Posted on 05/23/2016 4:10:08 PM PDT by mainestategop
It was state control rather than sectarianism that did it in for the missions and its converts. Especially when Mexico became independent and meddled in the affairs of the church even more than the Spanish. Most of the Mexican founders were like the French revolutionaries, so called enlightened thinkers, left wing opposed to the church many I think were into masonry and other anti-clerical movements. What came to my mind also was the Cristero rebellion in the 1920s when Mexico tried to outlaw the church completely.
The amnesty crowd holds to these same godless beliefs. They are also socialist. A few things to keep in mind when you see amnesty protests again.
“American founding father”?
A totally goofy proposition. Right in the headline.
American Indians slaughtered to extinction all large American birds and all large mammals except the buffalo and they were working on that one, too. They also slaughtered to extinction all peoples that came here earlier. No one with any education buys that "at peace with nature" crap.
And they were all wiped out.
Unfortunately the only literature about this comes from white supremacists and does not lend credibility.
I certainly disagree with your sentence “masonry and other
anti-clerical movements.” There is nothing anti-religious about Free Masonry. In fact belief in a Supreme Being is
required before one is accepted as an candidate for the three degrees.
*** only to find themselves massacred by the Comanche and Apache tribes.***
A point I love to bring up every time the Pueblo Revolt is mentioned.
****Most of the population of Mexico and central and/south America are a few generations removed from head-chopping indios,***
I believe it was the Empress Carlota of Mexico (Maxl’s wife) who said that Mexico was the most non Catholic Catholic country in the New World.
Something like that.
If they weren’t fighting each other they’d go and attack other tribes, killing the men and enslaving the women and children.
well there was talk about how they contributed to the French revolution and the revolts in Spain and Mexico. Sorry.
In this context, "clerical" refers to the ecclesiastical authority of the Catholic Church. Masonry certainly has never accepted such authority - to the contrary, in fact.
In this context, “clerical” refers to the ecclesiastical authority of the Catholic Church. Masonry certainly has never accepted such authority - to the contrary, in fact.
Why should a fraternal organization whose members are from all walks of life and all religions accept such authority?
Hoax.
"Purchasing indulgences that is buying forgiveness for sins commited [sic] or that might be commited [sic] in the future also were used"
Wrong-o.
First of all, notorious persons like Dominican Johann Tetzel [1465-1519) did sell indulgences on behalf of corrupt papal fund-raising projects raising money to build St. Peter's in Rome. However, in doing so they acted contrary to explicit Church regulations. This condemnation was reiterated very severely by the Council of Trent (16th century) and the sale of indulgences was *certainly* not done in the 18th century --- the time-frame of the foundation of the Alta California missions by Fr. Serra.
Second, indulgences have nothing to do with the forgiveness of sins. Indulgences are a kind of reparation to undo the temporal harms of sins already confessed, repented and forgiven. You can't "get" an indulgence for a sin which was not already confessed, repented and absolved.
Third, the idea that indulgences constituted some kind of get-out-of-jail card for sins that might be committed in the future, is a pure absurdity, typically claimed by somebody who doesn't know jack chick about Catholicism and hasn't bothered to find out.
Brian Ball, who wrote this article, seems like he's trying to portray Junipero Serra in a favorable light, but he is embarrassingly loose about his facts.
If I were his teacher, I would send this essay back, all marked up in red, for a major do-over.
I have a BA in History and took my share of California
history and geography classes. At the time (late 70s)
Father Serra was portrayed as a villain, relatively
speaking.
My late father and I used to debate the nature of the
California Indians of old. He asserted they have been
labelled “Digger Indians” because they were lazy. Not
true! Food was plentiful and easy to obtain. A society is not lazy because they don’t have to follow
buffalo herds around the Plains to survive. I call
that culture pretty smart. Plus many California
tribes utilized a variety of local vegetation to
make some of the highest qualify baskets in
North America.
I have often wondered how the American Revolution would have worked out if Masonry had not existed.
I didn't say they should. My point was that the quote didn't refer to "religion" but Catholic ecclesiastical authority, and that, as you've agreed, the Masons do indeed reject. But that doesn't mean they reject "religion." Although if the teachings of any particular religion clash with the requirements of Masonry, I would imagine the affected Mason would be required to obey Masonry against their religion, if they wanted to stay a Mason. As I am not a Mason I couldn't speculate on what exactly such a conflict would entail, but it's hard to imagine that such a problem wouldn't sometimes arise regarding a speculative philosophy.
Fr. Serra is a hero. The Indians thanked him, since Fr. Serra ended their constant war, saved the environment and had to patiently deal with the seven deadly sins of thirty native tribes. The 21 mission bring millions of tourists money to Calif. and are probably the best attractions in the state.
Prayer. Heavenly Father, look kindly on the missionary journey of Blessed Padre Serra, who founded nine missions of the salvation of the Indians and for the evangelization of souls. Padre Sera, brave missionary in early America, pray for us who have recourse to thee. Amen.
Sure, Serra was not perfect. But he humbly obeyed the Pope and followed the Lord with courage.
Protestants, Jews and Islam both hate the Catholic church and I know why. Do you?
Jack Chick? No, I don't take him seriously. Some of this tracts are good for witnessing to godless but that's about it. If he had anything to do with this article it would have also mentioned real batty things.
They were probably jealous because of all the free time that they had. Our forefathers would have used their free time to do more work and build more things to support their civilization, family and themselves.
The real issue was that the natives were hostile to each other and the white man. In some ways I sympathize with them since were facing a situation almost similar with the whole world wanting to come here and rather than assimilate, impose their culture, their values and their paradigm on us.
We're surrounded by people who want to get rid of constitutional rights, capitalism and Christianity and impose principles of Marxism, centralized government, conformity, pluralism, mutli-culturalism, globalism and other values that are incompatible with an advanced and developed country like ours. Our numbers are getting smaller and smaller every year and our voices are not being as heard over the blare of these newcomers and liberals who surround us. We yell "Lets support private property, small business, small government, personal responsibility and the bill of rights!: and they shout "NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"
The native American Indians are far better off now than they were 200 years ago but we did go too far and do some things wrong in some areas. I am afraid this is all a judgment. Reaping what we sow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.