Protestantism: Positive or Negative for Latin America?

Are the following two perspectives on Protestantism published in 1944 as contradictory as they might seem on first reading? Both authors, Peruvian Luis Alberto Sánchez and Brazilian Manuel Carlos Ferraz, are men of law and public intellectuals who are vitally concerned with the welfare and integrity of their respective nations.
(1) Would Sánchez refute Ferraz's evaluation of the contributions of Protestantism to Brazil?
(2) Would he reject Ferraz's characterization of Protestantism as “a democratic-federative movement”?
(3) Would Ferraz deny Sánchez's insistence that the U.S. government sees in every Protestant missionary another possible means of advancing U.S. interests, or even U.S. “imperial penetration” in Latin America?
(4) On the basis of his estimate of the state of Roman Catholicism in Brazil, would he find Sánchez's estimate of its status in all of Latin America too positive?
(5) Are the two essays mutually exclusive?
(6) Given the U.S. government's support of U.S. evangelist campaigns, especially in Central America during the tumultuous 1980s, which of the two writers might be considered the more perspicacious?