u/Blue__Northen_Star

My Religion subject books from my younger years would have you believe that the church is all sunshines & rainbows who only knows how to preach about Jesus love this & peace be upon that, but after I did some of my own researching, I found-out about "Things The Catholic Church does not want you to know about", so to speak.

For Example:

- The Books at school never taught is that past popes & cardinals used to have secret marriages or at least bastards or how The Catholic Church was manipulated. Like by the Borgias, for example.

- They never taught us why exactly The Roman Catholic Church & The Eastern Orthodox Church broke apart.

- They didn't teach us how older Christians used to be anti-simetic and would exclude, discriminate against, target & bully Jewish people.

- They didn't teach us why The Protestant Reformation even happened, The Counter Reformation, The Council of Trent, etc.

- They didn't teach us about the full scales of The Crusades. Just "Old Christian warriors go to war for Jerusalem lol."

- I literally had no idea what the heck some prayers were talking about. Once I read a prayer to St. Thomas More before I even knew who the guy was and there was a line that said, "You lost your head for refusing to acknowledge the king as Head of The Church instead of The Pope." and I was like, "Wtf???" "What happened to St. Thomas More? What king is this prayer talking about?" I had to find-out about King Henry VIII later-on. ON MY OWN RESEARCH!!!!

- The Reconquista.

- The power players like Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, Bishop Stephen Gardiner, Bishop John Fisher, Cardinal Richelieu, Bishop Cranmer, etc.

- Questions that could inspire critical thinking like: "Should priests & churchmen be allowed to get involved in politics especially if they are good at politics and have the talents for it?"

- They didn't teach us about The Rosary & The Divine Mercy Chaplet and why they're so important, what their histories were, how they came to be, etc. They just had us say Hail Mary and For the sake of his most sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world over and over and over again.

The effects?

The Rosary & The Divine Mercy Chaplet never stuck to anyone of my peers because to us it was meaningless, boring, choresome & repetitive. No value, depth, personal bond & closeness to those recitations, etc. My peers ditched these 2 time-consuming prayers as soon as possible.

- The Little Office of The Virgin Mary.

- The context, stories & meaning behind The Angelus & The 3 O'Clock Prayer to The Divine Mercy.

- The Book of Hours.

- What to do during a saint's feast day.

- Michaelmas.

- Lent's context, meaning and relevance. Why we should care about it, imitate it, etc. I was just told, "Oh just don't eat meat for 40 days and try to fast, lol." Well they didn't literally say "lol" but you get what I meant. They were dismissive and more "Let's just get this overwith."

- They didn't teach us about The Era of The 3 Popes. I had to learn that from an ATHEIST who wasn't afraid to call-out Church History.

- They didn't teach us about corrupt popes in history so as to learn from their mistakes. They always presented the pope as, "He is the father of all Catholics and we should all pray for him, support him and be respectful of him! (⁠◍⁠•⁠ᴗ⁠•⁠◍⁠) ❤️" again as though everything were fine.

- I also find The Catholic Church to be somewhat totalitarian because criticizing The Pope is banned in certain Catholic communities both online and IRL.

- In my observation, the church was also somewhat self-contradictory/back peddaling/inconsistent because they'd preach "The Pope is infallible!" then say "Oh he can make mistakes he's not perfect!"

They said the papacy has an unbroken chain from At. Peter himself, alright.

They just didn't say some of the popes were shit.

- The popes literally cannot be impeached.

- When pope francis was alive, I noticed how he would always keep 1 foot in the door of Orthodox Theology while preaching about things that the church already established were sinful. For Example: When pope francis visited singapore, he preached, "All religions lead to God" which completely contradicted Christ's words at John 14:16, which stated: Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'" (NIV) and pope francis would also repeatedly say, "Being gay isn't a crime." instead of saying "Being gay isn't a sin." because Church Doctrine established that it was because of 1 Corinthians 6:9 - 10 where it stated: "Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor revilers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." (NIV).

What pope francis was doing, in modern terms, was that he was trying to change the software of The Catholic Church without actually damaging the hardware, because even though popes are traditionally unimpeachable, exemptions can be made if they start altering core doctrines officially, so pope francis was - rather cowardly - playing both sides. He was making love to globalist views while remaining in the seat of power in the spiritual realm. Had pope francis officially declared "All religions lead to God.", he would've been in breach of John 14:16 which could've triggered his impeachment due to heresy but because pope francis was just saying it instead of actually changing the doctrine, he could claim plausible deniability of "I didn't technically do that."

He couldn't fully commit to one side. He was obviously on the side of the world, but didn't wanna lose his seat of power in the spiritual one. It's like seeing a hoe stay with a faithful man who pays her bills while going-out with the handsome popular jock who's just gonna pump & dump her when she's boring now.

Fricking "Thou shalt not question the master" bullcrap.

Everything I mentioned above, I had to research myself 😮‍💨 because the gosh damned church who was supposed to be the one teaching us about it couldn't be f-cking bothered.

A common argument I hear about why abortion isn't murder is "Well it's just a clump of cells". And then there's the whole "Abortion is murder" thing.

So my compromise is that abortion should be illegal if the fetus already has likea heartbeat or something like that. Like in the 4th month and beyond?

When stories like, "White Christian man from The UK tells black muslim immigrant to leave", such stories would be dismissed as islamophobia, intolerance, bigotry, etc. But I do find it odd how they ignore it when muslims don't like each other and/or do the exact same things.

For Example:

• turkey is 99% muslim. Out of all the muslim countries in the world, turkey has the highest amount of refugees (4 million people, most of whom are fellow muslims) and anti-immigration beliefs are spreading.

• lebanon & jordan host tremendous amounts of syrian and palestinian refugees and are economically & financially overwhelmed.

• palestinian refugees literally started the lebanese civil war decades prior where they encouraged muslims to go around killing lebanese Christians.

• palestinian refugees literally tried to overthrow the jordanian government & monarchy and mind you they're both muslims.

• The wealthy arab nations (saudi, abu dhabi, etc.) have all refused to be signatories of The UN's refugee convention thingies. They can deport illegal immigrants - even fellow muslims - freely.

• arab muslims have expressed shame at the way their fellow pakistani and bangladeshi muslims behave in The UK.

• iran & pakistan both have millions of afghan refugees, and the refugees face discrimination there and en masse deportations.

• Despite presenting itself as a democratic country, turkey actively stifles Christianity. turkey also does not have an Orthodox Christian Seminary to train the priesthood, bans Christian missionaries, there's almost no Christian in the turkish government's upper echelons of power and the moment an abbot (Leader of Monks) dies, they can seize the monastery and do with the other building & monks as they please.

• When the hagia sophia was briefly a secular museum, muslim guests could go around the whole building with 0 restrictions but non-muslim visitors - especially Christians - were heavily restricted. Isn't that... "non-inclusive" or "exclusionary"? "Our fellow muslims can go around freely but anyone who's not a muslim can't"?

• ahmad mulakhil, a 23-year-old afghan asylum seeker, was convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl. The attack happened just months after he arrived in the UK. He had been housed in a luxurious hotel in Nuneaton.

• I also find it odd how they don't seem to blame the taliban government, like, "It's your fault why there are so many displaced afghans in the first place! If it weren't for you, they wouldn't have had to leave their homeland to start with!"

• Back at 2025, a British sikh man named Harman Singh Kapoor hang-up a sign that said, "Proudly we don't sell halal food here." (or something to that effect). Then 100 muslims in London protested and harassed him outside of his restaurant and when he tried to defend himself by showing a sikh ceremonial dagger, the muslims called the police on him and fake reviewers left 1-star reviews on his restaurant + accusations of racism. Objectively speaking: Since sikhs are the smaller minority in Britain, doesn't that make them the victims and British muslims the bigots?

White Christian vs. muslim = "Oppressor vs. oppressed" → bigotry.

· muslim vs. sikh = "Minority vs. smaller minority" → inter-community tension, not systemic racism.

This feels like a convenient excuse to shield muslims from accountability.

muslims are not a monolith. They are divided by:

· Sect (sunni vs. ahia vs. ahmadiyya).

· Ethnicity (pakistani vs. arab vs. somali vs. bangladeshi).

· Theology (conservative vs. progressive vs. secular).

When muslims discriminate against ahmadiyya muslims (who are often persecuted and denied burial rights in some UK mosques), or when shia and sunni communities clash, it is rarely framed as "bigotry." Instead, it is called:

• "Sectarian tension."

• "Cultural differences."

• "Internal community matters."

Activists avoid calling it "islamophobia" because the perpetrator is muslim, and the victim is muslim. To label it bigotry would require acknowledging that muslims can be oppressors too—which undermines the "oppressed minority" narrative and the biased belief that muslims always gotta be the victims but never the a-hole.

Sometimes, bigotry accusers just feels kess like, "Let us strive to alleviate all societal sufferings & prejudices equally!" and more like "Whose suffering can be more trendy for my twitter feed & affirm my biases?"

I don't think bullying people in their name is what palestinians would want.

Which is why sweden's "open door to refugees" program failed spectacularly.

Queen Catherine of Aragon was King Henry VIII's first wife but because they had no living sons, he sought to get away from her, but Queen Catherine did produce 2 sons but they just didn't live.

Henry, Duke of Cornwall at 1511 and a son Queen Catherine miscarried at 1513 after The Battle at Flodden Field after the Scots invaded while King Henry was away at France.

What if both of them had lived? Asides from Princess Mary (1516) having 2 big brothers, that is.

So when religious people say things like, "It's a sin in my religion to be gay/eat meat/masturbate/get tattoos, etc. You're being a sinner." etc., a common response from the people being attacked is, "I never signed-up for your religion. If it's a sin in islam to eat pork, then that's your choice but I'm not a muslim so that law doesn't apply to me. That sounds like a you problem."

So then if that's the logic then people who never signed-up for liberal beliefs should also be immune from your labels.

It's homophobic to dislike gays? It's islamophobic to dislike muslims? It's fatphobic to be hostile towards fat people? Well tough luck I never signed-up for liberal labels.

So it goes both ways.

If "I never signed-up for your belief system = Your labels don't apply to me", then...

This person has been blocked by multiple people yet is still capable of commenting on others' posts. This person is arrogant and is always in denial when his favorite factions (liberals, leftists & palestine supporters) do something wrong. "No we don't do that! You're just lying about it to be pissy about it!" nyeh nyeh nyeh blah blah blah.

He is toxic, arrogant & invasive who has no respect for other people's boundaries and never listens to anyone who corrects him.

But have no worries, my dear citizens! I have already begun drafting a report and will repeatedly keep on reporting this person to the reddit developers until they do something about it.

Wish me luck!

Mods, if you read this post, pls do something about that person.

Black & other POC races & cultures can also have that sort of mindset & mentality, you know. Black & other people of color can be just as hostile towards foreigners just as much as white people can be.

​

But of course the media tends to view white people with more hostility than when it comes to blacks.

​

"White british man tells muslim to go back to his rapist country" is a much more controversial headline than, let's say, "Black man in south africa spits at white tourist, tells white Christian woman to go back to America" of something

Disclaimer: Before anyone assumes I am a right wing Christian, I'd like to remind you all that opposing team b does not always mean you automatically support team a.

​

Anyway.

​

I can't respect leftist christians because those guys generally tend to reek of pride, arrogance & toxicity. They force The Legacy of Jesus Christ & The Bible to fit modern-day political agendas & a political faction Jesus didn't even sign-up for.

​

Plus, many leftist Christians don't even go to church as far as I can tell. And, leftist Christians don't preach about nor practice, let's say:

​

• fasting

• donation

• baptism

• repentance

• the 10 commandments

• the legacies of biblical characters & the rememberance of them

• the banishment of demons & idolatry

• turning away from sin

• picking-up one's own cross

• protecting the widows & the fatherless

​

Etc.

​

They just wanna make Jesus look anti-establishment, anti-capitalist (just because he praised a widow for donating all her money which was an act of hermitage not leftism), gay-tolerant & somehow pro-choice/abortion (even though Jesus explicitly cursed child abusers & the fact that The Book of Revelations literally said that same-sex couples WILL end-up in hell).

​

Plus I literally never heard a single leftist christian ever preach about self-denial & self-discipline.

​

Sooo... for some context regarding the widow one: One day, Jesus was in The Temple of Jerusalem with his disciples. Rich people donated first then a poor widow donated her only remaining coin. Jesus said that that woman gave more than all the rich people. The disciples asked how and Jesus basically said that while the rich donors did give more money in a literal sense, that woman gave the most because she donated 100% of her money while they only donated like 0.1%. It was an act of complete submission & offering to God. "Everything I have is yours, God. I entrust my care to you." was basically the energy she was trying to project, and absolutely not "Let's get rid of capitalism." Why are you forcing a political narrative on a story about humility?

​

Side Rant: If leftists are really anti-capitalists, why do they make & keep money? They shouldn't!

​

And from personal experience, many leftist christians love to make fun of right wing & moderate Christians, which is very prideful & arrogant and a blatant defiance of not just the whole "love thy brothers & thy sisters" thing but also of Romans 12:16, which advises, "Consider everyone as equal, and don't think that you're better than anyone else".

​

Plus, as far as I can tell (based-on their meetings that I attended & from what I've seen online), leftist christians don't really convene to do anything traditionally Christian. They just convene to affirm their political & ideological biases like "IT'S OKAY IF WE'RE GAY! IT'S OKAY IF WE WANNA GET ABORTIONS! IT'S OKAY IF WE WANNA DO THIS DO THAT BECAUSE LOVE THY NEIGHBOR" and again, they never actually *do* anything Christian like going on pilgrimages, donating to the poor & teaching The Bible to the next generation (unless it's to tell kids Jesus approves of you becoming trans which is just so disgusting to me). They're not really convening to worship Jesus or actually study his word, they're just looking for ways to make Jesus & scriptures subservient to them when it should be the other way around.

​

I can't quite describe it but everytime I bear witness or attend leftist christian meetings (I attended some to see what all the fuss was about), the whole room always felt "spiritually stinky" to me, does that make sense? Like the whole area is just so toxic whenever leftist christians meet. Not at all serene, peace-giving, etc. It always reeks of pride & arrogance.

​

Their meetings were never about: "How can we make the world a better place?" It was always, "How can we make The Bible support our political & ideological arguments?" The aura & vibe I got was never "I feel God The Holy Spirit flowing into me!" It was always "When can I get home?" because those meetings legitimately always bored me with how un-inspiring they were.

​

Plus it's always just the same schmuck over & over again. "God is okay with us being gay!", "God is okay with us being this or that!" It feels less like a Christian worship and more like a reinforcement of shared delusion.

​

And the ironic thing is that they call traditionalist Christians "narrow-minded" and themselves as diverse, but the fact is that the traditionalists always change their homilies while the leftist christian conventions are the repetitive ones.

​

And everytime they pray together, there's no submission to Christ. They don't say humble things like, "Dear Lord, please use us as you see fit. Help us to be your hands, your feet & your mouth on Earth. If this is your will, may it be done." or anything like that. On the contrary it's always like, "Jesus, make (x)'s parents accept him for being gay." Not even a "please" and "thank you". They're commanding Jesus to fit their narrative. Their prayers always felt domineering, not humble to me. Like Jesus is the one who's supposed to obey them and not them obeying him. And anyone who tries to differ from them is automatically labeled as "hateful & bigoted". Maybe they're the real hateful ones because they got mad first.

​

And before anyone calls me judgemental, making remarks and rebuking others isn't judgemental. Biblical characters did it in both The Old & The New Testaments. Like when Prophet Nathan rebuked David or literally when Jesus told the pharisees of their moral failure.

​

"You're so judgemental" is just something people say when they don't wanna be corrected & told that they're wrong, and the people correcting them just so happened to be a Christian.

​

For all their faults: Right Wing & Moderate Christians have far more ongoing Christian missions than leftists could ever hope to compete with. Those guys actually evangelize, preach, feed the poor & do outreach programs. Unlike leftists christians who only ever say: "It's okay to be gay" for like the trillionth time in just 1 month 😮‍💨...

The traditionalist priest downtown already preached about purity on sunday, prudence on monday, perseverance on wednesday and sacrifice on thursday. Meanwhile the local leftist christians are still stuck on being gay.

I'm not making fun of people's misfortunes here. I just find it suspicious & eerie how - everytime I meet someone who says, "Yeah, I joined a cult/the occult. We do tarot cards, spirit readings & everything." , they always end with misfortune.

Like I recently met this gay dude who had his own discord server & a growing art career then one day he announced: "GUYS! I JUST JOINED THE OCCULT!" then a few days later, he deleted his account and his bio was so full of self-pity.

A few years ago, I met a girl who lived & worked in a circus and she did tarot and she was a self-confessed pagan. A few nights later she had a sleep paralysis experience where she felt a demon stabbing her stomach. His knife would go through her skin and made her stomach feel like it was getting pierced & torn.

I swear getting involved in all that 🔮 🧿 stuff always ends with misfortune.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

Whether it be religion, ideology or whatever, no matter how valid, if you go about spreading it in a way that can be considered toxic, unappealing, etc., especially if you're harassing or strong-arming others into supporting you, then you're not really honoring the cause you're trying to represent.

Let's say if I were an avid church goer and I tell you: "HEY! YOU! COME TO MY CHURCH! WE DONATE TO THE POOR & MAKE FOOD FOR THE HOMELESS EVERY WEEK!" and start harassing you into going to my church, then even if we're doing something good/I have a valid reason to be proud of what I do, then... It's still gonna be unappealing for you, wouldn't it be? Because the presentation was crap.

Let's say Maomao had like a little brother or a little sister before Fengxian died. How would it have affected the story? I.E Maomao's growth, Jinshi's courtship of her, The La Clan's inheritance, etc.