History, Truth, and Politics: the record on Father Junipero Serra

Los Angeles, Calif.- California missionary Father Junipero Serra’s canonization is “long overdue,” says a university professor concerned that the priest’s history has been politicized and misrepresented.

“When he died, many native peoples came to the mission for his burial. They openly wept. Others of his colleagues and even colonists, believed that he would be made a saint, because of the way he had lived his life, a self-effacing life of a martyr,” said archaeology professor Reuben Mendoza of California State University, Monterrey Bay.

“Because of what he had achieved in his life, even then they had talked about his impending canonization,” Mendoza told CNA March 26.

Fr. Serra was born in 1713 on the Spanish island of Majorca in the Mediterranean. He left his position as a university professor to become a missionary to the New World, helping to convert many native Californians to Christianity and teaching them new and vital technologies. The Franciscan priest founded several of the missions that would go on to become the centers of major California cities.

The priest’s mission work often took place despite a painful ulcerated leg Mendoza said was caused by a spider bite soon after his arrival in Mexico. He died in 1784 at Mission San Carlos Borroméo del Carmelo in what is now the state of California.

St. John Paul II beatified Fr. Serra in 1988. In January, Pope Francis praised the missionary as “the evangelizer of the West” and announced his intention to canonize the Franciscan missionary during his scheduled 2015 visit to the U.S.

Mendoza learned from other researchers that Serra was “a very humble man and a man who had a great sense of humor.”

He said the “self-effacing” priest would sometimes insist on doing the work of young Indian boys who cleaned the Convent of San Fernando in Mexico City.

“He would sweep the halls and pick up the trash and maintain his spiritual stance through work and action.”

The priest’s sacrifices and “spiritual evangelization” led to the establishment of the missions that were “fundamental” to California’s history.

“There has been a significant politicization of his canonization,” he said, pointing to opposition from those who feel that “the Church should not canonize a man who ultimately brought the missions to California and changed the lifestyles of native peoples.”

Mendoza rejected the possibility that native Californians could have avoided cultural change.

“As an anthropologist, I can tell you that all people change. There was already contact between other groups in the southwest and northern Mexico that had already initiated that process of change, and interaction and even conflict.”

Mendoza’s own view of Fr. Serra has changed from hostility to appreciation. While both of the professor’s parents had been devoted Catholics, his father “gradually soured on the Catholic faith” and “came to hate the Catholic Church for perceived wrongdoings.”

Mendoza had followed his father’s view and his initial research in archaeology, anthropology and history focused exclusively on Native Americans.

After the arrival of Spanish colonists, over 100,000 churches were built in a 150 year timespan in the New World.

“This is one of the greatest episodes of construction that the world has ever seen,” he said. “My eyes were pretty much closed to these churches.”

Mendoza still had a connection to Catholicism. He would sometimes feel moved to pray at the churches, preferring to say the Our Father in Nahuatl, the language of the Aztec people. His archaeological work in Mexico and California, as well as his marriage to a Catholic woman, helped him see the missionary work in California and Father Serra in a different light.

He learned of the stories of Catholic missionaries he described as “good guys.” He cited Fr. Felipe Arroyo de la Cuesta of the California mission San Juan Baptista, an early 19th century linguist who cared for native people and led a raid to bring back two young Indian girls who had been abducted from the mission.

The professor began to realize that while it is common to consider the missionaries’ impact on the Indians, it is far less common to consider the Indians’ impact on the missionaries.

“Here we see them literally becoming acculturated – learning the Indian languages, even doing their homilies in the multitude of Indian languages that they recorded and saved for posterity.”

Mendoza found his perspective further altered when he heard false stories about California history from grade school teachers leading their classes on tours of the mission. They would tell their students, many of whom were Latino and Native American, “horrific tales that teachers were clearly making up as they went along in their efforts to try to explain history that they didn’t understand.”

“They would go to features on the mission campus and tell the kids, ‘you see these three kits here with all this iron grillwork and the evidence for fire? This is where the Spanish and the friars would literally torture the Indians with fire’.”

“I’m listening to this, and I go, ‘Wait a minute, those are 1930s-era barbeque pits for the yearly fiesta barbecue of chickens. And yet this is what they are telling the children’.”

Visitors would confront Catholic priests at the mission and blame them for alleged abuses. Mendoza himself received personal attacks from people claiming to be of Native American descent who said “every brick in this mission represents another dead Indian.”

“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.”

Mendoza said it is clear from Fr. Serra’s writings that the priest would have been “mortified” to hear some claims about his treatment of the native people whom he “truly loved.”

The professor discussed the historical context of the missions, noting that the Spanish Empire had officially outlawed slavery outside of the Caribbean. Unlike the slave plantations of the English-speaking colonies, entrance into the California missions was a choice.

“You could not be coerced to come in, as was the case with African slaves who were being forced out of their homeland, and forced into servitude.”

He compared the missions to religious communes in which the friars were obliged to protect the “body and soul” of mission members.

Life outside the missions was difficult as well. Mendoza said that near the San Miguel mission, native people in the Central Valley were starving as a result of drought.

“They were beginning to settle around the missions, and when they saw that everybody got three square (meals) a day, everybody was clothed, everybody was housed, everybody was defended, people began to join the mission.”

“I don’t doubt that it’s likely that in some of these initial conversions, people didn’t fully understand what they were getting into,” the professor said. But while life in the missions was highly regimented, the work was intended to benefit the Indians and to sustain the mission as a community.

“Serra, I think, was mortified whenever native people succumbed to illness or disease. That’s not to say these didn’t exist prior to his arrival in the region, but clearly this had an impact on him.”

“The wide body of scholarship, the growing number of people who are beginning to understand who Serra was, will ultimately change a lot of the way we see him and the mission system overall.”

Mendoza particularly praised the book “Junípero Serra: California, Indians, and the Transformation of a Missionary,” by Rose Marie Beebe and Robert Senkewicz. Their scholarship relies on new translations of documents and letters.

He also recommended the history of Fr. Serra by Gregory Orsola, saying he “humanized” the priest.

Without efforts to humanize Fr. Serra, Mendoza said, “we continue to see books that literally pick and choose the facts that will support agendas that are clearly antithetical to the Hispanic tradition, to the Catholic tradition, and to the life of Serra proper.”

Only you Catholics would fall for this sham of “history”.

First of all, I'm not a Catholic. Second, the history the article talks about is a small part of the total history you cite, particularly in South America.

For the most part, the first missionaries to Upper California were exemplary men given their cultural blindness insofar as appreciating Indians and particularly Indian land management was concerned. The padres were put in a very hard place, to satisfy the imperial desires of the military in keeping the Russians and English from settling the area while simultaneously preparing the Indians for relative autonomy under colonial rule, at least that was the missionary goal. The latter didn't go so well, for lots of reasons, the worst of which was the sexual abuse of Indian women by Spanish soldiers that transmitted syphilis, which was probably the critical cause of demographic collapse among Indians in California. Unlike many researchers on the topic, I believe there is little indication of a pre-colonial smallpox pandemic in California, for lots of reasons I don't have time for here.

My point in saying this is that although the Spanish colonization was catastrophic for the Indians, in no way did the mission system itself intend a genocide, which is what your understandably bitter post suggests. For truly murderous intent toward California Indians, you are better off flinging the "genocide" charge against Americans.

BTW, I assume you know Yurok is a part of the Algic language super-family (or "phylum"). Do you know any lore about how such a small isolate of that linguistic group was established in California when most Algonquins are found in eastern North America?

“I’ve seen estimate of up to 70 million but the number vary but no matter , the end tally is way more that 6 million.”

This reminds me of those bemoaning the billions of blacks lynched by the Klan; completely unrealisitic. We now know that the Americas weren’t populated with masses of natives from coast to coast; due to their limited technology they couldn’t feed large populations. Some of the ruins in Latin America were abandoned before a European ever set foot there.

When you speak of the many Indians killed by "arms and disease" you are not speaking of Serra's missions. And your reference to Hitler crudely suggests a genocide policy, which is the opposite of what the Franciscan Missions were to the native Californians.

The Californians' vulnerability to European diseases was a bio-tragedy, not policy. In many parts of this Hemisphere, diseases spread faster than Spaniards: in other words, once the disease was introduced into the Amerindian population at the coast, it spread inland like wildfire, years before the Spanish set foot in the interior. It was no more a "genocide" (a policy of extermination) than was the Black Plague in 14th century Europe. The only place the Indians could get treatment --- inadequate as it was at the time --- was in the missions. That was one reason why so many willingly came to the missions.

As for arms, the Franciscans were firmly opposed to the policies of the Spanish military in the presidios, who wanted to round up Indians as slave or serf-labor for the haciendas. A further reason why native Californians came to the missions willingly, was because they were sanctuaries against abduction by slave-catchers and the military.

One of the reasons I am glad for Serra's canonization is that the historians will have a chance to win out against the Left-wing propagandists.

I see.

You know, over the last eight to ten years, I have invested considerably in re-establishing a 21st Century pastoral semi nomadic cohort, principally for purposes of land and resource management but also for national security, disaster preparedness, and a way to both create lasting careers with which to support families and deal with the coming displacements of increasingly capable automation. Needless to say, that research dovetails considerably with the historic interests and cultural predispositions of Indian tribes.

So to see you dwell with such bitterness and at least distorted impressions by emphasis upon events from 400 years ago appears to throw up a barrier to any degree of rational reconciliation, redress, and restoration of the connection with the land that animated Indian people for millennia.

Drop the bile. It's not good for you. It doesn't build a future or buy much of anything. It alienates those who would invest in a richer and more productive planet both for people and for wildlife.

I’m a bit out of touch because a colleague and close friend of 35 years just died, but I do have time to relate to those interested, a perhaps indicative book in which a US Army officer’s choice tells us much about the Indian culture.

When faced with where to have his child spend the summer while he was away, he chose the local Indian community, not the white community. The boy’s recollections were taken just before the boy’s death and are available on Amazon.

I think the title was Indian Summer. Carry-Okie can tell you the details, as I learned of them from him.

For those who believe the recent ‘history’ taught in the Pooblic Skrewl Collectives, might I suggest a Google search of “revanchist history”.

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.