Christianity in America is in big trouble. But whereas the Catholics and mainline Protestants have known about their problems for years, it is only being acknowledged now of the systemic problems that plague American and Latino “Evangelical” Christianity that may be worse than the other two.
According to the Pew Forum, there is a seemingly imperceptible fall in American Evangelicalism that crosses all racial backgrounds. In spite of the talk about the growth of the “Latino church” or that of other “immigrant” backgrounds, all of the “church plantings” that they do, and the constant talk about “revival”, the reality is that the children are not attending church unlike their parents because they do not believe and instead are adopting the secularism and popular views of the times:
PRRI Research Director Daniel Cox argued in a piece published last week by fivethirtyeight.com titled “Are White Evangelicals Sacrificing the Future in Search of the Past?” that the socially conservative views of many white evangelicals were causing the demise of their cause.
“For many young people, white evangelical Protestants in the 21st century appear to be advocating a mid-20th century approach to sex, relationships and marriage, even as American society resembles life during this period less and less,” wrote Cox.
“This may help explain why the religious profile of young adults today differs so dramatically from older Americans. Only 8 percent of young people identify as white evangelical Protestant, while 26 percent of senior citizens do.”
While Cox acknowledged that “it is difficult to draw a direct connection between the numerical decline of white evangelical Protestants and their increasing isolation on sexual morality,” he cited PRRI research noting that many leave evangelical churches over their negative views of homosexuality.
“… if white evangelical Protestants want to continue to be a home for younger Americans, they may have to reconsider what parts of Christianity are non-negotiable,” concluded Cox.
Tobin Grant, department chair of Political Science at Southern Illinois University, took issue with the claims of Cox through a series of posts on Twitter.
Grant’s major objections were twofold, in that he believed Cox’s article “conflates of race, ethnicity and religion” and “uses data for ideological argument rather than for analysis.”
“‘Are White Evangelicals Sacrificing The Future In Search Of The Past?’ That’s the title of the piece. The answer presented is that America has changed, evangelicals haven’t, so they’re getting old and will die out if they don’t adapt,” stated Grant.
“They can’t make that claim for mainline Protestants, but the data is the same. White Protestants, born-again or not, are getting older together. And white Catholics are right there with them. Why? Higher [socio-economic status leads to] less kids.”
In his series of tweets, Grant also argued that PRRI’s findings were colored by its own left-leaning ideological biases.
For example, PRRI founding CEO Robert P. Jones released a book in the summer of 2016 titled The End of White Christian America, with Jones arguing in an August 2016 interview that Donald Trump was going to lose the election because “Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign was the last campaign that could plausibly follow a ‘white Christian strategy’ to the White House.”
“But even if Trump somehow manages to pull off a win by bringing out unprecedented numbers of white Christian voters, the patterns in the electorate are clear,” stated Jones in 2016.
“Every four years, there is a shrinking pool of white Christian voters; if current trends continue, 2024 will be the first year white Christians will not make up a majority of voters nationwide.”
Regarding Grant’s Twitter postings, Ryan P. Burge, a political scientist at Eastern Illinois University, conducted some research and found that Grant was correct in noting the growing racial diversity of evangelicals and that whites in general were getting older.
One way for a religious group to get younger is to have more babies, Burge noted, and white evangelicals have a higher birth rate than white Catholics and white mainline Protestants. Burge added, however, that the evangelical portion of the population has not grown, despite having a higher than average birth rate. Burge suspects that is due to defectors, or a high number of children of evangelicals not becoming evangelical themselves.
Plus, while adding Hispanic and Asian evangelicals to the mix lowers the average age of evangelicals, Burge found the influence to be small because Hispanic and Asian evangelicals are older on average than their race group counterparts.
“… Hispanic and Asian evangelicals are not younger than their racial group in general. That means that while it is true that adding Asian and Hispanic evangelicals to whites would lower the mean age a bit, there is not a wave coming,” wrote Burge.
“Yes, there is some hope on the horizon for evangelicals, writ large. Evangelicals of color will make up a larger and larger percentage of the tradition going forward. There will likely still be an airtight relationship between the GOP and white evangelicals, but the importance of that relationship is going to shrink in the national electoral landscape. (source)
The decline of Christianity in the USA has been well documented for a long time. However, as the study notes, it is of particular importance that the Hispanics have experienced such a decline among the youth because as I alluded to earlier, it is the Hispanics who have been repeatedly presented as the “future” of American Evangelicalism.
This decline of the “Hispanic church” is also being seen repeated in Central and South America, and also with the same Evangelical Christianity brought to the former Spanish colonies primarily by American or American-backed Evangelical Protestant missionaries. While there is much talk about the problems facing the Catholic Church in these nations, which is a very real and serious issue, the same often-boasted claims about the rise of Evangelicalism are also looking to be as and if not more problematic, for just as younger people in America are abandoning Christianity for secularism, so are they doing the same in Latin America, just in larger numbers:
Returning to South America, Brazil, which is home to the largest Catholic population on earth (and also the largest Pentecostal community and second-largest Protestant population), remains majority Catholic at 54 per cent. But not for much longer. As a Brazil specialist, I had predicted that it would lose its Catholic majority by 2030. However, in light of the new data, I am moving that date forward to 2025. For Latin America overall, it’s quite likely that the region will no longer be majority Catholic by 2030.
Until the past decade or so the primary beneficiary of Catholic loss was Pentecostalism, as evidenced by Brazil now having a larger Pentecostal population than that of the US, where the dynamic branch of Charismatic Protestantism was born a century ago. After five decades of impressive growth, Pentecostalism has been able to claim some 70 per cent of all Latin American Protestants, and its influence and competition for religious market share has resulted in the Charismatic Renewal becoming the largest and most dynamic Catholic lay movement across the region and throughout the Global South. In both Brazil and Guatemala, where Pentecostalism has found especially fertile soil, more than 60 per cent of Catholics identify as Charismatic, according to Pew.
While Pentecostalism has continued to expand over the past decade, albeit it at a slower pace, the most significant new development on the Latin American religious landscape is the meteoric rise of the “religious nones”: those who don’t have any specific religious affiliation or identity. The 2014 Pew survey reported a Latin American population of 8 per cent nones. In just three years that figure has more than doubled to 17 per cent, according to Latinobarómetro.
In comparison, Pew reports the percentage of nones in the US at 22 per cent, which is slightly larger than the American Catholic population at 21 per cent. The Pope’s contrasting reception in Peru and Chile is partly due to the huge difference in the number of nones in each country. While Chile’s none population, at 38 per cent, is the second largest in Latin America, behind Uruguay’s, Peru’s ranks among the smallest (at 8 per cent), behind the Catholic bulwark of Paraguay. (source)
How interesting it is that the decline of American Evangelical Protestantism being replaced by secularism among the youth across all ethnicities in the USA is also taking place across Latin America.
It is also a known fact that the LGBT movement has become very powerful in the USA and is now attempting to spread to Central and South America. With the exceptions of lecherous events such as Carnival in Brazil that have been known about for a long time, homosexuality has been aggressively pushed throughout these nations, with much of the funding coming from the USA.
In January 2018, Shoebat.com reported on a story from LifeSiteNews in which they interviewed a Mexican Cardinal who gave a scathing criticism of the LGBT in which he said they can never be in good conscience because their behavior is worthy of death and brings about the justice of God. In that same interview, he also said that the homosexuality was being pushed by an “Anglo-Saxon elite”:
Cardinal Sandoval said that the impetus for initiatives to create homosexual “marriage” and impose gender ideology in Latin America were coming from foreign powers, principally from wealthy and powerful interests in the Anglo-Saxon countries, who are seeking to impose a “new order” and a global government on the world.
“They are forcing this on countries here in Latin America, most of all, by means of the economy,” said Sandoval. “Our countries are underdeveloped, they need help, they’re in debt, they need loans, and they can be denied to them if they don’t implement these policies. They can raise the interest rates on the debts they have, things like that.”
“So, that policy comes — so say many — from an Anglo-Saxon elite that is very dominant over international organizations, like the UN and others, and they have this plan to arrive at the ‘new order.’ And the ‘new order’ is one global government, one economy, one culture, one religion by which they can eliminate the Christian faith, or confuse it with the others.”
“[They claim that] it’s necessary to eliminate the family in which men are formed with conscience and character, who defend themselves. And it’s necessary to eliminate national independence, so that everyone is subject to an international authority. So you see it as a plan carried out by rich and powerful countries to impose themselves,” said Sandoval. (source, source)
The claims of Americans backing the LGBT also comes from other nations as well. Ramzan Kadyrov, the President of Chechnya, which was famously accused of being “anti-LGBT” and was attacked by Western media, recently stated that the stories told about Chechnya are lies made up to cause the downfall of Chechnya:
Interesting.
If one looks around the world, one sees there are different “spheres of influence” depending on where one is and exists in respect to the dominant power in the area. In areas where there are multiple dominant powers, there always is the potential for a war. Dominant powers do not absolutely correspond to the population size of a nation. While all dominant nations tend to have larger populations, they are usually not the largest, and sometimes comparatively smaller to their neighbors. However, it is the attitude of the people in these nations that differentiates between them versus the nations they influence.
Europe is a particularly interesting case because it is a collection of many dominant powers all living side-by-side. The three largest of these are the UK, Germany, and Russia. However, there have been many other dominant powers historically speaking such as Denmark, Poland-Lithuania, Spain, Portugal, France, Holland, Belgium, Sweden, and Finland. This is also one of the reasons why there has been such ongoing war in Europe for centuries, as they are all allies and rivals against each other that change with the scribble of a pen on a treaty depending on the political situation.
The Ottoman Empire/Turkey is another dominant power along with Persia, and due to the proximity of both with Russia, all three will often fight each other. China is attempting to become a dominant power but never has been able to, as she is usually overthrown from within or is invaded by a foreign power such as Japan, which is a major dominant power.
America is unique because she is really the only dominant power in the Western world. Canada may be part of the UK commonwealth and Mexico is a small but heavily populated nation to the south, yet the combined strength of both of these nations and possibly all of Latin America cannot equal that of the USA. Due to her isolation from other major powers, the USA’s geographically and militarily closest competitor is Russia. In terms of economics one might say that China, Germany, and Japan in that order are her greatest economic threats, but this must be viewed in light of the American consumerist economy, for without Americans to buy goods, especially the cheaply made Chinese products, China would not have a person to sell to in order to make a profit. Even Germany and Japan, for while they produce very high quality goods, they still sell to an American market and it is the Americans who work with them to see to their dominance in their respective geographic locations as part of “balancing power” throughout the world to the favor of the USA.
Historically speaking, religions go with the societies that people are a part of. When Spain conquered the Americas, she spread the Catholic Faith that has since endured for centuries. Portugal brought the Faith to Brazil and southwestern Africa as well as southern India, parts of Japan, and other colonies in east Asia such as Malacca and Macao. The French brought the Faith to Canada, West and Central Africa, and southeast Asia. Even while many times these nations were not always “good” Catholics and frequently engaged in all kinds of abuse, it does not speak to the Faith, for the foreign policy of a nation does not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the people or their failure to practice what they hold to be true.
The British are an interesting case because while they spread Anglicanism where they went and with it different forms of Protestant Christianity, the British never had the extensive and concentrated missionary efforts that the Catholic nations had. A case of study for this is British India, which for centuries was under the control of the UK but the missionary societies were all privately funded and long term did not make a terribly large impact on the nation. This contrasts with 16th century Portugal, who fought the Muslims in southern India and on the islands of the Indian Ocean, but brought the Faith and established a presence that in spite of four centuries of serious persecution and only to be displaced by the British still remains, particularly in the provinces of Goa and Kerala. In addition to the Protestantism from the UK, where the UK went so did Catholic missionaries follow from Ireland and in some cases England and Scotland, which established many of the Catholic presences that exist today, especially in sub-Saharan Africa.
The most successful religion that the British were able to spread, ironically, was that of nationalism through the promotion of mercantilism. This is not to speak of religion in the sense of a formal belief system, but rather a belief that by opening up trade with them, the locals would have the prospect of getting rich and be able to advance their interests. Most of the people who became rich were not the locals, but the British, and it only served to further future expansion which then worked with and was eventually eclipsed and absorbed by the USA, which was again a former British colony defined by both old-world Protestantism and nationalism.
Mercantilism is an economic policy, but it is often a vehicle to an inseparable from nationalism because it uses trade in order to build ones own power at the expense of ones neighbors, and if taken far enough to their complete destruction. The basic ideas of it are not per se bad either, and represent often times common sense financial strategies that anybody could use such as making sure never to go into debt but always be willing to be a creditor, to always buy local when possible and not have money leave one’s community or nation to another, and to incentivize local production while adding tariffs to anything one imports. However, if these ideas are applied in conjunction with a philosophy that believes in the absolute superiority of the self or group to the detrimental expense of other groups, then it simply becomes a vehicle for promoting nationalism leading to paganism because it brings about a worship of the self, his identity, the place where he is from and the things that he loves.
Many people get offended when it is said that America is not a Christian nation. It is pointed out that Christian symbolism is all over major American images of cultural or historical significance, and this is true. However, contrary to the claims of many an American “preachers,” “pastors,” or opportunistic businessmen such as Johnathan Cahn, America never was a Christian nation because never was some form of Christian doctrine adopted as the defining philosophy of the nation. There have been many Christian nations throughout history, beginning with Armenia and Ethiopia in the fourth century and going all throughout Europe and the world, but the USA is not, was not, and for the foreseeable future is not going to be one of them. To the contrary, “freedom of religion” is emphasized by the Bill of Rights in the Constitution, which is again another point that Americans of all religions LOVE to emphasize- that you can “believe what you want to believe” and nobody will say otherwise, and that there is no institutionalized faith by the government.
At the end of the 16th century and going into the 17th century, the Catholic Archbishop of Valencia, Spain, St. Juan de Ribera, wrote that one of the most pernicious errors was to promote freedom of religion since a society revolves around the religion upon which it is based because it provides the unifying principle for the rulers and the ruled. To take away the unifying religion or introduce multiple religions is to take away the main philosophy or to introduce multiple, competing philosophies with different ends and reasons into a society. The result of this is naturally either a chaos and conflict between the different groups, or the subordination of the groups to a “greater idea” that “all can agree upon” which by its agreement between both groups becomes recognized as the dominant philosophy over the others. In other words, a new religion is created to accommodate the conflict between the other religions.
This creation of a “new religion” to accommodate intrinsically different beliefs, while throughout history a source of major tension in Christianity and which resulted in the many councils and arguments of early Christian history, happens all the time in America and with such casualness as changing clothes. For every religious difference in America there is a church to accommodate it, and the majority of these people will all call themselves “Christians” even though they hold views that are openly heretical against each other.
For America, religion is a private matter because just as we have warned throughout our articles, in a society that builds its identity on some concept of nationalism as the first principle of unity, Christianity or any other religion is at best a secondary influence on the people. Even if a society is only “Christian” in name, the fact that Christian principles are emphasized first in a formal context established a structure of importance that even if ignored will persist unless it is formally removed, and until that point will influence the direction of a society.
People love to say now “AMERICA FIRST,” in the USA, but philosophically speaking, that is nothing new, for America has always viewed the promotion of herself first before the good of the people who constitute her. Since governments are made up of people and as such are a reflection of the people, it means that a large number of the people in America are of a philosophy that whether they realize it or not is Darwinian, for they embrace the promotion of their goals, aspirations, and power over those of and to the detriment of their neighbors for self-interest. Within America, this is represented by the “office politics” at work, the constant legal wrangling over technical terminology to use the law as a weapon to bludgeon one’s opponents instead of as a standard of guidance for social intercourse, or the “keeping up with the Joneses” attitude to “one-up” his neighbor. Outside of America, it represents the promotion of a “revolving door” between government, corporations, and the military. If Congress makes laws, the President passes and signs laws, and the courts interpret laws, then the corporations tell the government what they want from somebody else, the government demands the other person listen, and the military puts a gun in the other persons face to make him listen.
Owing to the fact that America’s closest actual enemies are at a great physical distance from her and the combined power of the Central and South American nations cannot equal that of the USA, she has had free influence over the Western hemisphere since her inception, but in particular after the Civil War. The Catholic Faith in America has been under attack from Protestant missionaries for centuries. The Protestant impulse to “save” people in Latin America, however, was as much driven by religious zeal as by ideas about American Nationalism, for as Archbishop Victor Manuel Sambria y Martinez noted:
Proselyting Protestant propaganda is an instrument of subjection and imperialism…. If the North American political protectorate is injurious to our Hispanic and Latin political tradition, the religious protectorate is doubly injurious (source)
As we have noted at Shoebat.com repeatedly, all forms of Protestantism are simply forms of nationalism which use Christianity as their delivery vehicle. Just as Peter Wiener pointed out in his book Luther: Hitler’s Spiritual Ancestor, Lutheranism was the predecessor to National Socialism because philosophically the two are the same except with the religious aspect removed or kept intact. This applies not just to Martin Luther, but to all of the Revolutionaries of the 16th century as well as to the many heretics and heresies that came before, for the goal is the reduction of the place of the Church (the second estate) to the government (the first estate), so that the Church becomes a mouthpiece of social policy instead of the unifying and separating force between the first estate and the people (the third estate).
When the Church becomes not promoted by, but subject to the government, it is reduced to an “echo chamber” of the status quo that places her on the path to irrelevancy, for it will be then only time until as the culture naturally changes with the people of society, future generations will simply cease to attend as there will be made no distinction between being a “good Christian” and holding fast to the ethos of the times. This is why it is possible that for example, in Denmark about 80% of people belong to the Lutheran Church but only 3% ever go to Church, because if there is no difference between being a “good Christian” and a “good Danish citizen,” why waste time going to a building each week with people one does not know or like if one does not have to?
Unlike America, the nations of Europe and other parts of the world have strong ethnic ties that go back centuries and which they draw on for their basis of nationalism. America compensates for this lack of a unified “heritage” ethnicity with mercantilism and political power- to be a “good Christian” in America is synonymous with promoting AMERICA FIRST policies abroad, and to question or doubt such policies is to both insult God as well as the flag because the two are one in the public mind. This is also a reason why secularism in America is so common and is found especially among dissenters of American imperialism, who are also often times former Christians, because as they have learned, if Christianity and Americanism are one, then to attack American imperialist ideas is also to attack Christianity.
The internationalist mentality of the Catholic Faith is another reason why she has never been able to take root in America. Surely there are many Catholics who have come to America and many more who have apostatized either to American Protestantism or secularism, and there is also a long history of institutionalized anti-Catholicism in the USA because the Catholic Faith is an inherent enemy to American imperialist ideas. She is not an enemy in that she is AGAINST the expansion of American political power, but that she is indifferent towards it. Whether America takes over the world or completely collapses into a divided land of warring states, both of which is unlikely to happen in an absolute sense, the Catholic Faith will always insist that she is the sure way of salvation to all men and the Church which Christ established on the rock of Peter and against which the gates of hell will not prevail.
If one takes a purely secular view of America, seeing the growth and power of the nation as proof of the greatness of the self and reason to justify dominance over others, then the Catholic Faith’s internationalism is an obstacle because of her capability to buffer the attempts of the government to take absolute power over the masses of humanity using any and all means possible. Since America lacks a common ethnicity around which to promote one religion that would serve a nationalist end, such as the Anglicanism of England, the Lutheranism of the Nordic countries, or the Calvinism of Switzerland and Scotland, then she makes all religions of “equal value” that will be tolerated and even promoted in society as long as they acknowledge the superiority of American economic and political power and any ideas attached to them. It is a kind of soft paganism, similar to that of the Romans but without- for now- the threat of death.
As it is well known, the Romans promoted the “freedom of religion” in their territories for the same reasons, as it allowed for them to exercise political control over their subjects. The condition, however, that they attached was that the people would have to or might need to make an offering to the Roman Emperor to show his loyalty to Rome. The early Christians refused to do this, because they said they must obey God before any Emperor, and for which many were thrown to the lions. Indeed, death for following the ways of Christ came before nationalism because while nations are good, they are all subject to Christ, the King of Kings, and a King who disobeys the Great King is not to be obeyed in so far as his disobedience persists.
The American equivalent of this, which is not yet at the level of antiquity, is the 501(c)3 form, which is the tax exemption status that is granted to all “religious groups,” following on the condition that the groups do not engage in “political activism.” This has been “selectively” enforced throughout the years by the government, and Churches do follow because owing to the property and income tax system in the USA, it would render the churches financially impoverished and unable to conduct their ministries. Because of this, the 501(c)3 has been a continual point of tension between religious groups and the government.
The rise of the LGBT is challenging the tax exempt status of the Churches. Using the “hate” laws in combination with judicial activism, the LGBT brags that their intention is to silence the voice of religious groups who criticize them by eventually being able to compel the courts to rule that any groups who engages in anti-LGBT speech is a “hate group” and will be made ineligible for tax exemption.
The group this would hit hardest would be the Catholic Church. It would have the same effect as the Protestant Revolution in England because owing to the large property holdings of the Church, it would be almost impossible to pay the taxes that the government would demand, forcing the Church either to conduct large-scale sell offs of Church properties or outright seizure. It would also destroy many of the smaller Protestant Churches who opposed, and to that effect the remaining churches would promote anti-Christian ideas such as homosexuality in order to stay “in business”, or they just might not criticize it. In other words, it would be the formal promotion of “Joel Osteen” and “Creflo Dollar” type “pastors”. They would likely see even more revenue come in because they already have large congregations owing to how they promote the “feel good” aspects of the status quo without actually challenging people on issues of the day that need to be addressed, such as homosexuality.
American religion is nothing more than nationalism suited to the social situation of American society. It naturally differs from European nationalism by necessity but is equally effective in arousing the passions of men and benefitting the society at the expense of her neighbors. Latin America has been the biggest “loser” in this way, as American missionaries have been used to promote American religion with the long term purpose of not actually saving the souls of the people, but ensuring the political survival of American hegemony in the Western Hemisphere.
One only needs to look at Latin America to see what work the “missionaries” have done in actually helping people. While certainly individuals and small towns have been helped, their presence has been far more harmful than helpful, destroying the unity of society and creating continual conflicts that have been used and exploited for personal gain at the loss of the many.
For example, is it an accident that at the time the USA destroyed the government of Guatemala for the benefit of the United Fruit Company, that American Protestant missionaries had an “unprecedented” amount of “missionary activity” in that nation?:
The late 1950s saw an unprecedented surge of the new missionary activity in Guatemala. Between 1954 and 1960, two new mission agences, the Church of the Four Square Gospel, and the Source of Light Mission, started programs in Guatemala. In addition, two groups that had made a hesitant entry into Guatemala during the Arbenz years increased their manpower and broadened their programs considerably during the second half of the decade.
…
These new groups, all of which were fundamentalist nondenominational “faith missions,” suffered from none of the stigma of association with the ousted regime that the established denominations endured during this period. The new faith missions differed greatly from the established Protestant churches in Guatemala. (source, pages 268-269)
This is just one example.
LEFT: Heretic John Eldredge. RIGHT: A Templar member named Broly Banderas. He is a part of a cult inspired by this heretic Eldredge
Or how about as we at Shoebat.com have reported, how major American Protestant Christian figures such as John Eldridge are promoting drug cartels who murder people, dismember their bodies, and sell the organs:
The cartel’s founder, Nazario Moreno, left his home state of Michoacán and went to the United States where he would leave the Catholic Faith and become “born again,” adhering to Hispanic evangelical preachers. Moreno became hugely influenced by the Evangelical teacher, John Eldridge, who operates from Colorado Springs, a hotbed for heresies, cultists, and American religious charismatics.
…
The cult and cartel leader, Moreno, emulated Eldredge. As Eldredge was a counselor, so Moreno became a counselor for drug addicts. Moreno’s wife hosted “self-improvement” seminars in Michoacán. Moreno became a preacher, starting his own church and erecting himself as the “Messiah,” (See Al Cimino, Drug Wars) using the Bible to create a facade of holiness, just as all of the protestant cults in America have done and still do. (source)
Bl. Pope Pius IX warned in 1849 about nationalism and Protestantism is his native Italy in the encylical Nostis et Nobiscum, where he said that the purpose behind governments promoting Protestantism is not about “freedom,” “liberty,” or other misnomers, but because it is about drawing man into a worship of the government promoting it so to make them a slave to their will:
You are aware indeed, that the goal of this most iniquitous plot is to drive people to overthrow the entire order of human affairs and to draw them over to the wicked theories of this Socialism and Communism, by confusing them with perverted teachings. But these enemies realize that they cannot hope for any agreement with the Catholic Church, which allows neither tampering with truths proposed by faith, nor adding any new human fictions to them. This is why they try to draw the Italian people over to Protestantism, which in their deceit they repeatedly declare to be only another form of the same true religion of Christ, thereby just as pleasing to God. Meanwhile they know full well that the chief principle of the Protestant tenets, i.e., that the holy scriptures are to be understood by the personal judgment of the individual, will greatly assist their impious cause. They are confident that they can first misuse the holy scriptures by wrong interpretation to spread their errors and claim God’s authority while doing it. Then they can cause men to call into doubt the common principles of justice and honor. (source)
Much of these revolutionary activities took place in Europe through the Freemason lodges and while to a lesser extent, still do today. America, however, surpasses Europe in all of this as America was not only founded to a large part by Freemasons and other darwinians, anticlericalists, and revolutionaries who seek power at all cost with respect to none, but due to her creation as a secular nation that acknowledges religions so long as they serve the desires of those in charge of the state and with no nearby enemies of serious concern, she has been able to wield that power to bludgeon all in her sphere of influence to give up the Faith through the promotion of Americanism through Protestant missionaries in the name of convincing the people to pursue, as Joel Osteen says in his sermons, “your best life now.”
Now religious practice can increase or decrease, but all heresies are venomous because they pervert faith to serve the ends of those who desire power. The end of all heresies is secularism and a return to paganism because eventually the religious practices serve as an impediment to the ideas taught, and once the practices are removed at that point, God can be removed and replaced with the image of man and his culture. The process of the embrace of heresy to apostasy can take centuries, but generally speaking does not last more than five centuries, and sometimes can be much faster. One only needs to look at Europe, for from over 1500 years of Christianity in some areas, in barely 500 years after the Revolution Christianity is dead in those same lands.
American “missionaries” will speak of the “holy spirit” that “swept” across Latin America beginning in the 1960s and brought about an ongoing process of millions of people embracing heresy. In some areas that trend has continued, but as noted earlier, it is slowing down as the younger people in these nations, many times the children and grandchildren of these “YO SOY CRISTIANO” converts are leaving these congregations and are not returning. However, these same people- secular and “evangelical” alike- all embrace and love “American” culture, and want to indulge in all things American. A quick look on Youtube, Instagram, or Facebook from people in or from these nations with such a background will confirm this.
American Protestants complain about the demise of the “Evangelical Church,” but the seeds for failure were inherent to it due to its nature. The “Latino Church” is in decline for the same reasons, except that the process has been expedited due to the technology of the times that enables people to reach the same conclusions that people of the past eventually realized, but much faster.
But this is not the end, for as we have noted, Islam historically fills vacuums in societies where Christianity once was but is no more. Given all of the Muslim immigration to the Western world, including the Latin American nations, the future might be more interesting that what one expects…