Catholic Indian schools still exist, now usually with something like a token hour class after Mass dedicated to their ancestors culture. Still called Indian schools, still disgusting.
It may also be probable that you were not flagrantly abused by nuns in mandatory cataclysm classes. I was not so lucky, but unlike my classmates, at least I did not get beat again at home when parents learned I had angered the nuns by asking (admittedly loaded) questions.
But "is" is no less than exactly what I carry now.
Thank you for you for reaching out to broaden your horizons.
> It may also be probable that you were not flagrantly abused by nuns in mandatory cataclysm classes.
I’m not sure what bearing that has on a factual understanding of the current mission of the Jesuit order (which whatever other present or past offenses it can legitimately be blamed for, abuses
committed by nuns in “cataclysm” classes is a pretty big stretch) in the North America.
I dislike religious people, generally speaking, but Catholics in the PNW are the source of a lot of reliable historical accounts of tribal groups. I’m somewhat resentful, but they did good work recording linguistic data. Better than the miners would have done.
Jesuits is one of the forward-looking and outgoing Catholic orders. They work on topics that both non-believers and believers could agree. Matteo Ricci was fluent in Chinese culture and language. Jean de Brebeuf learned aboriginal language and culture in the present day's Canada.
Many other orders have not been so much on going to foreign places and are pretty insular to the unfamiliar.
If we're talking about abusing and killing people, how do we weigh the factors of "reliable historical accounts" and "good work recording linguistic data"?
It’s not about weighing anything, they simply left something useful for posterity. Their observations and record keeping has helped preserve some scraps of indigenous culture that would have otherwise been lost, even to surviving members of tribes today. That’s a good thing, even if missionaries did more bad than good overall.
The motive behind their good schools, is just to prove their superior culture... Make non-Christians familiar with Christianity and western culture, make them admire them... And then convert people..
the school also provide jobs for people who are converted..
Jesuits are just doing crusades but in a more psychological and cunning ways...
And I say this from broad experience and insider knowledge.
I have heard your argument too often from outsiders but never from anyone who actually studied in these schools. Luckily, I don't know any queen sympathizer among my friends who passed out from Jesuit institutions neither do I know anyone who converted.
One thing I do know is that their schooling helped them to get jobs and get out of poverty when the software revolution happened.
I am not well versed in European history but common sense tells me a conversion collusion between the protestant British Queen and Catholic Jesuits has more probability to be a fiction.
My only point is the Christian schools or missions are not deserving of any of the praises you heap on them.
Their contribution to the actual school is 0. In fact it legitimizes their continuing hold of land and wealth grabbed from the natives and temples for a "good cause"
Colleges like Loyola in Chennai built on temple land manufacture derascinated Hindu hating Indians who go on to work in media, bureaucracy and judiciary and it does have a substantial negative impact, especially in a country trying to decolonise.
I think it's too bad this article got posted on a day when I'm assuming relatively few people are on HN, since it's an interesting story.
One doesn't have to approve of the history European colonialism, religious imperialism, etc., to find this adventuring academic religious order interesting and significant.
(Disclosure: attended a Jesuit parish school, and am not religious, but picked up some intellectual and humanist values from there.)
The suppression of the Jesuits occurred without a theological explanation from the Vatican. I would say that whatever the Jesuits did seemed to contradict the requirements of colonialism and religious imperialism.
It’s important not to lump Jesuits in with other groups, or discount all Jesuits in history because of the actions of some. Things I heard growing up in Protestant circles may have biased me towards writing off the Jesuits, but a few years ago I read the 21st century book Heroic Leadership which was written by a Jesuit seminarian who took a surprising turn into investment banking and worked his way up to managing director before retiring to work on several charity endeavors. The book tries to help people in the business world learn from Jesuit principles since he felt the annual 360 interviews and other corporate programs were so hollow in comparison to the routine personal reflection and deeper annual self-examination he learned from the Jesuits.
Anyway, along the way he told numerous stories from over the centuries as Jesuits were trailblazers into building connections in China, India, Japan and the Americas. They would learn the local languages and culture, believing understanding and respect was vital when crossing into other lands. Their founder didn’t want them cloistered and spending the bulk of every day in prayer, believing instead that Jesus’ final commandment was to be taken seriously and they needed to get out and about. Nearly 5 centuries ago, he wanted all Jesuits to be so free of ties that with only 48 hours’ notice they could board a ship to sail around to the other side of the world.
There are many stories of them defending the rights of local people in colonized lands. The Spanish colonists had only dirt streets and wooden buildings in Asunción when Jesuit towns among nearby native Americans had cobblestone streets and stone buildings and were teaching Native American children in schools. The Jesuits pleaded with the Pope via letters that the Native Americans were fully human and Portuguese raiders should be stopped, but by the time the Pope’s cease and desist could reach the Portuguese those towns were destroyed. Jeremy Irons and Robert De Niro acted in a movie about these tragedies. For all the faults of some Jesuits, many others gave their all for peoples around the world when it was a foreign concept to many other people to be genuinely loving instead of condescending to other ethnicities.
I went to Jesuit high school and we had to watch "The Mission" (the Jeremy Irons movie) almost as often as Dead Poet's Society. That and "Romero". The good thing about it, though, is that the Jesuits at that school were performatively endorsing liberation theology, which is not something you can say for Catholicism writ large.
I doubt it impressed many of the high school sophomores in the room, but it's interesting that a prominent Jesuit high school was so willing to cast the greater Catholic church as a genocidal villain. And whatever you want to say about the Jesuits of the 1700s, the work they did in the 1960's-80's is hard to dunk on.
I agree and think the Jesuits are one of the best things to emerge from the Roman Church in ages. There are/have been problems with the Jesuits as with any other big, influential organization, but I think as a whole they deserve our respect for their piety (even if they're wrong about theism), erudition, and bravery in traveling the world in the early modern period. They've been called God's Marines for a reason, like a soldier tasked with establishing a beachhead, they suffered miserably for their mission. Speaking truth to power in defense of the colonized and powerless has generally been another of their dangerous practices
They published a Mandarin translation of Galileo's Starry Messenger and notes on sunspots within about 15 years of Messengers' first publication in Italy. They were successful in converting Japanese by not attempting to replace Japanese culture wholesale. The arrival of the Dominicans, the Dutch, and the end of the civil wars put a bloody stop to that, but their temporary success does demonstrate the efficacy of their methods. They stood up to National Socialism (among many others).
They also tried to defend Catholicism in England (and indeed ministered to cryptocatholics who weren't buying what Henry and Liz were selling). They became a stereotype arch-villain of the English propaganda of the era called the Black Legend. It's largely mixed with the historical truth in the modern popular imagination of the anglosphere by now (viz. Dan Brown) . It alleges that the Spanish were treacherous idolaters, fond of torture and so on. The Spanish indeed were rabid imperialists and religious bigots, but not to a unique degree for the age. The Jesuits were the ones being tortured in England for (religiously) aiding the silenced and powerless.
This tendency hasn't really changed. Liberation theology and its less extreme brethren have largely been products of Jesuit theology. At times it seems like they're among the few Catholics who read whole catechism (there are some surprisingly progressive ideas in it) and don't focus to great excess on sex and abortion.
It is important to remember the failings of the Church too.
Thank you for cautioning others not to over-generalize and discount Jesuits in history.
I know someone who has been a Jesuit in the last 10+ years and was ordained a few years ago. At present, the order still encourages education, intellectual pursuits, service to others and learning other's cultures/languages. A number of Jesuits entered religious life with previous experience in many ordinary professions such as teachers and bankers. During the formation, the seminarians work in less privileged places around the world. The most enlightening aspect of the formation admission process is that the superior, using 3rd party medical professionals, ensure that all prospective seminarians have been in excellent mental health.
This is a whataboutism apologia, which is cool. But the English mainly "lucked" out by settling into pre-agriculture (or post-agriculture) places with very small number of natives. Where there are many, like in Canada, New Zealand and even CONUS, the English (and most protestant colonizers) were much more willing to live and let live compared to Catholics.
But the Conquistadors were just the first anyway, all the later colonizers were able to learn from them. So is all cool.
Sure, Protestants were much more likely to let natives alive, that’s why Native Americans were exterminated (e.g. broken treaties with natives) and moved to reservations and South American natives were considered people in the XVI century by the Catholic Monarchs.
Umm, that system, the encomienda, was undoubtedly slavery. That it resembled pre-colonial rule does not absolve the Spanish Empire from recognizing it. Everyone knew it was a death sentence, clear enough when they sent English “Lutheran dogs” into the mines, too.
You’re both arguing about revising history when plainly the rule is this: if the colonizer let you live (or even encouraged breeding) it was to extract labor.
Does anybody have reliable information on the political influence excerted by this organization? I hear that it is significant, and that the principles of benevolence are quickly forgotten during power play.
Specifically I am wondering what career paths are closed off to non-jesuites, in practice because we all know how nice the theory appears to be?
Jesuit political influence was probably at its height with liberation theology in Latin America 1960-1989. This was effectively ended with the assassination of leading Jesuit intellectuals by a US-trained army battalion in 1989 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_murders_of_Jesuits_in_El_...).
What a charming rumor! He did attend a Jesuit university, but somehow didn't make time for the rather extensive training the Jesuits undergo. But now I'm going to have to make an effort not to refer to him as "Bill Clinton, S.J."
50 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 113 ms ] threadIt may be possible, but is certainly difficult, to imagine a more flagrant abuse of the word “is”.
But "is" is no less than exactly what I carry now. Thank you for you for reaching out to broaden your horizons.
I’m not sure what bearing that has on a factual understanding of the current mission of the Jesuit order (which whatever other present or past offenses it can legitimately be blamed for, abuses committed by nuns in “cataclysm” classes is a pretty big stretch) in the North America.
No longer being sure is a good start, keep it up it you can.
Just saying.
Many other orders have not been so much on going to foreign places and are pretty insular to the unfamiliar.
'Now you have some nice charcoal for BBQs.'
Jesuits are just doing crusades but in a more psychological and cunning ways... And I say this from broad experience and insider knowledge.
The queen of England did not send ship loads of gold to do charity work in the colonies.
The native tax payers to this day pay the salaries including the priests who work as principals or head masters.
The land is almost always ill gotten, by force or on 99 year lease for $1.
And in many parts of the world these schools were started explicitly to breed subjects loyal to the colonizers, Macauly's children.
One thing I do know is that their schooling helped them to get jobs and get out of poverty when the software revolution happened.
I am not well versed in European history but common sense tells me a conversion collusion between the protestant British Queen and Catholic Jesuits has more probability to be a fiction.
Their contribution to the actual school is 0. In fact it legitimizes their continuing hold of land and wealth grabbed from the natives and temples for a "good cause"
Colleges like Loyola in Chennai built on temple land manufacture derascinated Hindu hating Indians who go on to work in media, bureaucracy and judiciary and it does have a substantial negative impact, especially in a country trying to decolonise.
One doesn't have to approve of the history European colonialism, religious imperialism, etc., to find this adventuring academic religious order interesting and significant.
(Disclosure: attended a Jesuit parish school, and am not religious, but picked up some intellectual and humanist values from there.)
Anyway, along the way he told numerous stories from over the centuries as Jesuits were trailblazers into building connections in China, India, Japan and the Americas. They would learn the local languages and culture, believing understanding and respect was vital when crossing into other lands. Their founder didn’t want them cloistered and spending the bulk of every day in prayer, believing instead that Jesus’ final commandment was to be taken seriously and they needed to get out and about. Nearly 5 centuries ago, he wanted all Jesuits to be so free of ties that with only 48 hours’ notice they could board a ship to sail around to the other side of the world.
There are many stories of them defending the rights of local people in colonized lands. The Spanish colonists had only dirt streets and wooden buildings in Asunción when Jesuit towns among nearby native Americans had cobblestone streets and stone buildings and were teaching Native American children in schools. The Jesuits pleaded with the Pope via letters that the Native Americans were fully human and Portuguese raiders should be stopped, but by the time the Pope’s cease and desist could reach the Portuguese those towns were destroyed. Jeremy Irons and Robert De Niro acted in a movie about these tragedies. For all the faults of some Jesuits, many others gave their all for peoples around the world when it was a foreign concept to many other people to be genuinely loving instead of condescending to other ethnicities.
Try to see the legend inside the myth and the genious inside the legend. I found it useful in life.
They published a Mandarin translation of Galileo's Starry Messenger and notes on sunspots within about 15 years of Messengers' first publication in Italy. They were successful in converting Japanese by not attempting to replace Japanese culture wholesale. The arrival of the Dominicans, the Dutch, and the end of the civil wars put a bloody stop to that, but their temporary success does demonstrate the efficacy of their methods. They stood up to National Socialism (among many others).
They also tried to defend Catholicism in England (and indeed ministered to cryptocatholics who weren't buying what Henry and Liz were selling). They became a stereotype arch-villain of the English propaganda of the era called the Black Legend. It's largely mixed with the historical truth in the modern popular imagination of the anglosphere by now (viz. Dan Brown) . It alleges that the Spanish were treacherous idolaters, fond of torture and so on. The Spanish indeed were rabid imperialists and religious bigots, but not to a unique degree for the age. The Jesuits were the ones being tortured in England for (religiously) aiding the silenced and powerless.
This tendency hasn't really changed. Liberation theology and its less extreme brethren have largely been products of Jesuit theology. At times it seems like they're among the few Catholics who read whole catechism (there are some surprisingly progressive ideas in it) and don't focus to great excess on sex and abortion.
It is important to remember the failings of the Church too.
an individual post says this, while generations uphold theism
I know someone who has been a Jesuit in the last 10+ years and was ordained a few years ago. At present, the order still encourages education, intellectual pursuits, service to others and learning other's cultures/languages. A number of Jesuits entered religious life with previous experience in many ordinary professions such as teachers and bankers. During the formation, the seminarians work in less privileged places around the world. The most enlightening aspect of the formation admission process is that the superior, using 3rd party medical professionals, ensure that all prospective seminarians have been in excellent mental health.
But the Conquistadors were just the first anyway, all the later colonizers were able to learn from them. So is all cool.
You’re both arguing about revising history when plainly the rule is this: if the colonizer let you live (or even encouraged breeding) it was to extract labor.
Specifically I am wondering what career paths are closed off to non-jesuites, in practice because we all know how nice the theory appears to be?