Trad Catholic essential literature

[Anonymous No.10450975]

What are the most relevant books about how to catholic relevant before the II vatican council?

Already have the 1917 canon law.

PS: Is there a liturgical calender following the old ways curretly online?

[Anonymous No.10451030]

The Catechism of the Council of Trent

[Anonymous No.10451061]

>>10450975
>PS: Is there a liturgical calender following the old ways curretly online?
yeah on wikipedia. do some basic research man.
>What are the most relevant books about how to catholic relevant before the II vatican council?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_communities_using_the_Tridentine_Mass
go to any of those in good standing of the see and get them to teach you catechism.
>muh i want to learn community from the internet
heretic.

[Anonymous No.10451064]

>>10450975
Communion IS “only” a symbol, just like the cross itself is “only” a symbol. It doesn’t mean a symbol drawn in crayon and an ornate tradition have the same value to men. The creator of that image should read Jung and stop blaming doctrine for penny pinching Americans.

[Anonymous No.10451076]

>>10451061
>heretic
Nah, just a orphan trying to catch up on dead family traditions. I'm reading into the stuff for the lat couple months, I honestly don't know where to start. I'm glad I came about the whole VII nonsense. Doesn't help that there are no tradcats around in RL where I live so autistic threads on our favorite taiwanese basket weaving forum is the best I can do.

>>10451030
Good point, just have the current one.

[Anonymous No.10451079]

>>10451064
>Communion IS “only” a symbol, just like the cross itself is “only” a symbol.
it's a trad catholic thread. the image doesn't fit because what transforms any bread and wine into communion is the grace and blessing of god and then it considered the living blood and flesh of jesus christ, while only maintaining the appearance of bread and wine. OP's image seems to be aimed more at the symbolic or consubstantiation crowd than catholics. get a catholic priest to bless what's in OP's pic and it's legit jesus flesh for both trad and V2 catholics.

[Anonymous No.10451086]

>>10451079
It might be legal but handling it like it's a lunchable is disrespectful at best. You don't sell the body of christ like a nutella-to-go deal.

[Anonymous No.10451089]

>>10451076
>Nah, just a orphan trying to catch up on dead family traditions. I'm reading into the stuff for the lat couple months, I honestly don't know where to start. I'm glad I came about the whole VII nonsense. Doesn't help that there are no tradcats around in RL where I live so autistic threads on our favorite taiwanese basket weaving forum is the best I can do.
you literally cannot be a trad catholic in good standing without attending mass on days of obligation and without receiving catechism and sacraments as outlined by trad communities. you are de facto excommunicated. whether by choice or accident, you are not part of the community of the faithful and cannot be. "best i can do" does not cut it.

it'd be like some chick coming into mass with her head uncovered and thinking she was still a traditionalist. it's not a pick and choose your own rules thing, dumbass.

[Anonymous No.10451094]

>>10451086
i served altar for years. communion wafers come in the same plastic bags you can get candy floss in. you're LARPing too hard.

[Anonymous No.10451099]

>>10451089
So, where did I say I am part of the community? I just try to read about it and do what I can. If you can't post any book recommendations just don't waste your time in here.

[Anonymous No.10451103]

>>10451094
t. murican

[Anonymous No.10451109]

>>10451099
if you want a good book about how any trad catholic will give your dumb ass the same answer, brideshead revisited. pay attention to bridey.

at least you're not asking for secrets off an orthodox church, they don't even tell their catechumens the upper level shit.

[Anonymous No.10451113]

>>10451103
sorry, m8, catholic european. swing and a miss.

[Anonymous No.10451121]

>>10451094
>candy floss
>>10451103
>t. murican
Which Murica you living in, boy? The UK Murica?

[Anonymous No.10451125]

>>10451109
Not sure why you act so butthurt, I thought spreading the good word was part of the whole deal instead of acting like I'm a parasite for wanting to hold a up the old ways. Kinda unproductive.

>brideshead revisited
Expain why I should read some Novel, anon. Please don't waste and few spare shekels on memes.

[Anonymous No.10451149]

>>10451125
>I thought spreading the good word was part of the whole deal
whoa careful there. you do not know anyone else's state of grace and proselytizing is generally considered protestant.

i'm saying your preconceptions about the religion are insulting within the religion, and basically equivalent to saying that traditionalists don't know how to religion themselves properly, which is why your prejudices should be trusted above hundreds of years of tradition. that's not going to fly.

and now you're going back on what you said and saying you want to try to uphold traditions, when you clearly don't. why are you lying when that is going to damn you? what you see as aggression is the standard method of expressing worry for your eternal soul within traditionalism. if you don't want to hear this kind of shit (or the kind of shit from bridey in brideshead) everyfucking day, you should not become traditionalist. there are many other routes to salvation, and if you go in on the traditionalist one, there is no way out that is not considered a breach of contract with god. do not sign the contract if you are not sure you can uphold it, because that is a worse sin than being unsure about wanting to sign.

you should read brideshead because it's about catholics, and illustrates how hard it is to live within just a family of traditionalists. it's also about how pride and guilt work and treating religion, like life, lightly will come to haunt you.

promoting traditionalism above the mainstream church can also get you placed outside the see, which excommunicates you from rome. that won't excommunicate you from all trad communities, as some of them are not in good standing, but those are more extremely aggressive with your kind.

[Anonymous No.10451182]

>>10451149
>recommend books
>reeee you're not one of us, showing interest is insuting, reeee

Anon, just cease beeing autistic. I'm not interested in novels about catholics. I am interested in actual books by the church before VCII like listed above.

>promoting traditionalism above the mainstream church
Jokes on you, I would probably consider myself a sedevacantist by what I know atm, and as you said, you can't be excommunicated if you never had communion. Thanks for the bump.

[Anonymous No.10451190]

>>10451103
>candy floss
>American
no

[Anonymous No.10451197]

>>10451182
>i want to make up a religion using source material from the catholic church before the 1970s
why didn't you say you were /sffg/?

i'll do you one better, Great Moments in Catholic History by Rev Edward Lodge Curran Phd., published 1938 (new york). It's a children's reader of 100 moments in the Church's history, including why Mohammad and Gommunism is bad mmkay?

should make your costume super neat, because it's even illustrated :3

[Anonymous No.10451198]

>>10451190
>tfw you realie it's not floss for teeth made out of sugar
Oh, well at least you understand why I thought he's american.

[Anonymous No.10451201]

>>10451198
That would be the most useless product ever developed.

[Anonymous No.10451204]

>>10451197
>placing words in my mouth
Enjoy yourself anon, it's nice to give joy to people in need o a little light in their life. If beeing a bitter vagina is your way of doing so, don't let reality crash it.

[Anonymous No.10451206]

Hmm

[Anonymous No.10451208]

>>10451201
Quite fiiting for the mongrelized nation, don't you think?

[Anonymous No.10451229]

>>10451204
>Enjoy yourself anon, it's nice to give joy to people in need o a little light in their life.
by doing
i've already given you two books and some good advice, i'm worried to pile more coals of fire on your head tbph. [proverbs 25; romans 12] you look like you're on a search for majesty, anon, be careful with that haughty spirit.

[Anonymous No.10451238]

>>10451125
>I thought spreading the good word was part of the whole deal instead of acting like I'm a parasite for wanting to hold a up the old ways.

Most traditional latins are great people, but it does attract some real spergs. Become Orthodox, though.

[Anonymous No.10451245]

>>10451238
>Become Orthodox, though.
how do you think he's going to react when they tell the catechumens to get out or read john of the ladder for the millionth time during lent?

[Anonymous No.10451246]

>>10451229
>a novel
>a picture book

>beeing surprised about not beeing taken serious after screetching through the whole thread because you missed the point
>quotting the bible after behaving like a arogant self-rightious gift to the humankind
SAD. Many such cases. At least you have something to repent next time.

[Anonymous No.10451251]

>>10450975
Jean Meslier's Testament

[Anonymous No.10451258]

>>10451238
My college is orthodox. Sounds comfy desu. It's just not what my grandarents tried to teach me before they left too. If it would not be for tradcats I would robably at least consider it in the long run.

[Anonymous No.10451265]

>>10451246
>a picture book has no religious worth
it's like you've never heard of the lives of saints. if you're going to shit on iconography, you're going to have a hard time being ecumenical man.

>SAD. Many such cases. At least you have something to repent next time.
>doesn't want scriptural citation
>wants to be trad catholic
so you want to be a traditional catholic without being a traditional catholic? interesting. btw, if you looked at those chapters before deciding i was judging you, you might have seen they're prescriptions against that. both vengeance and majesty are god's alone, and unknown to us.

[Anonymous No.10451270]

>>10451258
>Jean Meslier's Testament
Nice try, plebbit.

[Anonymous No.10451278]

Justify not being a Protestant without using the following excuses:

1. Traditions, even traditions that superseded older traditions, are more important than theological justification
2. B-but what about X Church!

I guarantee everyone here are just LARPers and would never call themselves Catholics if it required any real commitment

[Anonymous No.10451290]

>>10451265
I'm not trying to, anon. I can't be a tradcat, I'm to far gone. I just want to read about the faith of my dead family ffs. Suck up your hollier than thou attitude and just leave.

[Anonymous No.10451297]

>>10451278
believing in the apostolic succession of the church gets all kinds of catholics/coptics (including orthodox, african and eastern churches) off the hook. it doesn't even have to be the same line, they all have records.

[Anonymous No.10451303]

>>10451245
Was this your experience?
>>10451258
I can understand the conflict there. Definitely check out a few Orthodox services. The Divine Liturgy of course, but also a small Paraklesis, which many hold every Wednesday. It's a beautiful prayer to the Theotokos.

[Anonymous No.10451311]

>>10451297
Muslim tier, and what stops any man from claiming to be an apostolic succeeder?

[Anonymous No.10451334]

Dark Night of the Soul by Saint John of the Cross.

Peers translation for english is pretty good.

[Anonymous No.10451338]

>>10451064
Jesus seemed to think it wasn't a symbol. He let thousands of people leave Him because He keep reinforcing that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. See John 6

[Anonymous No.10451343]

>>10451290
seriously read that book. it and lives of saints are the exact kind of things that trad catholic grandparents give to their grandkids, and kids, as gifts.
brideshead revisited is not a happy book, but it's very accurate on the social dynamic of traditional catholics. for people who grew up with that kind of religion, it's like home.
your i'm too good to take any recommendations or advice from trad catholics shit isn't exactly respectful to any of them.

and it's good that you realise you're too far gone. everyone should realise this. while works count, and many trad catholics will judge the quality of your works to help you get closer in line out of fear you might burn for all eternity like we all deserve to, you have to keep in mind that all catholics are supposed to believe we are saved by grace of god.
god's grace might not fall on us even if we live well, which is why saints are contested and rare and need to preform miracles as a sign of god's grace, because we don't know it's been conferred otherwise. god could grace a murderer or a thief before someone who always went to mass and always fasted and always was kind and performed all works well, and that is his prerogative. becoming a trad catholic would just give you more ways to fuck up your works, and probably involve a turning from grace.

unless you really feel god's calling you, i'd stick away, because you would be asking him to hold you to a much higher standard.

[Anonymous No.10451349]

>>10451303
>Was this your experience?
No, it's just shit the Orthodox I know from an ecumenical forum talk about.
>>10451311
>Muslim tier, and what stops any man from claiming to be an apostolic succeeder?
archaeologists and carbon dating. catholics came up with the idea of a devil's advocate because they spend a lot of their time disproving spooky shit someone once said.

[Anonymous No.10451363]

>>10451349
>archaeologists and carbon dating.

You're completely missing my point. Lets say Peter did establish the Roman Church, what is to prevent me to claim I am the current day succeeder of that Church? Or that any Christian can be?
Its not as if Popes even choose their own successors, its totally arbitrary and mere opinion

[Anonymous No.10451367]

>>10451338
He never said it was a literal expression. Are we to take it that Jesus was literally a lamb too?

[Anonymous No.10451368]

>>10451363
>You're completely missing my point. Lets say Peter did establish the Roman Church, what is to prevent me to claim I am the current day succeeder of that Church? Or that any Christian can be?
Which Cardinal are you and how many of the others did you pay or sire?

[Anonymous No.10451374]

>>10451368
Is there mention of Cardinals in the Bible now?

[Anonymous No.10451383]

>>10451367
>Are we to take it that Jesus was literally a lamb too?
Well St John the Eagle probably wouldn't have eaten bread. I think that it's mostly ducks like bread, and you're not supposed to feed it to them because it's bad for them even though they like it.
Next you'll be saying the language of birds is not really important.

[Anonymous No.10451402]

>>10451374
no, but since it's now later than the synod of 769, that's the only way to qualify into the succession. if the current succession changes the qualifications again you could get lucky.

[Anonymous No.10451410]

>>10451402
>but since it's now later than the synod of 769

Right sorry, I thought you had a serious argument not just LARPing

[Anonymous No.10451414]

>>10450975
Your god isn't real, same as any other god

[Anonymous No.10451451]

>>10451410
>LARPing
watm8? the pope as bishop of rome doesn't exist really until the 4th C. there are other popes and means of succession, and they get validated at different points by different successions, and sometimes validate other denominations as well. rome recognised byzantium for a long time and all the churches various popes recognise some of the other successions to this day. that's what ecumenicism works from.
if you can get your claim validated by one, you can get in on that, but to get in on the roman one currently, you need to become cardinal and sway the rest.

[Anonymous No.10451498]

>Anon is actually interested in TradCat books
>Autistic TradCats tells him to fuck off
This is why your clique will never be in control

[Anonymous No.10451520]

>>10451498
Isn't the guy asking for books telling the guy giving book titles to fuck off? Is it samefag posting titles and then responding to himself saying I don't want that? LEL /lit/s got great spergers

[Anonymous No.10451521]

>I'm a new convert mostly interested in politics, but I already have steadfast views on Vatican II even though I haven't read my catechism.

Will this meme please die?

[Anonymous No.10451527]

>>10451451
>The Pope and his buddies are in charge because the Pope and his buddies said so, lol irrefutable logic

No wonder most of your church are niggers now

[Anonymous No.10451535]

>>10451527
>the synod of 769 changed nothing and cardinals were always choosing popes
>succession is constancy
wat? have a re-read.

[Anonymous No.10451537]

>>10451521
I have read the current one and am against the changed in VII simply because of modernism and the results it has on the public. The decline in attendance in the catholic church, or monastries show a clear line. People want a strict authority not a social worker giving out rubby bubble and rice crispies on high mass dancing to zumba before the post-modern interpretation of the crucifix.

It's not rocket science.

[Anonymous No.10451547]

>>10451535
I was asking you as a Christian for a Biblical justification for conferring hermeneutic authority to an arbitrary cartel and your response is to refer to one of the cartels interior meetings. It would be a joke if I knew you weren't just a ironic cynic with no authentic interest in faith

[Anonymous No.10451552]

>>10451537
Are you saying you'd go to Mass more often if there were a stricter congregation nearby? I'm not seeing the logic here.

[Anonymous No.10451574]

>>10451552
Yes. And this is also why more and more people find tradcats after beeing raised in the modern way.

[Anonymous No.10451582]

>>10451521
I think they're trying to compensate for being new and insincere by being (what they think is) super duper Catholic as possible
>Doesn't know anything about Bible translations or what Vatican II says about them but has steadfast views on usingonly Douay-Rheims

[Anonymous No.10451589]

>>10451574
Too bad the Catholic Church is a lethargic institution which doesn't respond to change against the interests of its aged and complacent leadership

[Anonymous No.10451591]

>>10451547
>I was asking you as a Christian for a Biblical justification
When God came down as the Holy Spirit and conferred his apostles with succession. After that generation, many succession were handed down, which are not recorded in the Bible. They don't tag on every new part of the succession to that. Asking for Biblical evidence which stops before the succession even morphs into a Bishop of Rome is going to make it very hard for you to become one, and harder to be recognised by any other Church, since Ethiopia won't have record of you being around back then either.
You're coming at this from a very literalist Protestant view, and that's only really developed in the past century or so. It doesn't really hold much sway over the longer documented history of how any of these successions work, or, really, any history outside of some new religious compounds I'd imagine...

[Anonymous No.10451593]

>>10451537
>People want a strict authority not a social worker giving out rubby bubble and rice crispies on high mass dancing to zumba before the post-modern interpretation of the crucifix.
You sound legitimately insane. Have you even been to a Novus Ordo mass?

[Anonymous No.10451607]

>>10451593
Yes. Multiple times.

[Anonymous No.10451613]

>>10451591
And so I say again, who is not to say all authentic believers are not a apostolic succeeders? Why have any sort of limit or trust any particular "line" if it is as you admit totally in the air regardless.
You'll find the Church of community is far, far from a 20th century concept

[Anonymous No.10451617]

>>10451574
I don't think OP really found Trad Catholics. He seems annoyed to be judged harshly for not acting like one, and apparently that's a big part of being strict. It doesn't seem like you or him actually want submission to a higher power/strict regime. Or like >>10451582 says, maybe overcompensating. Most Catholics seem to think being Catholic is not a pleasant experience. I have doubts you would show up more often if they gave a longer Mass in a dead language and judged you harshly. I don't think most people would find that offer appealing.

[Anonymous No.10451620]

>>10451613
>And so I say again, who is not to say all authentic believers are not a apostolic succeeders?
>can't I just ignore recorded history for 1700 years
You can, I'm just saying getting everyone else to ignore it is the tricky bit.

[Anonymous No.10451630]

>>10451620
>I'm just saying getting everyone else to ignore it is the tricky bit.

I don't know about where you live but in my country what was once a dominantly and ethusiastic Catholic state is now seeing rapidly dwindling congregations and struggling to recruit Priests without importing them from third world countries. It doesn't seem to me like people are exactly as convinced in Papal legitimacy as you pretend.

[Anonymous No.10451636]

>>10451617
Well, most people don't like what is best for them. Which is why most of use shitpost on the four chinks instead of working out or doing a good deed in RL. Learning latin is also not that hard, especially as every Missae has a local language conter page.

It's also not just about lookig for the most strict definintion, but mostly about going with what seems to be the right path. And that doesn't need to be the comfiest one. I for one don't really care for what some of them screetch about on here, most of them have their own burden to carry and use it to get omething off their chest.

[Anonymous No.10451643]

>>10451630
I'm not buying your Papal legitimacy and I even believe the Roman Pope has probably been shown 4chan. You're not selling it. Maybe try selling it to the Christians, see what happens and if you get more or less Protestant followers and if any other Pope recognises your claim?

[Anonymous No.10451654]

>>10451643
You're totally mistaking my argument. I'm not claiming I personally am the Pope, I'm saying we all succeed the apostles, we all carry the Church they established.
I'm an evangelical and you'll find there is no shortage of people finding our claim convincing

[Anonymous No.10451663]

>>10451636
Learning the Latin Rite is harder and longer than learning the vernacular, I'd imagine. I'm still not getting the logic of "I'll do X+25 amount of work, but X amount of work I won't do". It's like people who say "Oh no, don't start me on 50lb, I'm stronk, start me at 500lb", when it looks like they might need a spot at 50.

[Anonymous No.10451667]

>>10451654
Oh right, someone without succession from those who were touched by the Holy Spirit in the Bible. I always wondered, how do you get around Judas not being an apostolic successor?

[Anonymous No.10451675]

>>10451667
>I always wondered, how do you get around Judas not being an apostolic successor?

I don't follow, but he killed himself before the pentacost regardless

[Anonymous No.10451683]

>>10451367
Jesus was born in Bethlehem; this translates to House of Bread. He was placed in a manger; a manger is where animals eat and the word comes from french word, manger- to eat. When discussing the fathers eating of manna and eating His flesh (Jn. 6 49-50), in the earliest Greek manuscripts, Jesus uses "phago" to describe the eating of manna and He uses "trogo" to describe the eating of His flesh. "phago" translates to "eat" like at a table and "trogo" translates to "gnaw" or "chew" in animalistic way.

Jesus tells the masses to eat His flesh and drink His blood, the bread of life, 8 times, with no qualifying of His statement, no "it's just a metaphor guys!!"

In John 6:

>50. This is the bread[says I am the bread of life] which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

>52. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

>54. Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.

>55. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

>56. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

>57. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him.

>58. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me.

>59. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.

Then literally five thousand people leave because Jesus wouldn't budge on this teaching. People weren't assuming He was being metaphorical. If they did, why would they leave? Jesus persisted in telling them to eat His flesh and drink His blood and pushes the teaching further with more force.

He even goes to the twelve to ask if they want to leave Him too.

So yeah, Jesus was totally being metaphorical about us eating His flesh and drinking His blood, huh? No.

Jesus couldn't be any clearer. It's not a metaphor like "Lamb of God" or "I am the gate". Jesus NEVER qualified His teachings on this to the point of letting thousands of people leave and even expecting the twelve to leave too.

[Anonymous No.10451688]

>>10451683
>Jesus tells the masses to eat His flesh and drink His blood, the bread of life, 8 times, with no qualifying of His statement, no "it's just a metaphor guys!!"

Well they didn't fuck eat him there and then either did they

[Anonymous No.10451702]

>>10451675
I'm wondering how, if apostles in the Bible talking is the basis of everyone else becoming a Christian, how you view Judas within that tradition? I know Catholics are meant to be afraid to pray to the similarly named St Jude (Thaddeus), because they think they might invoke Jude (Iscariot). Is it a justification of suicide if you realise your trangressions, or what? There's so many way that could go if you're relying on the Bible as your only source. I think the Catholic superstition is from tradition since it's not in the Bible.

[Anonymous No.10451710]

>>10451688
>Well they didn't fuck eat him there and then either did they
Holy shit, I just thought about how his body goes missing for a few days after burial.

[Anonymous No.10451716]

>>10451702
My own view is that Judas deserves our forgiveness and treating him like a despicable pariah goes directly against how Jesus himself treated him

[Anonymous No.10451726]

>>10451688

See transubstantiation. The presence of Jesus's Body and Blood is in the Bread and Wine. When transubstantiated, the host literally becomes the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. It may not be physical, but it is literal.

Think of a Man who's married and his wife had just given birth. He became a father. His physical appearance or any piece of his physical matter did not change, yet he is a completely different man now.

Get that analogy and multiply its magnitude by infinity to approach what happens in transubstantiation.

[Anonymous No.10451732]

>>10451716
We ought to pray for him; we do not know whether he is in heaven, hell, or purgatory. Let us pray he is heaven

[Anonymous No.10451739]

>>10451716
I assume you don't use the story from Origen about Peter being crucified upside down and asking to be treated like a pariah, and works attributed to Peter to be apocryphal? That might be why some of the traditional succession isn't clear to you, because that is accepted in the Roman Catholic tradition of succession, but not in the Orthodox, since they chose to follow more than the books in the Bible.

Does evangelicalism ever discuss the formulation of the Bible, or does it just start at KJV for relevant history?

[Anonymous No.10451740]

>>10451726
Look whatever dude. In the end of the day though all this comes down to is Catholics need just one silly ritual to be a hardcoded magic to support their entire circus. You don't believe for a second that the bread is actually flesh and you damn well know it.

[Anonymous No.10451750]

>>10451739
Evangelicals don't use the KJV as standard. The general attitude is you are free to use your own sensibility in deciding which translation is most reflective of the spirit. The NIV tends to be most popular

[Anonymous No.10451759]

>>10451740
>There's only one bit of magic in Catholicism
There's lots of magic to be fair, bro. Magical necklaces, magical dead people, magical wellsprings, magical hats, magical bits of dead people. It's not like bread turning into Jesus's body is the strangest magical shit going on there.

[Anonymous No.10451768]

>>10451750
>The general attitude is you are free to use your own sensibility in deciding which translation is most reflective of the spirit.
That hurt the parts of me that agree with /lit/.

[Anonymous No.10451771]

>>10451759
True, but those others aren't directly Biblically justified. The Communion is the only regular practice which the Church claims has a mystical quality

[Anonymous No.10451776]

>>10451740

Top tier arguments here /lit/. Disregard >>10451683 completely. And I do believe the Eucharist is literally the flesh, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ. There's nothing like it. I pray you might come home to the Church bud. But hey, if you are a Christian (I assume you are because of this doctrinal argument) I'm glad we're brothers in Christ in so many other aspects. :-)

I urge you to look at this as well:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html

a eucharistic miracle with scientific evidence of the anomaly.

[Anonymous No.10451781]

>>10451771
Bible isn't the only authority.

sola scriptura is flawed

[Anonymous No.10451787]

>>10451771
No, the rosary, the Pope's hat, Lourdes, and saint's relics and miracles are all better indicators of Catholicism. Those necklaces to however many saints for whichever purpose, and that kind of magic is all the stuff that happens every day of the week.

[Anonymous No.10451797]

>>10451781
As an evangelical I would agree, but once you cross that line the authority of the Church becomes totally obliterated in face of what becomes a community of spirit.

[Anonymous No.10451832]

>>10451797
sorry, which line?

and what do you mean by the Church(RCC?) becoming
>totally obliterated in face of what becomes a community of spirit.

[Anonymous No.10451844]

>>10450975

[Anonymous No.10451860]

>>10451710
That's onestly the most blaspheme/holy thing I've ever heard about Jesus

Way to go anon

[Anonymous No.10451885]

>>10451860
He did say they should eat him. Maybe it's the last kosher supper before, you know.

[Anonymous No.10451949]

>>10451832
The collapse of all contingent authority in exchange for all worshippers having placed on them their own personal relationship to God in which the Church becomes simply the community of individuals in the one spirit

[Anonymous No.10452146]

>>10451949
Not him but are you arguing that the "church" needed to exist only as long as it prepared the Bible, afterwards the Bible itself , through faith, establishes a decentralized spiritual community?

[Anonymous No.10452217]

>>10451521
The solution to this is to read basic pro-VII Catholic stuff (Kreeft, Ratzinger, etc.) and classics that aren't considered solely trad (so read Aqunias but not various early 20th century NeoThomists). No reason why one can't go to a Latin Mass if they prefer it but stick to reading list that isn't specifically trad. Chesteron and Belloc are well liked beyond the trad-sphere as well. Don't want to be like someone who just learned what baseball is and immediately has a strong opinion on the DH and the Curt Flood case.

[Anonymous No.10452237]

>>10452146
That's exactly it. I take a lot of influence from Hegel's writings on Christianity here

[Anonymous No.10452262]

>>10450975
No, that happened because Protestants exist.

[Anonymous No.10452263]

>>10452237
but why though? Why would Church authority just end there. Wouldn't all the personal relationships with God be a melting pot of disagreement among each other?

Yeah everyone has their own personal relationship, but it seems without definitive teachings, there are no boundaries that keep the relationships non-heretical

[Anonymous No.10452310]

>>10452263
>Why would Church authority just end there.

It should never have existed in the first place. But we live in a world of men and sin where the Church was a mediating institution that controlled and protected a community of conflicting wills both pure and impure in intent. But it was ultimately one which like the Jewish law before Christ was all too arbitrary and contrary to the freedom of will, and in turn restrained the possibility of true community and acting in accordance with the spirit.
There will be heresy and there will be conflict and there will be those misled, but its the price that must be paid on the path towards true accordance with the spirit which must always be our goal.

[Anonymous No.10452925]

>>10452310
well, we'd never have the Bible without a Church authority if it never should have existed in the first place.

[Anonymous No.10452962]

>>10451103
Imagine thinking your meme is actually accurate for the general European population. I spot a self hating American

[Anonymous No.10453009]

>>10451787
It's all real, too. Catholicism is a religion of active miracles.

[Anonymous No.10453154]

>>10453009
>It's all real, too.
>doesn't post our lady of akita
wtf is wrong with you?

[Anonymous No.10453210]

>>10453154
I apologize, Anon, I'll post one of the approved Marian apparitions.

[Anonymous No.10453246]

OP
SHOULD
READ
THE
SUMMA
THEOLOGICA
COVER
TO
COVER
AND
THEN
ACTUALLY
READ
THE
TEXT
OF
VATICAN
II

MAYBE
THEN
HE’D
STOP
BEING
SUCH
A
FUCKING
PLEB

Also, Simon Peter was endowed with real authority of the church, which was passed to the Bishop of Rome. As such, the Bishop of Rome has real authority over all member’s of Christ’s Church. The only individual with a claim to that position today is Pope Francis. Therefore, protestants are really fucking dumb and don’t even realise The Church stopped selling indulgences ages ago.

Q E D

Also, sola scriptura is as retarded as being a Mormon. Original Sin is not a concept in the bible(since the OT was for Jews, and the NT for gentiles, and both were buying into the covenant once for their whole bloodline). If you believe baptism is necessary for Christian babies, you’re not sola scriptura.

Questions?

[Anonymous No.10453325]

>>10451663
It's pretty easy. Most people just don't see a reason to attent mass if it's completely earthly aka "it's just a symbol, dude", "let's just enjoy each other" and " the community is the core of the church" instead of the tabernakel and altar. Humans wat a deeper meaning, something aboce themselves, mysteries. Even more so in an age of reason, Why do you think so many people go into the occult or "spiriuality"? They stil want what the church has taken away in an attemt to go with the time.

That's why even as an atheist you will be taken away by the atmosphere of a ancient cathedral unlike a humble room with nothing but eathly symbols without anything beyond our knowledge. There is need for your own spiritual evolution if all myteries and glory are taken away and everything can be explained out in simple terms of just "love each other".

[Anonymous No.10453347]

>>10451663
It's pretty easy. Most people just don't see a reason to attent mass if it's completely earthly aka "it's just a symbol, dude", "let's just enjoy each other" and " the community is the core of the church" instead of the tabernakel and altar. Humans wat a deeper meaning, something aboce themselves, mysteries. Even more so in an age of reason, Why do you think so many people go into the occult or "spiriuality"? They stil want what the church has taken away in an attemt to go with the time.

That's why even as an atheist you will be taken away by the atmosphere of a ancient cathedral unlike a humble room with nothing but eathly symbols without anything beyond our knowledge. There is no need for your own spiritual evolution if all myteries and glory are taken away and everything can be explained out in simple terms of just "love each other".

[Anonymous No.10453362]

>>10453325
the community of saints (i.e. those who get into heaven) is considered a bit thing in RCC, and trying to work out mysteries is some shit you only do after becoming a Church lawyer.

it wouldn't make sense to go for traditional Catholic if you wanted to avoid community and get secret mysteries, and a lot of the more liberal communities would be easier to find that in them. there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding, like OP saw the word "traditionalist" and thought it meant super sekrit club. idk, maybe he really wants a priest to touch his tongue at communion instead of his hands, but i think he might be on the wrong path if that's the reasoning.

[Anonymous No.10453367]

>>10453347
>>10453362
it really does sound more like a movie version of the middle ages than actual trad catholics tbph

[Anonymous No.10453462]

>>10453362
I am OP and I came about the term just studying the bible and fellow lit off- and online. It's just what I consider the right path of what I currently know about the church and human nature. As you can read above, I can't patake in any community as there is no such thing in my wider area, so it's purely about my own understanding and feeling of appropiate behaviour in the given context. To make matters worse, I am also more of an agnostic, so TC is more of an cultural treasure in regard to the decline of the west, to use Spenglers words.

It also has not much in common with the middle ages, as the rules back then were much stricter. The reason why I would rather attend a latin mass are the fact that post VCII the community is the core, instead of christ (aka the individual conextion with god aking the church more or less useless and therefore takinga wa the main motivation for attending the one biggest social and cultural glue we have) and the respect given through rituals seen as "useless" and "out of touch" in modern versions. Not veiling for women is just anther attempt to play into modern notions of equality of the sexes instead of celebrating their distiction.

At least for me it's less about seeming hollier than thou (which would be pretty useless, I nobody even knows or cares for my believes) and more about the reasons why we do it. Even more so as someone with a scientific background considering it from an agnostic perspective.

Till I made that thread I didn't even know it's some kind of meme to sperg about.

[Anonymous No.10453779]

>>10451278
Protestant inability to ground their religious epistemology and understand what the Bible actually says without becoming arbitrary and based in a tradition that's there, but not Catholic. Private judgement is the death of meaning for religious judgements and understanding doesn't exist at all without a tradition. Protestants are just ignorant about this.

[Anonymous No.10453790]

>>10452217
To be fair all pre V2 will be taken as traditional because the spirit of V2 is in contradiction with everything before it. The modernist has very few authors to draw from without cherry picking.

[Anonymous No.10453896]

Non-Catholic here, been reading the Haydock Bible cover to cover and it's certainly an interesting experience. I like the comparisons between Bible law and literature and that of other societies.

It often seems like the Bible is too edgy for Haydock and his sources. They'll justify something extreme by saying "God gave this person special permission to do it in this case, but don't imitate their actions" when the text suggests no such thing. And then, on the other hand, sometimes they'll add something really fucked up. For example, there's a bit in Judges where a woman gets raped to death by an entire town and when news of this reaches the heads of all the tribes, they say, understandably, that it's the worst crime in the history of Israel. The commentary says something like "it was the worst crime committed against another person, but it goes without saying that idolatry is actually a worse crime."

[Anonymous No.10453906]

>>10453896
Yes, idolatry is a crime against God, crimes against God are worse than crimes against man.

[Anonymous No.10453924]

>>10453906
>praying to the wrong god is objectively worse than raping someone to death
>this is what Catholics actually believe

[Anonymous No.10453928]

>>10453906
Isn't the taking of a life given by god in an act forbidden even in the 10 comendments at least as bad? I mean, both are acts against god, but at least adultery is only by own failure, rape and murder show a far deeper ignorance of his comandments.

[Anonymous No.10453957]

>>10453924
Google vincible ignorance. Please.

>>10453928
I’d say indulging in sins of the flesh are more crimes against god than man.

[Anonymous No.10453969]

>>10453957
So, group rape-murdering is worse than adultery. It literaly breaks tweo comandments. Stop beeing edgy. Rape is the worst thing which can happen to a tribe, biologically and therefore socially and made into written theological law.

[Anonymous No.10453980]

>>10453957
>Google vincible ignorance. Please.
Don't need to because I know what it is. This reinforces another impression I've gotten from Haydock: Catholics are insufferably smug.

[Anonymous No.10453983]

>>10453924
Yes, for the same reason that it's not okay to torture animals, but it's worse to torture humans- ontologically more value is placed on humans than animals and on God than humans.

[Anonymous No.10453988]

>>10453969
>Rape is the worst thing which can happen to a tribe...

Nuh-uh, it's the best thing. What do you think early wars of aggression were about?

[Anonymous No.10453989]

>>10453928
Murder is worse than rape, rape is worse than adultery, I don't know what you are implying, no one is saying that murder is less severe than adultery. Crimes against God are on the other hand worse than crimes against man and that's why it's the first 3 commandments and not the last 3.

[Anonymous No.10454002]

>>10453988
Are you to retarded to read? Getting your only available wombs raped by a foreign tribe is the worst that can happen retard.

>>10453989
I am saying that rape, murder and adultery are all crimes against god and therefore adultery isn't worse than rape-murdering as that quote which the anon above shared. It implies that rae and muder aren't crimes against god.

[Anonymous No.10454015]

>>10453989
Is this what Catholics tell themselves?
>Hey my priest might be a child molester, but at least he's not as bad as these fucking heathens who don't respect God's true church

[Anonymous No.10454032]

>>10454002
Not for the raping tribe m80. You will note I said wars of aggression.

[Anonymous No.10454053]

>>10454015
You can be bad in one aspect, good in another, you end up in hell anyway as both are mortal sins, but of different severity.

[Anonymous No.10454064]

>>10453790
>all pre V2 will be taken as traditional
Only by the most extreme progressive Catholics. Normie conservative Catholics (Kreeft, Catholic Answers, EWTN, Bp. Barron) promote Aquinas, John of the Cross, Chesterton, etc. all the time. Most Novus Ordo churches I've attended have plenty of the pre-V2 classics in their parish library. Typically the stuff from before the 60s that gets pigeonholed as "trad" deals specifically with the Mass, the religious liberty debate, or Neothomism. I've found that the normie conservative types outnumber the outright modernists in most American dioceses.

[Anonymous No.10454073]

>>10454064
EWTN is at this point traditionalist and Catholic Answers new stuff quite modernist.

[Anonymous No.10454075]

>>10451094
>communion wafers
>wafers
Western ""Christianity"" is disgusting.

[Anonymous No.10454093]

>>10453779
The establishment of state churches in Northern Europe tricked protestants into thinking there was more consensus over doctrine then there actually was. Even something like Sola Gratia is non-essential. Lutheranism and Calvinism became dominant entirely because of state backing and the state suppression of Radical protestant groups. Modern Lutherans and Calvinists see all the dozens of protestant offshoots (JWs, Mormons, Pentecostals) and think its some weird historical development, and not something inherent in protestantism that would have occurred in the 1520s if not for Northern European princes burning radical protestant heretics.

[Anonymous No.10455420]

>>10454075
you mean cafeteria Catholics/ liberals?

the "wafer" is called The Body of Christ, the Eucharist, the Lamb of God, the Flesh of Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ, the Host and I attend a pretty conservative parish, not as conservative as europe tho

[Anonymous No.10455442]

>>10454075
>>10455420
The wafers are the ones for distrubution, the Host is the big one that the priest breaks and will not generally feed the whole congregation.
It is not called the Body of Christ or Eucharist or Flesh of Christ until they have been blessed, when transubstantiation happens. Until then, they are wafers.
>tfw eight year old Catholics know this shit it's so basic

[Anonymous No.10455456]

>>10453462
>It also has not much in common with the middle ages
>>10453367
>movie version of the middle ages
I don't think he meant movies get the middle ages right, tbqh.

[Anonymous No.10455476]

If you're not really hung up on being a traditionalist, go to RCIA classes at a Catholic Church/school. RCIA is a reaction against traditionalist indoctrination, but it'll teach you catechism and a basic understanding of terms as used within the Church. They can also probably advise you of any traditionalist communities or members are in your area you might have overlooked.
Hell, just show up to Mass and see if anyone refuses to take the Eucharist in their hands, and you have found your new traditionalist friend.

[Anonymous No.10455566]

>>10454064
Francis even recommended Lord of The World from the turn of the last century by Benson. I doubt OP means he wants sci-fi.

On the other hand, a lot of trad Catholics would have read and had opinions on the early Jesuits and recommend people read them to understand why they're wrong/right. You have to defend the adherence to tradition as not scruples, so knowing who you're arguing against and how is a larger part of it. I find it strange that scruples didn't come up in the latest popularity from the movie and book Silence. It's a very small step from a straw accidental cross to a manufactured cross, and Jesuit *founders* had recognised scruples against stepping on the first as probably sent by the Devil
Not reading the other side isn't trad. A lot of the conservative politically, but raised post V2, Catholics I doubt would link birth control with communism for instance, or argue for the exact text of the bull. For them it's an idea formed by their politics and not the edicts of the Church.

[Anonymous No.10457252]

>>10453246
Why has nobody responded to this?

[Anonymous No.10458552]

>>10455476
Or just google “Latin Mass x city”.

[Anonymous No.10458567]

>>10458552

[Anonymous No.10458654]

>>10450975
>muh grand tradishun
>rekt by shrewd businessmen
I guess that you like Father Brown too. Must be sci-fi for you. A catholic priest not complicit in kiddy fiddling.

Catholics are just like muslims. Leeching on the productive, then claim that they *really* did something.

[Anonymous No.10458739]

>>10451527
Here's a better one:

>the child abuse scandal started sporadically in the 80s and became public knowledge in the 90s
>it is not thousands of discrete cases, but proofs of some kind of systematic failure
>the culture of silence only explains so much, one factor under-adressed is the fact that christianity, especially catholicism, is a lower abdomen religion
>e.g. despite France being so republican and atheist, the church manged to obstruct proper sex ed in schools
>e.g. teen girls raped by priests are blamed because they didn't just say "Stop! Think of Jesus." or something
>e.g. there's a whole caste of celibates that, unlike incels, doesn't even aspire to full adulthood
>be Johannes Paulus II in the 90s
>what do?
>shall we go to the bottom with this?
>nah, let's push for that albanian nun who together with Muggeridge singel-handedly ruined Calcutta's reputation
>then let another pope steamroll her canonization

>>10451537
>I have read the current one and am against the changed in VII simply because of modernism and the results it has on the public. The decline in attendance in the catholic church, or monastries show a clear line. People want a strict authority not a social worker giving out rubby bubble and rice crispies on high mass dancing to zumba before the post-modern interpretation of the crucifix.
See above. The Church had a window where they could act harshly on the sex abuse scandal. Before they had to close down whole dioceses because the weregild got too heavy. It had.

Now it's in total decline and african cardinals and maybe popes who are Martin Sempa 2: Electric Boogaloo won't do anything good.

The question is not if the church will be supplanted but by what. The 2nd worst lower abdomen religion is islam. My suggestion is that the western world takes some hints from the dharmic and daoitic religions. There was a western world before abrahamism. There will be after.

[Anonymous No.10458768]

>>10458739
Well, on average there isn't more child molestation in the church than in the general public, so I don't really care. Every institution working with children attracts pedos, religious or not. Did they act the right way? Nope, but that's just liek any other business trying to minimize the fallout. Ever heard about Dutroux and the belgien/ european goverment? Consider such cases when bashing on a church, which gets mouled in the press while nearly 20 people got killed in the Dutroux case before they could speak out.

[Anonymous No.10458769]

>>10451149
>whoa careful there. you do not know anyone else's state of grace and proselytizing is generally considered protestant.
The absolute fucking state of Catholicism in America.

[Anonymous No.10458777]

>>10458768
>Well, on average there isn't more child molestation in the church than in the general public,
There's actually a lot less, given latest news and statistical analisys, seems like kids are a lot safer in Church than in the tipical public school.
But the world belongs to the Powers and Principalities.

[Anonymous No.10458786]

>>10458777
Can you give me some stats? Lost my source on my old bookmarks and couldn't find them again. Always nice to be able to prove onces words.

[Anonymous No.10458801]

>>10458786
I'll be back, i should have something bookmarked.

[Anonymous No.10458809]

>>10458801
https://www.google.it/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/forgotten-study-abuse-in-school-100-times-worse-than-by-priests

Here,first thing i've found. This links to some studies.

[Anonymous No.10458811]

>>10458768
>Well, on average there isn't more child molestation in the church than in the general public, so I don't really care.
>Every institution working with children attracts pedos, religious or not.
Oh, ffs! Every institution can nurture a culture of silence. But the church is odd man out because of:

A) It's a lower abdomen religion.

B) The local congregations often serves the same functions as the welfare state does "up north". The advantage is that it can run much smoother, because knowledge is tacit and sticky. The disadvantage is that a culture of silence can be purged by central diktats.

C) The church in general is most meddling regarding policy making. If it can make some semi-litterates in some 3rd world country believe that there's no opt-out from church teachings, then good. If they can practically run a country, such as El Salvador, then good.

>Did they act the right way? Nope, but that's just liek any other business trying to minimize the fallout.
Bullshit! In 1990, some retard in the US perpetrated the Volvo monster truck hoax. A central diktat from Volvo HQ purged the retard.

>Ever heard about Dutroux and the belgien/ european goverment?
Apples and oranges. The Dutroux case was because of the shitty belgian police organization.

>Consider such cases when bashing on a church, which gets mouled in the press
It's not like we've harping about *that* case from 1997. There's constantly new cases.

>while nearly 20 people got killed in the Dutroux case before they could speak out.
He killed "only" 5. Not *nearly* 20.

>tfw the papist cannot even into proper numbers

[Anonymous No.10458817]

>>10451064
>read Jung

Ah yes, here is a man standing on the shoulders of 2000 years of theological scholarship.

[Anonymous No.10458832]

This book will blow your mind even if you THINK you understand Catholic theology

[Anonymous No.10458845]

>>10458809
Thanks.

>>10458811
>A
Made up nonsene. Discharged.
>B
Wrong, as the case Dutroux shows. A goverment can silence much easier than a church with so many enemies and usefull fedoras.
>C
Stupid people will do stupid shit no matter what. Be it religious El Salvador or secular Venecuela.

>A central diktat from Volvo HQ purged the retard.
Yes, after they been foudn out, just like VW this year.

>The Dutroux case was because of the shitty belgian police organization.
Hahaha, sweet summer child. It's just been a coincidence. Yes, yes. That all it been. Nothing to see hear. Keep moving.

>There's constantly new cases
Just like in goverment, just that the later get called fake news or never come out if the wrong people are targeted.

>He killed "only" 5. Not *nearly* 20.
It wasn't him, it was the goverment who killed the witnesses.

>tfw fedoras suck up historical revisionism just to bash on the church

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuPkoGGm_xQ

[Anonymous No.10458847]

>>10458809
>100 times
And adjusting for pupil-on-pupil abuse, how bad is it then?

But if we follow the lower abdomen religion-logic, then a titty grab is *at least as bad* as raping boys in the ass so they bleed. Therefore schools are the sexual hellatory on earth. Or something.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/07/catholic-church-children-buried-at-tuam-ireland
>death certificates for 796 children
>burial certificates for 2 children
>papist math, not even once

[Anonymous No.10458854]

>>10458811
An observer would do well to note the degree to which your criticisms of a supernatural order hinge on worldly matters. Your understanding of Catholicism is cursory at best.

[Anonymous No.10458864]

>>10458847
>death certificates for 796 children at the home between 1925 and 1961
Anon, ever heart of Engelmachern? Those were the daily bread of nearly all children homes in those times, especially for those with retarded ones. Women paid such institutions to care for their unwnted born and those just let them starved and drowned them to enrich themselves.

You lacking in histporical knowledge is lacking.

[Anonymous No.10458881]

>>10458845
>Made up nonsene. Discharged.
So the church *doesn't* constantly harps about sex this and sex that?

>Wrong, as the case Dutroux shows. A goverment can silence much easier than a church with so many enemies and usefull fedoras.

>Stupid people will do stupid shit no matter what. Be it religious El Salvador or secular Venecuela.
No, only special systems allows the "stupid" people to do harm.

>Yes, after they been foudn out, just like VW this year.
You're not so bright. You could see the hoax fail in realtime. They strenghtened a Volvo and weakened the rest of the cars. Then ran a monster truck over them. Every intelligent person would get a hunch that something was wrong, despite not be able to prove it.

And if you don't get a hunch that something is wrong after 25-35 years of scandals, then. Well you can be two of these three things, but not all three at the same time.

X) Intelligent
Y) Honest
Z) Say that the church sex abuse isn't *that* bad

If you are X and Y, then you can't say Z.
If you're Y and say Z, then you aren't X.
If you are X and say Z, then you aren't Y.


>Hahaha, sweet summer child. It's just been a coincidence. Yes, yes. That all it been. Nothing to see hear. Keep moving.
The belgian authorities have cleaned up their act. Good thing that the church isn't responsible for solving murder cases. Because then they would not finger any suspect, because that would be thinking bad things about your neighbor.

>Just like in goverment, just that the later get called fake news or never come out if the wrong people are targeted.
>akshually, the church isn't worst
-_-

>It wasn't him, it was the goverment who killed the witnesses.
Kill 20 to cover up the murders of 5? That's some grade-A papist math. What's the next thing you're going to say? That The Brabant Killers akshually covered up for the rumors of "Rooze Balletten" or what?

[Anonymous No.10458895]

>>10458881
>So the church *doesn't* constantly harps about sex this and sex that?
Nope. Sexual as any other control of your urges is just the best way to stabilize a society, which is why monogamy is so productive.

>No, only special systems allows the "stupid" people to do harm.
I, too, envision a world of eugenics, anon. But we have to be patient.

>And if you don't get a hunch that something is wrong after 25-35 years of scandals, then
So you are telling me the public is stupid for not pushing the church to react earlier? Again, the stats show that it's not worse than anywhere else. Kids get molested in secular goverment institutions all the time.

>The belgian authorities have cleaned up their act
Sure, the european union has such a white vest. :^)

>akshually, the church isn't worst
It isn't. Just face it. If you want to hate on the church look for actual things in which they are shittier than the secular institutions instead of sperging out on a good goy meme.

>Kill 20 to cover up the murders of 5?
Anon, you obviously don't know shit about the Dutroux case if you think its about just 5 dead kids and one pedophile. Don't make a foul out of yourself.

[Anonymous No.10458901]

>>10458854
>eternal bliss for everyone, but not here, not now >>>>> the here and now for one individual

>>10458864
>whataboutism

Gee, reminds me of something else.

[Anonymous No.10458911]

>>10458901
>stating historical reliatity is whataboutism
Anon, it's not our fault that you know shit and pick such things out of context to make the church look the worst without telling that it's been something like a social rule. Do you even know how even adults in asylums got treated till the 80s? Death is a preferable solution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbiYJkiX-Dg

[Anonymous No.10458919]

>>10458895
>Nope. Sexual as any other control of your urges is just the best way to stabilize a society, which is why monogamy is so productive.
>the best way to control sexuality is that saying that it's inheretly bad, except for procreation
>fags are tolerated, as long as they are celibate.
Really nice outfit you got there.

>I, too, envision a world of eugenics, anon. But we have to be patient.
Nice strawman! North vs South Korea. East vs West Germany. Who sucked and why?

>So you are telling me the public is stupid for not pushing the church to react earlier? Again, the stats show that it's not worse than anywhere else. Kids get molested in secular goverment institutions all the time.
The public has been cucked since the beginning of the scandals. The public has been patient.

>Sure, the european union has such a white vest. :^)
>even the church is fallible
>then it's infallible again

>It isn't. Just face it. If you want to hate on the church look for actual things in which they are shittier than the secular institutions instead of sperging out on a good goy meme.
The church is shittier than any water and sewage treatment authority. But the church doesn't have any pretentions on knowing about that.

>Anon, you obviously don't know shit about the Dutroux case if you think its about just 5 dead kids and one pedophile. Don't make a foul out of yourself.
Belgians are retards. /thread

[Anonymous No.10458926]

>>10458911
The difference between authorities and the church is that even the average state has safeguards and a free press is the antithesis of culture of silence.

But the main difference is that neither the authorities nor the free press has the same telos as the church - namely eternal bliss for everyone yaddiyaddi (so what does a few or a few thousand boy's buttholes make a difference?)

[Anonymous No.10458929]

>>10458919
>he best way to control sexuality is that saying that it's inheretly bad, except for procreation
That's not what the church says, It's what puritans say, retard.

But yes, if you control your desire to sin, and don't sin you can be a better christian than those never having to deal with your inner devil.
It'S not tolerating faggots, it's making them not become faggots.

>The public has been cucked since the beginning of the scandals. The public has been patient.
The masses are always cucked and patient.

>even the church is fallible
>then it's infallible again
The church aka humans are fallible, never said anything else. Nice strawmen anon.

>The church is shittier than any water and sewage treatment authority.
[citation needed]
Concentrate your hate on reality soto not look like a foul if encountering people who know what they speak about.

[Anonymous No.10458937]

>>10458929
>believes that faggotry is only a figment of the mind
Then why didn't the priests just figment away from molesting children?

[Anonymous No.10458942]

>>10451064
>The creator of that image should read Jung
yeah, nah dude.

[Anonymous No.10458943]

>>10458937
>believes that faggotry is only a figment of the mind
Nope, it's a psychological (and therefore biological) reality as a illness of the mind due to nurture and nature. But one can controll oneself if one wants. If ones to weak to do it one should get thrown off the shore. Pretty easy.

[Anonymous No.10459040]

>>10458768
>Well, on average there isn't more child molestation in the church than in the general public, so I don't really care.
So the Christ's Church being no better than earthly institutions is alright? To me, it says that the Roman Catholic Church is just another earthly institution.

[Anonymous No.10459052]

>>10458943
So we should kill all the child-molesting priests? Why didn't the Church deal with them?

[Anonymous No.10459069]

>>10459040
>To me, it says that the Roman Catholic Church is just another earthly institution.
Sure it is. It's humans, what did you expect? The pope is a human. Even the most religious people only see him as a phonebox to god.

>So we should kill all the child-molesting priests? Why didn't the Church deal with them?
Yes. Dunno, because the church of today is mostly let by earthly politics like a filthy goverment? Just take christmas when the pope talked about fucking refugees instead of something spiritual and psuhes modernists naratives instead of faith. Read into why so many consider PostVII popes to not be legitimate and the sede therefore vacante.

[Anonymous No.10459095]

>>10450975

[Anonymous No.10459173]

>>10459095
NiBBers are animals, part of gods creation but not our equals.

[Anonymous No.10459315]

>>10458769
>The absolute fucking state of Catholicism in America.
It's not in America. If you lived in any Catholic country you'd understand why you're retarded, because how the fuck do you proselytize when everyone's baptised?

Further, it's literally doctrine that we can't. Not just one but several popes have literally called it "a grave sin" to proselytize, some even including the warning that it doesn't matter if they're Christian already and in the wrong Church or entirely pagan.

You're basically a protestant if you think otherwise.

[Anonymous No.10459323]

>>10459315
>You're basically a protestant if you think otherwise

This. Faggots here are happy to call themselves Catholic until it actually asks the slightest thing of them

[Anonymous No.10459337]

>>10459069
If you legitimately think the Body of Christ is just an earthly institution and are a sedevaticanist, you're literally not Catholic.

[Anonymous No.10459342]

>>10459323
I doubt many of them are baptised or confirmed Catholics. I think they're used to the protestant "anyone can join in" churches, and not the "we'll excommunicate you if you don't have special dispensation to attend an episcopal wedding" kind of churches.

[Anonymous No.10459435]

>>10459342
You meaning owning a Douay-Rheims and arguing with strangers on the internet doesn't automatically grant salvation?

[Anonymous No.10459633]

>>10457252
>responding to a Thomist
Do you know how long that can go on for? Look up how long scholasticism lasted.

[Anonymous No.10459984]

>>10458943
>Nope, it's a psychological (and therefore biological) reality as a illness of the mind due to nurture and nature. But one can controll oneself if one wants. If ones to weak to do it one should get thrown off the shore. Pretty easy.
Ergo: fags are stronger than priests. But it's the priests that bashes fags.

[Anonymous No.10460022]

>>10459984
Pretty sure most child molestation is male priest on male child, anon, as there aren't many female children in the care of males, but nuns. Therefore faggots are the plague in day to day life as well in religious circles trying to better themselves.

[Anonymous No.10460035]

>>10459323
>This. Faggots here are happy to call themselves Catholic until it actually asks the slightest thing of them
Blame it on confession! XD

[Anonymous No.10460044]

>>10460022
Religious priestarchies attract faggots, Tibet, Islam, Judaism all have the same problem with generational pedo-faggot behavior as Caths do.

[Anonymous No.10460081]

>>10460044
Institutions with children attract pedos which want to act on it, nothing secific to religion. I was on a border school and guess what, we had two Pedos, which everyone knew about. That's just how they roll. Its not a probelm of the church but law which should just kill of those which offend.

[Anonymous No.10460156]

>>10460035
>being this protestant and soulless

[Anonymous No.10460338]

>>10460156
>believing in the soul
>any year

>>10460081
>Institutions with children attract pedos which want to act on it, nothing secific to religion.
What's specific for the church of the confirmed bachelors is that it won't root out anything. As long as it remains a lower abdomen cult.

[Anonymous No.10460344]

>>10460338
>>believing in the soul
>>any year
>on a literature board
/mu/ might be more your speed
www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5Z9prlNj38

[Anonymous No.10460457]

>>10460344
>mu h /lit/
Is this liek yur last resort or what?

[Anonymous No.10460471]

>>10460457
it's not just /lit/, it's any literature forum. are you here to read manuals?

[Anonymous No.10460566]

>>10459633
It’s almost as if Aquinas was right.

[Anonymous No.10460591]

>>10460338
What the fuck is a lower abdomen cult? Explain your dumb terminology.

[Anonymous No.10460645]

>>10460081
>nothing specific to orders of chaste celibate effeminate males with immense power over women, elders and the community
oh ok anon

[Anonymous No.10460656]

>>10460081
>nothing secific to religion

What is specific is the great lengths the religion took to protect the pedophiles

[Anonymous No.10460847]

>>10451064
>Communion IS “only” a symbol

“If it's just a symbol, to hell with it.”
-Flannery O'Connor

http://shamelesspopery.com/flannery-oconnor-on-the-eucharist-and-church-history/

[Anonymous No.10461205]

>>10460847
love that quote from Flannery

[Anonymous No.10462334]

>>10460645
>the catholic church as an masculine institution is effeminate (still an ebil badriargy cause muh womanz and eldars, which pedophils are known to care for)
oh ok anon

[Anonymous No.10463065]

>>10460471
>catholic
>actually *reading* books

>>10460591
A lower abdomen cult is a cult that has an unhealty interest in the lower abdomen. If a married male dips his dick in powdered and has his wife kiss and lick it clean, the church will be there with plenty of tomes where they explain how sinful it is.

Face it: The Church is against masturbation on principle, because it's not foucsed on others (well, duh!) With some mental gymnastics, from that follows that contraception is bad, because it makes sex focus on pleasure, not other people. Then there's the whole jestery with "safe periods". Ogino's intention was to find out when a woman is most fertile. But with the usual mental gymnastics, the church just inverted the logic and claimed that it was the only "contraception" allowed. (Because, masturbation, oral- and anal sex is sinful. y'know.)

The church claims to be some kind of father, mother, midwife and keeper of science. But it's all BS. Just see where literacy spread among the commoners first.

Because saying that X has a lower probability than Y is not the same thing to say as X is safe and Y is unsafe. Consider if Ogino was to find out how to kill humans easiest. He would stab half of the subjects in the neck and the other half in the buttocks. Then he would conclude that the neck is more vunerable.

If the church used the same logic, they would say that the buttocks are bulletproof.

[Anonymous No.10463082]

>>10463065
Do you happen to be a person known as fbanon aka lennart? You have the same sort of writing style, I'm just curious.

[Anonymous No.10463098]

>>10450975
"Trad" catholic essential reading: read the Bible and then do the opposite of everything it tells you to do

[Anonymous No.10463121]

>>10463065
>strawmanning shit because you don't really know why certain rules have been implemented
Sex in a marriage is never "illegal" in the catholic church, you can fuck her sideways if you like. Again Puritans are those you describe.

Masturbation is "haram" because it makes going into a relationship less likely (because you already have something to jerk off), again self-restrain is a virtue in every aspect.

Only PURITANS are against sex in a marriage out side of procreation. Good lord, you retard don't even know what you are talking about. Shut you fedora mouth and read up before making a clown out of yourself and catching a hitchslap from a theist.

The churchs monch are the only reason we still have ancient knowledge, after the muzzioes burned down the library of alexandria and the monch autistically transcribed it from greek and latin, further their love for Aristoteles and Plato should be a nice little indicator about how much they been in love with science. Without them the renaissance would have never happened.

Neck yourself. Not for beeing a fedora, bt for talking out of your ass acting like you know anything.