest (Caballero) was run off by Jatiñil, who had helped Caballero build Descanso and Guadalupe (1830 & 1834).

Janitín escaped from San Miguel and hid in the mountains until after the missions were closed. Clearly not what Chief Jatiñil did.

grizzlyfsh95 - 3-30-2015 at 09:14 AM

The great thing about writing history, is that you can make it anything you want it to be. Just take the perceived end result (your own bias) and create a story that explains it. Folks have been doing it for years. Emphasize this, de- emphasize that, put whatever spin you want on it.

David K - 3-30-2015 at 09:31 AM

It is just great fun to read the letters from people who were there back then and gain insight at least on their feelings if not the actual unbiased facts.

DianaT - 3-30-2015 at 09:36 AM

Quote: Originally posted by grizzlyfsh95

The great thing about writing history, is that you can make it anything you want it to be. Just take the perceived end result (your own bias) and create a story that explains it. Folks have been doing it for years. Emphasize this, de- emphasize that, put whatever spin you want on it.

Yes, there has NEVER been a history book written that is not biased in one way or another. And one really needs to be careful when they read original letters and accounts of events, especially when the writers are talking about people to whom they feel far superior.

The oral history tradition is such an important part of history that is often ignored. It is as factual as is the written history---

[Edited on 3-30-2015 by DianaT]

güéribo - 3-30-2015 at 09:45 AM

Well said, DianaT.

academicanarchist - 3-30-2015 at 11:01 AM

Janitin.

David K - 3-30-2015 at 11:29 AM

Quote: Originally posted by academicanarchist

Janitin.

Do you think they are different people as I do?

Rojo's book translator thinks they are the same, and he can't figure out why only in that paper is Jatiñil spelled Janitín!

Because they are different people!! :light:

sargentodiaz - 3-30-2015 at 12:47 PM

Professor Mendoza is a fallen-away Catholic who has revisited Father Serra's story. This is a well-written article that I think clearly states a case for the reverend father

In Support of Father Serra

With the pope's announcement that he is going to make the founder of the California missions a state, isolated small groups and intellectuals are attacking this decision.

As someone who has studied Father Serra's life, this article is quite heartwarming and it corroborates what I've come to feel about this devout and caring man. Here is a quote from the article that says what needs to be said:

Quote:

“I began to realize: especially the most malicious comments about Fr. Serra were usually by people who knew nothing about him, who had picked it up secondhand on the internet or on a blog, or who simply just didn’t care for the Catholic Church and its doctrine.”

The full article can be read @ http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/history-truth-and-pol...

academicanarchist - 3-31-2015 at 04:35 AM

David. It has been years sincee I looked at Rojo, but as I recall I believed they were tw different people.

sargentodiaz - 3-31-2015 at 11:00 AM

I see no response to my last post.

Wonder why.

David K - 3-31-2015 at 05:01 PM

I see no response to my last post.

Wonder why.

Guess you made a good point and it aroused no dissension?

monoloco - 3-31-2015 at 05:22 PM

I see no response to my last post.

Wonder why.

OK I'll bite. I doubt than anyone knows exactly to what degree Serra was culpable in mistreating the natives but it certainly seems, from his own writings, that he supported whippings and other punishments of the people whose land the padres claimed dominion over. Based on that alone, I really don't see how he could be considered a "saint". What exactly were the two miracles (a condition of sainthood) that he supposedly performed?

güéribo - 3-31-2015 at 07:17 PM

I see no response to my last post.

Wonder why.

Guess you made a good point and it aroused no dissension?

Just don't think we'll convince one another here! But thanks for engaging in the question.

David K - 3-31-2015 at 07:42 PM

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

I see no response to my last post.

Wonder why.

What exactly were the two miracles (a condition of sainthood) that he supposedly performed?

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-miracle28-2009aug28-story...

Part of that article:

Serra, the revered and reviled Franciscan priest who founded California's missions, has one officially recognized miracle to his name. A nun in St. Louis was healed of lupus after praying to him, leading to Serra's beatification in 1987.

But sainthood requires a second miracle, defined by the church as an event that cannot be explained by science but can be attributed to the candidate's intercession from beyond the grave.

Two years ago, Serra advocates thought they had found one. A Denver woman who had prayed to Serra delivered a healthy baby, despite a dire prognosis. The case went to Rome, but physicians for the Vatican concluded it was not a miracle.

Now there's another possibility. Sheila E. Lichacz, a Panamanian artist, has survived 14 brain surgeries for tumors called meningiomas, after being told time and again that she was dying. One-third of her skull was removed in surgery and replaced with acrylic plates. But they too were removed after causing life-threatening infections.

monoloco - 3-31-2015 at 08:32 PM

Those "miracles" seem like quite a stretch to me. The first miracle supposes that the nun who was cured only prayed to father Serra exclusively, which is kind of hard to believe. I would guess that a devote Catholic nun would also pray to the Father, the son, and the Holy Ghost, as well as to the Virgin Mary and perhaps other saints, making it quite impossible to credit Fr. Serra with the claimed miracle, but then again, religion in general doesn't stand up to reason. LOL

academicanarchist - 4-1-2015 at 03:46 AM

Serra was the architect of the California missions, and implemented policies and rules that had been established by the Spanish from dayone of the conquest of Mexico.

academicanarchist - 4-1-2015 at 04:45 AM

I will read the article about Mendoza with care when I can, but I do agree with two points, in a critical way. Firstly, supporters of canonization have misrepresented the historical record, and have tried to present the history of Serra and the missions in an ahistorical fashion. Second, the process has been politicized, but by supporters and advocates of canonization.

Mendoza is an archaeologist, and his writings have narrowly focused on the description of material culture and architectural history as uncovered through excavations at mission and non-mission sites that date to the Spanish period in California, such as Monterey Presidio. He has published several articles in the journal "Boletin: Journal of the California Mission Studies Association." He most recently published an article describing excavations at Nra Sra de la Soledad mission. One of the problems that I have had over the years with many archaeologists is that they focus on the description of the artifact assemblages, and offer little or no analysis. In other words, there is no discussion of what the archaeological record shows about historical processes. This certainly is the case with what Mendoza has published. Paul Farnsworth is also an archaeologist who worked years ago on the Soledad mission site. I co-authored an article with him that went beyond the description of artifact assemblages and architectural features to analyze how the archaeological record related to processes of social and cultural change, and in the changing political context of the missions. Following the outbreak of the independence movemenet in Mexico in 1810, funding for the military in California dried up. The Franciscans expanded agricultural production and textile production to supply the costs of the military. This shift in focus was reflected in the archaeological record at Soledad that Farnsworth documented through the analysis of the material culture. The article appeared in a book I co-edited titled "The New Latin American Mission History," and Farnsworth wrote his doctoral dissertation based on his excavations at Soledad. Mendoza has been working on the historical archaeology of Spanish California for many years, but has not gone beyond description to contribute to a better understanding of historical processes.

Ateo - 4-1-2015 at 07:58 AM

Miracles = BS

Sometimes people who are sick get well.

Sometimes people who are sick die.

A miracle would be an amputee veteran growing back limbs. Wonder why that never happens?

vgabndo - 4-1-2015 at 09:16 AM

I find it really amazing when I hear people say "It is a miracle he/she survived that accident." "God certainly had his hand on her/him." The fact that the 9-1-1 system resulted in a fully equipped ambulance full of highly trained trauma specialists arriving within minutes, and being able to get the victim to a multi-million dollar emergency room facility with scientific life support systems beyond the wildest fever dreams of the committee who wrote the Bible is normally completely forgotten.

Can anyone lead me to a reputable report of any middle eastern scribe, writer, or historian who was working at the time that Jesus supposedly lived, and who reported on the phenomenon of a guy running around performing miracles all over the place? It seems that all those claims were generated hundreds of years later by guys with no last names.

TMW - 4-1-2015 at 09:28 AM

Let me tell a true story and you decide if it was a miracle or just luck or what ever.

Several years ago I did the maintenance on the TV stations transmitters. It was time to replace the water cooling filters for the main transmitter. The job required about two hours. The station signed off at 1:30 am and signed on at 5:30 am. I had that 4 hour time frame to do the job. The transmitter was located on Breckenridge Mtn east of Bakersfield, CA. It was winter time and cold with some snow on the ground.

I headed up Breckenridge Rd planning on getting to the site by 1 am. All the parts etc I needed was already there. As I approached the 5000 foot level I came upon a large pile of rock and dirt that had fallen away from the side of the Mtn. There was no way to get around. It was 8 miles or so to the site so walking was out of the question.

I back up for about 1/4 mile being careful on this winding mostly single lane road. On one side is a 300+ foot drop-off and the other side the embankment. I found a spot to turn around and I proceeded down the Mtn. As I drove I was thinking should I just forget it for tonight and come back another day when the road is open. I could go up the Kern river canyon hwy 178 to Lake Isabella and take the Bodfish hwy to Breckenridge Rd. That is the east side of the Mtn. That would allow me to come up the back way to the transmitter site. However to do so would take more time than I may have and it was already getting foggy. By the time I got down the Mtn and out to Comanche Dr it was 1 am.

While trying to decide for some reason I kept moving to hwy 178. I thought I would probably get to the site at around 3 am or before if I can see the turn off. I had only been that way once and that was in daylight. It would give me just enough time to do the job. Once on Bodfish hwy the fog was getting worse and it was hard to see anything to the side of the hwy where the sign would be.

After about 10 miles of winding Rd I was able to make out the Breckenridge sign. I turn and up the Mtn I go. As I went up higher the fog was getting thinner but there was snow and ice on the road. As I approached a turn about 4 miles from the site I see a small truck with is rear wheels in the ditch to my left. As I get closer I see someone setup in the cab. I slow to a stop and out of the truck come a man. He is only wearing a hoodie sweatshirt and jeans. I rolled my window down and he says, "man I am sure glad you came along. I have been here since noon and no one has been by until you. I'm really low on gas and have used my heater as little as possible, I thought I was going to freeze to death". He was just out for a drive up into the mountains to see the snow but when he got as far as he did the snow was getting deeper and since he did not have a 4x4 he decide to turn around. In doing so he backed into the ditch and could not get out.

I hooked a tow strap to him and pulled him out and he thanked me and we went on our different ways. I went to the transmitter and performed the maintenance and was finished just before sign on.

I have often thought of this and wonder if it was divine guidance that had me go around to help this guy or was it just luck or just the way things happen.

TMW - 4-1-2015 at 09:32 AM

Quote: Originally posted by vgabndo

Can anyone lead me to a reputable report of any middle eastern scribe, writer, or historian who was working at the time that Jesus supposedly lived, and who reported on the phenomenon of a guy running around performing miracles all over the place? It seems that all those claims were generated hundreds of years later by guys with no last names.

There are no original writings of the new testament. They are all copies and copies of copies.

vgabndo - 4-1-2015 at 10:09 AM

If the guy was sitting in his truck, blue, rigid, and obviously dead of carbon monoxide poisoning and hypothermia, and you opened his door and touched his corpse and he suddenly shook-off the icicles, turned pink, and started thanking you. THAT would be a miracle. The fact that he was stuck on the only alternate route to where you were needed/required to be was fortunate for him.

elbeau - 4-1-2015 at 02:32 PM

Others will doubtless chalk this up to coincidence, but here's something I consider to be a miracle:

When I was 19 years old, I was working as an LDS (Mormon) missionary in Shreveport, Louisiana. We were going door-to-door one day and came up to a house with a large bay kitchen window to the left of their front door.

Right as we knocked on the door, something inside the house went WHAM! against that bay window. My fellow missionary and I looked at each other with perplexed looks, then right as a man answered the door it happened again and this time we saw it. There was a bird inside their kitchen that was trying to fly out the window.

The man who answered the door took one look at us and started waving his hands for us to leave, saying "no, no, no" as he began to shut the door. I interrupted him and said "that's ok...but did you know there's a bird in your kitchen?". He gave me a look of distrust that I'll never forget as he tried to figure out what kind of trick I was trying to pull on him.

"No, really, there's a bird in your kitchen" I said, and as I said it the bird made some louder noises so they guy took a look. He saw the bird, grabbed a towel, and started chasing it around the kitchen. Meanwhile, me and the other missionary were still standing on the front porch.

I asked "do you want us to help?". From somewhere in the depths of the house his wife's voice rang out "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!". But he said "yeah, come on in". Liking his answer better, we entered and he gave us a couple of kitchen towels to chase the bird with.

For a couple of minutes we chased that bird around his house. Finally it ended up flying into his study and hiding behind some books on a bookshelf. We put a towel at the end of the row of books then pushed each book in one at a time until the bird went into his towel. He had us open the study window and as he let it loose it grabbed onto the outside of the screen and sat there for several seconds. It was a BEAUTIFUL woodpecker. It then flew away.

We were all a little winded from the chase (it was a very nimble bird), so he asked us to sit down and offered us some water or lemonade or something, so we sat and laughed with him about it for a minute.

Now, being LDS missionaries, we were definitely thinking that God was putting us in a situation to share our message with this man, but we were wrong.

It was what he said as he declined our offer this second time that struck me. He said "No, but my daughter up in Arkansas is joining your church and we've been pretty hard on her about it. Maybe God is trying to tell me something."

Over the years I've seen a lot of people go through hard times with family and friends who didn't like their choice to join our church. As I think back on it, I'm pretty sure that my woodpecker story is actually only half of a story.

That woodpecker was the only thing that could have got us through that door that day. I'll never know much about the other half of this story, but I'm quite certain that it involves a girl asking her Father in Heaven to help her parents accept her choice.

David K - 4-1-2015 at 05:57 PM

I am just happy that God has inspired you to search the past so we may better understand life as it was before 'modern times'. Now find us some more ruins out in nowhere! Thank you!

DianaT - 4-2-2015 at 12:13 PM

......

.......obviously the Spanish were advance beings.....

There it is, loud and clear --- YOUR BIAS.

Nothing wrong with having a bias as everyone does, and all of history is biased. Even the letters and accounts written at the time are BIASED.

But please, quit saying that your writings are only "facts and the truth".

The book that started this thread is also biased. Oral history is powerful and as "truthful" as any written history and it is also biased.

Good historians understand. Put the same primary and secondary sources in front of 5 historians and they will write 5 different interpretations of the information. It is just the way it is.

Your bias is that you believe that you believe the Spanish were superior and that colors how you see all of the information. Again, it is just the way it is.

[Edited on 4-2-2015 by DianaT]

David K - 4-2-2015 at 12:21 PM

Stop with the talking points and include the rest of my reply. To the natives the Spanish provided food without hunting. Built houses with roofs. Communicated with 'talking paper'. The natives were wowed and saw the Spanish as advanced and that was an attraction to join the missions.

elbeau - 4-2-2015 at 12:27 PM

Oh No! People have biases? That's unexpected, amazing, and scary!

I can never believe anything DK or anyone ever says again!

EVERYONE TO THEIR BATTLE-STATIONS! We must attack DK for sharing his opinions!!!

geesh...calm down.

Even if your assault on his biases mattered, you completely misrepresented what he was saying. Go read the statement, he was clearly trying to describe things from the Indians' point of view. He wasn't saying that he thinkd of them as "advance beings".

DianaT - 4-2-2015 at 12:36 PM

Not attacking him for his opinions, as you say. And yes they are OPINIONS.

elbeau - 4-2-2015 at 12:38 PM

Quote: Originally posted by DianaT

Not attacking him for his opinions, as you say. And yes they are OPINIONS.

Thank you for clearing that up.

DianaT - 4-2-2015 at 12:38 PM

Stop with the talking points and include the rest of my reply. To the natives the Spanish provided food without hunting. Built houses with roofs. Communicated with 'talking paper'. The natives were wowed and saw the Spanish as advanced and that was an attraction to join the missions.

And can you quote a NATIVE American source that backs that up, or is that taken from the writings of the priests who all felt superior?

David K - 4-2-2015 at 02:06 PM

Quote a Native American source???

Native American alive during the Spanish occupation are NO LONGER ALIVE... and developed no books to document events that we can study 200-300+ years later. THEY were NOT YET ADVANCED to that point. Some cave art that dates back 500-10,000 years shows no advanced communication skills, just representations of ideas or events. Now elbeau has done some fascination interpretations of cave art, and I welcome them. I do not fear the truth if some revelation is found in them. I don't need the Catholics in Baja to be superior to the Indians for any opinion.

The Indians were stuck in caveman-like conditions without progress. Maybe they didn't need more out of life or maybe they were awaiting the arrival of other men from other shores to jump start their evolution. Sad that diseases decimated them so the history is not complete.

So, you can add all the opinions you want on how wonderful life was as a Californian before the evil Europeans arrived, but you have no documentation to back up those New Age ideas on their life.

I do not assign advanced or superior values to one group over another, I just report what was documented and on what I have observed at mission and Indian sites in Baja California. I prefer to discover the facts and then let other run with them, hopefully to make more discoveries and not just to further their political agenda.

sargentodiaz - 4-2-2015 at 02:20 PM

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

I see no response to my last post.

Wonder why.

The ONE instance of "whipping" I've explained.

Like all adults of the time, parents looked upon "spanking" as a common way of trying to enforce the way of right and wrong.

In the case of the friars, the general rule was to put the culpable individual before the group (in itself a strong punishment as shame was, by far, the worst thing that could happen to the Indians) to explain exactly what the error was and what behavior was expected.

They would then be publicly "spanked" using a willow rod - the rule being NOT to bruise and definitely never to draw blood.

This Spare the Rod and Spoil the Child was common into the early to mid 20th Century. In fact, one friar was stripped of his license and forced to return to Mexico for harsh punishment of the converts of his mission.

rts551 - 4-2-2015 at 02:22 PM

I do not assign advanced or superior values to one group over another, I just report what was documented and on what I have observed at mission and Indian sites in Baja California. I prefer to discover the facts and then let other run with them, hopefully to make more discoveries and not just to further their political agenda.

Then why not accept someone elses point of view?

sargentodiaz - 4-2-2015 at 02:33 PM