/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12232942]

He's going to be a saint soon, /lit/. Have you read any of his stuff?

[Anonymous No.12232965]

As a matter of fact, I did. Grammar of Assent is one of my favourite books.

[Anonymous No.12232973]

He's no Lacordaire.

[Anonymous No.12232989]

>>12232942
>start a movement to revive catholicism after years of proddie tyranny and heathenry
>catholicism commits sudoku a century later
sad

[Anonymous No.12233034]

>>12232942
i can't wait for /ourguy/ pic related to get canonized
>>12232989
yeah, the catholic church really needs another newman to revitalize it, the scandal is still the first thing most people think of when you say 'catholic church'

[Anonymous No.12233059]

>>12232989
>>12233034
Fortunately it's usually just when things seem shittiest for the Church that great saints emerge to revive it and restore it to its former splendor. It happened in the time of Peter Damian and in the time of the Counter-Reformation. Every 500 years or so the Church seems to need a house-cleaning. Hopefully one will happen soon.

[Anonymous No.12233106]

>>12232989
>>12233034
Can you guys quickly explain to me the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism? What is the fundamental difference in their thought, and why do they hate eachother so much? Which one, do you personally consider to be "better" or more representative of Christ? It just seems funny to see this sort-of war between the two groups, and yet not know why they fight. Is it a serious feud, or a lighthearted one? Which group is more based, and which one buttmad?

[Anonymous No.12233140]

>>12233106
i don't mean this as dismissive, but you can look up the protestant reformation and find way more info than we can give you here

[Anonymous No.12233198]

>>12233106
im from NI so our culture basically revolves around that divide and most people dont even know why the conflict is there in the first place, its like an ingrained prejudice and tendency for disagreements. and as >>12233140 said; you're probably better just looking up Lutherianism and see the development from ML onwards, differences are minimal save for a few features in reality

[Anonymous No.12233204]

>>12233198
>differences are minimal save for a few features in reality

Eh, that depends on how far along the "reform" path you go. The Lutherans and the Anglicans, for example, can be relatively similar to Catholicism. But the Southern Baptists are rather nutty, and the Pentecostals are totally fucking insane.

[Anonymous No.12233223]

>>12233140
I will, thanks. Would still be nice, however, to at least get a meme-answer that'll make laugh, summarizing their differences in a silly greenpost or so.

[Anonymous No.12233233]

>>12233223
>catholics are super camp gay
>protestants think christians should be more butch gay
>conflict occurs

[Anonymous No.12233246]

>>12233204
the presbyterian here are practically just a stripped back and less strict version of catholicism

[Anonymous No.12233254]

>>12233106
>quickly explain to me the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism
Scripture is ultimate authority vs Pope is ultimate authority

>or more representative of Christ
Obviously both will say they are but if we're being honest going by the letter is (ie. protestantism).

>Is it a serious feud, or a lighthearted one?
Depends on who you ask within the two

>Which group is more based, and which one buttmad?
Goddammit reddit

[Anonymous No.12233261]

>>12233204
>and the Pentecostals are totally fucking insane.
The catholic church endorses pentecostalism.

[Anonymous No.12233265]

>>12233254
>Obviously both will say they are but if we're being honest going by the letter is (ie. protestantism)
protestants literally ignore multiple passages of the bible

[Anonymous No.12233281]

>>12233254
>Obviously both will say they are but if we're being honest going by the letter is (ie. protestantism).
protestants do not follow the majority of the epistle of james

[Anonymous No.12233283]

>>12233265
According to you

[Anonymous No.12233287]

>>12233254
This is wholesale wrong.

[Anonymous No.12233291]

>>12233254
jesus christ this is wrong

[Anonymous No.12233294]

>>12233283
no, according to martin luther
>In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works. It says that Abraham was justified by his works when he offered his son Isaac; though in Romans 4 St. Paul teaches to the contrary that Abraham was justified apart from works, by his faith alone, before he had offered his son, and proves it by Moses in Genesis 15. Now although this epistle might be helped and an interpretation devised for this justification by works, it cannot be defended in its application to works of Moses’ statement in Genesis 15. For Moses is speaking here only of Abraham’s faith, and not of his works, as St. Paul demonstrates in Romans 4. This fault, therefore, proves that this epistle is not the work of any apostle.

[Anonymous No.12233306]

>>12233254
>Scripture is ultimate authority vs Pope is ultimate authority
lol

[Anonymous No.12233313]

>>12233294
He retracted that opinion and it is not part of any known protestant denomination.

[Anonymous No.12233317]

>>12233313
he may have retracted the opinion, but the protestants to this day do not justify works

[Anonymous No.12233322]

>>12233317
Because they don't think scripture teaches it.

[Anonymous No.12233330]

>>12233294
Funnily enough modern scholarship agrees second Peter is a pseudepigrapha.

[Anonymous No.12233332]

>>12233106
have in mind that modern catholics are not that different, there are minor differences
when people fight between catholicism and protestantism they usually have in mind catholicism as it was before the 60s

[Anonymous No.12233333]

>>12233322
but the epistle of james does teach it. there's a reason it is today as part of the antilegomena in lutheranism
btw to the guy who wanted to know the differences between protestantism and catholicism, this is one of the bigger disagreements.

[Anonymous No.12233342]

>>12233333
>but the epistle of james does teach it
According to you. I'm not christian and I DO think Paul and Peter contradict each other but I understand how the protestants explain this passage.

>there's a reason it is today as part of the antilegomena in lutheranism
Is it the same reason everybody else considers it to be fake?

[Anonymous No.12233352]

He was a traitor to his faith. No wonder papists want to make him a saint!

And no, the Reformers were no traitors since they did not "switch teams", they fought the good fight against the world.

[Anonymous No.12233353]

>>12233342
>According to you
james 2:17
>>12233342
>Is it the same reason everybody else considers it to be fake?
this hasn't been a widely held opinion outside protestantism since gauis marius victorinus. even martin luther after his retraction of his previous statements stated it was an authoritative teaching of god

[Anonymous No.12233355]

Just found out Shiites consider Peter the first Imam of Jesus.
Made me smile.

[Anonymous No.12233364]

>>12233353
>>12233342
oh btw, i won't be able to give a real response to your next post, i gotta go. but i am enjoying this discussion, so if you want to leave a post i will respond to it in a few hours.

[Anonymous No.12233366]

>>12233353
>james 2:17
There is more than enough exegesis of this from the protestant perspective anyone interested can look up. I'm really not interested in this.

>this hasn't been a widely held opinion outside protestantism since gauis marius victorinus. even martin luther after his retraction of his previous statements stated it was an authoritative teaching of god
Pretty much every biblical scholar considers 2nd Peter a forgery. Whether you consider this forgery inspired is up to you I guess.

[Anonymous No.12233368]

>>12233281
Like what? "Faith without works is dead" perfectly fits e.g. the Lutheran idea since true faith inevitably leads to works.

[Anonymous No.12233373]

>>12233366
>Pretty much every biblical scholar considers 2nd Peter a forgery
i thought you were referring to james, i apologize for the confusion.

[Anonymous No.12233384]

>>12233373
Oh my bad. Wasn't it second Peter with show me your faith by your works?

[Anonymous No.12233396]

>>12233384
it's james 2:18. gotta go now but i'll be back if you want to continue the discussion, but if not that's fine

[Anonymous No.12233558]

>>12233106
Calvinism is the only logically consistent Christian theology.

[Anonymous No.12233856]

>>12233034
Long story short, protestantism unintentionally replaced God with the state in reaction to the Catholic Church abusing Him. Both are buttmad and unbased. Eastern Orthodoxy is even worse because they're Eastern and not Western.

[Anonymous No.12233911]

>>12233558
I wouldn't say he is the ONLY, but he is one of the greats. He is probably the most slandered of the reformers, people tend to just sum him up as "ITS ALL GOD'S *BURP* WILL M-MORTY". In actuality that was only a small part of his writings, which was mainly directed at the inevitability of sin and election of Christians. People should read him more, he is super intelligent and never misplaces a word.

Calvin is right though. Do people really think God just sits back and rolls some dice and lets everything be random?

[Anonymous No.12234226]

>>12233911
islam makes more sense than calvinism...dont understand the point of the gospels in calvinism

[Anonymous No.12234244]

>>12234226
what don't you understand?

[Anonymous No.12234271]

just skip all of the platonic programming and read difference & repetition instead

[Anonymous No.12234288]

>>12234226
why?

[Anonymous No.12234371]

>>12233558
wtf I chuckled when I read this unintentionally.

[Anonymous No.12234384]

>>12234371
Because its true.

[Anonymous No.12234399]

>>12234371
welcome to the elect anon

[Anonymous No.12234492]

>>12233911
God sees all of history in a single glance, and he can interact with the whole of time in a single instant. Calvin's view of God's acting in the world posits that God sees time the way human sees it, when in fact, as Augustine demonstrates, he does not.

[Anonymous No.12234508]

>>12233106
This sums it up pretty well

[Anonymous No.12234510]

>>12233558
>>12234371
lmao it works

[Anonymous No.12234630]

>>12234492
What do you mean he does not? For him all things are possible.

I don't think Calvin's writings conflict with that at all.