How did the Latin American Indian's religion change after the Spanish arrived?
345018
I suggest reading Everyday Life and Politics in Nineteenth Century Mexico: Men, Women, and War by Mark Wasserman (2000).  You will find the answers you need in there.  \nAlso, check out this website: http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/travel/dpalfrey/dpcolonial2.html
392144
Life on the spanish missions was divided between male and female and then by age.  Children spent their days fetching and carrying things for the older people.  They also picked olives from the trees and chased birds from the fields.  They gathered firewood.  The native american indians who lived on the missions were from different tribes and spoke many different languages but had to learn spanish as that was the only language to be spoken.  They had to give up their way of life that they had known and had to observe a new religion.  The women spent their days cooking and weaving.  The men herded cattle and helped with the tanning of the hides
1134306
The Spanish brought horses, their religion (Christianity - Catholicism), advanced weapons, and new diseases (like chicken pox).\nThey brough from the Americas gold, potatoes, tomatoes, corn, and chocolate.\nThat's just to name a few.  Also, are you talking about the first group of Spaniards (with Columbus) or more in general?  I was speaking more in general.
726318
they showed them how to trap and hunt for food and how to make clothing from the hides of animals that they killed, basically they taught them how to survive in the new America. with out the things they were used to in England, this new world was very harsh.  the Indians taught the settlers how to gather food like berries and nuts and showed them the plants that were good to eat. they taught them to make kayaks to navigate the rivers and streams.
391499
Here is what I was able to find out about the Karankawa -\nwho were an Indian tribe in Texas.\nhttp://www.texas-our-texas.com/Cultgrps2.html\n\nThe person you might be thinking of is Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca, one of the early Spanish explorers. Apparently he had Moorish roots, so he would have had dark skin, and he was held as a slave by the native Americans.\n\nHere is some info:\nBorn around 1490 in a tiny Andalusian town called Jérez de la Frontera to Francisco de Vera and Teresa Cabeza de Vaca, Alvar Nuñez Cabeza de Vaca is remembered as being the first European to see and explore the southwestern United States. Cabeza de Vaca’s name, which means "head of a cow," comes from his mother’s side of the family. In 1212, during the Spanish reconquest, one of Teresa’s ancestors, Martín Alhajahad, marked an unguarded mountain pass with a cow skull. The Spanish Christians attacked the Moors and won the battle "Las Navas de Tolosa." King Sancho of Navarre honored Alhajahad and his descendents with the name "Cabeza de Vaca." Although Alvar could have chosen to use his father’s surname, he preferred his mother’s surname and used it throughout his life.\nCabeza de Vaca spent his youth in Jérez and later joined the military where he was sent to Italy to fight in the battle of Ravenna in 1512. Although the battle was won by the French, Cabeza de Vaca was still promoted to the rank of alferez (ensign) for bravery. In 1513 he served as an aide to the Duke of Medina, Sidonia. He then fought in behalf of King Charles I (Emperor Charles V) during the Comuneros revolt. His loyalty obviously captured the king’s attention, for at age forty, Cabeza de Vaca received the appointment that would not only change his life but also the future of the New World. In 1527, Cabeza de Vaca was appointed as treasurer of a royal expedition to Florida led by Pánfilo de Narváez. As treasurer, Cabeza de Vaca was second in command.
269714
The ethniticity can vary from country to country in places like Mexico, Central America and South America.  A frind of mine is from Argentina and she told me that many people who live there are either of Polish or Italian descent.  Etniticity many times depends on who the original occupiers were.  Spain as an example, had a lot of influence, Portugal did too, throughout South and Central America and Mexico.  As a result most natives have Spanish and or Potugese blood.  Mexicans have a Indian and Spanish blood line and probably most of the people from that part of the world do, as well.  You are right about blacks, but I can't  answer your question on how they came about in this region. I'm sure that question will be answered soon.  This medium has an incredible following along with some extremely intelligent responders.
1011181
Native American tribes that once lived inside the boundaries of present-day Texas include the Apache, Atakapan, Bidai, Caddo, Comanche, Cherokee, Karankawa, Kiowa, Tonkawa, and Wichita. Currently, there are three federally-recognized Native American tribes which reside in Texas: the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas, the Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas, and the Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo of Texas.\n\nSpanish Texas is the name given by Texas History scholars for the period between 1690—1821 when Texas was governed as a province of the Spanish colony of New Spain. This period begins with the expedition of the governor of Coahuila to destroy the ruins of the French colony of Fort Saint Louis and establish a Spanish presence in the area, and ends with the independence of Mexico in 1821, facilitating Mexican Texas.\n\nIn the 17th and 18th centuries Spain and France maneuvered for control of Texas, with the Spanish based in Mexico and New Mexico and the French in Louisiana. Spain moved quickly to establish a string of missions (often with an accompanying presidio) to establish a toehold in the frontier land. During the War of the Quadruple Alliance in Europe, hostilities spread to the New World and French troops from Natchitoches briefly captured the capital of Texas, Los Adaes, in what is now Northwest Louisiana. The French were not able to wrest control of Texas from Spain, and by the early 19th century sold their North American holdings to the United States in the Louisiana Purchase, which then placed the United States as a threat to the Spanish control of Texas.\n\nIn the years following the Louisiana Purchase and the acquisition of New Orleans by the U.S., American settlers had begun to move westward into Mexican claimed territory. Some settlers were active filibusters, who sought the longterm annexation of the area by the U.S. In 1812-13, the Gutiérrez-Magee Expedition attempted to separate Texas from the Spanish Empire.\n\nSpanish Texas is the name given by Texas History scholars for the period between 1690—1821 when Texas was governed as a province of the Spanish colony of New Spain. This period begins with the expedition of the governor of Coahuila to destroy the ruins of the French colony of Fort Saint Louis and establish a Spanish presence in the area, and ends with the independence of Mexico in 1821, facilitating Mexican Texas.\n\nThe first declaration of independence for modern Texas, by both Anglo-Texan settlers and local Tejanos, was signed in Goliad on December 20, 1835. The Texas Declaration of Independence was enacted at Washington-on-the-Brazos on March 2, 1836, effectively creating the Republic of Texas.\n\nFour days later, the two-week long Battle of the Alamo ended as Mexican General Antonio López de Santa Anna's forces defeated the nearly 200 Texans defending the small mission (which would eventually become the center of the city of San Antonio). Remember the Alamo! became the battle cry of the Texas Revolution. The Battle of San Jacinto was fought on April 21, 1836, near the present-day city of Houston. General Santa Anna's entire force of 1,600 men was killed or captured by Texas General Sam Houston's army of 800 Texans; only nine Texans died. This decisive battle resulted in Texas' independence from Mexico.\n\nSam Houston, a native of Virginia, was President of the Republic of Texas for two separate terms, 1836–1838 and 1841–1844. He also was Governor of the state of Texas from 1859 to 1861.\n\nThe first Congress of the Republic of Texas convened in October 1836 at Columbia (now West Columbia). Stephen F. Austin, known as the Father of Texas, died December 27, 1836, after serving two months as Secretary of State for the new Republic.\n\nIn 1836, five sites served as temporary capitals of Texas (Washington-on-the-Brazos, Harrisburg, Galveston, Velasco and Columbia) before Sam Houston moved the capital to Houston in 1837. In 1839, the capital was moved to the new town of Austin.\n\nIn
994412
Well it all goes back to the 15th and 16th centruy.  Spain, who are pious catholics, conquered Mexico and south/central america and converted the indians to catholicism.  Mary is the most common name in honor of Jesus' mother.
618999
Because Spain colonixed LAtin America and the Catholicism was and is the country's religion
493738
It's always been that way, throughout history.  The Dutch hated the British, the British hated the French and the Irish, the Irish hated the Italians, and now everybody hates Latinos.\n\nNot really, a lot of us like them just fine.  But this is nothing new.\n\nInteresting what pflippy99 says.  Many Latinos have more native American than Spanish blood in them... most Spanish people have light skin, dark hair, and blue eyes. But the conquistadors didn't bring their wives...\n\nBut even the "native" americans came here from somewhere else.  Human beings evolved in Africa.
961911
The Spanish sure did much to disseminate Indian cultures...BUTT... Indian peoples seem to have originated in Asia and not Spain. Today most South Americans, Caribbean and places like Australia seem to have large populations of Aborigine and Indian types.
617435
Latin Americans in general have had a good influence on Florida including music and food. As well, the Spanish originally settled Florida. Spain finally ceded Florida to the United States with the Adams-Onís Treaty in 1819, in exchange for the U.S. renouncing any claims on Texas.
129567
Were American Indians killed for only being Indians the answer is yes.  In the beginning the Spainish Conquestidors killed as many Indians as they could, this was in North, South, and Central America basically in the 1500's.  Many Indian's died of diseases brought to the America's by the new settlers to the land that they had no antibodies for as they had never been exposed to them before.  Yes of course there were the U.S. and Indian Wars that lasted for over 100 years.  All skirmishes with different tribes around the country as the whites were settling the new frontier.  So the answer would be yes over a period of about 400 years Indians were forced to live where they did not want to and in ways they did not want to live and killed and fought with just for being Indian.  Indians did intermingle with people from all over the world that settled into this New World as it was called.  There are a lot of Indians around today and there are many more that have Indian Blood in their family lines.  Was what happened to the Indian's genocide, maybe by some definitions it was, however with a timeline of 400 years it does not appear that anyone was in a hurry about it.
464415
At first, the Native Americans were probably curious.  While some tribes might have been prone to instigating trouble - many other tribes might have been open to the idea of a new group of individuals living in harmony beside them.\n\nWhat they found was group of people with very little respect for the land and its native people.  The English settlers (I'm refering to the Pilgrims up here in MA) weren't nice people and they weren't interested in cultivating meaninful relationships with natives unless it could provide them with useful knowledge to farm or hunt.  Once the Native Americans learned of the true nature of the colonizing English I'm sure they became weary of their presence.  Wars broke out - remember?  \n\nWere the English right to enter a territory that was already being lived in by others and trying to ungratefully utilize resources?  Would you want someone barging into your backyard and say "Hi I'm going to live here now - even though you've work hard your entire life for this little plot of land in the universe...oh and I'm gonna need some food, want to go grocery shopping for me?" \n\nI think you'd get rather ticked off.\n\n**\nKit4info:  You would like ME to learn MY American history?  If you are so ignorant to the treatment of the Native Americans by English settlers then you should not be responding to this question.  Research King Phillip’s War (1675-1676).  The cause of this war was due to what I said previously: mistreatment of the Natives.   Specifically: disrespect of Natives and continued expansion of the settlers.  The war involved the Wampanoag, Iroquois and Mohicans (western territories), Narragansett, Podunk,  and Nipmuck to name a few.  When war broke out most Natives sided with Phillip, a few who had converted to Christianity fought with the English, others were neutral.  Read this excerpt: \n\n “King Philip’s War was one of the bloodiest and most costly in the history of America. One in ten soldiers on both sides was injured or killed. It took many years for Plymouth and the other colonies to recover from damage to property\nThe outcome of King Philip’s War was devastating to the traditional way of life for Native People in New England. Hundreds of Natives who fought with Philip were sold into slavery abroad. Others, especially women and children, were forced to become servants locally. As the traditional base of existence changed due to the Colonists’ victory, the Wampanoag and other local Native communities had to adapt certain aspects of their culture in order to survive.”  \n\nDid I say that I think we should all leave because this land we live upon was stolen?  No – so what are you talking about “dinosaurs” for?  I am not “parroting” anything I am stating historical facts, my dear:  The Puritan settlers and their leaders were not nice people – not the innocents seeking religious freedom that you seem to think.  The majority of Native American tribes up here were NOT happy with what was happening around and did not like these intruders, although they tried to live beside them for several years, they quickly grew weary of their presence.  That was the question I read and that was what I answered.  No need to speak so condescendingly in order to gain a sense of authority because your argument is unfounded, illogical and worthless.  To deny any of these facts would be absurd; have you EVER taken an early American history class?  Someone was denied a school fieldtrip to Plimoth Plantation as a child and it shows.
855948
They didn't have immigration laws back then.  The first native Americans that met the settlers liked and helped them.  Other tribes weren't so nice on the intrusion of their land,(the territory they were aware of and hunted in etc) even if it was other Native Americans.  You act like like they had maps and all abided by the same rules and cultural practices and met once a year to toke the peace pipe and compare notes.
930814
Because of the way many religions evolved in America: That is, racially segregated. The white people came from Europe, bringing their religion. When black slaves where brought over, they brought their religion with them, but from spending time in America, began to incorporate elements of the white people's religions. This led to similar, but still different, religions, since each had elements worked in from the original religions, and thus "black" and "white" churches.
297630
March 16,1521... Magellan, a missionary of spain arrived in limasawa islands... then made ties with the locals and spread the roman catholic religion... called the country philippines in honor of king philip II of spain during that time...\nthus ever since the country is composed of 95% catholics...