History of the DR and other thoughts...

[canadian bob]

An interesting thread....A year ago, I was astonished to discover that a local Priest is not only a member of the National police, but also has a prodigious position in the army! (No names no "pack drill)....No wonder he's so busy! Be careful in "Confessional"......
Canadian Bob.

 

[Rick Snyder]

The ability to preach per the ?Vicariato Castrense? also applies to the national police. Sorry I failed to mention that earlier.

I don?t know how many other countries have a similar situation but here in the DR the fact that you are a priest can be very beneficial to your lifestyle and pocket. Now, if you are a good priest and give 10% to the church then ????.. ?Those that pray together stay together?.

Rick

 

[Rick Snyder]

While wed surfing this morning

The mentioning of those in leadership position having the ability to ?pad their pockets? just happens to bring up this interesting article. In addition I?ve figured that the El Rancho Steak House must be a heck of a watering hole at 6,000 pesos a plate. Also on the same note I came across this concerning prices of software.

Ahhhhhh ....... The webs that we weave in order to decieve.......

Rick

 

[RonS]

Didn't the Vatican issue some kind of prohibition for Priest, etc. participating in political affairs which prohibition led to the resignation of a prominent and able member of the US House of Representatives? How do these guys get away with this stuff in the DR? It's bad enough that there is no separation of Church and State, but to have the Church comingled with the military is really dangerous!

 

[Texas Bill]

Ron S.

All you havea to do is read your history reagarding Spain and the Conquest of the"New World". Priests were imbedded with the Conquestadors and virtually ruled their actions.

I won't go any further with that statement since I might be called a bigot, but things haven't changed in over 500 years in Latin America, regardless of the "Political" climate.

"Sereration of Church andState"??? Don't pull MY chain with that noise.
the onoy two countries that pay any attention to that in the Western Hemisphere are Canada and the USA. And with the "Conservative (religious) Right", I'm not so sure about even that.

Texas Bill

 

[RonS]

I confess that my naivete got the better of me, and that I've taken the social and political policy of separating church and state for granted. True enough that the religious right has exercised more influence in US political affairs than I am comfortable with, but you must admit that we have come a long way from the day when the head of state and the head of the religious institutions were one in the same. The situation in the DR is certainly better today than it has been, and it is certainly better than other examples one can point to in human history. The fact that Constantine was at once Ceasar and Bishop of the Roman Catholic Church, that Popes are heads of state, that the Queen of England is the head of the Church of England, and that Iran is controlled by Islamic religious leaders, speaks volumes. I find the comingling of political, political and military institutions to be quite troublesome and dangerous, and, moreoever, injurious to the best interests of the people. Although far from a perfect political arrangement, I'm happy to be a citizen of the US. I am thankful to share the social compact that we call the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees rights and liberties, and provides for the opportunity to seek legal redress if those rights and liberties are violated. I hope that one day, the wonderful, loving people of the DR will enjoy a similar arrangement.

 

[Texas Bill]

I confess that my naivete got the better of me, and that I've taken the social and political policy of separating church and state for granted. True enough that the religious right has exercised more influence in US political affairs than I am comfortable with, but you must admit that we have come a long way from the day when the head of state and the head of the religious institutions were one in the same. The situation in the DR is certainly better today than it has been, and it is certainly better than other examples one can point to in human history. The fact that Constantine was at once Ceasar and Bishop of the Roman Catholic Church, that Popes are heads of state, that the Queen of England is the head of the Church of England, and that Iran is controlled by Islamic religious leaders, speaks volumes. I find the comingling of political, political and military institutions to be quite troublesome and dangerous, and, moreoever, injurious to the best interests of the people. Although far from a perfect political arrangement, I'm happy to be a citizen of the US. I am thankful to share the social compact that we call the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees rights and liberties, and provides for the opportunity to seek legal redress if those rights and liberties are violated. I hope that one day, the wonderful, loving people of the DR will enjoy a similar arrangement.

RonS;

I support your ambitions 100%!!!!

I and many others spent the better part of our audult lives standing ready to support those aspirations and in defending that self-same Constitution.
For that reason alone, I have been a very outspoken critic of Dominican Politics and it's implimentation upon the Dominican People.
I don't advocate the overthrow of the government here, as do some I could mention, but do support any endeavor to change the methodology presently used to administer that government to the benefit of those people.
I will state unequivically that the method should NOT be that of embracing Socialism, or the like, but rather the conduct of austerity and complete openness of actions by government officials.
The DR people are extremely nationalistic by nature. That is a good indicator of where their mindset is. If they were properly led, thiscountry could be the economic powerhouse of the Caribbean without a doubt, but the mindset of 500 years of historic activity in government and sociaology stands in the way at this time.
For the most part, the people here are "takers" as opposed to being "givers". If a balance between those two factors could be obtained, the solutions would surface very quickly andthe coultry would be well on its way toward progressing into the 21st century, socially, politically and economically.
There is an undercurrent of this evident in the country today, if one reads between the lines of the news reports. I don't think all those "anti-whatever" reports are just smokescreens or vocal representations of changes in theoffing. There has been a great deal of it over the past 5 years that I have been here and its getting to be more and more every day.
I would like to believe that the vocalizations that have been placed on this Forum have had a positive effect, but don't really know.
Maybe someday??? SOON!!!

Texas Bill

 

[Rick Snyder]

It is apparent that throughout history religion has played a significant role in the lifestyles of numerous people around the world and consequently is a complex and sensitive issue. The role that it plays in the structure and operation of governments and the intense conflicts that have arisen from the clash between different belief systems have often led to political turmoil and bloodshed. This role that religion plays in governments was one of the reasons that the United Nations introduced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.

Of all the forms of government that have been applied around the world is would seem that a form of democracy proves to be the best of the lot. This is not to say that it is perfect but it has been proven to be a lot better then a lot of others. Having said that then one of the main principles that must be remembered about democracy are the ?rights? that must be applied to the people if the wish is for that democracy to operate correctly and completely. In the same token it requires the people to recognize these rights and to exercise them.

The DR has been trying for over 90 years to form a system of democracy and has made some inroads in that endeavor. There are a number of reasons they have failed to make the full transition and this brings us right back to ?rights? as they apply to a democracy. These ?rights? include the application, enforcement and their usage.

If the people have the right to choose the religions that they wish are they equal? If one particular religion is made the official religion and is afforded a vast amount of benefits over the others and that religion?s leaders have a dramatic impact on the operations of the central government, police and military does this insure the ?rights? of all?

The history of the DR as it applies to religion is very interesting. Trujillo was, as a dictator, almost intelligent in my opinion. He understood the importance religion played in his people and therefore signed the ?Concordato? in 1954 thereby making the church the official religion and an esteemed position within his hierarchy. As ?El jefe? he figured he had nothing to fear from that quarter. He further enhanced their position with the signing of the ?Vicariato Castrense?, and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael in 1958. It wasn?t till 1963, when President Juan Bosch introduced a new constitution to the Dominican people, that the church felt threatened. The 1963 constitution did away from an official religion, separated church and state and made null and void the ?Concordato?, ?Vicariato Castrense?, and the ?Patronato Nacional San Rafael?. President Juan Bosch seems to have been a very intelligent person and it is a shame that he was only in power for seven months before being overthrown. He seemed to have a very good idea as to what a democracy is and how it should operate but he also knew that the Dominican people were maybe not ready for it as indicated by a speech he gave on 10 December 1962 of which I?ll post an excerpt;

?Dominicans cannot even imagine what a democracy is; they do not realize, they cannot realize it, that in a democracy everyone is respected; that no one is forced or can be forced to do what one does not want to do or think in ways one does not want to; that real democracy is the only political system which truly guarantees the freedom of man: freedom to live without miseries, freedom to educate oneself, freedom to think how ever suits one best, freedom to practice the religion that one likes. A functioning democracy has never been seen here, and there are people who are so afraid of democracy that they want to kill it before it is born, as it is being done by the ones who are killing it by cheapening the current political struggle until they have placed it, as it is today, in a quagmire of insults, infamies, and lies.?

?And why do they want to kill democracy before it is born? Because they already know, they know it well, they are certain about it, that the democracy that will be born, on December 20 in the Dominican Republic will be a real democracy, a democracy that will not tolerate privileges, abuses, exploitation; and there are people who cannot live if their privileges, the right to abuse and the custom of exploiting the people are taken away.?

Rick

 

[RonS]

WOW! I can see why they conspired to overthrow Juan Bosch! History clearly shows that oppressed peoples will not remain oppressed for ever. The only question is whether they use peaceful or more forceful means to obtain the dignity and respect that are thier inalienable right. I pray the leaders of the elite DR political structure, the Cardinal, the military elite, and, to a lesser extent, the DR elected officials, will heed the lessons of that history, and provide a system of government that is in the best interest of all of the Dominican people.

 

[Rick Snyder]

RonS I am having such a difficult time in establishing if you are just trying to pull my chain or if you really aren't aware of the situation here. Regardless as to which category you fall in I wish to thank you for the humor that you supply me with. Please understand that I am not laughing at you but rather with you if you can envision that.

The reason for this is because, as you stated, "the elite DR political structure, the Cardinal, the military elite, and, to a lesser extent, the DR elected officials", are in fact the people that President Juan Bosch was referring to in the second paragraph of the excerpts that I supplied.

Have a nice day.

Rick

 

[RonS]

I'm too serious a character and have too much respect for you Rick to be pullin your chain. I just msread your post. I apologize for the error.

 

[asopao]

on Wikipedia, it doesn't show DR as a State having an official religion. It shows Costa Rica, Bolivia, Argentina as having the Catholic Church as the Oficial state religion. What you guys think of that? a mistake?

Nowadays, DR allows people to practice other non-catholic religions. But did Trujillo allowed this during his dictatorship?

 

[A.Hidalgo]

on Wikipedia, it doesn't show DR as a State having an official religion. It shows Costa Rica, Bolivia, Argentina as having the Catholic Church as the Oficial state religion. What you guys think of that? a mistake?

Nowadays, DR allows people to practice other non-catholic religions. But did Trujillo allowed this during his dictatorship?

Look in the Library of Congress web under country studies. In the DR page look in Religion topic. You will see there Roman Catholicism as the official religion because of the Concordant signed during Trujillo's time and still in the books, but as you said there is freedom of religion.

 

[Rick Snyder]

http://economics.uchicago.edu/download/state_religion_03-03.pdf

I direct your attention to Table 1b on page 44. The entire article in itself is interesting.

Rick

 

[Rick Snyder]

Asopao,

Sorry about being late getting back to your inquiry.

All my studies show that Trujillo didn?t really put much emphasis into religion other then as a means to further his aims as they applied to the DR. It was back in 1937 with his massacre of the Haitians that started his falling out, if you will, with the rest of the world. This isolation from other countries progressed through the years and I believe that it was this contempt for him that caused him to look to Rome for support. His signing of the Concordato in 1954 made the official religion Catholic which insured very close ties and support from that part of the world but along with it came a lot of benefits that would have to be offered to the church. My feeling is that he considered this a small price to pay for the support he would receive from both within and without the country. The problem as I see it is that the present day Dominicans are still paying these same benefits out for support that isn?t needed.

In 1957 Trujillo banned the Jehovah's Witnesses from the DR. I have failed to determine his reasoning for this other then the fact that they were always an enemy of the Catholic church and because of their beliefs they had been banned from such places as Canada and the US. They were in fact allowed back into the DR in 1960. Interesting to note that shortly after their being banned that Trujillo signed the Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael with the Catholic church which increased the benefits to that church and to which they still prosper today from the pockets of the Dominican people.

Rick

 

[asopao]

Asopao,

Sorry about being late getting back to your inquiry.

All my studies show that Trujillo didn?t really put much emphasis into religion other then as a means to further his aims as they applied to the DR. It was back in 1937 with his massacre of the Haitians that started his falling out, if you will, with the rest of the world. This isolation from other countries progressed through the years and I believe that it was this contempt for him that caused him to look to Rome for support. His signing of the Concordato in 1954 made the official religion Catholic which insured very close ties and support from that part of the world but along with it came a lot of benefits that would have to be offered to the church. My feeling is that he considered this a small price to pay for the support he would receive from both within and without the country. The problem as I see it is that the present day Dominicans are still paying these same benefits out for support that isn?t needed.

In 1957 Trujillo banned the Jehovah's Witnesses from the DR. I have failed to determine his reasoning for this other then the fact that they were always an enemy of the Catholic church and because of their beliefs they had been banned from such places as Canada and the US. They were in fact allowed back into the DR in 1960. Interesting to note that shortly after their being banned that Trujillo signed the Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael with the Catholic church which increased the benefits to that church and to which they still prosper today from the pockets of the Dominican people.

Rick

Thanks Rick.

So I guess Trujillo allowed other religions besides the Catholic one, unless they attack the Catholic Church.

How about the Samanese Afro-americans that Boyer brought over in 1825? They brought over their Protestanism, Trujillo had a problem with that?
He led the Jews to get in and settle Sosua, so freedom of religion was available during the dictatorship?

I've heard Trujillo supressed the Afro-Caribbean religions ( Vudoo, Santeria, etc), and that people had to do their ceremonies in hiding.

 

[Rick Snyder]

Part I

The catholic religion was late in establishing their dominance in the DR but through time they succeeded in that dominance. The majority of the population consider themselves as catholic and religion has played an important role in the politics here to include the Roman Catholic archbishop Fernando Arturo de Meri?o Ram?rez, a politically active priest, being the president from 1880 to 1882.
.
Cooperation between government officials and religious leaders has been a determining factor for the success of many administrations and Trujillo knew this. As the majority of the DR was of the catholic faith Trujillo knew that he could use the popular religion as a tool for political legitimization. He needed and he used the respect granted to religious leaders to discourage criticism of atrocities committed by his regime. Trujillo was very successful in gaining popular support for his dictatorship with the help of the Catholic Church. Ricardo Pittini was appointed Archbishop of Santo Domingo 11 Oct 1935 and aided Trujillo in his ascendancy, primarily through tacit approval, which was rewarded with concessions made for the Church in property deals among other things. On 27 October 1953 Archbishop Salvatore Siino was appointed Nunciature to the Dominican Republic and was the major player in getting Trujillo to sign the Concordato in 1954 and Siino reinforced this public legitimization by reportedly attending every formal state function.

For many years Trujillo was able to shift attention away from human rights abuses largely because of an acquiescent Church as did rulers like Hitler with his dealings with the same church in the 30?s and 40?s..

The Roman Catholic Church has historically played a muted role in the public sphere. It has supported governments that maintain stability and the status-quo. but with the continuous abuses being committed by Trujillo and his government both nationally and internationally it became difficult for the church to stay silent. The fragile nature of religious influence in the public sphere did not have the means to prevent the powerful middle class and elite sentiment from turning against Trujillo. It was about 1959 and 60 that the Church began to follow the lead of the middle class and became an active political opposition force for the first time in the history of the Dominican Republic. Once he realized he could not recapture the Church?s support, Trujillo launched an unprecedented war against Catholic clergy. On 16 June 1959 Archbishop Lino Zanini was appointed Apostolic Nuncio to the DR. He had been instrumental in bringing down Juan Peron?s repressive administration in Argentina. He was instructed to show Trujillo a cold shoulder. It was because of this that Trujillo started a wave of politically motivated arrests of religious leaders which led to the creation of a famous Church document, the ?Pastoral Letter?. This ?Pastoral Letter? was read in every Catholic church on Sunday January 31st, 1960. The letter declared the Church?s opposition to the oppressiveness of the regime, and called for the return of democratic, natural rights, as well as instructing clergy to add a final line to the state enforced prayer, "You are requested to pray for the health of Trujillo, the benefactor of the country, and for his brother, the president...and all those who are suffering in the prisons of the country and their afflicted families?. Trujillo initially tried to diminish the intent of the ?Pastoral Letter? by claiming that it was rooted in the Church?s anger about the regime?s recent recognition of Protestant faiths. He also tried to stress how much the state subsidized the Church, while threatening to take that money away. Bribes were offered and when that didn?t work he started threatening to imprison or exile clergy who made public statements against the state, particularly targeting the two main leaders Bishop Reilly and Bishop Panal. After Archbishop Zanini returned to Rome, Trujillo instituted an anti-clerical campaign denouncing the Catholic Church as communist and revolutionary.

Trujillo was also being bad-mouthed by leaders like President Romulo Betancourt of Venezuela due to Trujillo?s support to exiles to overthrow Betancourt. This led the Venezuelan government to take its case against Trujillo to the OAS which further angered Trujillo and it all came to a head in 1960 with Trujillo's complicity in an attempt to assassinate Betancourt.

It was because of the actions of the OAS that an embargo was placed against the DR of which the US took part. Needless to say that the actions of the night of 30 May 1961 changed everything in regards to the DR. Did the church have any role in the actions that took place? You tell me.

End of Part I

Rick

 

[Rick Snyder]

Part II

I have heard and read nothing about Trujillo trying to suppress the Afro-Caribbean religions as stated. The reason for this, in my opinion, being that (voodoo, santeria and the like) proved to be of no threat to the dominate religion in the DR nor any other religion as being a threat except the Jehovah's Witnesses and he banned them in 1957.

Talking about voodoo and its related forms of worship it must be noted that its acceptance in countries outside of Africa has always run into resistance and for that reason it took on many symbolic characteristics of Christianity which has given it a sort of Christian sanction if you will.

The DR having been nourished by Spanish heritage incorporated Christianity and the Catholic church where that religion became prevalent. Haiti on the other hand had a huge influx from Africa and they brought their religion with them. Because of the Roman Catholic church failing to have official relations with the independent nation until 1860 voodoo had already flourished and had mingled with an unguarded Christianity, and a combination of the two had taken hold as a widely held belief system and is the religion which still dominates that country today.

Looking at the history of Haiti you see that no other leader has had greater success manipulating public sentiment through the use of Voodoo than Dictator Francois "Papa Doc" Duvalier. Like Trujillo, Duvalier used the respect granted to religious leaders to discourage criticism of atrocities committed by his regime. Doctor Francois Duvalier had spent much of his free time as a rural doctor in Haiti studying the practices and power of Voodoo. The religion gives the ability for any individual to have personal relationships with gods and this gives a popular religious or political leader a great amount of personal leverage by claiming to have such a relationship. That is what ?Papa Doc? did. He also publicly legitimated voodoo and openly practiced it. Many believe that ?Papa Doc? was so successful in his manipulation of Voodoo because he believed only in its influence, not in the religion.

Here is an added footnote to Part I;

The Military Ordinariate of the Dominican Republic was first established on 23 January 1958 after the signing of the Vicariato Castrense and first held by Archbishop Ricardo Pittini (died in 1961), Octavio Antonio Cardinal Beras Rojas (appointed in 62 retired in 82), Nicol?s de Jes?s Cardinal L?pez Rodr?guez (appointed in 82 and still serving).

Rick

 

[Rick Snyder]

I started this thread for the purpose of informing those that may be interested in the past history of the DR with that which has transpired here. There have been some questions that have been asked and as nobody else answered then I felt it was my obligation as the OP to answer them. I will be the first to admit that I am no expert on the history of the DR and request you to bear that in mind. I only try to post that which has been published in books and articles and wish this thread to serve as a medium for those that don't wish to or don't have the time to research the information to be informed. If there is a discrepancy posted I would hope that a person in the know will point it out as I don't want to convey any false information.

Be it known that this thread was not created as an arena for anyone to vent their frustrations nor was a rope installed to see how high you could pi$$ up it.

If you wish to post in this thread then stay on topic which is "History of the DR"

You know who

 

[andrewc52002]

question

What happened with the Jews who landed in Sosua in WWII ? Did they move out, or their families are still in Sosua ? They must have a synagogue, I guess, this is the first thing they build. Are they in business in that area ?
Thank you.