Cuba, Religion.

Looks a lot like Belgium...  

If you ask the Catholic church, 70% of Cubans are Catholic. If you ask the Communist Party, the appropriate policy of the government is the promotion of atheism, which is exactly what they have been doing since the revolution in 1959. So you have two important societal forces working at cross-purposes. Who's winning?

If the Communist Party is trying to eradicate religion in Cuba, by relative standards - compared to other Marxist-Leninist regimes - they are not trying very hard, and they are not succeeding all that much. It is true that the government of Cuba has an officially adopted policy of atheism. In the immediate wake of the Revolution they took steps to discourage religiosity.

And communist regimes have a lot of tools to discourage religiosity. In the Soviet Union you saw the closing and demolition of churches. In East Germany, the war took care of the demolition and churches simply were not rebuilt. That did not happen in Cuba. The old churches are still there, their interiors are still intact and the buildings continue to function as churches. That does not mean the party did not try to suppress them. Until 1991 you could not be a member of both the Communist Party and the Catholic church. That is an important choice. In a Leninist society the leading role (best opportunities) are reserved for party members. To choose the church was to forgo those opportunities.

So what changed in 1991? Well actually it was a bit before that. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to the loss of billions of dollars in economic support for Cuba. Hard times were on their way. From an economic standpoint Cubans would have to live with less. One of the government’s responses was to relax the constraints on religion -improving at least one aspect of life. In 1998, Pope John Paul II visited the island. For the first time, Christmas became an official holiday. The Castro's discovered ‘Liberation Theology’ was not that far removed from their own ideology. Cuba began to adopt a much more tolerant position.

In my neighborhood

I don't think you can say it has translated into a resurgence of Catholicism. The church I visited was in my neighborhood, which after five days of exploring I knew to be well integrated by both age and race. The church was notably not. It was considerably older and whiter than its surroundings. On this Sunday it was somewhat lightly attended (about half full). Not unusual for the churches I have seen elsewhere on my travels but not a sign of great health.

The other church buildings I visited were all more of the ‘tourist-visit’ variety.  They appeared well-maintained but reliant upon tourist CUC's (which they pursued relatively aggressively - verbal request for donation on exiting). Everyday churches I passed seem to be active, but closed except for services. This makes sense. Funding for the churches is restricted to the acceptance of donations from ‘approved sources’. No doubt this gives the regime the ability to control the church and its footprint in the community. No money - no staff, no staff - no services, small footprint - less competition with the party and its message.

I did see one interesting manifestation of this. As I entered the church on Sunday morning there was a line to stop at a table. I skipped it and sat down. As I sat, I watched. Not everyone stopped at the table. Those who did either put their name on a list (no idea what for) or made a donation to get a bulletin. No one got a bulletin without a donation, though it may just have been a token payment. Since I wanted a bulletin, I went back and got one. It was an interesting document. It had the order of service, of course, and some announcements - but what was interesting was that it was a national publication printed on the cheapest possible paper given only by extraordinary donation on request. Testament to a church with very limited resources.