There Is No Such Thing as Christianity

In the earthly life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, He started a Church and ministry. This would later, through the proselytizing of the Apostles, spread throughout the Middle East, Europe and eventually the world - adopting bishops, priests, a Mass and Saints. It has survived various heresy scandals throughout the years and has made itself known to all men. This is what is known as the Catholic Church.

In the last 500 years, we've had people not recognize that and create denominations - people splitting from the Catholic Church. That's a problem.

Not only is that heresy, but it's created false hope. It's created false hope that heresy and schism unites the people under the guise of Christianity.

I say there is no such thing as Christianity because there is no such thing as Christianity. "Christianity" is a mangled, sordid amalgamation of 33,000 different, (radically different if you count some others) beliefs and creeds and positions over a vast spectrum, many of them being unable to reconcile more than a critical belief in the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and even then you will have some sects interpret THAT differently.

They disagree on everything - the Lord's Supper/Eucharist, how or if to give credence to the Mother of God as a sinner or someone without sin or what, how to interpret Scripture, the infallibility of Scripture and even the nature of baptism. Credobaptists, for example, baptize when the believer professes Christ as Lord. Paedobaptism professes this when the party is an infant.

That's just a smattering among thousands among THOUSANDS of differing beliefs and ways and ideas that have amalgamated into something convoluted. I say again, there is no such thing as Christianity. There IS a Christian faith if you so choose to identify yourself as that. That is to say, Lutherans, Catholics, Methodists, etc. are all part of the basic Christian fold - at least recognizing the Divinity of Christ and the Holy Trinity in Three Persons as a key belief. Someone who is a Christian professes the basic Christian idea that Jesus is Lord.

But for now, identify with a denomination. Do not call yourself Christian.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Shema Israel, You're the New Lovechild of American Politics.

When it comes to state elections, I vote Republican. Democrats are immoral and Minnesota's Independence Party is just a bunch of confused Democrats. Nationally, the one time I voted, I also voted Republican. I was a confused neo-conservative Evangelical Protestant in 2012.

Republicans are many things in opposition to Catholic morals, but one of them is Zionist. 

Zionism is the political movement that stems from the idea that there should be a Jewish state in the world. More than likely, it stems from the persecution of Jews by Catholic leaders in Europe and the Jews' desire to have a land of their own. Christian kings and heads of state accused the Jews of the sin of deicide, therefore putting them in a level of servitude to Catholics. Their lands were taken away, they were exiled, etc.'

There is a problem with how modern Zionism conducts itself and conducted itself in the beginning. They came to Palestine as immigrants from Russia and Germany, setting up farms and colonies. This could've been fine had it been relegated to a small iota of land along the sea, like modern-day Gaza City. Enter the late 40s and the atrocities of World War II. The UN saw what happened in the Holocaust and decided to divide the Palestinian territories to give Jews the state of Israel in 1948.

It baffles me beyond all comprehension how a man who professes the Christian faith - that is, most of the Republican Party - could support Zionism. 

Jews do not deserve the Holy Land.

I'll say it again. Jews do not deserve the Holy Land. Te lo voy a decir en español. Los judíos no merecen la Tierra Sagrada.

They are the nation that killed the Son of God and made a religion out of it. What if Mark David Chapman paraded around Manhattan establishing a cult around his murder of John Lennon?

Approving of Zionism is denying Christ, but today's GOP must do it to win the office. What a shame.

Gospodi, pomiluj.

Naming Protestant churches after saints?

You will drive around your average town in the United States, Canada or any part of the Anglophone world and see many church buildings - St. Mark, St. John, St. Anne, etc. There's a caveat - they're mostly Protestant. 

It is an enigma as to why Protestants use names of canonized saints because of the nature of Protestantism - a heresy, and the nature of canonized sainthood - those who lived the Catholic faith and are deservedly in heaven, promulgated as such by a valid pope - invalidate the other. 

There is no one alive today who would be canonized by a Pope if they promoted such fallacies like sola scriptura, faith by grace or the denial of critical Catholic dogmas like the Primacy of Peter or the Marian dogmas. To their credit, they believe in the Sacred Trinity - that is where the Catholic faith ends in the Protestant religion.

So, is it really correct for Protestants to use the name of holy, canonized saints in the names of their church buildings? In truth, no. I can't control, nor can anyone but Our Lord, control what Protestants do, but naming castles of heresy after canonized saints is an act of vituperation against the Church. 

Saints are in heaven because they promoted the Catholic faith or in the case of martyrs, died for It. 

No one is a saint for heresy and schism or a martyr for schism. If there were people who died for the newly-formed Anglican sect when it was beginning to form from distorted Catholic rites and sacraments, they died for nothing. If there were Catholics protecting the Catholic Church from the infiltration of Protestant thinking, they were martyrs.

God bless you.

The modernist world is inherently blind.

Example I: From /r/catholicism, the Catholic forum on reddit, where someone's son disgraced his parents by announcing his idea of being higher than Our Lord.

My son (25) told my wife and that he is a woman and that he is using hormones to get a more feminine appearance. He told us that he wants me to call him by a new name and use female pronouns. And he changed his profile to him crossdressing. Frankly, I'm sort of lost for words right now. Our son has been my son for 25 years, and hormones cannot change that.

What would be the appropriate way to handle my son's new "identity"? Should we use his new name and pronouns? Or should we insist that he is my son, not my daughter. Obviously we don't want to alienate our son, but at the same time I don't want to encourage him to go further into this perversion.

Also, I'm wondering how I should handle his relationships with his siblings. He is the oldest of 7, the other children being aged 23, 21, 19, 16, 12 and 10. Obviously I can't control what the adults do, but I'm wondering if I should limit his interactions with our youngest. Family ties are important and I don't want to cause more pain on top of an already painful situation. But at the same time I don't want him to be a bad example and give them strange ideas. None of the children know he thinks he is a woman yet so we still have some time.

This is a very stressful situation for all of us and I would appreciate your advice and prayers.

 This is indeed a stressful situation. In this case, the son has decided to directly defy God the Father and His infallible idea of gender, an immutable characteristic, by "becoming" a woman. You cannot switch genders. No matter what modern medicine can do - and modern medicine can be a venerable tool - a man is a man and a woman is a woman, simply self-mutilating and perverting the ideas of Our Lord and on a way to deserved Eternal Hell, barring repentance.

This is what I posted in regards to his son getting a "sex-change" operation.

How could it not be sinful? How could it not be sinful?

A "sex change operation" is man - in all his deviancy, fallen nature and sinfulness - thinking he knows more than Almighty God by attempting to augment the immutable gift and characteristic He has given us. It is an act of defiance against Our Lord.

It's sinful because it's directly insinuating God, in all His Almighty Infinity and Divinity, erred. It is openly and perversely denying God, like Judas did in the last days of Our Lord's earthly life.

 A response, however taken out of the reddit formatting to add my own comments. Comments in red.

God, of course, never errs. Unfortunately, due to the stain of original sin, our bodies very frequently do err. [This I will grant you. Basic doctrine.]

How many people do you know with developmental defects, from a cleft lip to Downs Syndrome? And, when they get that cleft lip corrected, do you tell them they are "openly and perversely denying God"? No, of course not. When a man's cells go haywire, he gets cancer, and he starts chemo therapy, do you accuse him of "attempting to augment the immutable gift and characteristic He has given us"? No. We're Catholics, not Christian Scientists. [But that is medically necessary. I don't think you get it. If a man, God and Mary be with him, gets cancer and needs chemotherapy, he needs it to save his life. You don't get it.]

Heck, if somebody proved transsexuality was caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, then came up with a cure for it, would you tell your transsexual friends that taking that drug was an act of defiance against God? No. Very likely you'd consider it not just licit but a moral duty for your friend to take that drug. (And I would agree.) [Wrong. It would be curing said disorder. Transgenderism is a sin. It is the mutilation of the body to pervert Our Lord's creation that is a sin. Reversing that and going back to a normal state is encouraged, along with confessing said sins from that time.]

So the question before us is not, "Is transsexuality the result of original sin?" It is obviously the result of original sin. The question is, "Where is the problem: in the mind, or in the body?" Although many people on both sides are convinced they know the answer because "it's just common sense," actual evidence, to say nothing of proofs, are very hard to come by.

And if the problem does turn out to be in the body, rather than the mind, then it would follow that sex reassignment surgery is morally licit -- and perhaps morally obligatory for those with the means. [For crying out loud. It is not morally licit or obligatory to encourage someone to mortally sin. You're basically telling someone to literally go to Hell. ]

His comment was more well-received than mine and unsurprisingly, as it's primarily Novus Ordo.

Example II: Pope Leo XIII's Apostolicae Curae deals with the idea of Protestant Orders in a short sentence, saying that Anglican (and by extension, all non-Catholic orders) orders are void. No valid priests, bishops, deacons whatever. Despite Anglicans' insistence of their belief in the Real Presence of the Body and Blood, [Protestants believe in God and that might be the only thing they agree on] they do not. They have no valid transubstantiation. Jesus is not in their "Eucharist."

One such invalid Protestant bishop goes by the name Tony Palmer. Tragically, Tony Palmer is deceased. He was killed in a motorcycle accident in England last month. Tony Palmer was not a Catholic. He was Anglican. Not a bishop, nor a Catholic. This makes him ineligible for ecclesiastical burial according to Canon 1240 which bars heretics and schismatics.

Now, answer this question.

• Would Justin Welby, the head of the Anglican sect, be buried in a Catholic Requiem Mass? No.
• Would a shopkeep in Crown Heights that dies a Hasidic Jew be buried in a Requiem Mass? No.
• Would a Catholic-born-but-now-heretic open sodomite be buried in a Requiem Mass? No.

All of those people are denied by Canon Law access to burial. Why would a non-bishop non-Catholic be granted something like this? By this, Bergoglio the Modernist shows that he has contempt for the writings of holy, sainted Popes [bowed at Theodore Herzl's grave in May - The Jews have not recognized our Lord, we cannot recognize the Jews. (Pope St. Pius X)] and the Church itself. We cannot judge the state of another man's soul - the duty of which belongs to the Lord alone, but if Tony Palmer were to stand before Jesus Christ, Eternal High Priest and True Judge at the hour of his death, is it likely that such a man who could've easily been a Catholic by way of his family and a conversion through Tradition would see the Eternal Bliss? I don't think so.

What a sad, sad, time we live in where deviancy is accepted and the Pope defies God so brazenly and openly. May God restore the True Catholic Church to its former glory worldwide that it rightfully deserves as the True Church of all men.

Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Spotless Virgin Mary, especially in these days nearing the Assumption, pray for us.