St Junipero Serra statue toppled in San Francisco

  • Thread starter Thread starter C.Ray
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m listening, but they are shouting over my head calling me racist and toppling statues because they don’t agree with that ‘interpretation’ of the past.

Bringing Christ to the new world was very important, sure , it could have been done differently, but we wouldn’t have had the country we have today. Because of trying to do it perfectly , as a church we’ve almost stopped being bold with evangelization

It’s an imperfect world , with imperfect people. Are they going to start taking down statues/paintings /artwork of indian chiefs that sanctioned killing of other tribes? or those that massacred christian missionaries?
 
:roll_eyes:

Oh you got me! Everything I support is demonic and I’m a hell-bound spawn of Satan!

Whatever.

I won’t be back.

Enjoy the conspiracy theories.
 
In what way was Serra abusive towards native Americans? Did he torture native Americans?
He is representative of the entire mission system, Because he was the leader of the founding of the missions in California. His statue is representative of the whole thing, I don’t really think it’s about Junipero Serra individually.

The missionaries and soldiers came and took the land as they pleased and built these fortified missions.

The native population was put onto the mission lands, largely coercively. They worked the land, did not receive pay, the goods they created and animals/crops they toiled to raise were sold for profits.

They were not allowed to leave and if they tried to leave and return to their Indian villages or way of life, they were forcibly returned, and yes beaten. Children were taken and baptized and then held away from their parents until they too submitted to baptism. They were then sent to the presidios of the soldiers and landowners to be laborers and house servants, also unpaid.

There’s a word for a place you are forced to stay as free labor.

Then after Mexico won independence from Spain, they secularized the missions and sold off the valuable land to wealthy ranchers, leaving the Indians with nothing tangible but two generations of internment and forced labor. And a population decimated by disease.

So some see this statue as a symbol of that whole system.

Fr Serra himself wasn’t not a monster, his heart was in the right place and he was carrying out the mission of Evangelization as he understood it. (although he did believe in and oversee the physical punishment of Indians for various infractions and he did approve of their forced residence at the missions). He has a place both in the religious history of California and in the history of California’s colonization and eventual path to statehood and what it is today. It is of no doubt that the mission system was a vital importance to the development of California.

As I mentioned earlier, a lot of statues are being defaced or pulled down and not all of that is rational. Statues of St Junipero Serra have been defaced before. This is not a new controversy in California. The controversy doesn’t have anything to do with his catholicity, but rather with the controversy of the mission system itself.
 
Last edited:
I’ve felt the way you feel many times. For the most part, I try and stay away from the political threads. I am guilty of weighing in from time to time against my better judgement.

Like all social media this site can be extremely toxic.

I hope that if you leave you decide to come back once in a while.
 
Last edited:

I’ve seen others post dismissive comments about Matt Walsh before on this forum but I think he makes a really good argument against the idea of white privilege in this recent show.
 
Which makes it difficult for me to share your optimism about statutes being left alone on private land. Who is going to protect this private property ? The police?
 
Much half truth, long part of the black legend, which affected all if the history books we grew up with in America. Spain: bad, England: good.

I would certainly not defend all if the treatment of natives in Spanish colonies, but I would say this. Simply look at the predominant skin color of the present day population of Latin American countries, and then contrast that with the US and Canada, and then tell me who treated Native Americans worse.
 
Extremely rude and completely unnecessary. Is this a Catholic forum or Twitter where people celebrate others being “cancelled?”
 
40.png
Tis_Bearself:
40.png
StudentMI:
If you think they’ll observe the private ownership of such things…
There’s statues on private church grounds everywhere. If they’re not accessible, they are generally left alone.
If the church land is visible to the public, they won’t hesitate to take it down. In the riots most vandalism was on private property.
How many tens of thousands of people ae involved in the protests? If one group makes a mistake that shouldn’t count as an indictment against all of them.
 
Extremely rude and completely unnecessary. Is this a Catholic forum or Twitter where people celebrate others being “cancelled?”
Huh? No one here was “cancelled.” A poster chose to leave and flounced.
 
And you celebrated with an obnoxious gif like a twelve-year old.

Do you truly believe that to be an appropriate response to your fellow Christian?
 
I find flouncing obnoxious. I simply waved goodbye with a smile. 🤷‍♀️
 
I find flouncing obnoxious. I simply waved goodbye with a smile. 🤷‍♀️
What you did was obnoxious and childish whereas you’d be all apologetic if you agreed with his politics. “So sorry, this forum can be toxic at times…” Etc.
 
40.png
gracepoole:
I find flouncing obnoxious. I simply waved goodbye with a smile. 🤷‍♀️
What you did was obnoxious and childish whereas you’d be all apologetic if you agreed with his politics. “So sorry, this forum can be toxic at times…” Etc.
Wow. Okay… I’m not sure why you’re invested in making such assumptions about me but they’re unwarranted and uncharitable.
 
Actually, in my book, Spain had some bad actors but England was 1 million times worse both in scale and in atrocities.

On the whole, Spain was classist not racist. And yes the Catholic Spanish and French intermarried with the natives. Primarily upper class such as daughters of chiefs and prominent natives. But in some cases they took native wives while having European wives, and then left the native wives when they left the area. So it’s a mixed bag.
 
Last edited:
Justify it to yourself anyway you want sister. You celebrated his frustration. I ask you again: is that anyway to treat a fellow Christian?
 
Last edited:
Justify it anyway you want sister. You celebrated his frustration. I ask you again: is that anyway to treat a fellow Christian?
I shared a gif of someone waving, smiling, and saying goodbye. And that’s really all I care to say about that, brother.
 
My point about skin color was not just intermarriage, but more so actual survival.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top