Ramon Jrade State University of New York, Binghamton
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INQUIRIES INTO THE CRISTERO INSURRECTION AGAINST THE MEXICAN REVOLUTION* Ramon Jrade State University of New York, Binghamton Interest in the Cristero insurrection against the Mexican Revolu tion has continued unabated since the 1960s. Until now all the major published studies have viewed the rebellion as the climactic outcome of the long-standing conflict between church and state in Mexico. 1 By adopting this perspective, these works have deepened knowledge of church-state relations and sharply delineated the composition and de velopment of Catholic and revolutionary factions. At the same time, these studies have offered a wide range of interpretations of the Cristero movement, interpretations that are incompatible with one another. This article examines the published works on the church-state conflict and the Cristero insurrection. Its aim is to show that their com peting interpretations of the uprisings derive from shared assumptions that entail assigning responsibility for the violent struggle to one or more of the contending groups and, with one exception, imputing a religious motive to the rural rebels. The article also examines two re cently published studies that focus more narrowly on the Cristero stronghold of the Los Altos region of Jalisco. The final section proposes an alternative line of inquiry that relies on a comparative approach to set aside existing contradictions and to place the Cristero phenomenon in its proper context. A principal concern of the major studies has been to reconstruct a sequence of events that subsumes under the church-state conflict the outbreak and termination of the violent struggle in specific sections of the countryside. These works point to the renewal of the church-state confrontation following the overthrow of Victoriano Huerta's regime, and they trace the uprisings to President Plutarco Elias Calles's determi nation to implement provisions of the Constitution of 1917 that re stricted the internal functioning of the church. Enforcement of the *I wish to express my appreciation to LARR editor Gilbert W. Merkx for his comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this article. 53 Latin American Research Review "Calles Law," according to this chronological sequence, was scheduled for 31 July 1926. In order to bring about its repeal, the episcopacy sus pended religious services and an economic boycott was sponsored by the Liga Nacional Defensora de la Libertad Religiosa, a Catholic lay organization founded in 1925 by middle-class politicians who were ex cluded from the political arena. The strategy of passive resistance was overshadowed, however, by scattered rural uprisings centering in the central and western states. By the end of 1926, the League, which en countered no moral opposition from the episcopacy, set out to coordi nate the local groups in arms. The insurrection, which lasted for almost three years and mustered a contingent of approximately twenty-five thousand combatants, became known as the Cristero rebellion because of the rebel battle cry, "iViva Cristo Rey!" In August 1929, U.S. Ambas sador Dwight W. Morrow negotiated a settlement, a modus vivendi, between the episcopacy and the government, and the rural rebels laid down their arms. THE CONSPIRACY: CLERICAL-FEUDAL-IMPERIALIST OR REVOLUTIONARY MASONIC-PROTESTANT? Both Nicolas Larin (1968), a Soviet historian, and Antonio Rius Facius (1963, 1966), a Mexican businessman and journalist, have recon structed the sequence of events linking the church-state conflict to the rural violence in order to advance their ideological positions. Larin wanted to demonstrate the exploitativeness of the Catholic Church in Mexico, and Rius was interested in documenting the courageousness of the members of the Asociaci6n Cat6lica de la Juventud Mexicana, the ACJM. Although their points of departure differ, both men interpreted the insurrection as stemming from a national conspiracy that had for eign (specifically U.S.) support, and both regarded the leading con spiratorial faction (either the church or the state) as monolithic. But this similarity is only formal. Larin, who adopted a dogmatic Marxist posi tion, viewed the conflict as a clash of opposing socioeconomic forces; Rius, who adopted a dogmatic Catholic position, viewed the conflict as a spiritual struggle, one pertaining to faith. In La rebeli6n de los cristeros, Larin set out to expose the reaction ary role that the Catholic Church has played throughout the historical development of Mexico (1968, 12). He wanted to show specifically that the unstable bourgeois regime that had emerged from the inconclusive Revolution of 1910-17 succeeded in crushing the clerical-landowning insurrection of 1926-29, which was backed by United States monopo lies, through a short-lived alliance with workers and cultivators (p. 246). Larin thus postulated a clerical-feudal-imperialist conspiracy behind the 54 INQUIRIES INTO THE CRISTERO INSURRECTION Cristero uprisings, and he claimed that the insurrection drew support from a small group of hacienda workers who were deceived, bribed, or coerced by their employers into taking up arms against the revolution (p. 160). Rius's position lies at the opposite end of the ideological spec trum from that of Larin. In La juventad cat6lica y la revoluci6n mejicana (1963) and Mejico cristero (1966), Rius recounted the trajectory from 1910 to 1931 of the Catholic youth movement in Mexico that, under the im petus of Catholic Social Action, became organized after 1913 through the ACJM. He considered the Cristero rebellion to have been a defen sive response, propelled by the ACJM and the League (which the ACJM helped organize in 1925) against the anti-Catholic conspiracy instigated by the Mexican Revolution, with the support of Yankee Masonry and Protestantism (1966, 11). Rius did not elucidate the intricacies of the Revolutionary-Masonic-Protestant conspiracy, but he gave the impres sion that the ACJM almost single-handedly laid the foundations for "Mejico cristero." THE INTERNAL DIVISIONS WITHIN THE CATHOLIC AND REVOLUTIONARY FACTIONS Despite their contradictory doctrinaire positions, the studies by Larin and Rius have more in common with each other than they do with Alicia Olivera Sedano's Aspectos del conflicto religioso de 1926 a 1929 (1966). The latter constituted a pioneering effort to understand the church-state conflict and the outbreak of the Cristero rebellion by ex ploring the divisions that characterized the Catholic and revolutionary sides of the struggle. Derived from a 1963 master's thesis, this work mapped in sketchy form what were to become the major areas of schol arly concern. Perhaps because of its tentative nature, it avoided the interpretive simplifications of other published accounts. Olivera's main contribution lies in her specification of the oppos ing participants in the struggle. For her the confrontation between the revolutionary state and Mexican Catholicism involved two internally differentiated factions: the revolutionary faction, which by 1924 began to exhibit an increasing division between groups led by Alvaro Obregon and Plutarco Elias Calles, and the Catholic faction, which included the members of the episcopacy, the middle-class League directors, and the predominantly rural Cristero rebels. Subsequent works by Robert E. Quirk (1973), David C. Bailey (1974), and Jean A. Meyer (1973-74) would recognize the polarization within the revolutionary camp and, more specifically, the consequences of the alliance of the Calles regime with the laborites of CROM, the Confederaci6n Regional Obrera Mexi- 55 Latin American Research Review cana. But they would place one of the segments of Mexican Catholicism (without necessarily overlooking the other two) at the center of the struggle. The strength of Olivera's work lies precisely in its lack of inter pretive closure. The nearest she came to expressing a central thesis is when she asserted that the violent struggle was brought about by dis satisfied Catholics in areas marked by a high degree of religiosity (1966, 131). Provoked by what they regarded as an attack on their "essential liberties," these Catholics refused to accept the rigorous application of the fundamental law of the land and took up arms against the govern ment. But Olivera did not totally equate the motivational drive behind their actions with religious faith, and she speculated at one point that religious devotion may have been complemented by agrarian discon tent (1966, 258). Olivera concluded that the Cristeros may have also resorted to violence in protest against the defective implementation or the absence of the government-sponsored agrarian reform. The publication of Olivera's study coincided with the appearance of James W. Wilkie's seminal article, "The Meaning of the Cristero Reli gious War against the Mexican Revolution" (1966). Together these two researchers established the groundwork for a more differentiated per spective on the multifaceted relations between the revolutionary state and Mexican Catholicism. Moreover, both of them pioneered in utiliz ing a source of historical information that had remained untapped until then-the oral testimony of surviving participants in the struggle (see also Olivera 1970 and Wilkie and Monzon 1969). Nevertheless, Olivera's work is primarily recognized today not for contributing to the develop ment of "oral history" in Mexico but for having made first use of the substantial portion of League documents in the possession of Miguel Palomar y Vizcarra,