The Socioeconomic Situation and Scope of the Missions
The social upheaval for the hundreds of thousands of indigenous people who joined Catholic missions left is hard to overstate. They left “small, dispersed, and mobile communities to live in large, settled mission towns with Catholic priests” (Sarreal, 2014). For many natives, the missions were a refuge from the pressures associated with Spanish conquest. This is striking in light of the vigorous nature of the enculturation process the indigenous experienced on the missions. The Spanish Crown expected the missions to be means of forming the indigenous peoples into citizens of the empire. They were taught Catholic doctrine, European cultural practices, and settled agriculture. It is hard to think of a modern educational experience with such multidisciplinary, integrated, and all-encompassing scope (Sarreal, 2014).
The Jesuits alone housed more than 265,000 natives in their missions by 1767 throughout the Americas (Sarreal, 2014). The Jesuit missions of the Rio de la Plata region in current-day Argentina and Uruguay are widely considered to have been “the most successful in terms of the number of indigenous inhabitants, economic prosperity, and historical importance”. To each mission, two Jesuits would be assigned, but these could never force hundreds or thousands of indigenous people to come or to stay. Instead, it was in the face of Spanish and Portuguese colonialism that multitudes of natives joined the missions. By the eighteenth century, most Guarani members of the Jesuit missions were multiple generation residents steeped in mission culture. This way of life consisted of “biological, technological, organizational, and theological systems that incorporated aspects of both native and Jesuit-inspired customs and practices”. In other missions that depended on immigration and new converts, such comprehensive cultural change was not the case. The eventual decline of the Guarani missions in the late 18th century was due to the Spanish Crown’s reforms and intervention. Even still, due to the agency of the Guarani these missions endured until the end of the colonial period (Sarreal, 2014).
Some historians have highlighted that Jesuit missions protected the Indians from being taken advantage of and maintained the Guaraní language and other parts of native lifestyle. But less positive analysts draw attention to Jesuits’ depriving the indigenous of freedom, forcing them to change their culture, physically abusing them, and exposing them to disease (Sarreal, 2014). Research shows that a communal structure of shared labor, collective ownership, and administration of mission property was the foundation of the “mission economy”. The native members did not generally work for pay, participate in commerce, or own their own property. Rather, they depended mainly of provisions from communal supplies and worked in groups or individually. Communal property was more prevalent, but a culture of shared ownership did not make the missions “proto-socialist societies” as has been proposed by some research. Inequalities did exist among the natives, and although a level of prosperity existed, the economic system was not efficient. Contributions from the Jesuit order were needed, as well as protection from the colonial authorities. These factors and the lack of competition led to a system that survived but could not thrive (Sarreal, 2014).
After the decline of the missions to the Guarani, reformers proposed exposing the natives to the colonial market economy to intensify acculturation and assimilation (Sarreal, 2014). The result was the destruction of the missions and the benefit of a privileged minority of natives, especially those who could use mission property. The more vulnerable who depended on the missions suffered while “skilled and well-connected” Guarani benefitted (Sarreal, 2014). While these developments represent the decline of the missions, they do not indicate a general decline of Iberian Catholicism in the Americas. For as the missions declined, a level of Christian enculturation had been achieved that laid the foundation for the Catholic church to be the majority religious (nay, exclusive) of Latin America.
Different Indigenous Receptivity to Missions based on Sedentary Vs Nomadic
The culture of different indigenous peoples also affected how mission life developed, where it thrived and where it was harder to encourage. The encounter in 1492 and beyond between Iberian Catholic colonizers and native populations introduced the latter to Old World diseases and a “sea-change in the demographic patterns of the native populations of the Americas” (Jackson, 2015). Warfare, changes in subsistence patterns, competition between native and European men for sexual partners also contributed to severe population loss (Jackson, 2015). Significant variety existed between different populations where religious orders attempted to establish missions. The Jesuit missions of Paraguay in the Rio de la Plata region and the Chiquitos mission in current day eastern Bolivia were both established among sedentary
Where missionaries attempted to establish missions among nomadic populations they encountered more difficulties. Imposing new sociological norms offended nomadic culture, such as different paradigms for division of labor by gender (Jackson, 2015). The more difficult process of implementing these changes among nomadic populations led missionaries to impose harsher forms of control. This led to increased conflict and disruption, which explains the different results of attempts at social and political organization among sedentary and non-sedentary indigenous communities. On the Paraguay and Chiquitos mission frontiers a “kinder and gentler form of colonial domination” was used (Jackson, 2015).
Jackson (2015) draws attention to the difference made by the demographic situation of the different indigenous tribes evangelized by Iberian Catholic missions. Growth was sustainable where missions were established among demographically viable populations with high fertility and high mortality rates. In comparison, missions established among demographically weak populations such as nomadic hunters and gatherers were less sustainable.
Some missions such as the Paraguay and Chiquitos offered a buffer zone from the more abusive elements of Iberian colonialism (Jackson, 2015). Jackson’s concludes that the epidemic sickness that devastated native populations was neither generated nor exacerbated at the missions. Rather, disease spread to the missions from other highly populous communities such as Buenos Aires. The mortality rates at the missions were like those of “virgin soil” epidemics of the time. In missions such as the Chiquitos that were more geographically isolated, the mortality rates were much lower (Jackson, 2015).
The Incentivizing Power of Indigenous Resistance (on the Colonizer)
There was often violent indigenous resistance to evangelization in the peripheral areas of Spanish colonies in the Americas. This helped define missionaries as “warriors for Christ engaged in relentless struggle against defiant tribes and the demonic forces that in their view kept the indigenous population in darkness and resistance to Christianity” (Rivett, 2014). From the beginning of the Catholic missions in the Americas,
European Christian images and values made the missionizing friars the protagonists of a drama of male heroism clothed in virtue, selflessness, and utter dedication to the salvation of the souls of peoples about whom they had the greatest doubts. The purpose of evangelization was not martyrdom, even if some friars hoped for it, but when martyrdom occurred it was used to buttress the evangelization campaign and bring material and military support to the missions. (Rivett, 2014).
Christianity was rebelled against and repudiated persistently during the 18th century (Rivett, 2014).
The opposition missionaries faced rose a central issue: what was the nature of the indigenous people? Some accepted Christianity and were therefore seen as different from those who didn’t. Those who rejected the gospel became the embodiment of the evil present in human nature, of those under the influence of demons. But the real reason was that hunters and gatherers in the Northern regions did not want to live in reducciones – towns set up under ecclesiastical or royal authority to facilitate colonization. It was when faced with the threat of losing their customary nomadic life and religious traditions that indigenous communties responded violently. In the late 16th century, the northern provinces known as New Spain were thought of as islands of Christian “civilization”. But they were surrounded by what were considered “barbarian” indigenous communities that resisted conversion (Rivett, 2014).
The view that indigenous resistance was demonically empowered motivated evangelistic efforts. This was based on the Christian understanding of spiritual warfare, i.e., “You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world” (New International Version, 2011, I Jn. 4:4). And the fear of nearby barbarous communities would not only motivate the friars to evangelize more fervently. The colonial settlers would see the conversion of neighboring indigenous communities as a necessity. The conversion of the natives would be sought scrupulously by settlers when possible, or alternatively through forced conversion and massacre.
References
Jackson, Robert H. (2015). Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609-1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Vol. 00016).
Religious transformations in the early modern Americas / edited by Stephanie Kirk and Sarah Rivett. (2014).
Sarreal, Julia J. S. (2014). The Guaraní and Their Missions: A Socioeconomic History. Stanford University Press
davidjdawson 