The Expansion of Protestantism
in Mexico: An Anthropological View
James W. Dow
Oakland University
Abstract
In the last three decades of the twentieth century, many people in Mexico and
Central America turned to Protestantism as a new religion. The greatest
increase has been in rural and Indians areas. This article shows that
Protestantism in these areas is not a reaction against the Catholic Church as
much as it is a reaction against traditional Indian cargo systems generating
political and economic power. These people are farmers who live in tight-knitted, closed communities that dominate their lives. It has been difficult for
scholars of religion to understand these cultures because the communities are
closed to outsiders and many of the people speak Indian languages.
Anthropologists have been more successful than historians at finding the data
and discovering why the people are converting.
827
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
Introduction
This article shows how Protestantism has grown recently in Mexico and how
its appeal to Indian people has been a major factor in its growth. It has
opposed the power generated by traditional cargo systems and has helped
Indian communities shift from an agricultural subsistence economy to an
economy based on labor migration and trade.
The point of view taken here is one of cultural materialism (Harris 1974,
1979; Rappaport 1967) which sees the underlying causes of religious change
in the material relationships that people have with their environment and
each other. Harris (1979) called this infrastructural determinism. This point of
view does not deny the idealist aspects of religion. Symbolism and emotional
commitment are ever present. It simply sees them as the artifacts of religious
change not its cause. We should ask why did Evangelical Protestantism grow
very rapidly in the last three decades of the twentieth century and not in the
early part of the century when it had also been present? Something other than
its emotional appeal must have stimulated its growth at this critical time. This
paper proposes that the cause of the growth was a change in the underlying
material circumstances of life.
The Growth of Evangelical Protestantism from 1970 to 2000
Although the recent growth of Protestantism in Mexico and Central America is
undeniable, there is still some difficulty in quantifying it. Many Protestant
churches make an effort to tabulate the numbers; however their tabulations
are subject to inflation because the Evangelical churches have a strong desire
to show that their proselytizing efforts have been successful. David Stoll
explains how some Evangelical advisers have made their estimates.
To arrive at their figures, church-growth experts first added up the
memberships reported by all the denominations in a country. Then they
multiplied that figure by another number, to account for unbaptized
children, converts attending services but not yet baptized, and so forth.
The multiplier was usually 2.5, 3, or 4, depending on “sociological factors,” whatever those were construed to be. The result was supposed to
be the total Evangelical community (Stoll 1990:125).
For example, Everett Wilson (1997), a historian, estimates that there were
835,000 Evangelical Protestants in Guatemala in 1993; whereas, Clifton
828
JAMES DOW
Holland1 (1997), an Evangelical social scientist, estimates that there were 2.8
million there in 1995. These figures are barely compatible, because the addition of two million Protestants in two years is difficult to imagine. In another
example, he estimates that there were 5.5 million Protestants in Mexico in
1995; whereas the Mexican national census (INEGI 1992:96-97) recorded only
3.4 million in 1990. These estimates imply an annual growth rate of 10%,
which is hard to imagine.
Fortunately for the social scientist, the advance of Protestantism in Mexico
has been objectively documented by the Mexican census. Quite unlike the U.S.
census, the Mexican census records the religion of everyone in the entire
country. The monitoring of ecclesiastical organizations has been stimulated
by the long standing struggle between the Catholic Church and the state. In
the census tabulations, the percentage of Protestants is measured by the percentage of persons five years of age or over who are declared to be Protestants
by the heads of the households. Unfortunately, some of the 1980 census data
on religion were not published because of computer problems, so nationwide comparisons could not be made with the 1980 data. However the other
census data reveal the growth pattern.
Table A-1 in the Appendix shows the number of Protestants in the various
Mexican states in 1970 and 1990 as tabulated by the Mexican national census
for those years, This table show that there was an impressive growth of
Protestantism in Mexico between 1970 and 1990. When the 2000 census data
became available it was apparent that things were somewhat different
between 1990 and 2000. The new census data are shown in Table A-2 in the
Appendix. The overall Protestant growth continued. A measure of the rate of
annual growth of Protestantism in each state during both periods, 1970 to
1990 and 1990 to 2000, was estimated with a steady exponential growth
model.2 The results are shown in the following Table 1. The rate of growth
slowed in the south and picked up in the north. The states with the largest
percentages of Protestants continued to be the southern states.
What Type of Protestantism is Growing in Mexico?
Most Protestantism in Mexico is transmitted by conversion, horizontally, from
person to person. Once a religious group establishes itself, the faith also can
move from generation to generation as well. However, practically all established
groups in Mexico retain the goal of spreading the faith by conversion. The continued evangelization activities of the older groups such as the Baptists and
829
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
TABLE 1: Percentage of Protestants and Annual Growth Rates
of Protestants in Mexican States
Percentage Protestants
1970
1990a
2000b
State
Code State Name
Annual Growth Rate
1970 to 1990
1990 to 2000
0 Mexico (nation)
2.2
4.9
7.3
7.08%
5.98%
1 Aguascalientes
0.5
1.0
2.7
7.89%
13.51%
2 Baja California
2.8
5.3
10.6
6.72%
11.04%
3 Baja California Sur
1.0
2.6
6.0
9.75%
12.15%
4 Campeche
6.6
13.5
17.9
7.73%
5.79%
5 Coahuila
2.7
6.2
8.6
7.49%
4.89%
6 Colima
0.5
1.9
4.3
10.24%
10.66%
7 Chiapas
5.8
16.3
21.9
9.23%
5.03%
8 Chihuahua
3.1
5.6
9.1
5.31%
7.28%
9 Distrito Federal
1.9
3.1
4.9
3.58%
5.35%
10 Durango
1.4
3.2
5.7
6.34%
6.92%
11 Guanajuato
0.4
1.0
2.0
8.36%
9.23%
12 Guerrero
1.5
4.1
6.4
8.05%
6.35%
13 Hidalgo
1.9
4.6
6.5
7.28%
5.46%
14 Jalisco
0.7
1.3
2.9
5.99%
10.08%
15 Edo. de México
1.7
3.5
5.4
8.99%
6.98%
16 Michoacán
0.8
1.7
2.9
6.45%
6.85%
17 Morelos
4.4
7.3
10.4
6.28%
6.15%
18 Nayarit
1.2
2.0
4.3
4.73%
9.63%
19 Nuevo Leon
3.4
5.9
8.2
6.30%
5.58%
20 Oaxaca
1.8
7.3
10.1
9.65%
4.78%
21 Puebla
2.1
4.3
5.8
6.56%
5.06%
22 Querétaro
0.4
1.4
2.8
11.38%
10.65%
23 Quintana Roo
9.5
12.2
15.7
10.52%
8.96%
24 San Luis Potosí
2.2
4.4
5.6
6.06%
4.08%
25 Sinaloa
1.4
2.4
4.9
6.04%
9.26%
26 Sonora
1.8
3.7
6.6
6.75%
8.07%
27 Tabasco
10.1
15.0
18.6
5.71%
4.82%
28 Tamaulipas
3.5
7.7
11.0
6.68%
5.78%
29 Tlaxcala
2.3
3.3
4.3
5.01%
5.29%
30 Veracruz
2.8
7.5
10.2
7.92%
4.43%
31 Yucatán
3.4
9.3
11.4
8.50%
4.24%
0.8
1.7
2.9
5.70%
6.29%
32 Zacatecas
aSource: INEGI 1992
830
bSource: INEGI 2002
JAMES DOW
Nazarenes, are sometimes not recognized. They were labeled as “historical” in
the 2000 census rather than Evangelical, although they still seek new converts.
The difference between the historical Evangelical Protestantisms and the more
modern Evangelical Protestantisms is more a matter of the style of proselytization rather than a lack of enthusiasm for making new converts. The Nazarenes
and the Baptists see themselves as saving souls rather than putting people in
contact with the Holy Sprit, as the modern Pentecostals do. In spite of these doctrinal and procedural differences, few Protestants in Mexico are associated with
churches that are not seeking the acquisition of new members by conversion.
The distinctions made in the 2000 census between “historical,” Evangelical, and
Pentecostal groups do not tell us much about how these groups are spreading.
For example the large number of historical Protestants in the states where Mayan
languages are spoken does not mean that Mayans are stable adherents to a traditional Protestant faith. It means that the Nazarenes are doing much of the conversion there, whereas in Oaxaca and the north, Pentecostals are at work.
The 2000 census divides Protestantism into two major groups (1)
Protestants and Evangelicals (Protestantes y Evangélicas) and (2) Bible Oriented
but not Evangelical (Bíblicas No Evangélicas) (INEGI 2003b:88-92). The percentage of people five and older in these two groups in 2000 were
Protestants and Evangelicals – 5.20%
Bible Oriented but not Evangelical – 2.07%
The first group, Protestants and Evangelicals, contains four subgroups as follows. The percentages indicate the percentage of each subgroup among all
the Protestants, including the Bible Oriented (INEGI 2003a, INEGI 2003b).
Historical, older Protestant religions (Históricas) – 9.74%
Pentecostal Protestants (Pentecostales y NeoPentecostales) – 22.29%
Religions with Pentecostal origins (Raíces Pentecostales) – 1.12%
Other Evangelical religions (Otras Evangélicas) – 38.40%
Table A-4 in the Appendix shows the denominations included in each subgroup. The second group, the Bible oriented and remaining 28.44% of the
Protestants, contains the Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the Seventh Day
Adventists. It is important to realize that most of these Protestant groups
maintain a tradition of conversion and that they seek to grow by conversion
as well as by passing on a family or a cultural tradition.
831
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
Why is Protestantism Spreading in Mexico?
In spite of the strong correlations between the expansion of Protestantism
and Indianness, there seem to be as many explanations for the growth of
Protestantism in Mexico and Central America as there are people who have
studied it. The explanations are rather diffuse, but can be divided into three
styles: (1) psychological explanations that attribute the change to the way
Protestantism resolves personal and family problems (e.g., Turner 1979,
Garma 1987, Bowen 1996, Chiappari 2001), (2) historical explanations that see
Protestantism as a process of confrontation with various powers, such as the
U.S., the state, or the Catholic Church (e.g., Bastian 1983; Martin 1990; Stoll
1990; Baldwin 1990; Cleary 1992; Aguilar et al. 1993; Gill 1998, 1999), and (3)
materialist explanations that see it as resulting from changes in the material
or economic situation (e.g., Smith 1977, Annis 1987). All of these styles of
explanation have some validity.
In the psychological camp, Garma proposes that modern Pentecostal
Protestantism appeals to Indian groups because it is closer to native spiritual
healing than Catholicism. He writes: “As I have shown in Garma (1987) and in
Garma (1998), many Indians have understood the similarity between
Pentecostal spiritual healing and traditional supernatural curing that invokes
the aid of divine elements or entities.” (Garma 2001). The Pentecostal ecstatic experience has parallels in native culture. Worship in traditional native religions often leads the participant, sometimes with the aid of hallucinogenic
drugs, to experience a normally unseen vital reality. Garma and others draw a
parallel between this and the Pentecostal experience.
My research with native healing among the Ñähñu3 calls this idea into
question as a full explanation for the appeal of Protestantism. The Ñähñu
people in the Sierra of Hidalgo perform rituals which they call costumbres or
“flower ceremonies” (Dow 1986). Organized by shamans, these rites are
encounters between supernaturals and humans. A costumbre begins with
offerings of flowers and food. Later, according to them, the supernaturals
arrive to partake of the food and to participate in the festivities. Within a costumbre, the faithful cross a frontier between the normal and the extra normal.
They sense the presence of the supernaturals. This ritual experience may
appear to be similar to speaking in unknown tongues; however there are significant differences. During the costumbres, Ñähñu shaman-priests and other
adepts called zid ni (“flower women”) eat a hallucinogenic plant Santa Rosa,
have visions, and speak while in a trance state; however their speech is very
intelligible. They speak about the lives of the people who are there. Their
e
832
JAMES DOW
speech is a type of counseling that treats tensions within the community.
Other people attending the ceremony seek the counsel of the trancers
The parallel between speaking in tongues and native visionary counseling is
obtuse. Both occur in religious ritual and during an altered state of consciousness. Both are symbolized as contact with superhuman beings. Both involve a
belief in the accessibility of the supernatural through ritual. However, one kind
of speech is ecstatic and unintelligible. The other is visionary and meaningful.
One is a purely personal experience. The other is a public counseling service.
One involves an overwhelming personal contact with the Holy Ghost, while the
other involves channeling visions to others. There are common features, and
there are differences. Among new religions, ecstatic experiences are common,
so it is difficult to explain the rise of a particular new religion, Pentecostal
Protestantism in Mexico, in terms of something that is almost universal in new
religions and does not resemble Indian religious practices.
Annis (1987) and Smith (1977) have suggested that Protestantism is stimulated by the stresses of economic change. Protestantism in Mexico seems to be
perfectly correlated with the rapid growth of a burgeoning capitalistic economy. But its is not coming in through the front door with the wealthy bourgeoisie, as Weber ([1904-1905]1958) predicted, but through the back door
with the poorest native people. It is not functioning as it did in Europe and
the United States in previous centuries, when, according to Weber, it offered
a moral justification for the accumulation of middle-class wealth during periods of economic change.
An obvious source of theorizing about the relationship of Protestantism to
economic change is the work of Max Weber ([1904-1905]1958). He was the first
modern social scientist to examine seriously the connection between
Protestantism and economic change. The relevance of his theories to Latin
America have been discussed by a number of scholars (Martin 1990, Cavalcanti
1995, Bowen 1996, Gooren 2002). An examination of Weber’s ideas is particularly important because Protestantism is spreading in Latin American among the
lower classes instead of among the middle classes, where Weber thought it
belonged, and, perhaps, some revision of his ideas is necessary.
The conditions that Weber looked at in Europe during the Protestant
Reformation are not duplicated in most areas of Latin America today. The rural
Indian peasants and the lower urban classes of Latin America are reacting to a
global capitalism that is unlike the early capitalism that Weber studied. Weber
in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1958[1904-1905]) explains
how Protestant theology provided a new morality for entrepreneurial behavior
833
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
in Europe after the Reformation. The enemy of capitalism then was a economic system in which people worked for their own comfort and for ideals often
given to them by the Catholic morals of the times. The idea of moneymaking as
an end in itself to which people were bound as a calling was not included in
these morals (Weber 1958[1904-1905]:63). Something was necessary to provide
the capitalist entrepreneur with a holy mandate that could overcome religious
strictures against wealth accumulation. Protestantism was against working just
to satisfy one’s desires (Weber 1958[1904-1905]:157). The Protestantism of that
time made work a holy calling. It proclaimed that wealth accumulated under a
capitalistic system of production was a sign of godly grace.
In another work, The Protestant Sects and the Spirit of Capitalism, Weber
(1946) looks at the way in which Protestantism in the United States supported
bourgeois capitalism. He sees this as a continuation of the asceticism of
European sects, which could portray economic success as a sign of grace. This
relationship to bourgeois capitalism solidified the dominant school of
Weberian thought in sociology, which came to define the link between capitalism and Protestantism as primarily psychological (Hamilton 1996). In this
psychological model, Protestantism is seen as an ethic that morally legitimizes
new wealth of the hardworking middle-class businessman. In this psychological model, entrepreneurial activity is affected primarily by one’s attitude
toward life and less by the political and legal apparatus in which one lives.
Weber was not a great admirer of peasants. Peasants are subsistence farmers,
and many live in tight-knitted communities which encapsulate their social life.
Weber was interested in urban, merchant, bureaucratic, and noble classes. He
left peasants out of his discussion of religion and economics. Weber’s view of
peasants was rather distant, romantic, and based primarily on historical sources.
He referred to historical, and even biblical, accounts of peasant religion and saw
peasants as tied to nature and concerned primarily with magical ritual:
The lot of peasants is so strongly tied to nature, so dependent on organic processes and natural events, and economically so little oriented to
rational systematization that in general the peasantry will become the
carrier of religion only when it is threatened by enslavement or proletarianization, either by domestic forces (financial, agrarian, or seignorial) or by some external political power. (Weber 1963:80)
In other words, he saw peasants as far removed from the dynamics of the
moral and religious messages of Protestantism. Weber’s relegation of the peas834
JAMES DOW
antry to the undynamic religious status of traditionalists interested only in magical earth rituals is out of line with what we now know about peasant societies.
The century that has passed since Weber wrote his treatises has produced
much more understanding of peasant cultures in Latin America (Wolf 1955,
1966; Redfield 1956; Foster 1967; Cancian 1972; Halperin and Dow 1977;
Ellis 1988). Peasants have participated in religious movements not recognized by Weber, such as the Taiping rebellion in China, the Cao Dai and Hoa
Hao movements in Viet Nam, and the Dukabours and Raskolniks in Russia.
Even during the Protestant Reformation there was a peasant revolt in Swabia,
Germany, that took its humanistic philosophy from Protestant religious
ideas. Weber’s attitude toward peasants is difficult to explain. He was simply
not interested in them and did not consider them capable of responding to
religious change. He put them outside of his theoretical thinking, although,
as evidence now indicates, their cultures do respond to religious messages in
a very dynamic way.
The history of the Reformation included many political upheavals, the disestablishment of the Pope, and the peasant revolt in 1525 in Swabia and the
Rhineland, all of which should be recognized by anyone looking at more modern appeals of Protestantism. There was a large humanistic element in the
Protestant reformation (Whitford 1999). For example, the peasants of Swabia
demanded the reexamination of their god-given rights (göttliche Recht). At
that time, many humanistic thinkers attacked the feudal order supported by
the Catholic Church, and they expressed their ideas in Protestant religious
terms. Yet, the modern Weberian point of view now focuses more on the role
that Protestantism plays in liberating individuals from guilt rather than on the
way that it liberates them from institutional control, although the two
processes go hand in hand.
The problems with Weber’s ideas as they relate to the spread of
Protestantism in Mexico and other parts of Latin America are: (1) They do not
recognize the ability of subsistence farmers (peasants) to undergo radical religious change and, (2) they lay too much emphasis on the psychology of the
individual and not enough emphasis on the political environment.
The Effect in Indian Areas
The appeal of Protestantism to native people is clearly seen in the census
data. Protestant growth has been more rapid in the Indian areas of Mexico.
Figure 1 shows the states with ten or more percent of Protestants in 2000.
835
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
These states had larger percentage of people speaking native Indian languages than the other states. They were located primarily in the southern,
more Indian, parts of Mexico. The correlation between percentage Indianness
and percentage Protestants in 1970 was +.473. In 1990 it was +.564. In in
2000 it was +.498. Percentage Indianness is measured here by the percentage
of persons five years of age or over who speak an Indian language. The rate
of growth tapered off somewhat in these states between 1990 and 2000. This
indicates that the appeal of Protestantism is still strong in the more Indian
states but that it is beginning to wane a bit. The rate of growth is beginning
to pick up in the non-Indian states of the north, but, with the exception of
Baja California, the percentages of Protestants there have yet to reach the percentages found in the Indian south.
Protestantism is often seen as opposing Catholicism. When it converts people in Mexico it is converting primarily people who think of themselves as
Catholic. However, what type of Catholicism is it opposing? There have been
many Catholicisms in Mexico. The Indian populations of Mexico were converted
by Spanish friars in the Colonial period. They developed a type of Catholicism
that was different from the Catholicism of the colonists (Ricard 1966). After the
Independence, the Spanish Catholic Church lost its hold on economic and political power. The 1857 constitution proclaimed that “The Congress cannot pass
laws establishing or prohibiting a religion.”4 Since 1857, the various federal governments have encouraged people to worship as they pleased and have prevented the Roman Catholic Church from exerting economic or political pressure
on people to follow Vatican orthodoxy. The constitutional reform of 1873 separated church and state and stopped congress from passing laws establishing or
forbidding religion (Gill 1999). The post-revolutionary Constitution of 1917 reaffirmed the principle of religious freedom and continued to allow the citizens of
Mexico to worship as they pleased. The property rights of religious groups, particularly the Roman Catholic Church, were limited up to 1992 when, finally,
Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution was amended to reinforce all the previous religious freedoms and to give religious groups permission to own property. The result of this history is that people in rural areas, especially ones with
limited contact with the modern Catholic Church, have been able to worship
within forms of “Catholicism” that are almost completely removed from papal
doctrine or the ideas of the secular clergy. Some authors have chosen to call this
Cristo-Paganism (Madsen 1967), catolicismo popular (Carrasco Pizana 1976), or
religión popular (Giménez 1978).
836
JAMES DOW
FIGURE 1: Mexican States with 10% or More Protestants in 2000
Arguments have been made that these traditional rural “Catholic” religions
are derived mostly from pre-Columbian beliefs (Van Zantwijk 1967) and, conversely, that they are derived from colonial missionary teachings (Carrasco
Pizana 1970, 1976). There is a bit of truth in both points of view. Folk
Catholicism has its historical origins in both the pre-Columbian and the
Colonial Periods, but it is clear that it is not modern post-Vatican-II
Catholicism. Most of these folk religions have achieved a comfortable accommodation with the Roman Catholic Church. One might call them “Catholic
affiliates” rather than Catholic in any modern sense. When looked at closely,
modern Catholic post Vatican-II doctrine is conspicuous in its absence, except
where the Church has made an effort to counter Protestantism with their own
version of Evangelical Christianity. In rural areas, modern Protestantism is
opposing a type of Catholicism that isn’t very Catholic at all. Protestantism is
converting more people from traditional folk Catholicism with non-Catholic
origins than it is from a modern post-Vatican-II Catholicism.
837
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
Although Folk Catholicism is, old Protestantism has grown rapidly only in
recent times. What seems to be happening in these rural areas is: (1) There is
a local need for religious change that manifests itself in a number of ways. (2)
A Protestant organization that is sensitive to such manifestations supplies
Bibles and other materials that allow a group of rebellious local religious
thinkers to organize themselves. (3) A local Protestant group grows. (4) The
Roman Catholic hierarchy perceives a loss of affiliation and may help to
organize a competing group to recapture lost affiliation, although it may also
stand on the sidelines. Thus, Protestantism is not opposing Catholicism as
much as it is catalyzing needed religious and social change. To understand
what drives the movement toward Protestantism we need to understand the
need for religious change at the social level in which it manifests itself.
The Nature of Cargo Systems
Folk-catholic rituals take place in the context of cargo systems. The word
cargo is a Spanish word meaning “official duty,” “charge,” or “obligation.”
The obligation is to perform rituals celebrating the relationship between the
the community and supernatural beings represented by images of Catholic
saints. These beings are actually local divinities although the images are
usually of historical Catholic saints. Cargo systems are found mostly in the
Indian areas of Mexico and Guatemala. Cargo systems are jointly economic,
political, and religious. They redistribute wealth, create political power, and
foster beliefs in the power of the deities (Carrasco 1963, Cancian 1965,
DeWalt 1975, Chance and Taylor 1985, Korsbaek 1996). The wealthier members of a community spend a great deal of their wealth sponsoring the public fiestas. In turn, they receive prestige and political influence and power.
In extreme cases, called civil-religious hierarchies (Carrasco 1963), the sponsors wield all political power within a community and constitute the government of the community.
The appeal of Protestantism to Indian people can be seen in the ethnographic data (Annis 1987, Bastian 1985, Dow and Sandstrom 2001, Garma 1987, Gross
2001, O’Connor 2001, Redfield 1950, Smith 1977) as well as in the statistics.
Unfortunately, there has been a tendency for cultural anthropologists studying
cargo systems to see their collapse as due to some sort of general modernizing
or secularizing trend (e.g., Cámara 1952). This is an anthropological version of a
general secularization theory that is now loosing favor among sociologists (Stark
and Finke 2000). Secularization theory leads to sweeping generalizations without
838
JAMES DOW
examining the motives and behavior of individuals. The collapse of a cargo system is factually a process of religious change at the local level not a process of
secularization at the general level. A cargo system does not disappear into a secular modernity. People abandon one belief for another one. In Mexico and
Central America this new belief has been Protestantism.
In 1922 William Cameron Townsend, the founder of the Wycliffe Bible
Translators and prodigious missionary to the Mesoamerican Indians blamed
much of the economic misery of the Guatemalan Indians on their cargo systems
(Stoll 1982). He expected Evangelical Protestantism to save the Indians from that
misery. He wanted to free them from these onerous economic obligations.
Evangelical missionaries, such as he, have never doubted that their main objective was to rid the Indians of their cargo systems. Robert Redfield’s (1950) second
study of Chan Kom, a Maya village in the Yucatan, clearly revealed the economic and political implications of Protestantism. Protestantism had fragmented the
village. Redfield recognized that the village remained centered around religion
in spite of the fact that modernizing influences were impacting it. Protestantism
set off “progress,” Redfield’s metaphor for modernization without secularization.
Secularization was urban and a spirituality was rural in his view (Redfield 1941).
The people of Chan-Kom modernized within a religious context in which
Protestantism played an important part.
Religion is a political issue in the state of Chiapas. Hundreds of indigenous
Protestant families have been expelled from Oxchuc, Mitontic, Ametenango
del Valle, and Chenalhó for manifesting political opposition to traditional
cargo-based authority (Collier 1994:139). When Jean Pierre Bastian (1985)
notes that Protestantism in Mexico and Central America is a means of offering
political resistance to “Catholic” systems, the systems to which he is referring,
for example Chamula in Chiapas, are not Catholic in any doctrinal sense. They
are actually a powerful civil-religious hierarchies, cargo systems. O’Connor
(1979:261) writes that Mayo Indians in Sonora became Protestants in order to
avoid taking on religious cargos in the traditional Folk Catholic fiesta system.
The Mayo Indians chose Pentecostal Protestantism in order to get rid of a
expensive cargo system.
When Protestant-Catholic conflict turns violent, the Catholics often accuse the
Protestants of avoiding their civic duties such as contributing labor to public
projects (tequio, faena). These labor taxes are imposed by the traditional political leaders who have received their authority from participation in a cargo system. Not only do the Protestants reject the supernatural beings, the saints of the
village, but, most of all, they reject the temporal authority of the servants of the
839
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
saints, the village elders, the cargo holders. These conflicts have reached serious
proportions in the Indian states of Chiapas and Oaxaca (Gross 2001).
Chiapas with its high Indian population has seen many conflicts between
Evangelical Protestants and traditional authorities supported by cargo systems.
Villa Rojas (1990) writes that thousands of Indians in Oxchuc converted to
Protestantism to escape abuse by the traditional cargo system authorities. In the
hamlets of Zinacantan, Indians converted to Evangelical Protestantism to oppose
the power of the municipal cargo system (Collier, Farias, Perez, and White
2000:35). There have been cases, such as that of the truckers in Zinacantan,
(Cancian 1992:199), in which some economic entrepreneurs successfully participated in a cargo system for a short time. However, this co-optation cannot continue under the pressures of the new market economy. People will not recognize cargo holders if they are new capitalists uncommitted to a redistributive
economy. The trucker power disintegrated in 1994 (Collier 1997:19). There has
been a recent retrenchment in Zinacantan in which people are recommitting
themselves to the traditional cargo rituals in opposition to Evangelical
Protestantism (Collier 1997).
In eastern central Mexico Nutini (2000) finds that people convert to
Evangelical Protestantism because of the high cost of Catholic rituals, especially
in the rural areas, which are more likely to have cargo systems. The cases that I
have studied in the eastern sierra to the north of his area provide dramatic evidence of the process. From 1967 to 1999, I was able to witness three villages go
through various states of Protestant reformation (Dow 2001). At any one time,
each village was in a different stage of transformation. During this period, one
village, Santa Monica, made the complete transition from governance by a civilreligious hierarchy to a town-meeting type of government. Half the villagers
became Protestants. By 2005 the the percentages of Protestants were stabilizing.
There was some, but fortunately not much, violence during the period of
Protestant expansion. I suspect that most villages make these transitions without
the extreme religious violence that has been seen in areas such as Oaxaca (Gross
2001) and Chiapas (Bastian 1985). Turner (1972:92) notes that Protestantism
opposed the traditional cargo system among the Highland Chontal.
The Impact of Market Economy
The recent rapid advance of Protestantism in Mexico and Central America
coincides with rapid economic development. Statistics show that modern
Protestantism has grown the most rapidly among Indian people. Since Indian
840
JAMES DOW
people have been undergoing drastic economic changes moving from a subsistence-oriented economy to a modern global market economy, it is reasonable to look for the material origins of the religious changes in these economic changes. Karl Polanyi (1975) defined the market economy as an
economy in which the social mechanisms necessary to maintain the flow
goods are dominated by market exchange. Buying and selling creates all
wealth in a market economy (Polanyi 1975). Everything necessary to maintain human beings is available on markets, and most people sell something,
primarily their labor, in a market to survive. Market economies are important
foundations of social life in Europe and the United States, and they have
spread to other parts of the world.
Market economies gave rise to the industrial revolution. Widespread markets made production for profit possible. Inputs could be bought, and products, sold on markets. This allowed the difference between the cost of production and the sale of the products to be returned to the entrepreneurial owner
of an industry. Owners of the means of production discovered that they could
reduce the cost of production and increase their profits by developing machine
technology, which eventually tapped the fossil fuel resources of the earth. With
these new energy sources industrial cultures were able to create much more
wealth per capita than paleotechnic peasant economies such as those found
today in the rural regions of Latin America and Asia. Products produced in the
industrial system now encapsulate larger acquisitions of energy than products
produced in any peasant economy. To acquire these new valuable products, a
peasant needs to participate in the market economy where his or her productivity measured in market value is greater. These products are not just things.
They are important life-enhancing benefits such as more sanitary housing, better medical services, and education. Rural people in Latin America enter the
market economy primarily by migrating to find better-paying jobs.
Today, the rural subsistence-oriented economies of Mexico and Central
America are being reinstitutionalized to integrate them into the energy-rich
market economies. Values, customs, and institutions are being brought into
line with a total commitment to markets as means of survival. The imposition
of a market economy on poor people can be brutal, yet the poor themselves
also benefit from a new economy. It gives them access to good things that they
cannot produce themselves. The massive migrations of peasant laborers from
Mexico to the United States shows that peasants have something to gain from
participating in the market economy. I suggest that Protestantism plays and
important a role in this process of economic reinstitutionalization by under841
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
mining the power of traditional authorities that support a redistributive economy rather than an wealth-generating capitalist economy. In Mexico and
Central America, Protestantism is prying loose economic and religious traditionalism and sending it downstream into the river of history.
Religion has an important relationship to the economic system. Religion
can establish the means by which a person can use wealth to gain political
power. If a religion says that gods want people to be generous, the most generous person will be most respected and most politically powerful in the community. If religion says that entrepreneurship is a holy calling, the person who
uses wealth most creatively to create a new business will be a political leader.
The political establishment of a society can rest on the moral injunctions of
religion. Political and economic change may require new gods toward which
new commitments can be made.
Protestantism produces political freedom without appearing overtly political. It keeps the traditional power holders from reproducing the redistributive system that gave them their power. It frees up the economy and allows
the investment of wealth in material things. Protestant movements always
have had sophisticated interactions with political powers. By the time
Methodism and Pentecostalism reached Latin America, they had developed a
political style that was non-militant and politically apolitical. In other words,
they had political impacts, but they avoided confrontation with the state. The
current need is to confront the political power generated by cargo systems in
Indian communities. Protestantism is serving this purpose. Protestantism in
these areas is not a reaction against the Catholic Church. It is a reaction
against cargo systems that have generated political and economic power
opposed to the expansion of an investment-oriented economy.
Conclusion
The growth of Protestantism in rural areas from 1970 to 1990 was more rapid
than in urban areas and correlated with the presence of peasant, subsistence oriented, Indian communities. There is much ethnographic evidence that
Protestantism opposed cargo systems. At the time of the Reformation,
Protestantism opposed the Catholic Church in Europe, but today in Mexico and
Central America, the Catholic Church is no longer a powerful political force. In
Mexico, a doorway to alternative religions was opened by the anti-Catholic attitudes of the Reforma in the 19th century and the Revolution in the 20th. In the
last three decades of the twentieth century, Protestantism grew rapidly in Indian
842
JAMES DOW
areas where local political power developed primarily from traditional cargo systems. These systems were Catholic only in the sense that they included images of
Catholic saints. Firm in its conviction that the Bible provided the true source of
moral wisdom, Protestantism opposed the political power of cargo holders and
freed up economic exchange. The commitment to a new god strengthened the
trust that people had in new leaders and in a new economy. Protestantism
changed the economic rules of villages. It released the ideological hold of a traditional elite. It allowed the institutionalization of economic behaviors compatible with the market economy, and it is still doing this today.
In rural Indian areas of Mexico and Central America, the institutionalization
of the market economy is not yet complete. In agrarian peasant economies,
ideologically supported cargo systems restrict economic freedom. When
Protestantism takes hold in a peasant community, people can use the money
they gain from migrant labor to improve their standard of living, and everyone
can accumulate some wealth to make their lives more secure.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to thank Candice Alcorta, Henri Gooren, and three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.
ENDNOTES
1
Clifton Holland is Professor of Missiology for the IMDELA/School of World Mission in San
Jose, Costa Rica and Director of Church Growth Studies Program for IDEA Ministries. He
headed a number of projects to gather information on church growth in Latin America. His
estimates are published for the benefit of Evangelical missionaries.
2
The rate of exponential growth from X1 to X 2 over n years is calculated as the constant
growth rate gr that produces the change.
1
gr (n) = -1 +
( )( )
p2
p1
n
An exponential model is appropriate for a cultural change process in which the majority of
the population has yet to change. Most cultural change processes follow an S-curve pattern
(Rogers 1995). The lower end of the S-curve is a variation of an exponential curve.
3
The Ñähñu are also known as the Otomí.
4
My translation of “El Estado y la Iglesia son independientes entre si. El Congreso no puede
dictar leyes estableciendo o prohibiendo religión.”
843
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
APPENDIX TABLE A-1
Protestants in Mexico in 1970 and 1990
1970
Population
5 or overa
Protestant
Populationb
1990
Population
5 or overc
Protestant
Populationc
Aguascalientes
278,196
1,358
619,401
6,198
Baja California
725,015
20,406
1,425,801
74,873
Baja California Sur
106,071
1,106
275,985
7,104
Campeche
210,511
13,914
456,452
61,725
Coahuila
928,930
25,255
1,730,829
107,149
S TAT E
Colima
200,016
1,021
371,876
7,175
Chiapas
1,301,140
75,378
2,710,283
440,520
Chihuahua
1,339,479
41,811
2,118,557
117,593
Distrito Federal
5,820,042
111,957
7,373,239
226,350
Durango
770,043
10,805
1,169,332
38,935
Guanajuato
1,868,869
6,797
3,396,283
33,845
Guerrero
1,322,091
19,471
2,228,077
91,637
991,009
18,544
1,628,542
75,661
Hidalgo
Jalisco
2,725,357
19,082
4,584,728
61,066
Edo. de Mexico
3,127,508
54,193
8,563,538
303,180
Michoacán
1,923,182
14,982
3,037,340
52,291
514,052
22,685
1,048,065
76,624
Morelos
Nayarit
450,015
5,516
711,691
13,897
Nuevo Leon
1,407,536
47,714
2,750,624
161,858
Oaxaca
1,688,160
30,177
2,602,479
190,459
Puebla
2,093,224
43,030
3,565,924
153,439
Querétaro
397,402
1,447
898,199
12,487
71,502
6,822
412,868
50,428
San Luis Potosí
1,058,668
23,431
1,723,605
75,967
Sinaloa
1,045,167
14,148
1,923,515
45,681
Sonora
918,682
16,188
1,596,063
59,788
Tabasco
628,721
63,732
1,288,222
193,493
Quintana Roo
Tamaulipas
1,212,412
41,911
1,974,755
152,644
Tlaxcala
349,361
8,160
662,426
21,689
Veracruz
3,171,856
88,031
5,424,172
404,607
Yucatán
643,432
21,610
1,188,433
110,377
Zacatecas
Mexico (nation)
aSource: Mexico (1972) Cuadro 4
844
770,079
6,197
1,100,898
18,767
40,057,728
876,879
70,562,202
3,447,507
bSource: Mexico (1972) Cuadro 11
cSource: INEGI (1992) Cuadro 10
JAMES DOW
APPENDIX TABLE A-2
Mexican 2000 Census Data
S TAT E
Mexico (nation)
Protestantsa
Populationa Evangelicalsa
5 and Oldera and Biblicalsa
Populationb
Workingb Earning Min .
Populationb Wage or Lessb
84,794,454
6,160,069
33,730,210
6,973,705
Aguascalientes
821,404
22,011
331,083
37,060
Baja California
2,010,869
213,333
906,369
37,957
374,215
22,354
169,014
15,318
606,699
108,401
243,323
86,442
2,018,053
172,728
822,686
61,424
Baja California Sur
Campeche
Coahuila
Colima
457,777
19,759
199,692
32,254
Chiapas
3,288,963
719,470
1,206,621
670,559
Chihuahua
2,621,057
237,504
1,117,747
94,120
Distrito Federal
7,738,307
381,285
3,582,781
379,641
Durango
1,264,011
72,140
443,611
77,552
Guanajuato
4,049,950
81,837
1,460,194
239,586
Guerrero
2,646,132
169,537
888,078
318,928
Hidalgo
1,973,968
128,723
728,726
245,101
5,541,480
159,544
2,362,396
325,109
11,097,516
595,381
4,462,361
613,137
Jalisco
Edo. de México
Michoacán
3,479,357
101,454
1,226,606
315,672
Morelos
1,334,892
139,118
550,831
106,650
Nayarit
815,263
34,848
318,837
77,713
Nuevo Leon
3,392,025
278,518
1,477,687
88,028
Oaxaca
3,019,103
303,805
1,066,558
511,515
Puebla
4,337,362
251,356
1,665,521
549,286
Querétaro
1,224,088
34,342
479,980
59,765
755,442
118,938
348,750
55,803
San Luis Potosí
2,010,539
113,272
715,731
207,857
Sinaloa
2,241,298
110,709
880,295
103,654
Sonora
1,956,617
129,924
810,424
72,941
Tabasco
1,664,366
309,794
600,310
225,472
Tamaulipas
Quintana Roo
2,427,309
267,724
1,013,220
123,269
Tlaxcala
846,877
36,303
328,585
89,974
Veracruz
6,118,108
624,166
2,350,117
854,739
Yucatán
1,472,683
167,259
618,448
203,067
Zacatecas
1,188,724
34,532
353,628
94,112
aSource: File 00re01.pdf (INEGI 2004)
bSource: File 00em11.pdf (INEGI 2004)
845
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
APPENDIX TABLE A-3
Persons Five and Over Speaking an Indian Language
Y
S TAT E
Mexico (nation)
1970 a
E
A
1990b
R
2000b
3,111,415
5,282,347
6,044,547
Aguascalientes
283
599
1,244
Baja California
2,096
18,177
37,685
119
2,749
5,353
57,031
86,676
93,765
581
3,821
3,032
Baja California Sur
Campeche
Coahuila
Colima
Chiapas
406
1,481
2,932
287,836
716,012
809,592
Chihuahua
26,309
61,504
84,086
Distrito Federal
68,660
111,552
141,710
Durango
4,848
18,125
24,934
Guanajuato
2,272
8,966
10,689
Guerrero
160,182
298,532
367,110
Hidalgo
201,368
317,838
339,866
Jalisco
5,559
24,914
39,259
200,729
312,595
361,972
Michoacán
62,851
105,578
121,849
Morelos
16,354
19,940
30,896
Nayarit
9,476
24,157
37,206
787
4,852
15,446
Oaxaca
677,347
1,018,106
1,120,312
Puebla
346,140
503,277
565,509
Edo. de México
Nuevo Leon
Querétaro
11,660
20,392
25,269
Quintana Roo
38,529
133,081
173,592
SanLuis Potosí
113,898
204,328
235,253
11,979
31,390
49,744
Sinaloa
Sonora
29,116
47,913
55,694
Tabasco
34,188
47,967
62,027
Tamaulipas
2,346
8,509
17,118
19,886
22,783
26,662
Veracruz
360,309
580,386
633,372
Yucatán
357,270
525,264
549,532
1,000
883
1,837
Tlaxcala
Zacatecas
aSource: Cuadro 17 (Mexico 1972)
846
bSource: Cuadro 2.27 (INEGI 2004)
JAMES DOW
APPENDIX TABLE A-4
Protestants and Evangelicals in the 2000 Census (INEGI 2003b)
Historical, older Protestant religions (Historicas) – 9.74%
Anabautista, Anglicana, Bautista, Calvinista, Congregacional, Cuáquera, Del
Nazareno, Discípulos de Cristo, Ejercito de Salvación, Episcopaliana, Luterana,
Menonita, Metodista
Pentecostal Protestants (Pentecostales y Neopentecostales) – 22.29%
Amistad Cristiana, Asambleas de Dios, Casa de Oración, Centro de Fe, Fuerza
Ágape, Iglesia Alfa y Omega, Iglesia Agua Viva, Iglesia Apostólica, Iglesia de Dios,
Iglesia de Dios de la Profecía, Iglesia Del Evangelio Completo, Iglesia Evangélica
de Hermanos, Iglesia Aposento Alto, Indígena Pentecostés, La Voz de la Piedra
Angular, Misionera Pentecostal, Sociedades Cristianas, Sociedades Evangélicas,
Evangélica Neotestamentaria, Pentecostal, Sociedades Pentecostales, Pentecostal
Independiente, Sociedades Cristianas Evangélicas, Sociedades Cristianas
Pentecostales, Sociedades Evangelicas Pentecostales, Sociedades Cristianas
Evangélicas Pentecostales, Soldados de la Cruz de Cristo, Tabernaculos,
Tradicionalistas, Otras Sociedades Evangélicas Pentecostales, NeoPentecostal,
Pentecostal insuficientemente especificada
Religions with Pentecostal origins (Raíces Pentecostales) – 1.12%
Iglesia del Dios Vivo, Columna y Apoyo de la Verdad, La Luz del Mundo
Other Evangelical religions (Otras Evangelicas) – 38.40%
Cristiana, Evangélica, Alianza Cristiana y Misionera, Apostolical No Pentecostal,
Asociaciones Evangélicas, Bíblica, Confraternidades, Iglesia de Cristo, Iglesia de
Gracia Paz y Misericordia, Iglesia de La Biblia Abierta, Iglesia de Santidad, Iglesia
Evangélica Salem, Iglesia Mexicana “La Mujer Hermosa Vestida de Sol,” Mesiánicas,
Ministerios Evangélicos, Misioneros Evangélicos, Movimientos Evangélicos, Nueva
Jerusalem, Visión Mundial, Evangélica insuficientemente especificada
847
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
REFERENCES
Aguilar, Edwin Eloy, José Miguel Sandoval, Timothy J. Steigenga, and Kenneth M. Coleman.
1993. “Protestantism in El Salvador: Conventional Wisdom Versus Survey Evidence.”
Latin American Research Review 28(2):119-140.
Annis, Sheldon. 1987. God and Production in a Guatemalan Town. Austin: University of Texas
Press.
Baldwin, Deborah. 1990. Protestants and the Mexican Revolution: Missionaries, Ministers,
and Social Change. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Bastian, Jean Pierre. 1983. Protestantismo y Sociedad en México. México, Ediciones Cupsa.
__________. 1985. “Dissidence religieuse dans le milieu rural mexicain.” Social Compass
32(2-3):245-260.
Bowen, Kurt. 1996. Evangelism and Apostasy, The Evolution and Impact of Evangelicals in
Modern Mexico. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Cámara, Fernando. 1952. “Religious and Political Organization” In Sol Tax (ed.), Heritage of
Conquest. Glencoe, Illinois.: The Free Press.
Cancian, Frank. 1965. Economics and Prestige in a Maya Community: The Religious Cargo
System in Zinacantan. Stanford, Stanford University Press.
__________. 1972. Change and Uncertainty in a Peasant Economy: The Maya Corn Farmers
of Zinacantan. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
__________. 1992. The Decline of Community in Zinacantan: Economy, Public Life, and
Social Stratification, 1960-1987. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Carrasco Pizana, Pedro. 1963. “The Civil-Religious Hierarchy in Mesoamerican Communities:
Pre-Hispanic Background and Colonial Development.” American Anthropologist 63:483-497
__________. 1970. “Tarascan Folk Religion: Christian or Pagan?” In Walter Goldschmidt and
Harry Hoijer (eds.), The Social Anthropology of Latin America, Essays in Honor of Ralph
Leon Beals. Los Angeles: Latin American Center, University of California.
__________. 1976. El Catolicismo Popular de los Tarascos. México, D.F.: SEP-Setentas.
Cavalcanti, H. B. 1995. “Unrealistic Expectations: Contesting the Usefulness of Weber’s
Protestant Ethic for the Study of Latin American Protestantism.” Journal of Church and
State 37:289-308.
Chance, John K. and William B. Taylor. 1985. “Cofradias and Cargos: An Historical Perspective
on the Mesoamerican Civil-religious Hierarchy.” American Ethnologist 12(1):1-26.
Chiappari, Christopher L. 2001. “Conceptual Dichotomies and Cultural Realities: Gender,
Work, and Religion in Highland Guatemala.” Anthropology of Work Review 22(3):14-21.
Cleary, Edward L. 1992. “Evangelicals and Competition in Guatemala.” In Edward L. Cleary
and Hannah Stewart-Gambino (eds.), Conflict and Competition: The Latin American
Church in a Changing Environment. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Collier, George A. 1997. “Reaction and Retrenchment in the Highlands of Chiapas in the
Wake of the Zapatista Rebellion.” Journal of Latin American Anthropology 3(1): 14-31.
Collier, George A. and Elizabeth Lowery Quaratiello. 1994. Basta! land and the Zapatista
Rebellion in Chiapas. Oakland, CA: Food First.
Collier, George A., Pablo J. Farias Campero, John E. Perez, and Victor P. White. 2000. “SocioEconomic Change and Emotional Illness among the Highland Maya of Chiapas Mexico.”
Ethos 28(1):20-53.
DeWalt, Billie R. 1975. “Changes in the Cargo Systems of Mesoamerica.” Anthropological
Quarterly 48:87-105.
848
JAMES DOW
Dow, James W. 1977. “Religion in the Organization of a Mexican Peasant Economy.” In
Rhoda Halperin and James W. Dow (eds.), Peasant Livelihood, 215-226. New York: St.
Martin’s Press.
__________. 1986. The Shaman’s Touch: Otomí Indian Symbolic Healing. Salt Lake City, UT:
University of Utah Press.
__________. 2001. “Demographic Factors Affecting Protestant Conversions in Three
Mexican Villages.” In James W. Dow and Alan R. Sandstrom (eds.), Holy Saints and Fiery
Preachers: The Anthropology of Protestantism in Mexico and Central America, 73-86.
Westport, CT: Praeger.
Dow, James W. and Alan R. Sandstrom. 2001. Holy Saints and Fiery Preachers: The
Anthropology of Protestantism in Mexico and Central America. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Ellis, Frank. 1988. Peasant Economics: Farm Households and Agrarian Development.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Foster, George M. 1967. Tzintzuntzan: Mexican Peasants in a Changing World. Boston: Little,
Brown.
Garma, Carlos. 1987. Protestantismo en una comunidad Totonaca de Puebla. México, D.F.:
Instituto Nacional Indigenista.
__________. 1998. “The Socialization of the Gifts of Tongues and Healing in Mexican
Pentecostalism.” Journal of Contemporary Religion 13(3):353-361.
__________. 2001. “Religious Affiliation in Indian Mexico.” In James W. Dow and Alan R.
Sandstrom (eds.), Holy Saints and Fiery Preachers: The Anthropology of Protestantism in
Mexico and Central America, 57-72. Westport CT: Praeger.
Gill, Anthony. 1998. Rendering Unto Caesar: The Catholic Church and State in Latin America.
University of Chicago Press.
__________. 1999. “The Politics of Regulating Religion in Mexico: The 1992 Constitutional
Reforms in Historical Context.” Journal of Church and State 41:761-794.
Giménez, Gilberto. 1978. Cultura y religión en el Anahuac. México, Centro de Estudios
Ecuménicos.
Gooren, Henri. 2002. “Catholic and Non-Catholic Theologies of Liberation: Poverty, SelfImprovement, and Ethics Among Small-Scale Entrepreneurs in Guatemala City.” Journal
for the Scientific Study of Religion 41:(1):29-45.
Gross, Toomas. 2001. “Community and Dissent: A Study of the Implications of Religious
Fragmentation in the Sierra Juárez, Oaxaca.” A dissertation submitted for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in Social Anthropology, Cambridge University
Halperin, Rhoda and James Dow (eds.) 1977. Peasant Livelihood: Studies in Economic
Anthropology. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Hamilton, Richard. 1996. The Social Misconstruction of Reality. New Haven: Yale University
Press.
Harris, Marvin. 1974. Cows, Pigs, Wars, and Witches. New York: Random House.
__________. 1979. Cultural Materialism: The Struggle for a Science of Culture. New York:
Random House
Holland, Clifton L. 1997. “Estimated Size of The Protestant Population in Spanish &
Portuguese-Speaking Countries of The Americas.” A Report Produced for Members of the
Latin American Church Growth Task Force. http:www.geocities.com/Athens]/Aegean
/4170/laptop97.htm, downloaded Aug. 2, 1999.
849
The Expansion of Protestantism in Mexico: An Anthropological View
INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía, e Informática). 1992. Estados Unidos
Mexicanos, Resumen General, XI Censo General de Población y Vivienda, 1990.
Aguascalientes, Ags., México: INEGI.
__________. 2003a. XII Censo General de Población y Vivienda 2000. Aguascalientes, Ags.:
http://www.inegi.gob.mx, México: INEGI.
__________. 2003b. Catálogos de Codificación (cat-cpv2000.pdf). XII Censo General de
Población y Vivienda 2000. Aguascalientes, Ags.: http://www.inegi.gob.mx, México:
INEGI.
__________. 2004. Anuario de Estadísticas por Entidad Federativa, Edición 2004.
Aguascalientes, Ags. México.
Korsbaek, Leif. 1996. Introducción al Sistema de Cargos. Toluca, México: Universidad
Autónoma del Estado de México.
Madsen, William. 1967. “Religious Syncretism.” In Handbook of Middle American Indians,
Volume 6, Social Anthropology. Manning Nash, Volume Editor. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
Martin, David. 1990. Tongues of Fire: The Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Mexico (Estados Unidos Mexicanos), Dirección General de Estadística. 1972. IX Censo General
de Población, 1970, 28 de Enero de 1970, Resumen General. México, D.F.: Dirección
General de Estadística, Secretaría de Industria y Comercio, Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
Nutini, Hugo G. 2000. “Native Evangelism in Central Mexico.” Ethnology 39(1):39-54.
O’Connor, Mary. 1979. “Two Kinds of Religious Movement among the Mayo Indians of
Sonora, Mexico.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 18(3):260-268.
__________. 2001. “Evangelicals in The Lower Mayo Valley.” In James W. Dow and Alan R.
Sandstrom (eds.), Holy Saints and Fiery Preachers: The Anthropology of Protestantism in
Mexico and Central America. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Polanyi, Karl. 1975. The Great Transformation. New York: Octagon Books.
Rappaport, Roy A. 1967. Pigs for the Ancestors; Ritual in the Ecology of a New Guinea People.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Redfield, Robert. 1941. The Folk Culture of Yucatan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
__________. 1950. A Village That Chose Progress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
__________. 1956. Peasant Society and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ricard, Robert. 1966. The Spiritual Conquest of Mexico. Berkeley: The University of California
Press.
Rogers, Everett M. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations, Fourth Edition. New York: Free Press.
Smith, Waldemar R. 1977. The Fiesta System and Economic Change. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Stark, Rodney and Roger Finke. 2000. Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion.
University of California Press.
Stoll, David. 1982. Fishers of Men or Founders of Empire: The Wycliffe Bible Translators in
Latin America. London: Zed Press.
__________. 1990. Is Latin America Turning Protestant? The Politics of Evangelical Growth.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Turner, Paul R. 1972. The Highland Chontal. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
__________. 1979. “Religious Conversion and Community Development.” Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion 18(3):252-260.
850