Friends & Enemies

Catholicism & Christianity
By Steven J. Grisafi, PhD.

American politicians ought to recognize this: I, as an American of European of ancestry claiming Catholic (or Christian) identity, have no reason to fear or hate the Russian people. It makes little difference to me whether the Crimean Peninsula is under the control of either Moscow or Kiev. The distinctions between both the Ukraine and Russia are so slight from my perspective that I see no reason to interfere with their quarrels. However, as an American of European of ancestry claiming Catholic (or Christian) identity, I have strong reason both to fear and hate Black Americans.

With the Russians I share a common European heritage. With the Russians I share a common Christian identity. The Russians don’t condemn me for being Caucasian. They, like myself, are Caucasian. The Russians are Capitalists. I am a Capitalist. The world view of the Russian people differs little from my own.

Black Americans call me racist while knowing nothing about me. Black Americans condemn me as an imperialist colonizer. My skin color makes me a target should I ever walk through a predominantly Black neighborhood. Unlike the confused politicians, I have walked through such neighborhoods and I know the great danger of doing so. While the descendants of those who enslaved Black Americans assert that my ancestors were not “White.” I, through some miraculous transformation of the generations, have become “White.” Black Americans hate me for what the ancestors of other Caucasians, who also abused my ancestors, did to their ancestors.

So how is it that American politicians think that they can unite the American people by suggesting that the Russians are my enemy when my enemy is clearly apparent to me? I know my enemy and he is not Russian. The current strategy of America’s political elite is to portray “Whiteness” as a choice. It boggles my mind to read news and opinion articles suggesting that demographic groups previously discriminated against, for reasons nobody wishes to admit, miraculously transform over time to be accepted as “White.” This is clearly a strategy designed to counter the very effective strategy of Black Americans. Their strategy successfully convinced Americans of the various Spanish ancestries that Hispanics are not “White.” Americans of Spanish ancestry have always been “White.” You cannot claim to be a “Latino” if you have no Latin ancestors.

The Latins are Caucasians. The Afghans are Caucasian. Shave off their beards and transport them to Yorkshire. You would never know just by looking at them that they are not Englishmen. Similarly, so too with the Iranians. What is quite apparent to me is the hesitancy of the current American political leadership to admit the real reasons that previously unaccepted demographic groups are now accepted and designated as “White.” One cannot argue that formerly discriminated against groups such as Irish-Americans and Italian-American were discriminated against because they were not considered to be “White.” There never was a checkbox available to either Irish-Americans or Italian-Americans on any sort of official document for them to indicate any other identity than “White.” We are not Black, we are not Native American nor Aboriginal, we are not Asian, nor are we Hispanic. The reason for the discrimination was because we were predominately Catholic.

Slowly one can see what “Whiteness” has always really meant. In truth it has meant those persons descended from the primary colonizer nations of North America. They were the English, the Dutch, the Swedes, the Danes and, reluctantly, the French (all imagined as Huguenots). The Germans became indistinguishable from the Dutch in the eyes of British Americans and were consequently accepted as “White.” What those persons of the acceptable “Whiteness” group had in common was that they were all predominately Protestant.

If Catholicism is a fraud then so too is all of Christianity. To be a Christian means to accept the divinity of Christ. There is no hedging, or blurring, possible with that distinction. We can never know whether or not the misreading of the New Testament was intentional or not. The evidence suggests to me that at the Council of Nicaea the misreading was unintentional. But through the centuries that then passed the misunderstanding became so entrenched in dogma that most persons could not recognize the obvious truth. At some point I suspect that it was recognized. By then Christianity had become indispensable to European civilization. It became the primary component of all European cultures. It was the great tragedy that not all persons who learned to read were privy to a very well kept secret. The institution of Christianity was the primary component for the defense of a European way of life. The two great schisms cleaved Europe and diminished its ability to resist the invasion and incursion of non-European ways of life. The divisions fragmented the continent further and Europe was reduced to a collection of nation-states each asserting their supremacy over other Europeans. Thus we see the motivation for the perpetuation of the Catholic Catholic and the fraud of Christianity: It was to keep Europe united.

I recognize the wisdom of my ancestors and am grateful for their efforts. They understood that the Prophet Muhammad read the New Testament correctly. Our ancestors faced the choice of either succumbing to Islam or maintaining the fraud of Christianity. Despite his good intentions, Martin Luther took too simple a view of a very complex situation. The result was disastrous for Europe, especially those regions exposed to incursions by Islam. Safe on their island in the North Atlantic, the British were never exposed to the dangers of conversion by the sword. In Britain and Scandinavia there was little need to remain united with other Christians in order to preserve their local culture. Protestantism was their means of obtaining release from all tyranny that they perceived on their horizon. Unlike the Greeks, the Italians, or the Spanish, they had no fear of Islam. So they cursed and blamed the Pope and the Catholics for attempting to keep them in accordance with a uniform set of principles designed to preserve and perpetuate the European way of life.

To all who would listen to me, I unhesitatingly explain that the New Testament claims that Jesus of Nazareth is the Jewish Messiah. It does not claim that he is the Son of God. By doing so I deny the fundamental principle of Christianity, all of Christianity, not just Catholicism. Yet I consider myself Catholic. I adhere to the secular and cultural norms of Catholicism. Openly proclaiming that Jesus is not the Son of God would make me an outcast to all of Christendom, not merely incommunicado from the Catholic Church. So why do it? Why adopt such a self-destructive position? I do so because it is my hope that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church will someday recognize that Catholicism does not need Jesus.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *