/CLG/ - Catholic Literature General

[Anonymous No.19409469]

Discuss catholic literature here.

>The Vatican website
https://www.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html

>The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
https://www.usccb.org/

>Catechism of the Catholic Church
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

>Catholic Encylopedia
https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia

>Catholic Resources
https://www.catholic-resources.org/

>Catholic News Service
https://www.catholicnews.com/

>National Catholic Reporter
https://www.ncronline.org/

>The Jesuit Review
https://www.americamagazine.org/

Talk about
>The last Catholic related book you read
>Who's your favorite Catholic writer and why?

[Anonymous No.19409935]

How much of the Vatican archives are accessible to lay people online?

[Anonymous No.19409947]

>>19409469
Can I get a rundown of St. Augustine's De Civitate Dei?

[Anonymous No.19409949]

Can I become Catholic, or is it too late?

[Anonymous No.19409956]

>>19409949
The most intelligent man who ever lived converted when he was close to death.

[Anonymous No.19409964]

>>19409947
Combine
>start with the Greeks
>start with the Jews
In one book. That’s the book which made me want to study the Greeks and Bible in its entirety so I could actually understand what Augustine was saying. Neverthless you will get a lot out of it if you don’t know the events of the Old Testament or Greek philosophy

[Anonymous No.19409967]

>>19409956
...I’ll best that.

[Anonymous No.19410030]

Best to read “Imitation of Christ” not as
>how to act like how you think society’s hipster-propaganda’d Jesus would act (aka Jesus outside of Old Testament context and Jesus outside of post-industrial technociv phantasms of comfort)

More like

>how to become a living sacrificial offering—an incarnation of redemptive suffering—a high priest who, surrounded with an aura of pain, is, after the example of Christ, able to draw from the wellsprings enough energy to: understand, guide, congregate, and inspire those stagnant, ignorant, weak, lost members of humanity
If everyone followed Kempis’ book, humanity would immediately go extinct, but then again it’s not titled: “guide for Christians”, but “Imitation of Christ”. Expecting all Christians to follow the book would be, like Mary, to behold your newborn infant as beholding someone destined to a life of torture as redemptive sacrifice. Are you strong enough to proclaim the Fiat for your own children? It would mean that man was born to suffer. Such is the way of the Christ. Such is the Imitation of Christ.

[Anonymous No.19410051]

>>19410030
The negative reviews of that book on goodreads only proves that they missed the point and underestimated the profundity of the book

[Anonymous No.19410098]

>>19409469
Why the Vatican website is so shitty? I mean, the church is rich af and have billions of followers around the world, why they can't improve the website?.

[Anonymous No.19410205]

>>19410098
>not optimized for mobile
it's a based website

[Anonymous No.19410222]

>>19409949
You'd best hurry, they withhold Communion for about 2 years.

[Anonymous No.19410313]

>>19409469
Can we replace the NCR with the Pillar?
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/

Anyway, I've seen pic related shilled recently on /lit/. I've heard mixed reviews on its usefulness for apologetics vs. just use for lay Catholics. Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.19410593]

>>19410313
>reading the quran for apologetics
waste of time, unironically just watch youtube debates on the trinity since that's the cornerstone of islamic debate.

[Anonymous No.19410955]

I got filtered by his philosophy, twice. I'll stick with his biblical commentaries for now.
Should I just start with Plato and Aristotle before retrying? What reading order do you suggest?

[Anonymous No.19411171]

Question. I've been thinking of putting together a sample and then pitching this to Catholic publishers and/or academic institutions to aid me in pursuing further, but I'd like /clg/'s thoughts. Would there be an audience for the original 1582-1610 DR annotations reproduced in their own volume? Like, in the same way there exist Biblical commentary volumes that are just commentary without reproducing the full Bible text? The main aim being to reproduce the text transliterated into modern spelling so Catholics today can read, and Catholic writers can easily cite, the comments from "Counter-Reformation" Catholic thought, seeing as they've never been reproduced in subsequent DR editions, but without having to dig through old scans or deal with 16th-century spelling. Perhaps even get a prominent Catholic apologist or theologian today to provide historical contextual commentary to these annotations where necessary?

Pic related is a quick and rough example of the basic content compared to the original on the left. It's not properly formatted or anything, but gives you a starting point idea of my broader idea.

[Anonymous No.19411222]

Any there any decent CLG approved books regarding self help/discipline?
I'm a lazy degen neet who wants to change

[Anonymous No.19411258]

>>19409469
How do you guys cope with the fact that the current pope is a puppet and heretic? Genuine question. I admire the Catholic faith a lot, but the papacy is one of the main reasons I converted to Orthodox Christianity.

[Anonymous No.19411297]

>>19411222
whatever peterson is putting out these days
>>19411258
there have been worse and more ground-shaking heresies in the church's history, like arianism. modernism will eventually be extinguised as well and common people won't know it existed in a thousand years

[Anonymous No.19411402]

Can /clg/ suggest me something on hope in dark times? Really need to read something that makes me feel the vicinity of God.

[Anonymous No.19411418]

>>19410313
>>19410593
>islamic apologetics
"SILENCE! I KEEL YOU"

[Anonymous No.19411515]

>>19411171
It's a decent idea for a book.

One concerning thing is that you have an *idea* for a book that I don't think you can really protect from an intellectual property perspective. I'm not sure if simply transliterating the original provides enough new content for copyright to adhere to the transliteration (the original text is presumably in the public domain).

So I think you'd be taking something of a risk (how much, I'm not sure) in posing the idea to a publisher, who could, hypothetically, turn around and do it in-house without your involvement, since you can't copyright an idea.

It's the type of thing you could self-publish via Kindle or some other platform. Otoh, it would be nice to have a 'real' book if you could find an amenable publisher.

In sum, I'm not an expert in this area, but it seems like something that would be worth pursuing -- I think there is a niche of readers who would be interested in a book like this. If you could get a "name" attached to the project, either via a 'blurb' or someone who would write an introduction, that would help the saleability, I think.

>Perhaps even get a prominent Catholic apologist or theologian today to provide historical contextual commentary to these annotations where necessary?
Yes, we're thinking along similar lines.

[Anonymous No.19411517]

>>19411402
daily mass

[Anonymous No.19411607]

>>19411515
Interestingly, some other guy did the bigger version of what I'm thinking like 15-20 years ago (he retyped the entire 1610 DR, with the annotations, cross-references, etc., and self-published through Lulu) and claimed to have copyrighted the result, but as you said, I'm not sure that would actually hold up in court aside from his own introduction at the front. His was separated into 4 paperback volumes and seems to be largely OOP, as some of the volumes are now missing from Lulu. He also came across as a bit of a fundamentalist, so that might've been why he couldn't get a real publisher behind him.

And to your point, I'd actually have no problem if the publisher did it in-house themselves upon my pitch; my assumption is just that, if it hasn't been done by a real publisher over the past 400+ years since the original, it's probably because they don't want to. I really just want it to exist one way or another and to be in print. I just think a "Douay-Rheims Annotations" possibly with contextual commentary from those Catholic Answers types or guys from Franciscan University or something, with the end result published by St. Benedict Press or Ignatius or something, could have an audience, at least as a reference work for Catholics.

Thank you for your reply.

[Anonymous No.19411686]

>>19411607
>And to your point, I'd actually have no problem if the publisher did it in-house themselves upon my pitch

You should go for it. I think it's an interesting idea that would appeal to a certain niche audience, which at least *seems* to be growing (i.e., non-larping tradcaths).

A book I myself would like to see republished is Fernand Prat's two-volume Theology of St. Paul -- I'm sure technically "out of date" in some respects, but most of the content is solid theological analysis of perennial appeal.

I have also been told that there are many excellent articles in the French Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, which has never been translated into English. I think it would be a sweet project to publish a one-volume compendium of "the best" articles from the DTC. And/or put the whole thing online, where it could have a value similar to the old public domain Catholic Encyclopedia that's now online.

[Anonymous No.19411758]

>>19410098
I like it because its got that old late 90s-early 2000s vibe where people did everything by hand and it isn't some bootstrap/similar copycat.

>>19410955
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/4chanlit/images/e/e9/Greekchart3.jpg/

I can't post images

[Anonymous No.19411800]

>>19410030
You just gave me much more motivation to read and take it to heart. Do i need any previous reading to get everything out of it?

[Anonymous No.19411817]

Thanks for making a general

[Anonymous No.19411821]

What can you tell me about Luisa Piccarreta and THE BOOK OF THE DIVINE WILL?

[Anonymous No.19411863]

>>19411258
for me its with this

[Anonymous No.19411889]

What's the difference between each denomination?

[Anonymous No.19412035]

>>19411889
Different levels of heresy.

[Anonymous No.19412059]

>>19412035
Nice one. Now, what's the serious answer?
Or even, what you consider the true one and why?

[Anonymous No.19412085]

This is pretty good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtEX3q7hbAA

[Anonymous No.19412103]

>>19412085
Why are prayers such as the rosary and whatnot so long and repetitive?
It brings Matthew 6:7 to mind.
>But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

[Anonymous No.19412354]

>>19409935
I kept this thread from going past p10 and no one answered this.

[Anonymous No.19412375]

>>19409935
https://www.archivioapostolicovaticano.va/content/aav/en/consultazione/admission-request.html

[Anonymous No.19412393]

>>19412354
>2354▶
>>>19409935
>I kept this thread from going past p10 and no one answered this.
this is supposed to be in /his/

[Anonymous No.19412477]

Anyone else read this book? I'm about halfway through and it's pretty good.

[Anonymous No.19412737]

When I asked for introductory books for Catholicism almost always somebody said Jordan Peterson

[Anonymous No.19412746]

>>19411258
>How do you guys cope with the fact that the current pope is a puppet and heretic?

By actually knowing about Church history.

PROTIP: Francis is not the worst Pope we've ever had.

[Anonymous No.19412810]

>>19412737
Peterson is a Deist or a spiritual Agnostic.

[Anonymous No.19413119]

>>19412737
>introductory books for Catholicism
Pat Madrid's "Why Be Catholic?" and Trent Horn's "The Case for Catholicism".

[Anonymous No.19413137]

Catholicbros, I need advice. I want to believe Catholicism is real but I also don't want to be biased towards it and never listen to opposing views regarding God, Religion, Abortion and Liberalism.

How do I open up myself to other viewpoints without fear? I'm scared of realizing I'm wrong.

[Anonymous No.19413142]

>>19413137
marijuana

[Anonymous No.19413532]

Thinking of rebinding my Bibles, but I don't want to just use Sokoto goatskin for all four. Two of them are well-worn over the years and definitely could use new binding, and the other two I'd do just because. Thoughts on leather?

[Anonymous No.19414324]

>>19413137
Listen to Bishop Barron. He frames these topics in ways which are comprehensive, surprising, and convincing. Really helped me during RCIA

[Anonymous No.19414329]

>>19411800
>Do i need any previous reading to get everything out of it?
Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, and the Gospels.

[Anonymous No.19414347]

>>19409469
Can someone reccomend a good Catholic study Bible?

[Anonymous No.19414541]

>>19414347
Jerusalem Bible?

[Anonymous No.19414574]

>>19409949
Please think carefully about this. I converted and left about 18 months later, and it has been very awkward for me and all those involved.

The Catholic Church in the US has major, major problems. Perhaps the most obvious is a liturgical divide that almost perfectly mirrors the political divide in the broader public, suggesting that American Catholicism has largely become an expression (one way or another) of political ideology.

And then there's the unhappy fact that most dioceses require Virtus training for any adult-child interaction, which is very obviously for liability mitigation, decreases the ability of the church to reach out in witness to the Gospel, and strikes me as profoundly insincere. The reaction of the church to the massive scandal of sex abuse cannot be "We are sorry but honestly no worse than anyone else and we will do our best to prevent lawsuits going forward."

[Anonymous No.19414650]

>>19414574
Thank you for your honesty.

[Anonymous No.19414656]

>>19414329
>actually got answered
nice. thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.19414726]

>>19414650
In the spirit of honesty I should mention that there are a lot of wonderful people in Catholic churches with very real and living faith. I should also say that they have a lot going for them in terms of apostolic succession. I think the Spirit is to be found with these people, which is really all that matters, and partisan apostates like myself frankly do not help anything.

From what I know of the early church fathers, there is a great deal of agreement between them and contemporary Catholic dogma. Unfortunately I don't know that there was much agreement between the Apostolic Fathers and the Apostles.

My difficulties with Catholicism really have more to do with a pretty overwhelming suspicion that Christianity took on forms unrecognizable to its founder during its first centuries of existence, especially in developing the Trinitarian God. Did Peter and James the Just think of Jesus of Nazareth as being of the same divine nature as YHWH? Probably not. Probably not even Paul thought so.

[Anonymous No.19414729]

>>19409956
What was his philosophy?

[Anonymous No.19414881]

>>19411800
>Do i need any previous reading to get everything out of it?
I wouldn't worry too much about grinding pre-requisites. It's not a narrative book. St. Ignatius would just read a short chapter during a meal. Others just open at random pages. It's actually quite repetitive because it's mean't to drill stuff into your mind. I'd say jump into it directly

[Anonymous No.19414884]

>>19410955
>Should I just start with Plato and Aristotle before retrying?
>you didn't start with the Greeks
anon I....

[Anonymous No.19414896]

>>19414574
>Virtus training for any adult-child interaction
Profoundly cringe...yikes

[Anonymous No.19414954]

>>19414896
It's totally fucked up man. When covid hit my church tried to shrug off responsibility for taking care of several homeless families because they could not come up with enough Virtus trained parishioners to attend them.

Virtus training involves watching a video, doing a worksheet, having a group round-table discussion and getting a background check. Then you have to complete a single monthly multiple choice question which is basically completely obvious. If you fail to complete the monthly multiple choice questions after 6 months, you are no longer Virtus qualified.

All volunteer coordinators/youth ministers have to constantly check the rolls for Virtus compliance. Parishioners frequently cannot volunteer because they lapsed on the monthly questionnaire or cannot complete a training course in time.

If the parish is working with other programs/churches, it will continue to require Virtus training even from non-parishioners, regardless of their professional status. In other words, a Methodist elementary school teacher with 25 years of youth group experience will have to complete Virtus training before they can be allowed to drive a van with Catholic teenagers in it to a soccer game.

In practice it becomes an outrageous pain-in-the-ass. The real kicker? Virtus is designed, administered and owned by an insurance cooperative.

[Anonymous No.19415057]

>>19414881
Will do. Not like getting some scripture into my head can hurt either

[Anonymous No.19415092]

>>19414954
what if he was a literature teacher? there's a book on it

[Anonymous No.19415154]

>>19414954
Man that's ridiculous. Compare that to how a small Christian village hundreds of years ago would respect its parroquia. Think about the times altar boys were apprenticed to be priests before seminaries. But multiple-choice tests and worksheets will solve the problem right?

[Anonymous No.19415216]

>>19414347
>>19414541
This. It's a pretty good option.

[Anonymous No.19415456]

>>19414726
>Did Peter and James the Just think of Jesus of Nazareth as being of the same divine nature as YHWH? Probably not.
What? I think they most certainly did. On what are you basing this? Paul may not have, but Peter and James?

[Anonymous No.19415467]

daily reminder that it not a "larp" general
please only discuss catholic literature here and keep larping to /his/

[Anonymous No.19415501]

Anyone have experience with the Great Adventure Bible?

I wonder how it hold up in comparison with the Jerusalem Bible

[Anonymous No.19415518]

>>19412737
If Jordan Peterson was catholic, he would be considered a modernist, in the strict sense.

[Anonymous No.19415525]

>>19415501
The coloring and timelines kinda reminds me of the basedhistory textbooks in middle school not sure if that's an argument against it lel

[Anonymous No.19415556]

>>19415456
There is no unambiguous statement of Jesus being God in the Synoptic gospels. Mark appears most interested in the theological meaning of Jesus as Messiah. The virgin birth is nowhere to be found in the earliest Christian literature (Mark, Pauline letters, Didiache, Gospel of Thomas).

It seems there was a gradual progression of Jesus into high Christology. First he was rabbi(Gospel of Thomas, Q) then he was Lord and Messiah (synoptics/Didache) then he was redeemer (Paul/John). The Johanine corpus gives him a divine status, but the equivalency is always "like me, like you, as me, as my father" (If John had a Trinity it was probably Father, Son, Elect).

The first to state the trinity explicitly appears to be Tertullian in the 2nd century.

It did not become Creed until various sects forced the issue by proclaiming variations of it (orthodoxy and heterodoxy are formed at the same stroke!).

It's a question I am still working through. The Baptismal formula in the synoptics is possibly trinitarian. There is a lot of reason to be suspicious of theories that aim to show tradition, which self-understands as keeper of the faith, has always been wrong. But the above evidence is enough to make you seriously doubt the official teaching.

[Anonymous No.19415570]

>>19414729
"Fuck commies lmao"

[Anonymous No.19415581]

>>19414726
>I should mention that there are a lot of wonderful people in Catholic churches with very real and living faith
May I ask you what country you live in? Sadly I have seen the complete opposite in my own country which is entirely Catholic.

[Anonymous No.19415632]

why catholic instead of orthodox or protestant?

[Anonymous No.19415651]

>>19415632
>orthodox
their larp is too hard for my taste
>protestant
cringe

[Anonymous No.19415681]

>>19415501
I don't have personal experience with it, but I've heard strong things about it, aside from the first print glued binding (which they've since allegedly fixed, though only the paperback is known 100% to be sewn). It's definitely a Babby's First Bible, as it is exceptionally hand-holdy. It uses a far more formal translation than the original Jerusalem Bible, and the notes are of course of a different sort--chiefly because the JB prides itself on its detailed notes, which are arguably more useful than the JB translation itself; however, the RNJB is a travesty, so if you go JB, stick with the original. The GAB (and the other study variants of the RSV-2CE) instinctively take a more theologically conservative and reverent approach to the text--a notable example off the top of my head is the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible NT, whose book introductions, while presenting all the major perspectives, always argue in favor of things like the Synoptic Gospels being written before AD 70, all Paul's letters being legit, and all-around being the polar opposite of the NAB's secularism. The GAB no-doubt follows in that tradition, only it's more focused on facilitating a smooth reading experience through the Bible, whereas the Didache and ICSBNT are more focused on giving you doctrinal and historical/apologetical footing for everything, respectively.

I'll post some of the insides of the GAB so you can get a feel.

[Anonymous No.19415688]

>>19415681
2/3

[Anonymous No.19415691]

>>19415688
3/3

[Anonymous No.19415714]

Jerusalem Bible or KJV?

[Anonymous No.19415732]

Reminder Jesus is the Son of God and God in the flesh

[Anonymous No.19415754]

>>19415714
If you're Catholic, you're not using the KJV. However, even despite that, it's not a fair comparison. The KJV is a formal equivalence translation and the JB is a dynamic equivalence translation, so each has wholly different goals. While it might've served its purpose at the time, the JB is not what you want as your main Bible imo, as it's far too loose. That looseness allows it to sound great when read aloud, but I wouldn't suggest using the JB as a citation in the midst of Biblical argument, for instance. The translations I make use of personally are the Douay, the Knox, and the Ignatius RSV; of these, the Douay and the Ignatius are formal and the Knox is more dynamic. If I were to get a fourth translation, it'd probably be the JB, or perhaps the NJB, but I've largely decided not to pursue it simply because I don't find myself ever using it as I regularly use the three that I have. If you're an old-fashioned Anglo or Irish Catholic, then the JB might scratch that itch for cultural reasons, but otherwise, the Ignatius RSV is pretty much the default formal non-Douay Bible for Catholics, and so should be given the chief consideration.

[Anonymous No.19415772]

>>19415754
Didn't Anglicans use the KJV?

[Anonymous No.19415773]

>>19409469
What are those rings?

[Anonymous No.19415774]

>>19415754
huh. who's the KJV for then? Why don't catholics use it?

[Anonymous No.19415785]

>>19410222
>You'd best hurry, they withhold Communion for about 2 years.
What?

[Anonymous No.19415807]

>>19415774
Don't fall for people who'll say Douay-Rheims because nobody uses it. You will use the modernish translation that they use in your parish.

[Anonymous No.19415812]

>>19415774
Ah and the KJV is a Protestant Bible. This is why Catholics do not use it. That said it's not forbidden to read the KJV, but you will be missing the Apocrypha.

[Anonymous No.19415826]

>>19409469
Since I am at it... How much would you have to spend on a rosary to have one that wiill last? I'm not sure how flimsy I should expect the ones that sell for a few bucks online to be.

[Anonymous No.19415859]

>>19415772
Yes.
>>19415774
The KJV was specifically created to be ecumenical amongst England's protestants, though chiefly as the Bible of the Anglican church. Catholics don't use it because (A) no Catholics were on the translation team, thus it was purely written from a protestant theological slant, and it was created during a time when Catholics were being actively persecuted by the state--although they did consult the Rheims NT translation when making their own NT, that's not the same as having a Catholic on the team to argue for the choices made; (B) while the original KJV contained the deuterocanonical books in an appendix, modern printings lack them unless otherwise stated, and as such it does not contain the complete Catholic canon decided at Carthage and Hippo and excepted by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches (although the Orthodox disagree that the canon was formally closed, and thus later added to it complementary books); and (C) the 1752 Challoner revision of the 1582-1610 Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible took much of the good diction from the KJV, without the protestant theological baggage, so a Catholic seeking a classical English translation already as a comparable alternative in that. There are other reasons, but I'll leave it here.

[Anonymous No.19415886]

>>19415772
Yes.
>>19415774
The KJV was specifically created to be ecumenical amongst England's protestants, though chiefly as the Bible of the Anglican church. Catholics don't use it because (A) no Catholics were on the translation team, thus it was purely written from a protestant theological slant, and it was created during a time when Catholics were being actively persecuted by the state--although they did consult the Rheims NT translation when making their own NT, that's not the same as having a Catholic on the team to argue for the choices made; (B) while the original KJV contained the deuterocanonical books in an appendix, modern printings lack them unless otherwise stated, and as such it does not contain the complete Catholic canon decided at Carthage and Hippo and accepted by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches (although the Orthodox disagree that the canon was formally closed, and thus later added to it complementary books); and (C) the 1752 Challoner revision of the 1582-1610 Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible took much of the good diction from the KJV, without the protestant theological baggage, so a Catholic seeking a classical English translation already as a comparable alternative in that. There are other reasons, but I'll leave it here.

[Anonymous No.19415909]

>>19415886
Whats the "protestant baggage" i've read the KJV has? Pretty much i wanna know the whole "why these books controversial/not considered" deal and that

[Anonymous No.19415931]

Are there any good Catholic books about 21st century tech like AI, social media, etc.?

[Anonymous No.19415947]

>>19415785
I inquired how long it would be from starting until being allowed Eucharist and was told about 2 years.

[Anonymous No.19415962]

>>19415826
I got mine for $2 and it's lasted for over 2 years now

[Anonymous No.19415975]

>>19415962
Where, in a third world country?

[Anonymous No.19415976]

Do other denominations use rosaries too? I've heard of it.
Are there rosaries with crosses instead of crucifixes or is that regular?

[Anonymous No.19415986]

>>19415962
Anon you are supposed to pray with it!

[Anonymous No.19416020]

So whatever happened to the ESV-CE? Did it flop? I remember when it came out all the marketing and bells and whistles and talk about study bibles and commentaries, and yet seemingly nothing has happened. And nobody talks about it anymore.

[Anonymous No.19416031]

>>19415976
Cross or crucifix is the same. There are also rosaries with the franciscan Tau which doesn't look like a cross at all.

[Anonymous No.19416135]

>>19415975
second world desu
it was the cheapest one out there though
>>19415986
it broke many times and I confuse knots for beads sometimes

[Anonymous No.19416229]

Just got a bunch of books.
>The Kalam Cosmological Argument by William L. Craig
>Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary: Unveiling the Mother of the Messiah by Brant James Pitre
>The Final Days of Jesus: The Most Important Week of the Most Important Person Who Ever Lived by Andreas J. Köstenberger, Justin Taylor
>The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem by Mark Goodacre
>The Quran with Christian Commentary: A Guide to Understanding the Scripture of Islam by Gordon D. Nickel
What am I in for and does anyone have any recs on how I should order these readings?

[Anonymous No.19416235]

What book should I read about Catholic soteriology?

No meme apologists, please.

[Anonymous No.19416238]

Just got a bunch of books.
>The Kalam Cosmological Argument by William L. Craig
>Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary: Unveiling the Mother of the Messiah by Brant James Pitre
>The Final Days of Jesus: The Most Important Week of the Most Important Person Who Ever Lived by Andreas J. Köstenberger, Justin Taylor
>The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem by Mark Goodacre
>The Quran with Christian Commentary: A Guide to Understanding the Scripture of Islam by Gordon D. Nickel
What am I in for and does anyone have any recs on how I should order these readings?

[Anonymous No.19416253]

>>19409947
>disproves 'le christians destroyed Rome' written by someone literally living during it in first 5 books
>introduces concept of the two cities, that of man (our world) and that of God
>introduces real fleshed out concept of original sin
If you have a decent background in Greek and Roman culture/history you should just go ahead and read it. Seriously its a giant tome but 100% worth it

[Anonymous No.19416260]

>>19410955
just tried his Political Writings after finished City of God. Felt like an absolute brainlet about halfway through and had to give up. Restarting with the Greeks is on my to-do list.

[Anonymous No.19416299]

>>19409469
>Book of the New Sun
>A Canticle for Leibowitz
>The High Crusade
Any other examples of "pulpy" fantasy literature from Catholic writers.

[Anonymous No.19416324]

>>19416299
Didn't know Wolfe was a catholic. Guess that explains all of the references to pederasty in BOTNS.

[Anonymous No.19416341]

>>19415681
Thanks for your detailed and helpful answer, sounds like GAB is what I'm after.

[Anonymous No.19416432]

>>19416341
No problem! Just be wary of the red lettering. Red text can often be light when printed, so if you can, make sure you flip through the Gospels upon getting a copy to be sure your print is dark enough to keep; nothing worse than the words of Christ being light pink on white paper, so don't hesitate to keep sending it back until you get a good printing. I'd probably get the index tabs, too. I don't use index tabs on any of my Bibles, but if there was one to use them on, it'd be the GAB, especially since they have their own tabs designed specifically for it.

[Anonymous No.19416646]

>>19415807
But anon, all of the readings in the missal we use at my church are from the DR...

[Anonymous No.19416679]

>>19416432
Thanks. I'm going to have to import it, unfortunately, so ita going to be luck of the draw.

[Anonymous No.19416690]

>>19416324
He did it! He did the joke lads!! hahahhahaha

[Anonymous No.19416699]

>>19416135
>>19415962
>it broke many times
>it's lasted for over 2 years now
I commend you for repairing your rosary, but "to last" means that it won't break.

[Anonymous No.19416807]

If i go for a rosary, should i keep it barebones, or go for something nice if i feel like so?

[Anonymous No.19416815]

>>19412103
Also, answers on this?

[Anonymous No.19416999]

>>19416815
It's more like a Buddhist mantra. The words basically take the chattery part of your mind and give it something to chew on, which opens the soul to a deeper connection to God in a meditative mode more transcendent of language.

Praying the Rosary is much more about the contemplation of the Mysteries than simply saying Hail Marys by rote.

[Anonymous No.19417085]

>>19416999
Ah, got it.
>>19416807
If i may bother you some, any input on this?

[Anonymous No.19417090]

Does the education system change if you go to a private, Catholic university?

What is different about it? I'm talking, for example, with regards to a Jesuit university.

[Anonymous No.19417094]

>>19415774
Catholics can use the kjv as long as it includes the apocrypha so kjva but most catholics prefer to use rsv or the douey rhimes. The douey rheims is older than the kjv and includes the apocrypha

[Anonymous No.19417106]

>>19412103

>One point that Shahak repeatedly emphasizes is that in traditional Judaism the nature of the ritual itself is absolutely uppermost, while the interpretation of the ritual is rather secondary. So perhaps a Jew who washes his hands three times clockwise might be horrified by another who follows a counter-clockwise direction, but whether the hand-washing were meant to honor God or to honor Satan would be hardly be a matter of much consequence.
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/

That's what 'vain repetition' is. It's a Pharisee thing. Hardly the same as meditating on Christ's passion while you pray the rosary.

Stated otherwise: repetition itself is not a problem, neither is length of prayer, but vain repetitions, vain prayers are the problem, whether long or short, loud or silent.

Another way to look turns on the proper translation of Mt 6:7:

>while the King James is general a very good translation, in this case, the translation is a bit debatable. The word behind that translation "vain repetitions" is the Greek word "battologeō" (βαττολογέω), which more precisely means "to stutter" to "babble". Some examples of contemporary translations that reflect this are:

>“And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words" (ESV).

>"And in praying do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words" (RSV).

https://steemit.com/orthodoxy/@amonksheart/is-saying-the-jesus-prayer-just-vain-repetition

Hope that helps.

[Anonymous No.19417108]

>>19417094
>includes the apocrypha
No, it doesn't. Neither the Douay nor the Catholic RSV have ever contained the Gospel of Thomas or the Book of Enoch or any such apocryphal books.

[Anonymous No.19417116]

>>19416999
So basically it's mindfulness, which i could hypothetically do away with? Just to have a fun argument.

[Anonymous No.19417118]

>>19417094
>Catholics can use the kjv as long as it includes the apocrypha
I'm pretty sure we can't.

[Anonymous No.19417126]

>>19417094
>>19417118
Has anyone ever checked this out?
http://www.walsinghampublishing.com/kjv/

[Anonymous No.19417142]

>>19417118
Tell me why we can't?

[Anonymous No.19417152]

>>19417108
Apocrypha is another word for the deuterocanonical books I'm not referring to your gnostic fanfiction

[Anonymous No.19417190]

>>19417116
Once in a while you overhear yourself saying "Holy Mary Mother of God" or "Glory be to the Father" and suddenly these words will have a depth of meaning or an emotional intensity hitherto unrealized. That is certainly helpful.

I memorized Hail Marys/Glory Be in Latin (which I don't comprehend) and have experimented with the Rosary that way. It seems to still "work."

Also, just for your records, I am an apostate out of communion with the church. Thankfully all I have to do is tell a man in a booth about it and all my apostasy will be forgiven.

[Anonymous No.19417238]

>>19417152
>Apocrypha is another word for the deuterocanonical books
No, the term apocrypha in the Christian context was appropriated to refer to the deuterocanon by heretics. In the early church, the term was specifically for the gnostic fanfiction you mention. This is why when non-protestant Christians comment on the Quran, they refer to it making use of Christian apocrypha in its construction. That has never meant that the Quran used, say, the Book of Tobit; it refers to stuff like the Protevangelium of James or the Infancy Gospel of Thomas or the Arabic Infancy Gospel.

[Anonymous No.19417254]

>>19417190
>I memorized Hail Marys/Glory Be in Latin
I've been trying to do the same, starting with the Lord's Prayer, but it's been difficult in the memorization front.
>Pater noster qui es in caelis
That's as far as I've memorized. Varying pronunciations depending on the teacher hasn't helped.

[Anonymous No.19417261]

>>19415931
lol

[Anonymous No.19417278]

>>19414729
he's the reason you're using a computer.

[Anonymous No.19417279]

>>19409947
Written in response to the barbarian raids against Rome, the decline of Rome and the idea that abandonment of paganism lead to it. The first in-depth, long-form treatise on Christianity from a Platonic/Greco-Roman Classical perspective. The single-most important work of Neoplatonic thought other than Plotinus' Enneads.

Essential Christian literature, but the prerequisites should be
>entire New Testament
>entire dialogues of Plato
>The Confessions (start here if you're new to Auggie)

[Anonymous No.19417339]

>>19414574
>Perhaps the most obvious is a liturgical divide that almost perfectly mirrors the political divide in the broader public, suggesting that American Catholicism has largely become an expression (one way or another) of political ideology.
This tells me you weren't actually that active in Catholic spaces and got most of your knowledge of Catholicism from online culture war clickbait. Novus Ordo is by far the biggest expression of Catholic liturgy and doesn't represent a "liberal political contingency" or anything. Yes, traditionalists are more likely to be even more conservative, but the suburban grandmas who go to Novus Ordo are by no means "liberal."

The real divide in American Catholicism is actual practicing Catholics vs Christmas and Easter/"raised Catholic" types.

[Anonymous No.19417357]

I've got the Tyndale House Greek NT in a cart right now. Should I go regular edition or reader's edition?

[Anonymous No.19417403]

>>19417339
>Yes, traditionalists are more likely to be even more conservative, but the suburban grandmas who go to Novus Ordo are by no means "liberal."
This. My aunt, to my knowledge, hasn't gone to a non-Novus Ordo mass, but that hasn't stopped there from being a crucifix in nearly every room in the house; multiple card-size pictures of Jesus stuck in the edges of mirrors; a well-read 105-year-old Douay Rheims Bible on the shelf with family obituaries and prayer cards stuffed inside; a statue of Mary, Joseph, and the Baby Jesus on her dresser; and that week's copy of the local Catholic newspaper on her countertop every time I visit. I'm not 100% how conservative she is in her faith, but I have no reason to believe she's a "liberal" Catholic.

[Anonymous No.19417439]

Starting at about the 25 and a half minute mark, this video, in which Michael Lofton interviews Dr. John Joy, has some very interesting remarks on (i) the Church's position towards slavery (I don't think I've ever heard the Church's position in this regard explained in quite this way before, or quite this well; I think the speaker is accurate, however, and I very much like the way he frames the issue here), and (ii) usury (he explains it in a way I had not heard before, and points out that there is much confusion on the public perception of the Church's position, but the Church really hasn't changed its doctrine over the centuries, including up until now).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd5-Wv_zvkc

Pic not related.

[Anonymous No.19417461]

>>19417339
The parish I attended certainly existed on a liturgical fault line. I was an *extremely* active parishioner for about 18 months. I often was in the building 3 or more times a week. At one point I literally lived in the building. I was in young adult groups, worked in youth groups, volunteer groups, RCIA etc.

It is possible that the area I was living in had a larger traditionalist presence than may be found elsewhere.

I began to feel very suspicious about it all when I noticed that parishes offering Latin mass did not require masks during the pandemic.

I dropped into churches in two other states during and noticed the same thing. It got the point that I could anticipate, without fail, mask requirements (or lack) based on the artwork in the atrium.

I have no desire to talk about masking, only notice that Americans were divided on political lines by masks.

Perhaps I am being silly about all of this, perhaps over-reading. I do not think so. Here are some of the associations, and you can check them against your own observations:

>Traditional liturgy, masking-is-hysterical, kneeling at communion, Benedict XVI is our guy, sexual morality is very important, abortion is the major political issue facing America

>Novus Ordo/relaxed liturgy, masking-protects-others, standing at communion, Francis is our guy, sex is not as big a deal as Bishops seem to think, poverty/immigration/climate is the most important political issue facing America

[Anonymous No.19417494]

>>19417461
I live in a fairly liberal place, but interestingly we're in the middle.
>Novus Ordo/relaxed liturgy and traditional liturgy over at different hours, masking-protects-others, standing at communion, Francis is our guy, sexual morality is very important, abortion is the major political issue facing America (and our archbishop is very outspoken about abortion and denying communion for pro-abortion politicians)
The only time I've ever heard about immigration or climate in a Catholic mass was an Ash Wednesday mass at my university meeting hall one year where they brought in a local bishop to lead it. In fact, outside of that college setting, I've never really heard any politics as part of the mass, at least not when held in an actual church building.

[Anonymous No.19417523]

>>19417238
You're right, but you're also a sperg

[Anonymous No.19417529]

>>19417523
Thank you, and I know.

[Anonymous No.19417550]

>>19417494
Very interesting. It may have just been particularly bad in the diocese/parish I was in.

Anyways, I don't believe in the Trinity, the virgin birth or the real presence, so I suppose I am an apostate and no longer a Catholic.

I am trying to figure out a way in my mind to continue being a Christian anyways, but it's not looking good.

[Anonymous No.19417593]

>>19417190
Just popped into my mind, wouldn't praying in Greek/Hebrew be the best? They're the ones the Bible is written in.

[Anonymous No.19417600]

>>19417593
Thats up to you anon. If you value language in that sense, go for it.

I suppose someone else might say, "learn it in Spanish because most Catholics alive today speak Spanish."

Who knows. Be your own boss.

[Anonymous No.19417607]

How Do You Do my fellow LAR-er, Brothers in Christ (is that how they address each other?). Gee, isn't it great that we've all read Augustine?

[Anonymous No.19417611]

>>19417550
What puzzles you anon? Why don't you believe anymore? Some denominations don't go for actual transubstation also.

[Anonymous No.19417617]

>>19416807
Opinions?
>>19417600
Well, I'll find out eventually.

[Anonymous No.19417622]

>>19417607
You should read the Bible instead

[Anonymous No.19417668]

>>19417550
>Anyways, I don't believe in the Trinity, the virgin birth or the real presence, so I suppose I am an apostate and no longer a Catholic.

What is the source of the cracks (or gaping holes, perhaps) in the foundation?

[Anonymous No.19417695]

>>19417190
I feel like a pussy because I won't say "hell." Because of that, I've constantly tried to find ways to say the Apostles' Creed and the Fatima Prayer without saying the word; I've moved from using Hades as a kid, justifying it because it was in the Bible, to using "inferos" and "inferior" respectively, to contemplating finding a Greek equivalent to use. Please have mercy.

[Anonymous No.19417707]

>>19417695
I should add that I've also contemplated just learning those prayers in Latin as another way around the issue when saying the Rosary.

[Anonymous No.19417754]

>>19417668
The causes are complex, some are biographical and some are intellectual.

[Anonymous No.19417763]

>>19417754
>vague answer
we asked because we want to help, you know?

[Anonymous No.19417851]

>>19417763
I appreciate that sentiment. I don't mean to be cryptic but it is complicated and I don't want to get too into it.

Covid hit, I broke up with someone I once thought I would marry, then a close family member died in an accident, then I moved away. The intellectual doubts I have always had now feel more real, if that makes sense. It's not a matter of being angry at God or any persons, though there is of course some of that. It is more an overwhelming sense of "Who the heck am I kidding? Jesus was a man and I know it."

[Anonymous No.19417892]

>>19417851
I do not really follow. He's both God and man.
Also, I've been atleast somewhat there, and I know anything i say will be taken as apologetic drivel, because that's what i would do. So I'll just say, don't give up your faith.
You're wrongly calling those doubts "intellectual". They're nothing but lies that crept there.
Catholicism =/= Christianity ; there's a reason Protestantism became a thing.

[Anonymous No.19417933]

>>19417892
>there's a reason Protestantism became a thing
way more than one

[Anonymous No.19417936]

>>19417933
heh.

[Anonymous No.19417940]

>>19417892
I do not believe Jesus was God. I do not believe he was born of a virgin. And I think an honest reading of canonical New Testament books would show that these were additions to the tradition.

see my post here:
>>19415556

[Anonymous No.19417961]

>>19417940
What do you make of Him then? Why would the Holy Spirit descend upon Him otherwise?

[Anonymous No.19417984]

>>19417940
different anon.

please, expose yourself to the historical evidence for Jesus and the Resurrection.

Please read one or both of these books:

Pitre, The Case for Jesus

Green, Was Jesus Who He Said He Was?

Another good book, that I hesitate to recommend on /lit/ because of the somewhat "corny" writing style is McDowell, More Than a Carpenter. The *evidence* McDowell marshals, and his arguments, are fine, first-rate, even; but his style. The book however is blessedly concise.

Anon, please read one of these books before you jump ship.

And pray. Ask God to reveal Himself to you, to enlighten your mind. Will yourself to have faith, at least for purposes of making this petition.

Anon, my friend, please do these two things: 1 book, plus a bit of prayer.

[Anonymous No.19417990]

Any good books on catholic culture?
I want to read interesting stories about how there was an argument at w church in italy which had x result or how y monastery started to adopt cats in the 12th century and one of the monks wrote a poem about how much he loves cats or how z priest discovered something interesting or maybe something more scandulous

[Anonymous No.19418023]

>>19412477
I’m currently reading it. It easily mogs the other Totalitarian novels of Orwell and Huxley with a dose of actually predicting the future. (Ex. Aircraft being used for warfare) Pope Francis (i dont care if you hate him) endorses people to read it because of its theme about secular ideological colonialization.

[Anonymous No.19418031]

>>19417961
I think Mark views Jesus as the Messiah. To begin that story, he wanted to describe Jesus as favored by God, while also distinguishing Jesus from John the Baptist and his movement (which Jesus belonged to before beginning his own ministry).

[Anonymous No.19418052]

>>19412810
https://youtu.be/PcM3Y8kACo4

This video of his pretty much refutes what you just said. If I recall correctly, Deists and Agnostics don’t pray.

[Anonymous No.19418071]

>>19416324
>Makes “le pedophilia joke”

Hard cringe.

[Anonymous No.19418107]

>>19417984
I find apologetic works to be dishonest.

Are you aware that none of the gospels agree on the Resurrection?

Mark has two Marys finding a boy angel in the tomb. Luke has two Marys finding two man-angels in dazzling garments. Matthew has one man-angel descending from Heaven and rolling back the stone in front of two Marys and some centurion guards. John has Peter, the beloved disciple, and one Mary discover the empty tomb, followed by Jesus (who looks like a gardener) appearing to Mary Magdalene after the Peter and John leave.

[Anonymous No.19418203]

>>19418107
They all agree He came back though.

[Anonymous No.19418245]

>>19415556
>First he was rabbi(Gospel of Thomas, Q)
>Q
Why are you making claims about distinctions in a hypothetical document we don't have?

[Anonymous No.19418290]

>>19418107
>I find apologetic works to be dishonest.
>Are you aware that none of the gospels agree on the Resurrection?

I consider the differences minor -- like the differences in testimony that could arise between different eyewitnesses at a car wreck. I also think some of the differences can be reconciled. As for apologetic works, some perhaps sometimes strain to establish a point, or harmonize seemingly conflicting texts, yet the strain is on the surface of the text as it were; one is in a position to judge whether the apologist is convincing or not. Thus, I have never really been struck by apologetics works being dishonest. I find Catholic apologists, in particular - although, doubtless, they sometimes get things wrong - are fairly scrupulous, because they know their critics are likely to be many, and quite exacting in their criticisms and analysis.

Do pray, however.

Fwiw: Did you happen to read the rather lengthy Resurrection colloquy on /lit/ last week? I thought the defender of the historicity of the Resurrection, who rested his argument on the central fact of the Apostles' behavioral change, made a very strong case.

It is sometimes difficult to tell the various anons apart, but the 'defender' appears to have engaged in two vigorous debates, here:
>>/lit/thread/S19367849#p19371538

And here:
>>/lit/thread/S19367849#p19372411

Again, this may not be your cup of tea, or may just not find 'defender' as persuasive as I did, but I mention this fwiw.

[Anonymous No.19418341]

>great deal on Didache, Jerusalem Bible and Annotated Torah combo
easily my best buy.

[Anonymous No.19418375]

what are some books that I could read to better understand the catholic church and it's ways of worship?

[Anonymous No.19418497]

>>19418341
Nice. I just got the Tyndale House Greek New Testament Reader's Edition and the Quran with Christian Commentary, and the total came to under $50. The former I've wanted for a while and the latter I've seen shilled recently and got curious.

[Anonymous No.19418520]

>>19416807
Check out Rugged Rosaries they make long lasting rosaries, sometimes the best rosaries are familial, one of my favorite rosaries is a 'cheap' wooden one made in Mexico that my Grandmother used and after she passed it passed down to my mom and then down to me so it all depends on circumstances and your preferences.

[Anonymous No.19418523]

>>19418290

All Gospel accounts agree Jesus was resurrected. They say, "He is risen."

I have never seen or heard of a human returning from death. It is an extraordinary claim. I believe the followers of Jesus loved him greatly, that he came along and changed their lives completely, and showed them a way of living they had not even dreamt of.

Then he was taken from them and brutally executed, and there was profound sorrow. When someone you love so much dies, you try with all your soul to hold on to them. You and all those weeping around you who knew the miracle of his person. And you all together know it in your hearts- "It does not matter if they killed him. He remains with us."

I believe something of this sentiment is the original meaning of "He is risen." And frankly I find it profoundly more human, more divine, more beautiful and more convincing than God resurrecting Jesus in a tomb in the dead of night, then privately revealing it to a handful of favorite individuals, leaving the rest of humanity to cling by a thread of hearsay to salvation.

[Anonymous No.19418592]

>>19416432
The only good redletter is Cambridge. It's such a nice deep red.

[Anonymous No.19418611]

>>19416807
Watch it because rosaries fall within jewelry and there's no upper limit to how fancy they get.

[Anonymous No.19418637]

I started reading Life of Christ by Fulton Sheen. It’s decent so far, and very much written for the common man. Which is not a bad thing, as I’m not as smart as I’d like to believe I am.
I’ve been having a hard time for a while with doubts about my faith, with extreme spiritual sloth (ie not going to Church or praying), and common sins of our age.

[Anonymous No.19418902]

I'm thinking I might donate my bonded leather ICSBNT when the full thing comes out (apparently next year). Whether the finished ICSB is in one or two volumes, unless Ignatius does what they've never done before and offers a genuine leather option for the final product, I think I'm just going hardcover. I've started to feel that not everything needs gilt page edges and all the bells and whistles, and that more study-oriented books or supplementary texts really should just stay hardcover. I came to this decision firstly when I chose a hardcover Greek NT over the leather option of the same one and secondly when I realized that, when I eventually get my existing bonded leather Bibles rebound in the quality goatskin stuff, I'd feel kinda silly having it done to what are essentially Catholic textbook versions of the Bible. Also, I kinda just want to move away from supporting bonded leather editions because I think it sends the wrong message to Catholic publishers.

Does anyone else with their eyes on the ICSB have thoughts? Otherwise, would the best option be to just offer it to my local church/the church's school for their library or something else? I've used it, though there's no writing in it or damage to any of the pages, so I think it's still suitable for others to use when the time comes.

[Anonymous No.19418946]

>>19418523
Nah, this sort of abstract literary-psychological reading feels impossible to reconcile with the extended passage about Thomas not believing and then being amazed when Jesus wants him to feel his wounds. That wouldn't have been part of the story if it were some "Jesus is still alive in our hearts" cope shit.

[Anonymous No.19419625]

I love being Catholic

[Anonymous No.19419632]

>>19418902
I'm in the market for a study Bible for my wife who is currently a catechumen. Would you recommend it? I was looking at the Jerusalem Bible and the Great Adventure Bible but I must admit, I'd forgotten about the Ignatius ones. I really like the cover design.

For me, I always like leather-bound but I get what you mean about having study versions in Hardback.

[Anonymous No.19419871]

>>19418946
The oldest recording of this story is Mark, (which ends at 16:8 originally!). John wrote about 50 years later. For 50 years, stories and memories about the appearance of the Risen Christ developed. For 50 years, Johanine theology developed its understanding of bread, blood, wine and flesh.

Their understanding of the Resurrection is very obviously a response to the views of other early Christians who conceived of Jesus being resurrected in the spirit (associated with the name Thomas). John practically beats you over the head with bodily resurrection: Jesus ate fish, Thomas touched his wounds.

Mark has none of this.

[Anonymous No.19420102]

Which Modern Catholic writer's life do you feel very inspired by? I find Knox interesting.

[Anonymous No.19420474]

>>19418523
does it not trouble you that this interpretation of events is literally the only time in recorded history that this has happened? By that I mean at no other point in time have supposed grieving friends and family proceeded to convince entire nations that their friend/family member has risen from the dead and is actually God? I'll give you that some people obviously grieve to excess and 'see' their loved one after death, but to extrapolate that to what is described in the Gospels as well as the historical reality is not logical.

[Anonymous No.19420479]

>>19419632
leather bound isn't worth it unless it's the super fancy actual leather
consider that "genuine leather" is meaningless and it could be shit like bonded stray dog leather from China

[Anonymous No.19420637]

>>19418523

What you're saying is not unreasonable.

I would just ask you to read: (i) Michael Green, Was Jesus Who He Said He Was? and (ii) McDowell, More Than a Carpenter.

With all due respect, there are facts on the ground that your remarks suggest you are either not aware of, or don't perceive the full implications of.

These two books lay out the relevant facts, and the implications, in a concise and cogent fashion.

Before you jump ship, please, give this a shot. I emphasize again that both books are quite short. You could probably read through both in an evening.

[Anonymous No.19420641]

>>19420102
Waugh and Flannery O'Connor are quite interesting, in their very different ways.

Graham Greene's story, by contrast, is rather sad.

[Anonymous No.19421039]

>>19420474
I don't think the sightings of Jesus were grief visions, though probably some of that occurred. It was more a conviction that his person and lordship, his presence, could not be defeated by death.

I actually agree with this and I think Jesus is Lord. I do not think he was God or rose from the tomb.

I think Paul saw Jesus. I think God reveals himself in the person of Christ and in the message of the Gospel.

I think the uniqueness of the Christian movement came from a profound conviction that the life of Jesus embodied something which was greater than death (a way of living in the spirit, a way of acknowledging the God of Justice and Mercy). If this conviction existed independently of an empty tomb, as I believe, it is all the more convincing to me. My life has witnessed no apparitions or miraculous visions, nor any convincing evidence of them. The Catholic miracles, the bleeding hosts, Padre Pio's wounds, Juan Diego's painting of the Virgin-- None of these are even slightly convincing to me.

In other words I agree with much of the theological content of the Resurrection (I am wary of Paul's atonement theology). And I find it possible only to have faith in them in a way that does not require me to pretend to believe something I cannot believe.

[Anonymous No.19421208]

>>19421039
>Catholic miracles
That's because none of those are.
Why do you think God would reveal miracles to us so easily?
What point is there to Faith if you have proof? You need to surrender without fear, not with easy certainty.
Also, your lack of faith is what keeps you from said things. Kind of a catch 22, i suppose.

[Anonymous No.19421267]

>>19419632
I would absolutely recommend the ICSBNT in terms of its content. Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch just oozed their conservative Catholic autism all over it and the result is the strongest and most sincere Catholic Study Bible arguably since the Orchard Study Bible of 1953. But since the full thing's supposedly coming out in fall 2022, I'd say anyone who really wants it for long-term use can wait another year to get the full thing unless you find it cheap secondhand. If you really want good leather as a Catholic, just get your favorite Bible and send it to Leonard's or BensBibles and, for $100-300 (depending on what you want done and the type of leather), they'll do whatever you want to it.

[Anonymous No.19421325]

>>19419632
>I'm in the market for a study Bible for my wife who is currently a catechumen. Would you recommend it?
Yes. That study Bible argues for every piece of Catholic teaching in the New Testament text you could think of. I would recommend the Didache Ignatius edition, too, as I've seen others give it to those undergoing RCIA. It's not as detailed but it is complete OT and NT and directly cites the Catechism of the Catholic Church in all its footnotes. So it depends on what you specifically need out of it. Want to understand where Catholic teachings come from the Bible, then the Didache; if you want to learn just the NT from a Catholic perspective in extreme detail, then the Ignatius.

I'd like to separately offer this video. It's long, but use the timecodes in the description to jump around and skip the fluff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70BRXzoHAdU
It grades a bunch of study Bibles, including Jewish and protestant ones at the end, on how secularized or sincere they are in their content, and thus helps you avoid ones that try to push their secular theories to attack Christian teachings overall.

[Anonymous No.19421376]

How good of an experience would giving Greek a shot for original NT be?

[Anonymous No.19421389]

>>19421376
It'll bring you one step closer to the original text and meanings, so go for it.

[Anonymous No.19421390]

I'm currently reading "Sayings of the desert father's".
I'm more interested in practice then abstract theology.

[Anonymous No.19421402]

Good books on the history of the liturgy, preferably east and west?

[Anonymous No.19421686]

>>19421402
Adolf Adam
Liturgy

[Anonymous No.19421750]

>>19421686
> Above all, Adolf Adam endeavored to develop and communicate the Christian worship service scientifically; his writings, which opened up the renewed liturgy after the Second Vatican Council

Doesn't sound promising but oil give it a try.

[Anonymous No.19422176]

>>19421208
>What point is there to Faith if you have proof?

I completely, totally agree with this. It is part of my retort to people who

1) Argue the Resurrection as a well-attested historical fact
2) Cannot comprehend Christian faith without reference to things like virgin birth/resurrection

It is not my fault Catholicism is dogmatic in nature and requires its faithful to adhere to a creed.

[Anonymous No.19423117]

roman catholic vs greek orthodox:
i think byzantium is really cool. is there a major difference?

[Anonymous No.19423428]

>>19423117
One is filled with suffering and a true test of your heat, see how long one can remain Catholic without complaining they're not receiving beautiful liturgy while the other one is FUCKING BASED WITH BASED ORTHO CHANTS WITH BASED MT ATHOS AND BASED ORTHO CHADS AND BASED DIVINE LITURY ITS SO BASED.

[Anonymous No.19423556]

Who's your favorite Catholic Monarch?

[Anonymous No.19423577]

>>19423556
You posted him.

[Anonymous No.19423586]

>>19423117
Just go to a Byzantine Catholic mass. That's what Trent Horn does instead of TLM.

[Anonymous No.19423718]

>>19419871
>Mark has none of this.
Mark is pretty clear about the apostles not believing and Jesus reprimanding them for their unbelief, which wouldn't make sense if it was some abstract thing. Furthermore Mark's account of Mary Magdalene in the tomb points to Jesus' physicality when the angel points to the spot of his burial and says that his body isn't there "see the place where they laid him." (16:6)

If his body was still dead and he was "alive in spirit," the angel wouldn't point out the physical place of his corpse being empty.

[Anonymous No.19423868]

>>19419871
>The oldest recording of this story is Mark, (which ends at 16:8 originally!). John wrote about 50 years later. For 50 years, stories and memories about the appearance of the Risen Christ developed. For 50 years, Johanine theology developed its understanding of bread, blood, wine and flesh.

Don't forget the resurrection account in 1 Corinthians 15, with a very strong nigh universal scholarly consensus that the letter was written by Paul circa 55 AD.

[Anonymous No.19423924]

>>19423718
The boy-angel in the tomb does not unambiguously imply bodily resurrection. It could perhaps indicate ascension or, as I think, metaphor. It is very interesting that Mark ends (originally at 16:8) without Jesus appearing. This unusual ending bothered later writers enough to write multiple alternative endings to Mark (The Longer Ending, The Shorter Ending and Freer Logon ending) and be heavily redacted by Luke and Matthew.

>>19423868
Thank you for bringing this into the discussion. 1 Corinthians 15 is the earliest written reference to the Resurrection and we can see the skeleton of a narrative in it. It is interesting how Paul's timeline of events differs wildly from all Gospel accounts (which all disagree with each other on the order of who saw Jesus in what order) and has no mention of a tomb or Mary Magdalene.

To me this is further evidence that the story of the Resurrection (Joseph of Arimathea) in the Gospels is not historical.


By the way I am taking almost all of this analysis from Crossan "Birth of Christianity"

[Anonymous No.19423948]

Does A Canticle for Leibowitz count? Cause its fucking kino (in latin)

[Anonymous No.19423992]

>>19423924
>does not unambiguously imply bodily resurrection.
Why else would the angel explicitly mention Jesus' tomb being physically empty? Metaphors aren't capable of hiding corpses; I'd buy the whole thing being rubbish before buying the angel appearing just to talk in some kind of metaphor.

>Crossan "Birth of Christianity"
This might just be where we diverge but I trust tradition exponentially more than I trust anyone involved with the Jesus Seminar.

[Anonymous No.19424026]

>>19423992
The question is not "why did the angel say," but rather "why did Mark have the angel say." Mark is making the metaphor. The angel is part of Mark's metaphor!

Please be careful how you are reading!

[Anonymous No.19424394]

>>19417090
I study Law in a Jesuit university. I pretty much believe I could have gotten the same lay-like education from another top school.

The only difference is that you must see some Theology subjects in any time of your career. However, if you register yourself as any other religion in the platform they won't oblige you.

TL;DR: almost nothing, at least in LATAM.

[Anonymous No.19424566]

>trying to use Mark as an argument that Jesus isn't God

Somebody missed Mark 2:23-28:


>One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”

>He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”

>Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

[Anonymous No.19424639]

did u dudes read this

[Anonymous No.19424662]

>>19423428
>>19423586
bible version to larp as byzantine?
why is american christianity so un-kino? protestants were a mistake

[Anonymous No.19425061]

Lads I think I might be able to manage it so that I can be in Mexico City for the feast day of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

I'm pumped. I think I'm going to take the plunge and go. Imagine being at the basilica, seeing the tilma, on the feast day.

[Anonymous No.19425078]

>>19425061
You're lucky anon, in our country, attendance for Fiestas and Novenas are dropping although they're still numerous.

Bless your heart.

[Anonymous No.19425110]

>tfw making plans over a decade in advance to go to Jerusalem for Holy Week 2033
The fact that I'm (hopefully) going to be alive to mark 2,000 years since the crucifixion in AD 33 is too much to pass up by just celebrating at my local church like every other year. Anyone else think about this?

[Anonymous No.19425129]

>>19425110
I've been thinking about attending the Third Council of Nicaea in 2025. Imagine being on the ground as the Great Schism is healed. Of course, there's no guarantee it will actually take place. But imagine being there if it does.

[Anonymous No.19425242]

>>19425061
I hope you have a great experience, anon.
Blessed be The Mother of Jesus.

[Anonymous No.19425319]

When putting the Bible on the shelf, are you supposed to fold the ribbon back into the book the same way they are when initially sold or are you supposed to leave it sticking out?

[Anonymous No.19425353]

>>19425110
I hadnt considered this, I will have to start making arrangements.

[Anonymous No.19425373]

>>19425319
I do the former for some reason

[Anonymous No.19425394]

>>19425373
Same. I've seen people do the latter, but it never looks right to me to just have the ribbon hanging off the shelf or in front of the book like in picrel.

[Anonymous No.19425895]

>>19410030
>If everyone followed Kempis’ book, humanity would immediately go extinct.
I don't think thats necessarily true.

[Anonymous No.19425901]

>>19415785
Its not true. Maybe for someone with no faith whatsoever. But if you already have a working understanding of the Church and faith in it then it could be less.

[Anonymous No.19425906]

>>19415826
You don't even need beads. You can count them on your fingers.

[Anonymous No.19425919]

>>19409469
What's the most /clg/ anime?

[Anonymous No.19425921]

>>19425319
That sounds like a ton of pointless work and a chance to ruin the pages. I leave them hanging.
>>19425906
I was thinking of making my own. I have made a few crosses so I was just thinking of adding beads to those.

[Anonymous No.19425923]

>>19411258
by acknowledging the Church as a spiritual institution first and foremost. The gates of Hell shall not prevail...

[Anonymous No.19425936]

>>19411889
Catholicism is fairly uniform in belief globally.
Protestants are more unified by their rejection of the Church than anything else. Minor variations on things like grace/justification, but that's about it.

[Anonymous No.19425944]

>>19412746
>Francis is not the worst Pope we've ever had.
Were there popes who were apostate before Francis and other popes who prayed towards mecca and kissed the evil quran? I don't meant just really sinful, but actual apostates.

[Anonymous No.19425947]

>>19417461
DAmn dude. It looks like you lived the online culture war irl. I'm sorry that happened. I hope you consider returning to the Church one day.

[Anonymous No.19425993]

>>19417494
It's nice that there are more sane places that don't sit on one extreme or the other.

[Anonymous No.19426132]

>>19412393
why just his? put an outpost in all the smarty boards and help save more souls

[Anonymous No.19426166]

>>19423924
>By the way I am taking almost all of this analysis from Crossan "Birth of Christianity"

My friend, as you probably know, Crossan is famously skeptical. He is a man who has lost his faith, yet he retains the intellectual and writerly gifts God gave him, and hence, can articulate his skepticism about the resurrection with great persuasiveness.

But Crossan only presents one side of the story -- the skeptical side. Thus, to reach a verdict based solely or primarily on Crossan would be rather like a juror rendering a verdict based only on the evidence set forth by one side, rather than giving a fair hearing to both sides.

You are currently sitting in the juror's seat. You've heard the case for the prosecution, as it were -- ably presented by Prof Crossan.

May I suggest that, in fairness, you owe it to yourself to hear the other side - the case for the defense. The above two referenced books (>>19420637) reflect such a defense.

However, I cited those books because I didn't really know where you were coming from, intellectually. And while both the Green and the McDowell are good books, in my opinion, the argument is essentially framed so as not to be beyond the understanding of any reasonably intelligent high school student.

If you are intelligent to have read Crossan, where the bar is set rather higher than in Green or McDowell, then you might, in the interest of rendering a fair verdict, try reading an equivalently weightier work, such as N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God; Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus; or Habermas, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus.

Listen to the rest of the story before you render a final verdict.

[Anonymous No.19426210]

>>19424639
Cover art is too trendy to probably be anything but a whitewashing away of the most important secret information involved in the corruption of the Catholic directors and agents in the CIA.

[Anonymous No.19426221]

>>19425919
Hellsing has some of the more positive representations of the Church.

[Anonymous No.19426993]

>>19425319
>putting the Bible on the shelf
This is only done by Catholics, "Orthodox", and those "churches" with the women and/or homosexual "pastors". Christians read it constantly.

[Anonymous No.19427143]

>>19426993
>having 4 Bibles spread across your desk instead of neatly and respectfully filed when you're reading the Church Fathers instead
I thought prots were supposed to be clean?

[Anonymous No.19427210]

>>19427143
>needing 4 "bibles" when the King James is the only legitimate Holy Bible
Just sit it in it's own dedicated spot on the nightstand atop the small stack of commentaries (only needed as references for cultural/historical background info and symbolism accentuations/explanations while reading the Holy Bible).
>"""Church Fathers"""
How does one "father" something that already existed before them? Really makes one think.

[Anonymous No.19427326]

>>19427143
They are deluded and stubborn. Like modern pharisees pretending they follow the law.

[Anonymous No.19427368]

>>19409469
any good fiction written from catholic writers with a catholic influence besides Tolkien, C.S Lews and Gene Wolfe?

[Anonymous No.19427399]

>>19426166
I think the main "problem" is the framework of discourse modernity establishes. Even if you casually mention that you are Christian to people around a table, chances are they will reply respectfully but the air will immediately be filled with that "he doesn't actually believe *that*, does he?" aura, in the sense that it is acceptable at most to be a cultural Christian who respects morality and the culture around it, but on the other hand that *actually* believing the central theological points of Christianity makes one nuts. People have this kind of reaction not out of any ill will, but instinctively due to conditions of modernity. It is because of this that it seems like Christianity loses ground in modern/contemporary discourse, the very conditions of our present era ensure the "space" for Christianity is shrinking. For this reason many lose faith at worst or feel fatigued at best. The positions for Christianity, whether in public space/discourse or even privately, inside one's own head, are always due to the profoundly secularized conditions of modernity, attacked by hermeneutics of suspicion and the longer the world is "disenchanted" and temporally removed from the Apostolic Age and Christ, the bigger the suspicion, since nobody alive has experience of anything like it or even knows anyone who had an experience like it. Thus, I think for believers, there is a sort of fatigue of faith present, that can feel quite like a heavy burden in contrast to a basically hostile secularized world and even those disenchanted by secularization tend to gravitate towards new age-y stuff often, since to rhem the "old story" which is Christianity, still feels like an impossibility they already previously rejected. Only a cataclysmic event could change the course the West is going, personally I do not doubt that when things get off rails completely, such an event will no doubt manifest itself.

[Anonymous No.19427405]

>>19427326
>argues endlessly against proven history that "ever virgin Mary" was not Apostolic in origin
>allows prayers to be subverted by Satan from God to Ishtar and miscellaneous demons for centuries
>calls others deluded and stubborn

[Anonymous No.19427542]

>>19427405
>comparing The Holy Virgin Mary with the demon Ishtar
I swear the blasphemy of prots have no end

[Anonymous No.19427585]

>>19427542
What do you expect? I think Trent Horn put it best in his video where he pointed out how peculiar it is that protestants tend to act like atheists a lot, using the very arguments that atheists use against them against other Christians, with zero self-awareness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNreY29xfoE

[Anonymous No.19427603]

>>19427542
>>19427585
Where after Jesus said "After this manner therefore pray ye" did He include anything about His mother?

[Anonymous No.19427703]

>>19427603
Did Jesus say that you couldn't ask others to pray for you? For example, am I allowed to ask you to pray for me or you to ask me to pray for you? If yes, then I can similarly ask those in heaven to intercede through prayer for me, or you, or others, unless you believe they are spiritually dead, in which case you're in conflict with Christian teachings.

[Anonymous No.19427855]

>>19427703
>am I allowed to ask you to pray for me or you to ask me to pray for you?
Not via telepathy.
"Praying the rosary" is a 10 "Hail Mary" per 1 "Our Father" ratio. Really makes one think.

[Anonymous No.19427867]

>>19427855
obligatory matthew 6:7 call out for all those repetitions

[Anonymous No.19427875]

>>19427855
>The Marian Rosary has Hail Marys in it
Anon...

[Anonymous No.19427906]

>>19427867
Allow me to reply. Matthew 6:7 says is And in praying do not heap up empty phrases (“vain repetitions” in KJV) as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words.
And also Matthew 26:44
This is a prayer to be recited, but they are neither “empty phrases” nor “vain repetitions.”

[Anonymous No.19427917]

>>19427399
I mean, I more or less agree with what you're saying, but my response here (>>19426166) to this post (>>19423924) turned on the latter poster's specific remark suggesting that his skepticism about the Resurrection arose from reading Crossan's analysis of the issue, an analysis that is certainly not the last word on the matter.

I note that I make the instant post in the uncertainty whether you (i.e. >>19427399) are the same person as the poster referenced above (i.e. >>19423924). My remark would seem to apply in either circumstance.

[Anonymous No.19428055]

>>19427917
I just used your post to develop my thoughts tangentially. I think the type of thinking Crossan exhibits is in part influenced by the conditions of modernity ie that it cant possibly be true except in some psychological sense or in that vein

[Anonymous No.19428138]

>>19424394
>TL;DR: almost nothing, at least in LATAM.

Onions el mismo anon. Fíjate que quiero entrar a una jesuita; entonces se requiere tomar materias en teología?

Thanks for the info btw.

[Anonymous No.19428200]

>>19428055
>I just used your post to develop my thoughts tangentially.

Okay. Your points are well taken.

As for Crossan, I can only shake my head, as, tbqf, I can only shake my head when I think of Joyce losing his faith, or Loisy and Tyrrell, all four of them being rather brilliant men.

[Anonymous No.19428357]

>>19426132
>he wants to save more souls
ohnonononono its time for >>19411863

[Anonymous No.19428461]

>>19427368
Lord of the World by Robert Hugh Benson

[Anonymous No.19428900]

>>19427368
Mauriac, Viper's Tangle
Bernanos, Diary of a Country Priest
Flannery O'Connor, short stories; two novels (worthy works, but her short stories are where she shines); The Habit of Being (collected letters); Mystery and Manners (collected essays) (the latter two books, of course, are not fiction, but I would think any /lit/terateur would enjoy them)
Evelyn Waugh, A Handful of Dust; Brideshead Revisited
Graham Greene, The Heart of the Matter, The Tenth Man; many anons also quite like The Power and the Glory

[Anonymous No.19429557]

>>19425919
Bump.

[Anonymous No.19429778]

>>19428200
Crossan just wants to claim Jesus is some kind of progressive commie hippie. He feels wishy-washy because the reality of Jesus doesn't even matter to him that much as opposed to progressive ideologies that can be gleaned from Jesus' teachings.

[Anonymous No.19430140]

>>19425919
Cute!

[Anonymous No.19430167]

>>19425919
I've actually offhandedly considered doing some form of longform essay on the portrayal of Catholicism in anime. It's like reverse Orientalism; a weird space where aesthetics are really important and questions of personal morality are constantly posed.

[Anonymous No.19430170]

For the more academically minded Catholics here I can highly recommend basically anything published by Emmaus Academic. Very high quality books covering a whole range of Catholic theological and political issues.

https://www.emmausacademic.com/books

[Anonymous No.19430190]

>>19418107
>I find apologetic works to be dishonest.
Secular scholars are far, far more dishonest than any Catholic apologetics book. Take it from a former atheist. Their scholarship is very dodgy, but honestly all you need to do is remember that the biblical secular scholarship types are made up of the same ilk who say cutting your dick off makes you a genuine woman.

If you think they're reliable then you haven't done your readings. Secular biblical scholarship found its beginnings with the Young Hegelians and their project to undermine the Prussian state by weakening it's religious basis. Many of their "theories" still are accepted today in academia. It's never been a neutral or objective enterprise

[Anonymous No.19430277]

>>19430190
where can i read more about this

[Anonymous No.19430288]

>>19430190
This makes me think about what R. Grant Jones said in one of his Bible reviews (in fact, I think it was a short review of that paperback companion to the Tyndale House GNT), where he off-handedly pointed out that, in all his reading and research, and when compared to tests in his background as a physicist, he doesn't believe that "textual criticism" has ever proven itself as an actual science, despite all the weight and merit it's been given for decades if not centuries. And the more I look at stuff like "Q source" and later-dating for the Gospels and whatnot, despite them being the "majority" opinions and being "scientifically-based" on textual criticism, they really are just guesses that run counter to traditional dates and attributions almost seemingly just to be critical.

[Anonymous No.19430297]

>>19430277
Biblical Criticism as a Tool of Statecraft by Scott Hahn. Or you could just read the Young Hegelians entry on Wikipedia, they don't try to hide it. Go and read the philosophy section and see how many theories you can spot that are still parroted today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Hegelians

[Anonymous No.19430302]

>>19430288
Pretty much yeah. If it is a "science" it's the softest of the soft sciences and is mostly conjecture with atheist presuppositions. Secular biblical scholarship is largely worthless.

[Anonymous No.19430306]

>>19411222
Allers, Improvement of the Self
Percy, Lost in the Cosmos

[Anonymous No.19430366]

>Biblical Criticism
If you don't believe Matthew is the first gospel written in Aramaic, you might as well be an atheist.

[Anonymous No.19430377]

>>19430366
Mark was written in Latin originally too.

[Anonymous No.19430388]

>>19430297
Man, Scott Hahn has so much stuff I need to read

[Anonymous No.19430402]

>>19430377
Quite possible, since St. Mark was St. Peter's translator. But I haven't heard about this view before.

[Anonymous No.19430436]

>>19430402
https://www.scribd.com/doc/30411279/Proof-that-the-Gospel-of-Mark-was-written-in-Latin-By-David-Bruce-Gain

It was the prevailing view before (((modern))) scholarship. The Challoner Douay Rheims has a note about it.

[Anonymous No.19430504]

By what standard did the Church decide which books of the Bible are canon and which are not?

[Anonymous No.19430509]

>>19430504
Whether they were inspired by God or not

[Anonymous No.19430511]

>>19430509
Yes but that's begging the question though. By what standard did they judge whether a book was inspired by God or not?

[Anonymous No.19430527]

>>19430511
There was no standard used to judge. It was divinely revealed to the Church through Christ and His apostles.

[Anonymous No.19430537]

>>19430527
But then why do Protestants follow a very similar canon when they reject the Church? Since they can't rely in divine revelation of the Church what is their standard, ?

[Anonymous No.19430556]

>>19430537
Protestants basically accept the tradition of the Church with a few changes (removing the deuterocanonicals). If you asked a Protestant why they accept certain books as canonical they simply wouldn't be able to answer in any satisfying way. It's one of the big holes with Sola Scriptura. Canon Revisited by Kruger would probably be your best bet for Protestant apologetics on this issue

[Anonymous No.19430618]

>>19430556
But anon you see, the Catholic answer "it's the right book because Church said so" isn't satisfying either. If you look into Islamic sciences, they have a very complex methodology of verifying the historical validity of each narration. I was expecting a similar thing in Christianity but I guess I'm disappointed. How do you know the Gnostics aren't the true followers of Jesus then? How do you know the account in the Gospel of Barnabas (where Jesus talks about Muhammad) isn't true? Just because the Church says so?

[Anonymous No.19430652]

>>19430618
Everything comes down to the resurrection of Christ. If it happened then the apostolic tradition handed down is correct and the Church can authoritatively say which texts are inspired. If it didn't happen then it's all bunk anyway. The Resurrection of Christ is what validates scripture as being scripture. It's not a matter of what the Church says it's a matter of what the Church received from the incarnate Logos.

[Anonymous No.19430670]

>>19430556
The broadest rule to my understanding is that the early reformers wanted to get rid of the books of the OT written in Greek rather than Hebrew, maybe they thought "not real jew language = not real book"

This is why they got rid of Maccabees, which is incidentally a big part of why they also don't believe in purgatory.

[Anonymous No.19430694]

>>19430652
I see. Is there a book I could read that summarizes all these doctrines? I'm considering "Introduction to Christianity" by Pope Benedict. Would that be a good comprehensive introduction?

[Anonymous No.19430710]

>>19430694
Introduction to Christianity is very good but a bit misleading since it's also very philosophical. It's not a rundown of Christian doctrines but rather a comparative theology between Christianity and modernity.

I'd recommend these:
Catechism of the Catholic Church (You can read this online for free, or get the mass market paperback for around 10 bucks)
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott
Sources of Catholic Dogma by Denzinger
Fundamental Theology by Lawrence Feingold

[Anonymous No.19430752]

>>19417278
Nobody here likes the fact that they're using a computer, so that's not a good argument

[Anonymous No.19430792]

>>19414729
Von Neumann, considered the man with the highest IQ in history and high functioning autistic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann

>Von Neumann reportedly said, "So long as there is the possibility of eternal damnation for nonbelievers it is more logical to be a believer at the end," referring to Pascal's wager. He had earlier confided to his mother, "There probably has to be a God. Many things are easier to explain if there is than if there isn't."

One of his remarkable abilities was his power of absolute recall. As far as I could tell, von Neumann was able on once reading a book or article to quote it back verbatim; moreover, he could do it years later without hesitation. He could also translate it at no diminution in speed from its original language into English. On one occasion I tested his ability by asking him to tell me how A Tale of Two Cities started. Whereupon, without any pause, he immediately began to recite the first chapter and continued until asked to stop after about ten or fifteen minutes.[220]

Von Neumann was reportedly able to memorize the pages of telephone directories. He entertained friends by asking them to randomly call out page numbers; he then recited the names, addresses and numbers therein

[Anonymous No.19431066]

>>19430618
>How do you know the Gnostics aren't the true followers of Jesus then?
Because they deny the incarnation The Holy Eucharist refutes them, exposing their system as a satanic lie.

[Anonymous No.19431227]

>>19430792
Damn, that's a real life Mentat

[Anonymous No.19431265]

>>19430792
What in the hell, how is a human being like this even possible?

[Anonymous No.19431320]

>>19430170
Thanks for the tip. Feingold is very good.

>>19430504
>By what standard did the Church decide which books of the Bible are canon and which are not?

Here is what Augustine wrote: “I would not have believed the gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic Church had induced me.” (St. Augustine, Contra Ep. Fund., V, 6.)

The quote is taken from this article:

The Canon Question
https://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/01/the-canon-question/

The article addresses the hermeneutic of the early Church Fathers in determining the canon. Note that there are also internal links to earlier articles from the website on the same general issue that may also be of interest:

Hermeneutics and the Authority of Scripture
https://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/09/hermeneutics-and-the-authority-of-scripture/

Solo Scriptura, Sola Scriptura, and the Question of Interpretive Authority
https://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/11/solo-scriptura-sola-scriptura-and-the-question-of-interpretive-authority/

In sum, I think you'll get a good sense of the early Church's hermeneutic for determining the canon of scripture, and in passing, too, what passes for a Protestant hermeneutic, to wit, Scripture is self-attesting to the believer via the inward testimony of the Holy Spirit.

Calledtocommunion.com is an excellent Catholic website, btw. A lot of good stuff on there, including much high quality discussion in the reader comments.

[Anonymous No.19431375]

>>19430618
>But anon you see, the Catholic answer "it's the right book because Church said so" isn't satisfying either.

This is a legitimate point. Was Augustine's claim - “I would not have believed the gospel, etc” - merely a circular argument? Let's see if there's a satisfactory answer.

OBJECTION: How could anyone ever claim that a tradition is erroneous when the Catholic church begins with the premise that Scripture and tradition, as determined by the Catholic Church are authoritative? Saying the appeal must be made to the Church does not qualify as an answer! It absolutely cannot work because the RCC maintains the Church's and pope's authority is based on Scripture AND tradition, i.e. it is begging the question--in other words purely circular reasoning.

ANSWER: Catholics don't start with the assumption the Church is infallible.

We start with the objective historical claims of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection.

The result of this line of reasoning is that we must conclude that Jesus indeed rose from the dead. Consequently, his claims concerning himself—including his claim to be God—have credibility.

Further, Christ said he would found a Church. Both the NT texts (taken as merely a historical texts (see, e.g., attached pic here: >>19431320), not yet as inspired ones) and other ancient works attest to the fact that Christ established a Church with the rudiments of what we see in the Catholic Church today—papacy, hierarchy, priesthood, sacraments, and teaching authority.

We thus reached the material and purely historical conclusion that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. Because of his Resurrection we have reason to take seriously his claims concerning the Church, including its authority to teach in his name.

This Catholic Church tells us the Bible is inspired, and we can take the Church’s word for it precisely because the Church, according to Christ's promise is infallible.

NOTE: this is not a circular argument.

We are not basing the inspiration of the Bible on the Church’s infallibility and the Church’s infallibility on the word of an inspired Bible.

That indeed would be a circular argument!

What we have is really a spiral argument.

On the first level we argue to the reliability of the Bible insofar as it is history. From that we conclude that an infallible Church was founded. And then we take the word of that infallible Church that the Bible is inspired.

This is not a circular argument because the final conclusion (the Bible is inspired) is not simply a restatement of its initial finding (the Bible is historically reliable), and its initial finding (the Bible is historically reliable) is in no way based on the final conclusion (the Bible is inspired).

What we have demonstrated is that without the existence of the Church, we could never know whether the Bible is inspired.

Source: https://www.catholic.com/tract/proving-inspiration

[Anonymous No.19431405]

>>19431375
You don't take for granted the people in it though.
Where does it say you should "revere" the saints? Where is the pope and his infallibleness said?

[Anonymous No.19431447]

>>19431405
>Where does it say you should "revere" the saints?

Prayer to saints: https://www.catholic.com/tract/praying-to-the-saints

Veneration of saints: https://www.catholic.com/tract/saint-worship

>Where is the pope and his infallibleness said?

Biblical Basis for Papacy: https://www.catholic.com/tract/peter-and-the-papacy

Authority of Pope Recognized by the Early Church Fathers (Part I): https://www.catholic.com/tract/the-authority-of-the-pope-part-i

Authority of Pope Recognized by the Early Church Fathers (Part II): https://www.catholic.com/tract/the-authority-of-the-pope-part-ii

What is 'Infallibility'?: https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/infallibility

Papal Infallibility: https://www.catholic.com/tract/papal-infallibility

See also pic related.

[Anonymous No.19431455]

>>19430752
he invented computers to calculate trajectories for missiles to destroy commies so it's based

[Anonymous No.19431486]

>>19431447
What with the action of those popes? Are their blunders inspired?
Isn't praying to someone other than God heresy?

[Anonymous No.19431525]

>>19417126
Save your money. I donated my copies to my church. It’s simply a blown-up, cheap reprint of the KJV. Absolutely not worth it.

[Anonymous No.19431555]

>>19431486
>What with the action of those popes? Are their blunders inspired?

No, their blunders are not inspired. Please look at the link that explains the *scope* of papal infallibility ("What is 'Infallibility'?"). Infallibility most definitely does *not* mean that everything a pope says or does is infallible, and nor does it mean that a pope cannot sin.

What it means, in a nutshell, is that the Holy Spirit protects the Pope from teaching error when the Pope is teaching on a matter of faith and morals.

>Isn't praying to someone other than God heresy?

Catholics distinguish between veneration and worship. We only *worship* God, but we do venerate the saints. The Catholic position is explained well in the above linked articles.

These videos may also helpful in that they explain the Catholic pov from different angles and perspectives:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYRSv-LtrH8

As taught by Romans 12:4 and 1 Cor 12:12-27, Christians are "one body," whether on earth or in heaven: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj0k1j2MX6E

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3K9yGNPaIcA

Can the saints in heaven hear our prayers? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3l-wpUWN0M

[Anonymous No.19431564]

>>19431555
venerate and worship are synonyms.

[Anonymous No.19431604]

>>19431564
>venerate and worship are synonyms.

"Veneration" used to have a broader meaning, close or synonymous to the meaning of "worship" today, but in current usage (which is the sense in which I'm using the words) the meaning of "veneration" has narrowed to mean great respect or reverence, vs. worship, which is the adoration given to God. Pic related.

I mean, if you prefer, you could just replace "veneration" and "worship" with "reverence" and "adoration," respectively, and the latter two words convey the same meaning I intended by the first two, perhaps with greater clarity?

[Anonymous No.19431621]

>>19431604
That helps. I've seen countless catholics praying to representations of saints though, and they seem to put much more faith into that instead of into actual prayer.

[Anonymous No.19431651]

>>19431621
>I've seen countless catholics praying to representations of saints though, and they seem to put much more faith into that instead of into actual prayer.

I can understand your reaction to that as appearing to be a dubious practice.

While legitimate, in my view, prayer should not be limited to prayer to saints, however.
And indeed, the highest public prayer of Catholics takes place in the liturgy of the Mass, in which Catholics adore the Holy Trinity and receive the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist.

With that said, I would acknowledge that not all Catholics necessarily have a well-balanced prayer life. I mean, I know there are quite a few nominal Catholics. And yet I know too that there are many Catholics who quietly and without a great deal of show do have a very balanced and devoted prayer life -- persons who are deeply devoted to following Christ.

[Anonymous No.19431669]

Reminder to anons feeling guilty for sinning. Truly repent and you shall prevail.
Mark 14:38
>Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.

[Anonymous No.19431684]

>>19431651
I'm delivering a low blow, if i may confess.
Every denomination has its bad fruits.
I abhor the concept of saints and the pope though. That's why Protestants exist, anyways.

[Anonymous No.19431781]

>>19431684
>I abhor the concept of saints and the pope though.

Consider, however, that both prayer to saints and the office of the Pope are clearly established in scripture, as I think is well-attested in the various arguments made on this thread, and in the linked articles and videos.

Read through some of those links that explain the biblical basis of the papacy, and prayer to saints: >>19431447

Just one of each. You might be surprised by what you find. I can assure you that the Catholic Church is *thoroughly* biblical.

[Anonymous No.19431825]

>>19431781
It's all interpretation. It doesn't say in clear wording "catholics are right".
There's a reason people have being bickering over it for centuries.

[Anonymous No.19431832]

>>19430388
Definitely. Just reading the essays and notes in the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible NT tells me this is the guy to read. Anyone able to list the essentials?

[Anonymous No.19431860]

>>19431525
I always assumed. His footnotes always seemed like minimal effort, and you could just buy one of those "KJV w/ Apocrypha" leather Bibles and get the act same content. Also, another anon pointed out a while back that the comments on that website intentionally misrepresent the history of the KJV to make it seem significantly less controversial to Catholics than it was.

[Anonymous No.19431911]

Next thread needs a Latin subtitle. Collegium Littorum Catholicae or something.

[Anonymous No.19431925]

>>19431911
Latin, then next has Hebrew for OT, and next Greek for NT

[Anonymous No.19431934]

>>19431925
Main title needs roman numeral thread counter. /clg/ -- Catholic Literature General II
Collegium Littorum Catholicae
Greek
Hebrew

Links

[Anonymous No.19431943]

>>19415785
That is not true, you can enroll in RCIA classes and be received into the Church and receive communion within a year.

[Anonymous No.19432034]

>>19431943
Correct. When I did RCIA I believe it was May to April 3, Easter Vigil, where you are given the sacraments (baptism, confirmation, first communion).

[Anonymous No.19432269]

>>19431604
An anime I watched recently even made this distinction between venerate and worship. It was in That Time I Got Reincarnated As A Slime, a couple characters were asked by another characer if he could join to worship their leader, but they make the correction that they venerate their leader not worship him.

[Anonymous No.19432311]

>>19425919
I always wonder why Japan, a 1% Christian country, is so obsessed with using Christian imagery for the aesthetics and even sometimes for the message. Evangelion is an example where it was explicitly just for the aesthetics, Madoka had a whole character whose dad was a renegade priest, and even Pokemon seemingly did the whole "Judas betrays Jesus" story once and even "crucified" Ash in that arc--imagery that was so on the nose, they reanimated it for the international dubs. It really makes me think, because I have doubts a single actual Christian was on the writing team for any of these shows.

[Anonymous No.19432533]

>>19431825
>It's all interpretation.

There are also the facts on the ground, including the Catholic Church itself, which, unique among centralized, hierarchical institutions, has lasted for some 2000 years. Certainly the Protestant historian Macaulay found it remarkable:
>There is not and there never was on earth a work of human policy so well deserving of examination as the Roman Catholic Church. The history of that Church joins together two great ages of human civilization. No other institution is left standing, which carries the mind back to the times when the smoke of sacrifice rose from the Pantheon, and when cameleopards and tigers bounded in the Flavian Amphitheater.
>The proudest royal houses are but of yesterday, when compared to the line of Supreme Pontiffs. That line we trace back to an unbroken series from the Pope who crowned Napoleon in the nineteenth century to the Pope who crowned Pepin in the eighth; and far beyond the time of Pepin the august dynasty extended till it is lost in the twilight of fable.
>The church saw the commencement of all governments and of all the ecclesiastical establishments that now exist in the world; and we feel no assurance that she is not destined to see the end of them all.
>She was great and respected before the Saxon set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the Rhine, when Grecian eloquence still flourished at Antioch, when idols were still worshiped in the temple of Mecca. And she may still exist in undiminished vigor when some traveler from New Zealand shall, in the midst of a vast solitude, take his stand on a broken arch of London Bridge to sketch the ruins of St. Paul's.

>There's a reason people have being bickering over it for centuries.
Because that's what people do, especially since the enshrining of the principles of sola scriptura and personal interpretation following the Reformation.

And it's also the reason why Christ created one Church to which He granted the power to teach infallibly in His name, and against which the gates of hell would not prevail.

The facts on the ground: they are relevant to the analysis. And seen with a clear eye, I daresay dispositive.

[Anonymous No.19432662]

>>19432533
You have my (You)

[Anonymous No.19432711]

>>19431375
>On the first level we argue to the reliability of the Bible insofar as it is history.
But there seems to be a problem with this too. There are different accounts of the historical accounts surrounding Jesus, and some of them do not include resurrection. Why take this one over the others?

[Anonymous No.19433044]

>>19432711
>But there seems to be a problem with this too. There are different accounts of the historical accounts surrounding Jesus, and some of them do not include resurrection. Why take this one over the others?

Sure, the resurrection is disputed. So is the Holocaust, and many other things.

With that said, there is more evidence for the Resurrection than many people realize. It is set out in such books as Was Jesus Who He Said He Was? by Michael Green, and McDowell, More Than a Carpenter.

>Why take this one over the others?
You could read both the above books in an evening. They are solid, well-argued little books. They set out the substantial evidence as to why belief in the Resurrection is reasonable, and indeed consistent with substantial historical evidence.

[Anonymous No.19433806]

>>19432311
>I always wonder why Japan, a 1% Christian country, is so obsessed with using Christian imagery for the aesthetics and even sometimes for the message
I really don't know for sure but I feel like it's basically reverse-Orientalism, like how English painters in the 1800s were obsessed with Japan and India.

Even if they don't understand it it's just this weird space where they can deal with stories moral struggles that are similar enough to be recognizable for nips but different enough to not feel too on the nose. Plus they just think shit looks cool.

Also Japan's perception of Catholicism basically comes down to two events:
>Amakusa/the Shimabara Kirishitan rebellion, which I presume they just neutrally see as a weird oddity like the Native-American wars in America or something
>Takashi Nagai and the destruction of the Nagasaki Cathedral from the atomic bomb, a really devout Catholic Japanese person basically becoming "the face" of the suffering during and perseverance after the nukes

I also think that the Kirishitans should have been formalized as their own rite similar to the Maronites or the Coptics tbqh, but they just never had enough formal contact with Rome to make that happen