I think I understand (maybe) what he might be getting at in a general sense. Most Pentecostals (or non-denominational, fundamentalist, evangelical types) that I know turned to that for harder core reasons… they needed something really strict to keep them in line, they needed the emotional high / energy that only something that extreme could provide, they needed to feel closer to God, and less constrained, than more traditional churches could provide. As such, once any of that wore off, anything not as intense, equalled a fail on the religious scale for the most part. And for myself when I was this self-described, that’s exactly how I slid into agnosticism. All that juxtaposed against waning belief was simply too much and I lost my increasingly tenuous hold on my faith. Now that I’ve returned, I’ve found something more true and honest (for me) in a more liberal outlook. Just one anecdotal observation.
Your accusing an unamed Professor of not knowing what he’s talking about based on a second hand paraphrase of a two sentence quote on an un-named radio show?
On the facts that I was given, and the additional fact that the statement was an alleged quote which has NO proof/citations to go with it, and which is incredible as well as incorrect, Yes! I do! Call me bold! Daring! Mad! Yes, Mad!
Holy Moses-Who peed in your cornflakes this morning???
A quote allegedly by an unnamed professor makes a doltish statement, I say he’s full of it, and you get your underwear in a bunch? WTF is with you??? If the professor is related to you, I apologize.
Please understand, on a message board, given X information, one cannot get to the heart of all truth. On an IMHO message board, it is quite alright, QUITE ALRIGHT, to make a statement expressing one’s opinion. I didn’t say that I had in my hand positive proof of the man’s communistic leanings, or being a fellow traveller. I did not swear in open court. I stated an opinion. It is the way message boards work. Life is hard.
But, again, Yes! I do!
If I had to take a stab at it, he’s implying that a religion based on an emotional, personal connection with God isn’t really religion…it doesn’t really have religious trappings, it has spurious theology, it don’t really have anything concrete to anchor it. Emotions are ephemeral and changeable. Catholics may not always feel emotionally connected to God, but there are tangible things that connect you to not only God, but the community of believers and keep you involved in the religion.
People often say they have a personal spirituality, but they are not religious…I think that’s what he’s driving at.
I’ve got a question for the OP. You state the professor said the following:
For the later, was he specifically saying the Hispanics were leaving the RC church, becoming Pentecosts and then leaving or were the two not directly connected in the people in general who leave Pentecostalism go to no religion, and that this may happen for the Hispanics as well?
As an ex-Mormon, I see this movement to no religion and atheism much higher in former LDS than in the population as a whole. This phenomenon is frequently discussed on ex-Mormon boards. After deciding that an extreme religion is false, I think it’s easier to conclude that there is no god and deciding you aren’t happy with one mainstream Protestant church and switching to another.
[hijack, sort of]You know this, but for others, the retention rate for Mormon converts is particularly bad in South America and the Philippines, with something like only 20 to 30% remaining after the first year. Worldwide, it’s about 30%, with higher rates in the US.
There hasn’t been any real growth in the number of active Mormons in many Central and South American countries despite the large number of baptisms. Other evangelical religions are experiencing a similar trend of lower real growth.[/hijack]
I don’t believe he was singling out Hispanics for this “X religion”-> Pentecostalism-> “no religion” trend that he thought he had noted.
If that is the case, then he’s probably right. It does fit the same trend as ex-Mormons.