[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 222 KB, 1226x1837, 71EOSDZZ6ZL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558242 No.19558242 [Reply] [Original]

Catholic literature thread. Post and discuss Catholic books and writings.

>> No.19558277
File: 18 KB, 325x499, scheeben, mysteries of christianity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558277

If you're curious about pic related, check out the discussion here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uROmrFJK-c

You may find your curiosity converted to a ravenous desire.

What's the verdict on Prat, btw.

>> No.19558331
File: 256 KB, 710x1286, 0040571x2701508512.fp.png_v03.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558331

>>19558277
>What's the verdict on Prat, btw.
Bretty good. While it's surprisingly hard to learn the exact backstory of these books (aside from being translated by Prat from the "11th French Edition" of presumably another book by John L. Stoddard), my reading leads me to assume they were primarily Catholic seminary textbooks used in the 20s-60s. There's also this partial book review of it. Also, here's a glimpse to see if it interests you (apologies that it's on Twitter, an Orthodox found this link):
https://twitter.com/Vhorwort/status/1452343005189484549

>> No.19558356

>>19558242
braaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaap

>> No.19558367
File: 157 KB, 907x1360, 71la2ic4OiL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558367

>>19558242
The Genius of Christianity by Chateaubriand

>> No.19558370

>>19558356
Based fartposter farting on christcucks

>> No.19558432
File: 90 KB, 304x475, 3486989.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558432

The most popular book among Catholic Priests.

>> No.19558438

>>19558432
wow they have pretty good taste desu

>> No.19558444

>>19558331
>Also, here's a glimpse to see if it interests you

Thanks. I didn't mean to mislead; I've read the book, recommended it on /lit/ a couple of weeks. I like the part where he analyzes Augustine on predestination, and how his slight shifts in position were adopted by various schools (such as the Calvinists).

>(aside from being translated by Prat from the "11th French Edition" of presumably another book by John L. Stoddard)
Just to clarify, Stoddard was the translator of Prat's book, in its 11th edition.

>my reading leads me to assume they were primarily Catholic seminary textbooks used in the 20s-60s.

Interesting question. I don't know the answer. Having gone through 11 French editions, it was clearly popular in France; not sure of its status/popularity in the US.

>> No.19558455

>>19558242
The Imitation of Christ.

>> No.19558462

>>19558432
>Lolita (male): The Catholic Edition

>> No.19558478

>>19558444
>recommended it on /lit/ a couple of weeks
Oh, then you might've been the same poster who recommended it to me in the first place. It was in the discussion of 1610 Douay notes, I believe.
>Just to clarify, Stoddard was the translator of Prat's book, in its 11th edition.
Ah, that makes sense.
>not sure of its status/popularity in the US
Seeing as one of my volumes says "Reprinted in 1946, 1950, 1952, 1956, 1958, 1961", I'm going to assume popular enough.

>> No.19558486
File: 113 KB, 646x724, in_awe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558486

>> No.19558527

>>19558478
>Oh, then you might've been the same poster who recommended it to me in the first place.
Seems likely. I don't think I've ever seen anyone else mention it.

>Seeing as one of my volumes says "Reprinted in 1946, 1950, 1952, 1956, 1958, 1961", I'm going to assume popular enough
Yeah, it did good. It's nice to see. But almost completely forgotten today. Due for a rediscovery, I daresay.

>> No.19558534 [DELETED] 
File: 646 KB, 1836x2237, The Catholit Guide to Bibles.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558534

Recently assembled this chart, and had been waiting for a thread to post it in. I was going to add more, but I didn't want to speculate in a planned "Recommended Reading" section.

>> No.19558558
File: 1.03 MB, 1836x2237, The Catholit Guide to Bibles.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19558558

Recently assembled this chart, and had been waiting for a thread to post it in. I was going to add more, but I didn't want to speculate in a planned "Recommended Reading" section.

>> No.19559111

>>19558527
>Vatican II happens
>pre-VII books vanish
Really makes you think.

>> No.19560203

>>19558558
love me ignatius catholic study bible
simple as

>> No.19560322

Not looking to start denominational shitflinging, but how do Protestants address the fact that as far back as the first and second centuries the earliest Church Fathers overwhelmingly advance the real presence of the Eucharist, in addition to the first-century Didache strongly implying it as well? I feel like even if you're ignoring any notions of "tradition" and going solely on the earliest writings, there's arguably more of an argument for the Eucharist than there is for several other basic theological concepts agreed upon by most Christians.

Seems like a weird move for Protestants to accept most of their theology on the Trinity, Christology, etc but then just randomly throw out their basically unanimous thought on the Sacraments.

>> No.19560487
File: 120 KB, 500x500, pope-pepe-43193153.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19560487

Why isn't the Pope in the Bible Catholic-bros? Is he just fanfiction?

>> No.19560525

>>19560487
primacy of peter. also solo scriptura is cringe and gay. without tradition youre just making up your own heresies

>> No.19560563

>>19560525
>without tradition youre just making up your own heresies
As opposed to making up your own heresies WITH tradition? Like claiming that giving the church money can get your ancestors out of hell, or refusing to immerse people in water during baptism even though the word baptism literally means immersion? It's literally Mormon-tier fanfiction.

>> No.19560742

>>19560322
I don't have much time to discuss this as I'm about to go to bed, but perhaps you will find this helpful if you can follow it. In the modern world (post middle ages) we hold that a symbol is something that is wholly distinct from the thing that it signifies, so the bread can only point to the flesh which is somewhere else, or that a symbol must be the thing that it signifies literally, so that the bread is the flesh. In the ancient world people did not make this sort of hard distinction. So they could say that the bread is the flesh and mean that it *is* the flesh, but also that it isn't literally. The symbol was a non-literal reality rather than solely a pointer to an external thing. They did not have the same paradigms of thought that we do. Similarly they also used simplistic language for this as there was not a doctrinal controversy that necessitated that it be clearly formulated.

>> No.19560813

>>19560563
Anon, this is a book thread, so I'm going to recommend a book for you that addresses the kinds of issues your raising: Karl Keating, 'Catholicism and Fundamentalism'

It's a very good book.

>> No.19560827

>>19560813
Thank you for the recommendation but until Catholics start baptizing I'm not really going to change my opinion of them.

>> No.19560912

>>19558558
This is very good.
Why the refuge of sinners version of haydock?
Possibly the catechism section should be expanded to include Trent and Baltimore (maybe Pius X)
The study bible section seems a little biased to the didache with the highly recommended line at the end. I think Ignatius is superior in nearly every aspect and it is what I would recommend to someone in rcia. Without the last line I think the 3 study descriptions are balanced.
What else are you planning to add?

>> No.19560943
File: 3.35 MB, 2560x2739, 1636485142908.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19560943

the best chart

>> No.19560948

>>19558370
>Catholics
>"christcucks"

>> No.19560950

>>19560827
>Catholics dont baptize
????????

>> No.19560962

>>19558558
Rightful NAB shame.

>> No.19561039

>>19558558
>Prot
>got a Jerusalem Bible
thats how it is.

>> No.19561056

>>19560912
>Why the refuge of sinners version of haydock?
When assembling the list, I went through /lit/ Catholic discussion, and the only mentions of the Haydock were always coupled with the emphasis on that version, so I carried it over into the chart. From my browsing, it does seem to be the most solid volume. And since I've never heard much about the other versions, one with existing praise should obviously be emphasized over ones that don't get talked about.
>Possibly the catechism section should be expanded to include Trent and Baltimore (maybe Pius X)
The catechism was a last-minute addition, because that was originally going to be an "Essential Reading" section, but I felt it'd become too subjective. So I just added the CCC which would've topped that list and renamed the header.
>The study bible section seems a little biased to the didache with the highly recommended line at the end. I think Ignatius is superior in nearly every aspect and it is what I would recommend to someone in rcia.
While I agree that the ICSBNT is superior, it's also incomplete, so the Didache, by default, becomes the only complete one to highly recommend for the RSV-2CE. And the mention of RCIA comes from constantly having seen it recommended and used outside of /lit/ for that purpose, so I added those endorsements via that last sentence. Once the ICSB is completed, the chart would be revised and probably become more biased toward it than the Didache. But I understand your point. I could remove that sentence or revise it if you think my reasoning is lacking.
>What else are you planning to add?
Before I cut things off, I was considering a section on commentaries (Orchard's A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture series, the IVP Bible Background Commentaries (not Catholic, but endorsed by the Franciscan University of Steubenville and very good, etc.) and/or supplementary volumes (think the Great Adventure Bible, the Word on Fire Bible, etc.), as well as possibly shouting out the Tyndale House GNT on its own due to its greater agreement with the RSV-2CE than the Nestle-Aland 28 (based on R. Grant Jones' charts). I actually wasn't planning a general lit chart, as I assumed they already existed, as shown by >>19560943. My focus was on Bibles and Bible supplementary resources.
>>19560962
Yep. In an expanded chart, it might've been in another section or just in the parentheses for the CCSS commentary series).

>> No.19561080

Is the NIV good?
Also, is the Jerusalem Bible good?

>> No.19561111

>>19561080
The Jerusalem Bible is the Anglo-Irish Catholic Bible. If you have those roots, it might feel like home. The notes are very extensive, those can be a tad too secular, and, of course, are a product of 1950s France, as the JB, and specifically the notes, are themselves translations of the French JB from 1956. Here's a detailed video you can watch/skim:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhSsImL7AM

>> No.19561133

>>19561111
nice quads.
Biggest little bump is i'm protestant.

>> No.19561143

>>19561133
You can argue that the JB is the Catholic NIV (at least outside of the US where the NAB is probably a better comparison for the NIV). Both are looser, more dynamic translations and both are very widely popular and used by normies. Nevertheless, I think that video (and channel broadly) can help you learn more about Bibles.

>> No.19561146

>>19561143
Well, you can never have too many of them. Comparing translations helps understanding.

>> No.19561190

>>19561146
As the chart says, stick with the JB over both of its revisions. The NJB is fairly unremarkable, and the RNJB ripped most of the notes out for seemingly no good reason and has yet to have a printing where they didn't fuck up the ones retained (either attached to the wrong verse or referring to something that used to exist in the JB/NJB but had been removed, leaving the note nonsensical; etc.) If someone wants to use the JB, they'll use the JB; if they want something more literal, then why not the RSV-2CE or ESV-CE? I really can't justify to you why the RNJB really exists in its current form.

>> No.19561494

>>19558242
Got both volumes the other week, its been great reading so far, very exciting. I love St. Paul so much lmfao.

>> No.19561498

>>19561494
It's funny that we might be the only people in the world still reading these two books lol.

>> No.19561504
File: 38 KB, 460x562, 9857.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19561504

>>19558370
>Based fartposter farting on christcucks

>> No.19561525

>>19561498
I actually hadnt thought of it that way hahah, huh.. Praise God.
thanks for leading me to them!

>> No.19561572

>>19561525
Not the guy who originally recommended them (>>19558444), but the one who originally got the recommendation weeks ago (>>19558478). Him, you, and me (and, assuming you're not him, one other guy in an Orthodox thread weeks ago) could be the only people actively using these books. Quite remarkable for a set that came out in the 20s and went through multiple reprintings in the 40s and 50s before vanishing. Praise God indeed.

>> No.19561592

Do you know of any good books about Carmelites? I find them interesting.

>> No.19561824

>>19561572
Ive also been reading Dr. Scott Hahns Joy To The World as well and hes soooo good, I love him so much.

>> No.19562022

>>19561056
The other 2 catechisms aren't really necessary to be on there, but I think the CCC should definitely be on there and I like the guide as it is. I think an essential/recommended reading section would eventually turn it into one of the typical unfocused 50 entry charts, so I would try not to change much.

It's unfortunate the Ignatius OT is not out yet. Once it's released, the chart could be revised and become the default. The apologetic explanation pages in the Didache are generally very good, but it always feels like the commentary on individual verses does not quite give me the explanation or information I'm looking for. Maybe it's the style of the commentary (dry? I'm not sure).

For revisions, maybe the didache could say "verse-by-verse commentary footnotes for both the OT and NT, most directly..."
(they don't all reference the CCC)
The Ignatius gave me so much more of the information I was looking for when I was in RCIA. That's why that last line bothers me and I would hate for someone to miss out on it if they were trying to choose one or the other.

>> No.19562071

>>19562022
Or maybe adding something to the Ignatius like "Also highly recommended for RCIA if you don't mind NT only commentary"
I'll leave it up to you if you want to change anything. I just wanted to give you my thoughts.

>> No.19562132 [DELETED] 

>>19558558
This is really good and I like how clean it is and how you've refrained yourself from including other translations and study editions like the Navarre Bible, Oxford Study Bible, Little Rock Study Bible, and of course NAB.

>> No.19562274
File: 1.27 MB, 1836x2386, The_Catholit_Guide_to_Bibles.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19562274

>>19562022
>>19562071
I understand. However, by the time I saw your post, I finished adding the two catechisms, heh...oh well. Nevertheless, I just added your wording to the Didache, added a similar "highly recommended" line for the ICSBNT including a note about RCIA, and tempered the Didache praise with an acknowledgment that it's the best full volume *until* the complete ICSB. I feel that levels things out. I also fixed some uncentered text.

>> No.19562423

>>19560487
Matthew 16,15-19
[15]Jesus said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
[16]Simon Peter responded by saying, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
[17]And in response, Jesus said to him: "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father, who is in heaven.
[18]And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.
[19]And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven."

>> No.19562433
File: 94 KB, 265x400, 1637795367339.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19562433

>>19558242
Anything by Lawrence Feingold is a very deep, rewarding read.

>> No.19562444
File: 72 KB, 720x1280, Catholic books.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19562444

>>19558242
Got this chart to add. Read a few from it. Quite good.
Laus tibi Christe.

>> No.19562459

>>19558277
Scheeben is the most underrated Catholic Theologian of modern times. His Glories of Divine Grace is an absolute must read.

>> No.19562663

I need a book that talks about explains just war because nowadays there’s ‘just’ keeps getting cloudier and cloudier.

>> No.19562818

>>19558242
Lazarillo de Tormez is a great book on the catholic church

>> No.19562850

>>19558558
good post

>> No.19562921

I have a question, there's a SSPX Chapel in my country, if I attend their mass, conduct confession or partake in any of the sacraments under them, is it considered heresy?

>> No.19563149

>>19562921
No. They are not in schism I'm pretty sure. I think Rome just says they have an irregular relationship or something vague like that. I wouldn't worry about it.

>> No.19563538
File: 125 KB, 500x334, 83EB6D79-FBE7-459A-9ABE-E24792D43F41.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19563538

how do i into lectio divina?

>> No.19563577

>>19562274
Just wonderful, the catechism section looks complete with the additions and the additional sentences for the study bibles give the nuance needed. Really great, a guide with correct, valuable information. Thank you.

>> No.19563634

>>19562423
18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.


I think the Gospel gives leaway for both those that join thr Catholic church and do not personally.

>> No.19563721

>>19563538
Read the Bible and pray for understanding and conversion, in addition to your regular prayers.