The entry of Assad Shoman into the public life of British Honduras/Belize in the late 1960s caused a substantial change in how party politics and denominational religion had been interacting with each other in the self-governing colony.
When George Price took over the leadership of the People’s United Party (PUP) in 1956, this was a man who had previously been determined to become a Roman Catholic priest. Belizeans knew this, and Belize was still considered a black/Protestant country at the time. It was therefore a surprising development for the Latin/Catholic Mr. Price to take the reins of the colony’s most powerful political party.
Growing up in Belize in the late 1950s and early 1960’s, my sense was that almost all Roman Catholics here were PUP. It appeared to me that almost all Methodists were National Independence Party (NIP) supporters, and also most of the Anglicans.
Mr. Price’s embracing of Assad divided his hitherto monolithic Roman Catholic support. The Liberal Party, which emerged as if out of nowhere in early 1973, was Roman Catholic in leadership. It even included a former Jesuit seminarian who had become the editor of the Chamber of Commerce newspaper – THE REPORTER, that former Jesuit seminarian being Paul Rodriguez. The other devout Catholics in Liberal leadership were Harry Lawrence, Manuel Esquivel and Net Vasquez. A conservative business element of the Romans had decided that Shoman was a communist, and they were going to fight him. But, to fight Assad in 1973, you had to fight Mr. Price. That is exactly what the Liberal Party had decided, in fact had been established, to do.
In 1973, I was 25, 26 years old, but I was still a real rookie in Belizean politics. I was disdainful of the Liberals. Who were these guys and what were their street credentials? Had any of them ever been arrested, much less gone to jail? How could they have any credibility to match that of the UBAD movement I led? UBAD, after all, had taken over the streets of Belize City in the summer of 1972. The UBAD leaders had been the victims of many arrests, court trials, and some jail time.
In retrospect, it is clear that UBAD was completely vulnerable in one area: UBAD had no money. UBAD had existed for three years and had not been able to generate serious financial support. When the Liberals came, they came with money, and UBAD did a Humpty-Dumpty – we came tumbling down.
And when UBAD came tumbling down in 1973, the PUP almost did the same in 1974. If you are not old enough to remember the October 1974 general elections, then you cannot appreciate how incredible the results were. Before 1974, Mr. Price’s PUP absolutely ruled. The PUP had won 51 out of 54 seats in the three general elections before – 1961, 1965, and 1969. In October of 1974, facing a United Democratic Party which was so new it could not declare publicly who their Leader was, the PUP lost 6 out of 18 seats, and came within 17 votes of losing Collet, Pickstock, and Corozal North.
Less than three months later, the PUP lost the Belize City Council, for the first time ever, to the Opposition. The UDP won, six seats to three, and Paul Rodriguez, an avowed Roman Catholic, became the Mayor.
These thoughts occurred to me in the pre-dawn hours this Monday morning as the result of a column I had scanned in The Belize Times, which is the official Opposition PUP newspaper, the previous Friday afternoon. The anonymous columnist, who writes under the title of “Amazing Grace,” offered passionate arguments why the state should never be separated from the church, why the two must be one, and so on and so forth.
Belize, you know, is such a Christian place that they changed the title of Samuel Haynes’ poem when, set to music, it was chosen to be the national anthem of independent Belize in 1981. This anthem that we know as “Land of the Free” was actually titled “Land of the Gods” by the author. Haynes was dead when they changed “Gods” to “Free.” I am sure Haynes was a Christian. For him to refer to “Gods” was what writers call “poetic licence.” But Belize, you see, this wicked and evil place which is always flaunting its Christianity, could not bear for anyone to think the nation was not committed to monotheism. The title of the national anthem was changed to cater to the chronic hypocrisy which exists here.
Returning to “Amazing Grace,” I had thought that it is universally agreed that the specific stipulation of the Constitution of the United States, that the state should be separated from religion in the United States of America, was a progressive and democratic concept. You know that the first Europeans to settle in America, those who came over on the ship Mayflower in 1619, were fleeing religious persecution in England. You will understand why the American Founding Fathers separated church and state in 1776.
It may be that we have our own version of the Tea Party in the Opposition. They want to go back to the rule of God. Unfortunately for the people of “grace,” history indicates that theocracy has not worked well in the governing of human societies. This is because there is never a direct connection with the divinity. There have always had to be men who say they are representing God. In societies supposedly ruled by God, but actually by men using the name of God, the result has been ignorance, superstition, fanaticism, and persecution. Maybe if we had a direct link with the Almighty, it could work. The problem is, who has the link?
Power to the people. Power in the struggle.