/clg/ - Catholic Literature General

File: weyes1.jpg (108KB, 770x1155px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 770x1155px

>>9995836
I'm slowly working my way through A Good Man Is Hard To Find by Flannery O'Connor, just finishing Good Country People. Damn she's good...

Why do Catholics seem to care more about the saints than they do the characters and authors in the bible?

Just curious

>>9995836
>Catholic literature general
>Half of the literature isn't Catholic, even has Tolstoy, an excommunicated apostate
>Has C. S. Lewis beyond one title
Changes to the op will need to be pretty extensive because it ignores the massive amounts of incredible Catholic writings to give way for schismatic or heretical writings.

>>9995861
Characters and authors of the Bible are saints in a lot of cases.

Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion" has changed my entire world-view.

>>9995871
I should explain what I mean

I feel like Catholics are more familiar with persons who have become saints within the tradition over the past couple thousand years, than the lesser-known biblical figures.

Maybe it's just an example of the
>religious people don't read their holy texts
meme

Anyway, no hate. You old-church types tend to be a lot more level-headed than the charismatic protestant fuckery I was brought up in. Keep being yourself and don't forget to savor the savory savior

>>9995879
You realised Calvinism was retarded?

>>9995867
>>9995867
These recommendations were copied directly from pic related's chart. I'll change this next thread. If (You) or some other anon would like to, that'd be more than appreciated.

>>9995836
>>9995895
>christ-chan
stop larping you fucking faggot, you ain't christian.also how man time have you already jacked off to her?

>>9995897
What are you even basing that off?
The fact that they're a weeaboo faggot?
Calm the fuck down and lrn2 love thy neighbor

>>9995897
I'm not LARPing. I am Catholic. I'm just avatarfagging as Christ-chan to be more easily identified.

>>9995895
I've been saying for ages it's a bloody awful chart, I don't understand why people always post it. Especially for a supposedly Catholic thread (there's a chart for it as well).
>>9995890
Lesser figures aren't as important. It's much easier to relate to st. Francis as you know Franciscans or Augustine because you've been converted by him, or Thomas Kempen because he's someone who's important for your meditative life than say Esther or Judith.

>>9995907
Well stop it.
t. Catholic

File: 1504684124805.jpg (57KB, 501x542px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 501x542px

>>9995915
Share the Catholic chart, anon. I'd love to use it in the next general.

>>9995901
>>9995905
>>9995907
what an embarrassment. imagine showing this shit to a priest

File: Judgement.jpg (19KB, 443x121px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 443x121px

>>9995924
imagine telling a priest you go on 4chan

let he who is without sin... (i.e. not you)

>>9995922
I don't have it on my PC sadly and a new one should probably be made. I'll contribute by linking important thomists people should read
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Cajetan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Su%C3%A1rez
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Garrigou-Lagrange
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Maritain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89tienne_Gilson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edith_Stein
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Copleston
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Anscombe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Geach
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alasdair_MacIntyre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Feser
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_S._Oderberg

Also, anyone looking to read Aquinas, read a lot of Aristotle before and do not start with Summa Theologiae, go with Summa Contra Gentiles instead.

Do you fear judgement day?

>>9995893
No, I realized that it is correct. TULIP is indefensible.

>>9996075
*invincible, not indefensible. I've haven't read any good Catholic arguments against election.

>>9996090
https://archive.org/stream/Garrigou-LagrangeEnglish/Predestination%20-%20Garrigou-Lagrange%2C%20Reginald%2C%20O.P_#page/n5/mode/2up

File: wallhaven-471783.jpg (301KB, 1280x1777px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1280x1777px

>>9995922
>>9995905
>>9995895
>>9995836
that character reminds me of this

File: 1417846590688.jpg (1MB, 1020x1369px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1020x1369px

>>9996448

I was an atheist my whole life but now I want to commit to a religion. Anyone interested in convincing me to become a Catholic?

>>9996482
>Anyone interested in convincing me to become a Catholic?
jesus faggot. Choosing a religion is not like going to the deli.

>>9996482
I can recommend you books.

>>9996448
tfw

Kierkegaard = greatest

I'm not a Catholic myself but I envy your carefully structured, institutional and historically based system of belief. I had a period where I read a lot of Catholic literature and participated in the liturgies, and the feeling of having my own place in a chaotic world and discovering meaning was great, I wish I could discover that happiness again. No other religious tradition gives me the same vibes as a majestic genealogical tradition beyond your understanding.

File: 2311.jpg (58KB, 195x273px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 195x273px

Where do I start?

>>9996519
With the Septuagint

>>9996524

Okay but I'm not sure what Chesterton had to with it.

>>9996506
you could become one
join uuuus

>>9996519
Manalive, Heretics and Napoleon of Notting Hill.

>>9996528
"start with the Greeks" is the meme
I just made it more bible-y

>>9996539

That was really dumb and you should feel ashamed

I got two requests:

1: I need more christchan pictures.
2: I'm about to read The Bible for the first time, how should I go about it? I know that I'll have to reread it one or two times after that but should I immediately start looking into secondary lit for my first read or should I let everything impress on me and study it more indepth later?

File: 54483368_p0.jpg (136KB, 731x945px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 731x945px

>underage memesters become so insecure because of the fedora atheist meme that they feel the need to become christian
Can't make this shit up

>>9996548
A study bible, with commentary from the Church Fathers is always nice, for example you could read it with the Catena app next to you as it has commentaries for every verse. If you don't want to go as hardcore, just reading it cover to cover before bed slowly (you'll get burnt out otherwise) is a good option with something like Aquinas' commentary on the Gospels and Jesus of Nazareth by Benedict XVI.

>>9996548
that depends on what your intention is

if you want a solid feel for Christianity, reading Luke-Acts is a good starting point

The case can definitely be made for reading the latter half of Genesis first. Genesis would give you a solid foundation for all the Abrahamic faiths.

If you just want some good literature, Job is top-tier. I'd rate Job highly as just a standalone.

>>9996574
You only need a commentary for your first reading if you're a Sola Scriptura faggot. Treat literature as literature, not as a fucking English assignment. Study Bibles are good for literary criticism but that's about it.

>>9996548

My first time reading it I went straight through, Genesis to Revelation and at the same time I devoured every bit of commentary, notes, essays, and whatever that I could find. It took a very long time to actually finish my read through. I managed to avoid burning myself out by sticking to a consistent schedule, so I would recommend doing something like that. Every morning for at least a year I would spend 30-60 minutes reading an annotated bible and every afternoon I would read one 1-2 chapters of a book related to the bible, usually academic or historical but sometimes apologetic from Scott Hahn, Trent Horn, or Peter Kreeft.

It is an extremely rewarding experience.

>>9996582
The Bible isn't just literature and treating it as purely that will lead you to both remove yourself from the context of continuity of tradition and reduce everything to accidental causes. Study Bibles or rather commentaries from the great saints are masterpieces in themselves and will greatly enhance the reading and understanding of it.

>>9995845
>A good man is hard to find
unironically what did she mean by this? Why was Flannery so edgy? My university's library has a book called 'Why Flannery O'Connor Stayed At Home' which I'd read if I had the time. Does anybody ITT know? I love her work but it always leaves me feeling stupid and lost.

>>9996605
>The Quran isn't just literature and treating it as purely that will lead you to both remove yourself from the context of continuity of tradition and reduce everything to accidental causes. Tafsirs from the great Islamic scholars are masterpieces in themselves and will greatly enhance the reading and understanding of it.

I suppose that's the only solution to fight against heresy, but I feel like you would be opening yourself up to being misled.

>>9995861
Some Catholics do because it demonstrates the continuity of the church and the holy spirit across time. The lives of the saints form a chain of historical events that is anchored in the life of Christ.

>>9996614
Almost all of her characters are twisted and evil, but in banal and small things, like how petty or backwards they are, how they focus on appearances and so on. Some are on the other hand just murderers.

>>9996626
How would you be mislead by the saints and doctors of the Church?

>>9996652
They're only human. Human's of the past are known for their inaccuracies

>>9996662

Is it your position that we shouldn't learn history? After all, people that have lived in the past have been wrong about things. Therefore, they can't be useful for learning anything.

>>9995890
Sainthood means you've been accepted into Heaven (or could be reasonably guessed to be in Heaven). So a lot of people like saints because they're stories of people you can identify with or with your problem and whom you can model to become more likely to reunite with God.

Patron saints, because they're related to more everyday or human problems, tend to bear more relevance to the everyday believer. You lose things more often than you have to fight magical bears, so calling up St Anthony for a powwow on the situation happens more often than calling up Elisha.
Actually I think only the Carmelites think about Elisha at all really and they don't get out much.

>>9996662
In each point where there's agreement amongst them they are preserved from error by God, as decreed in the Vatican Council.

>>9996679
History is extremely important. It's how we got to where we are now. I'm just saying humans aren't infallible.

>>9996685
Do Catholics really believe this?

>>9996698
So the Vatican basically just canonizes Biblical interpretations, so long as they align with the already set Canon? That's a neat little setup

>>9996709
>I'm just saying humans aren't infallible.

This is not something that the Church claims in the first place so I'm not sure why your making this point.

>>9996574
>>9996600
Thank you for your advice but I should probably have mentioned that I'm not reading an english bible. I'll look into these scholars after I have read it at least once.

>>9996715
If humans make mistakes then the "official" interpretations of the canonized saints can contain mistakes.

At a certain point I just found it easier to see if I could understand it for myself.

>>9995836
What are the main differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy?

Is Greek orthodoxy the full name for orthodoxy or does that mean everything will be in Greek?

Sorry for dumb questions.

File: g9luxi.jpg (107KB, 650x633px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 650x633px

>catholic general
>bunch of non-catholic literature
PROTESTANT BULLS

>>9996732
Luther was right tho. The catholic church was BS back then. He didn't call for a seperation of faiths, he criticized how materialistic it has become and wanted to fix it but not start something new.

>>9996725
Neither Aqunas not Benedict XVI wrote originally in English and should have translations.

>>9996726

I'm sorry but vague assertions really bother me. They're no good for carrying on a conversation and finding truth. First off, what does an "official interpretation of a canonized saint" mean? The only "official interpretation" in the Catholic Church that I'm aware of is the one that comes from the Magisterium, and they only make declarations on things that become problems so the vast majority of the Bible is open to personal interpretation. Second, be specific about the mistakes that canonized saints have made. What are they, why did they believe them, and what is the official Church response to them? Being a heretic precludes somebody from becoming a saint.

>>9996742
>Didn't call for a separation
>Literally invented a new, completely contradictory account of grace
>Denied the validity of forgiveness of sins by the successors of the apostles
>Denied the celibacy and oaths to God

Why was Luther so antisemitic? Should Protestants follow in Luther's antisemitism? As far as I know there is no scriptural source that justifies faith alone.

>>9996727
The Orthodox don't believe in the original sin, they don't have a purgatory, but instead demonic toll houses (?), they deny papal primacy, they deny that reason plays an important part in theology. Also they are more often than not using Church Slavonic.

>>9996759
The faith alone doctrine has a different account of faith, compared to say Abraham, it for Luther means only something you profess with your lips and see as true in the same way that a molecule of water is H2O, it isn't a supernatural act of placing yourself in God's hands, the combination of intellect and will aided by grace. For him faith alone means you can be a complete piece of shit, who is only covered up by the mercy of God, it has no personal reformative quality to itself. He described it as a pile of manure covered by snow, unlike the account of faith Catholics have where it will make you change your ways, where grace is gained and regained by confession after mortal sins and washed by the blood of Jesus. So yes, it is completely unbiblical. Someone will probably say I'm confusing sola gratia and sola fide, but I'm not because of how closely they are related.

Anyone seen the James White response to How to Be a Christian? I haven't seen it yet but I saw a recap on Reddit, it was kind of funny. It sounds like James is completely incapable of defending his position but his fans have been pressuring him to respond for so long that he had to make an effort.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/6ysbcv/discussion_on_james_whites_response_to_how_to_be/?st=j7c1tkkt&sh=28ee9c1e

>>9996807
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Private_Memoirs_and_Confessions_of_a_Justified_Sinner
Best book ever written on the topic of Calvinism

File: IMG_3863.png (360KB, 700x693px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 700x693px

>>9995897
>>9995924
>Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
I forgive you.

>>9996842
this
If you come to 4chan and are surprised that the christians here are spergy weebs I don't know what to tell you

>>9996842
>getting called a faggot for posting dumb anime girls is persecution

File: FgHCPru.jpg (53KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x333px

>>9996855
This^2
Nothing more to say.

>>9995895
Why did you censor the image with the 4 + 4ch 's /christian/ board?

>>9996877
Hilarious image.

>>9996882
mods are prickly over here at halfchin

>>9996897
We don't have mods

>>9995986
Yes, why shouldn't you?

>>9996490
Then how do I choose a religion then? I don't want to be an atheist anymore, and I'm a complete blank slate since I was raised in isolation from all forms of religion.

>>9996492
Please.

File: FeserBanner-1-600x325.png (240KB, 600x325px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 600x325px

Anyone have the ebook? All I could find on libgen is the pdf.

>>9997946
The pdf is all you are going to get atm, and it's good enough.
>>9997930
What do you like reading? Philosophy or apologetics or fiction?

File: 1503825916252.png (3MB, 2560x2148px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2560x2148px

>>9997930
Not the anon you were replying to, but just attend a local Mass every Sunday while reading pic related's atheism section. Pay attention to the Gospels and try to make friends with the parishioners. Try Catholicism first because it's the most mainstream. And if you don't like it you can always try a Protestant or Orthodox church.

>>9995836
Why does no one ever mention J. F. Powers' Morte d'Urban in these threads?

>>9998290
Thanks for understanding my predicament. I already tried the Orthodox church and the Protestant church, and I disliked both. Catholicism seems like a good combination of the two, more focused on tradition than Protestantism but less dry and stale than Orthodoxy.

>>9998185
I'm fond of good allegories in fiction, also philosophy.

>>9998290
Who makes these stupid charts?

>>9996482
Start going to Catholic mass, preferably old style. Like Solemn or full Latin mass. See if you have any FSSP or Dominican churches near you and check them out. If your city has a cathedral that will probably do an old style mass once a week too. Then absorb yourself in the mysteries, like the Resurrection or the Trinity. Looking deeply into the mysteries will convince you. I'm a convert and it was studying the Holy Ghost that helped me to finally understand what the whple religion meant.

File: 519lI70dLwL.jpg (50KB, 325x500px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 325x500px

I got this in the mail today. Is it a good place to start with Aquinas?

File: pope_benedict_xvi1.jpg (49KB, 500x664px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x664px

Reminder that Benedict is a future Doctor of the Church and everyone should read his writings. His "Jesus of Nazareth" books are a genuinely incredibly introduction to Christianity.

>>9995890
It's also easier to relate to people closer to you in history.

>>9998834
Some one answer this man

EASY

>>9998834
Start with the Greeks

I'm planning on going to a Solemn Mass tomorrow. Should I bring anything? Do I need a missal or will it be provided?

I've started reading the KJV (I know, whatever). I feel closer to God as I read it, but every time I try to attend Catholic mass, I leave feeling awkward and strange. I feel disconnected from the people and what the priest is saying, but when I read the Bible, it feels right. Not sure if this makes me a proddy or what, but I can't seem to get myself to become a church-going Christian.

>>9999808
The Bible requires you to go to mass, in fact Christ himself establishes the Eucharist for all Christians to go to one.

>>9998834
Have you read extensive amounts of Aristote and at least one or two secondary texts like Copleston and Feser? If you haven't, it's a bad place to start with Aquinas.
>>9999015
To be a doctor you first must become a Saint. I don't think they'll saint him.

I grew up Catholic.
I got my first communion.
I went through confirmation.

Now I'm an atheist because I grew up.

>>9998644
I'm a cradle Catholic, but mass before the Tridentine was always just something I did out of obligation, it was (NO still is) banal and secular, but the old rite is like the manifest form of all the great things about Catholicism, it's solemn, sublime and moving, completely focused on Christ, where you are truly nakes before God. Paul VI is the butcher of Catholicism, and I hope God forgives him the greatest mistake since the Reformation.

>>9999808
Go to Latin mass.

>>10000359
You know, anon, I did attend Latin mass, but I studied Latin in university therefore it doesn't have any mystery about it to me. It felt weird hearing Americans and Mexicans pronouncing Latin with their accents. Then the whole wafer mouth thing... Yeah, I get that it's an old rite, but it's not like Jesus did any of that. What in the Bible gives the Tridentine Mass any authority?

An interesting but very rare book for Catholics interested in the "humanist socialism" of right-wing thought and its intersection with 20th century Catholicism: J. K. Heydon's Fascism and Providence.

Why is there such a big difference in zeal between people raised Catholic and people who converted?

>>10000495
Cradle Catholics don't go through a lot to become Catholics and don't have any education, making most converts much more knowledgable and zelous.
>>10000416
Where Christ establishes a Church, gives Peter the keys of Haven, sends out the apostles with the Holy Spirit to preach, teach and the Eucharist he established. The Tridentine mass dates back to the early Church, proably the 4th century.

>>10000123
I grew up Christian.
I had my first Christmas.
I went through a bunch more.

Now I don't believe in Santa Claus because I grew up.

>>10000416
>but it's not like Jesus did any of that
What? he did, the Mass is found throughout the Bible.

File: lazarus.jpg (36KB, 324x499px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 324x499px

This book is pure wisdom and power. Immense.
Explained so much, so effectively. I can't even...

>>9996709
>Do Catholics really believe this?
Really believe what? If it's the "saints are people likely to be in heaven" part, yes, that's what a saint is.

>>9996807
You've got to be careful about Christian subreddits they tend to be extremely liberal to the point of preaching heresy.

File: IMG_0143.jpg (40KB, 635x477px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 635x477px

>neckbeards pretending to be catholics because they consider it to be contrarian and anti-degeneracy
Deus Vult xD

>>10000879

Why do you assume that people are pretending?

>>10000879
>he thinks the suspicious amount of latin and greek speakers came from the public school systems
>quotes le hindu man

>>10000893
They're just new and aren't accustomed to anything but nu-/lit/ so when they aren't see anything that goes against their world-view they freak out.

I don't understand how Catholics can defend any ritual besides communion without leaning on the Church Fathers.

>>10000000

>>10000897
>they aren't see
I don't even know how I managed to fuck up this sentence so badly, the fuck.

>>10000898
What rituals are you referring to?

>>10000898
wakes are fun, easter parades freak out anglos, and baptism and confirmation are jesus approved.

>>10000879
How is being a Catholic contrarian?

>>10000906
Try telling people in basically any big city in the developed world that you believe in god and pay attention to the reactions.
Being religious (especially Christian) is frowned upon, scientism is in today.

>>10000904
>>10000905
im mostly referring to the mass traditions, such as robes and incense. i dont see anything unusual with baptism or easter stuff.

>>10000911
We've had this discussion before Ms. Clinton, a substantial amount of people do in fact live outside of major urban centres.

I've been interested in christianity for a while, I've been areligious for 26 years but I feel gravitated to it more every day.
Today for the first time ever I think I felt like I somehow experienced God, can't really describe it but anyway how would I even decide which branch of the church is true? Do I just wait for some kind of revelation or choose based on knowledge?

>>10000919
Yeah and they don't influence the mass culture at all against which contrarians rebel.

>>10000928
I was baptised as a protestant by the way, but only because that was the only church in our little town and it was something like a tradition, my family never really cared about religion at all.

>>9996629
Never read her but that sounds pretty accurate of humanity

>>10000915
incense is mentioned in the bible too, and frankincense is used to elevate moods. [chinese medicine still uses it to regulate blood, and other incenses in other traditions, like oud, have mentions in the bible also.]

the robes come from identifying different orders and different calendars. it's so that people don't imitate orders and also to communicate the purpose of the order or mass.

>>10000915
>incense
Featured plenty in the Bible; we're told to "regularly burn incense for the Lord" and the censer which it's burnt in comes from The Book of Revelation in which a angel is depicted holding a gold censer while the prayers around him ascend in the smoke produced.

>robes
Similarly plenty of emphasis on robes in the Bible, in particular clean and white robes. There's also instructions on how to build priestly robes. I believe the official response is that everybody should be wearing robes, but society outgrew them while the clergy kept to traditional garments, hence why they don't contain any special properties.

Is there any real reason to be anachronistic and continue to propagate Christianity and identify yourself with the religion? Why not just be a sensible person and imbibe the good parts of the tradition, without joining the Church and without calling yourself a "catholic" or a "christian"?

The reason I ask this isn't because of Christianity's incompatibility with science, but because Christianity is inherently intolerant when it comes to faith and calls upon its members to declare war on heretics. It should be clear that Christianity as an organised religion simply has to go.

>>10000904
>I don't even know how I managed to fuck up this sentence so badly, the fuck.

I aren't see how you did either

>>9996855
I've got a theory Christians are attracted to the relative simplicity, purity and morality of anime, people like to pretend /pol/ is the source of the renewed interest of Catholicism on /lit/ but /a/ was the originator and pusher, they started the whole "Is a Christian imageboard" thing.

>>10000999
Catholics would probably recommend you not join because if you join without meaning to obey the contract, you're just fucking your eternal soul over. It's perfectly acceptable to be a moral human outside the Church once you don't feel morally drawn to Her. If you're already a Catholic and no longer morally drawn to the Church, you're supposed to excommunicate yourself until you do [i.e. not take the sacrament of Communion until you repent and want to rejoin]

Protestants are encouraged to proselytize while Catholics aren't. Declaring yourself a Catholic basically means you've signed a contract with the Church and God, holding yourself to the standards outlined. If you don't want to give up meat on certain fast days, give up sex outside marriage or birth control, etc. etc., you shouldn't join and just try to be a real human been.

>>10000999
If your talking about the material benefits of attendance, Church has a massive impact on the mental and physical healthiness on people more so than just being religious or spiritual. Atheism has a problem with producing lonely, socially awkward and depressed individuals even in non-religious countries.

And before you get upset, I'm not even religious let alone Catholic.

>>10000898
The whole huge part of law books dealing with various Jewish rituals and the fact that Jews had huge numbers of the same.

>>10000950
She's imo the finest author of the century when it comes to characterisation.

>>10001021
All non Catholics are dogmatically condemned to hell, read the council of Florence.

>>10001072
Invincible ignorance is a thing. Using shit deep in scholastic suppression of the Churches influences is kind of dumb, especially when Aquinas' proposition has been accepted since before your greatgrandparents were born.

>>10001084
>Churches
*Church's

Here's a passage from a Hindu theologian from the 8th century
>The validity of the Vedas holds good only with regard to matters which cannot be known through such other valid means of knowledge as direct perception, etc., because the validity of the Vedas lies in revealing what is beyond direct perception. Even a hundred Vedic statements cannot become valid if they say that fire is cold or non-luminous. If a Vedic text says that fire is cold or non-luminous, one should assume that the intended meaning of the text is different, for otherwise its validity cannot be maintained. One should not interpret it in such a way as to contradict some other valid means of knowledge.

Is there any pre modern Biblical scholar that even comes close to stating the above with regards to the Bible?

File: 1486447914113.jpg (427KB, 1052x936px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 1052x936px

>>9996448
>>9996453
>>9996497
2017 version

>>10001132
https://drreluctant.wordpress.com/2007/02/27/a-brief-history-of-biblical-interpretation/

http://www.thepoorinspirit.com/post/57661686300/hermeneutics-early-church-fathers-origen

>>10001138
>tfw no traditionalist gf
I hope 2018 has a mantilla

>>10001132
>dude don't take everything literally

Woah, the Pajeets are truly on a whole other game

>>10001132
Sounds pretty much identical to Aquinas desu senpai

File: 4g3.jpg (26KB, 600x344px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 600x344px

>>10001157
>traditionalist muslim
>traditionalist christian

>>10001177
They're easy to mistake. Modest girls are qt in an ecumenical manner.

File: 1429815755757.jpg (39KB, 861x1075px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 861x1075px

>>10001144
>>10001158
>>10001163
If all of this was clearly laid down then why has there been such a huge conflict between science and Christianity? Are we going to pretend Galileo and Copernicus never existed?

>>10001213
The Catholic Church is a political entity, and Vatican observatories had made the same discoveries as Galileo earlier than he did. That the Vatican has an observatory means it's not so much anti-science, so much as it just doesn't let science get in the way of politics all the time, though sometimes it uses science when it fits politics.

There's a big conflict with Protestantism and science at times, because of literalism. The Catholic Church views things through a different lens.

>>10001213
You obviously aren't that well read about Galileo, It was way more petty that "Christianity vs. Science", Galileo was a asshole who got into a argument with another asshole, that asshole eventually became pope, then Galileo decided it's time insult the now Pope even further, so asshole Pope decided to fuck his shit up.

It also didn't help that Galileo had literally zero evidence
for the stuff he was blabbing on about and a lot of scientists didn't like or believe his shit either.

Oh and despite all this Galileo was allowed to continued his research, received funding from the Church and then had to be protected by armed Catholic guards because protestants wanted to gut him.

Oh and the best part, none of this would have happened if he didn't try to go all Bible on the censors.

>>10001260
I like how you're still mad about Galileo, anon.

>>10001280

People should be angry about it because the whole "church is ani-science" thing is anti-Catholic propaganda that was originally perpetuated by Protestants. First, the Catholic Church did not condemn the heliocentric or sun-centered view of our solar system. According the online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, at this time in history "there was no official Catholic position on the Copernican system, and it was certainly not a heresy. Many scientists in Galileo's time accepted ancient Greek arguments for a stationary earth, arguments that had not been refuted. Today we can use satellites to prove the earth rotates around the sun, but five hundred years ago the question was far from settled. In fact, Galileo thought the planets orbited the sun in a perfect circle, whereas they actually have an elliptical orbit. Because of this, Galileo's theory could not account for all the observable movements of the planets, which is one reason Pope Urban VIII urged Galileo to treat his theory as tentative. Unfortunately, Galileo chose to mock the pope in his work Dialogue Concerning the Two World Systems, in which a character named Simplico, which means "simpleton" in English, represented the pope's views Galileo also claimed that Scripture would have to be reinterpreted in light of his findings, a conclusion that lay outside his area of expertise. Both of these missteps led to his famous trial in 1633.

Contrary to popular belief, Galileo was not tortured, but was found to be "under suspicion of heresy." According to his friends Francesco Niccolini, Galileo was placed under house arrest but was given a servant to attend to him until he died of old age. Pope John Pail II later apologized for any injustices committed against Galileo during his trial and reaffirmed the positive relationship between Church and science.

>>10001280
>Gets destroyed
>lol your just mad
Good post

>>10001084
Invincible ignorance isn't a thing for people who have normal contact with Catholics, it's far from invincible.

>>10001213
Why would we pretend it was a large conflict?

>>10001423
It applies even to Catholics, but if you go through RCIA you're probably willfully ignorant by not reading more.
>>10001402
I'm not the anon he was talking to; I just like the fire.
>>10001341
I get mad everyone accuses the Inquisitions of being torturers too, when they were set up to not torture people like state systems did.

>>10000879
Why would anybody pretend to be Catholic though? the Church is currently in the gutter.

>>9995890
>>9995861
>Why do Catholics seem to care more about the saints than they do the characters and authors in the bible?

The saints of the New Testament are greater than they are.

"Amen I say to you, there hath not risen among them that are born of women a greater than John the Baptist: yet he that is the lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." (Matthew 11:11)

"But blessed are your eyes, because they see, and your ears, because they hear. 17For, amen, I say to you, many prophets and just men have desired to see the things that you see, and have not seen them, and to hear the things that you hear and have not heard them." (Matthew 13:16-17)

Recommended Bible version en español por favor?

>>9995836
Isnt't that shitty meme supposed to be a protestant?

I grew up Protestant, havnt been to church since I went out on my own (in 20s now) but am interested in going back to church, but Catholic and not Protestant. Looking to find a good Christian qt and potentially corrupt her. What do you guys think?

>>10003098
>Looking to find a good Christian qt and potentially corrupt her. What do you guys think?
>trying to corrupt catholic girls
good luck with that, anon, you might be in over your head.

>>10003183
I've done pretty well with Protestants, are Catholics harder?

>>10003225
He's being sarcastic. They're usually already corrupted.

>>10003389
well there's no fun in that.

File: download.jpg (35KB, 267x400px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 267x400px

Has anyone here read pic related?

Personally I am an atheist, and I've been one for a while, but I think this book made me reconsider my thoughts on the Christian faith and the crucial role it plays in sustaining society. I'm interested in hearing a Christian interpretation of the story, because the only reception I've heard of is that it was put on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (which is no surprise).

English translation for those who don't speak Spanish:
http://www.armandfbaker.com/translations/unamuno/san_manuel_bueno_martir.pdf

Been reading, with some considerable pleasure, Louis Bouyer's Memoirs.

His The Meaning of Sacred Scripture is tremendous, imho.

I haven't read any of his big fat books, but he avers in the Memoirs that they may not contain his best work.

Not a big fat book, but a most excellent one is The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism. (For our Protestant friends on this thread, Bouyer was an ordained Lutheran minister who converted to Catholicism. The first 80 or 90 pages - if memory serves - of The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism is devoted to beautiful testimonies of Lutheran spirituality at its finest.)

>>10003077
We've co-opted it, like we co-opt everything.

We take pagan/Protestant memes, and make them over as Catholic.

We've been doing this for 2000 years, we're not about to stop now.

File: smirk.jpg (173KB, 584x438px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 584x438px

>>9995836
you mislabeled the bible is suppose to be in the fiction

>>10003833

*nods in your direction*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AMvbF76cIw

>>10003851
thanks for video :)

>>10003851
did he get kick out?

>>10003851
so cringy tbqhwyf

File: 8906888.jpg (12KB, 267x400px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 267x400px

>>9995836
A bit advanced for beginner's in Catholic literature, but what do you guys think of this

>>10003851
He just stuck it in a random spot.

He should have put it between Henry James and PD James.

>>10003877

There are a shocking amount of people that record themselves doing this. Atheism was a mistake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT_rCSafk8c

Still haven't seen any good responses from Christians in >>9990597

>>10003985

Because threads like that are a magnet for stupid. That's why I haven't even clicked on it at least.

>>10003907
Garrigou-Lagrange is the greatest Catholic philosopher of the pre v2 era for a reason my nigga

File: Yw5nHHJ.jpg (296KB, 1280x1926px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 1280x1926px

>>9996448
>>9996453
>Go into Catholic literature thread
>End up horny

Fuck you

File: sershy.webm (3MB, 1414x1040px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1414x1040px

>>10004829

>>10004845
You made me sin.

>>10004845
Meh

>>10004845
fuck

>>10004845
I want to touch that flufly hair

>>10004886
YOU DID THAT YOURSELF

>>10000911
>Try telling people in basically any big city in the developed world that you believe in god and pay attention to the reactions.
Most don't seem to give a fuck? Only a few western european nations would give any sort of reaction.
t.I live in a big city in the first world

>>10008490
Telling people you believe sodomy is a mortal sin and abortion murder, socialism as bad as capitalism (rerum novarum), that there's no salvation outside the Catholic Church and so on on the other hand might not be ignored as easily. It of course depends on the circles of people you are moving in.

>>9996482

These spiritual window-shoppers,
who idly ask, 'How much is that?' Oh, I'm just looking.
They handle a hundred items and put them down,
shadows with no capital.

What is spent is love and two eyes wet with weeping.
But these walk into a shop,
and their whole lives pass suddenly in that moment,
in that shop.

Where did you go? "Nowhere."
What did you have to eat? "Nothing much."

Even if you don't know what you want,
buy something, to be part of the
exchanging flow.

Start a huge, foolish project,
like Noah.

It makes absolutely no difference
what people think of you.

- Rumi

>>10008786

>>9996752
Plus he married and fucked a nun

>>10008815
That's the celibacy and oath. He gave himself an indulgence for it.

>>10008802
Dante is aware of that, in fact there's a change of attitude within him the further he goes, he first shows compassion for the souls in Hell, but later on realises that God is perfect justice and that each of those gets exactly what they deserve.

>>10008831
Okay. I see that the journey is Dante the pilgrim becoming Dante the Poet, but it seems off to leave that irony hanging in the air.

When the pilgrim starts to shift into the poet towards the end, he justifies to himself the indifference that his Poet self was making and then at the end joins in on the indifference nature.

I've seen other writers use this literary device to turn the hero into an anti-hero which is party why Im confused.
It also doesnt help that towards the end, dante the pilgrim seems to exhibit almost sinful behavior towards the tormented souls he finds.
He torments a few souls further by insulting and somewhat harming them without remorse (wrath). there are a few other examples but I cant remember right now.

Why is everyone okay with dante the pilgrim's display of wrath towards the damned? I thought god is the only one who can doll out punishments?

Also why does God's design not seem jarring to Virgil? He states at the beginning that he regrets not being able to know it but through the tale his behavior shows that he doesnt really seem to care either way. At least it came off that way to me

Any help to make this more clear?

File: doge_of_venice.jpg (74KB, 600x849px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 600x849px

>>10008887
>Why is everyone okay with dante the pilgrim's display of wrath towards the damned?
Because they hate God, whatever do you think they're doing in hell? A vacation? What do you think they are, that you accuse Dante of wrath? They're not Dante's neighbours, they've already been tried, judged and condemned by the authorized personnel. You slow on the uptake or what?
>god
>g
You're not paying attention.
>is the only one who can doll out punishments?
He's also the only one that endorsed Dante's entire journey and everything that happened therein in the first place.
>other writers use this literary device to turn the hero into an anti-hero
And are these writers called Aristotle, Virgil, Ovid, Augustine, Boethius, Aquinas? You should stick to genre fiction.
>Also why does God's design not seem jarring to Virgil?
He's been chosen by God for the job, also centuries of waiting down there.

>>10008907
>If it is a righteous journey then why is he displaying wrath and belittlement and some kind of harm towards souls after so many changes.
What part of: "The deeper you go the graver the sins" do you not understand?
>How can everyone be okay or at least ambivalent towards Dante the pilgrim almost turned poet displaying actions like that?
Because God is okay.

You're making it abundantly clear you're reading a book about hell without understanding the first thing about hell.

>>10008920
>slow on the uptake
if by that you mean not well versed in the teachings of Christianity, or any religion for that matter, then yes. I am not religious but wish to study the area so that maybe I can find a home in Christianity and convert. I've read the bible but beyond that - not much.

Is there a certain commentaries or analytic over the Divine Comedy that you recommend?

>>10008940
yes
see>>10008943

>>10008943
>I am not religious but wish to study the area so that maybe I can find a home in Christianity and convert
If that is your goal then talk to a priest, and read the Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church:
http://www.usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

Not Dante.

>>10008967
and adventure begins...

File: mary.jpg (25KB, 259x239px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 259x239px

>>10008943
Good luck senpai
God bless you

>>10004886
t. Adam

>>9996505
Except it's flowery meaningless nonsense

>>9996749
Not him, but
>if the saints aren't infallible, their teachings can contain mistakes and this provides uncertainty
Is what he's saying
>bro just point out where this uncertainty should be even though that's against the fundamental nature of uncertainty
Is what you're saying
Catholicism. Not even once

>>9996877
>I am the whey, the truth and the life
>none come to the protein powder but through me

>>10000119
[citation needed]

>>10000119
[citation needed]

>>10001021
How is birth control prohibited by the Bible?

>>10001213
The church being anti science in more modern ways, like with its stance on embryonic stem cell research, makes more relevant and convincing arguments desu

>>10009667
Have you ever read the parts about the last supper?
Birth control isn't explicitly prohibited anywhere, but it's always been seen as evil, contrary to the natural law in the tradition, starting with the Didache. Things don't need to be explicitly stated in the Bible to be morally evil. Christ didn't establish a bible, he established a Church.

>>10009683
>you can't experiment on human beings and murder them
>anti science

>>10009686
>embryos that are literally incapable of any trace of cognition of sentience and would be killed anyway in cases like ivf
>human beings
>murder

>>10009685
>natural law in the tradition
Natural law is just wishful thinking, probably the most embarrassing thing to be espoused by aquinas

>things don't have to be directly from christ or God for you to believe them, even though you're supposed to follow the teachings of christ and emulate him lmao
>christ made a church, just follow the words of your fellow people as your own Gospel, there's nothing wrong with the blind leading the blind

>>10009707
The Catholic Church clearly doesn't necessitate cognition as an essential feature of the human form in actuality. >>10009720
The natural law predates Aquinas by like 1600 years and 1200 as far as the Church tradition goes.
But honest question, how much of Aquinas and secondary lit on him have you read? I personally found him to be an incredibly difficult read and studied him on the side for about a year intensively before I could say that I understood him well enough, after all it's hardly uncommon for even great philosophers to completely miss his point (Kant, Hume, Russell for example).

>>10009733
If you have no trace of cognition, you cannot praise God or have any understanding of him or of yourself. You are no better than an animal at that point in time, and cannot serve the purpose by which human beings are defined (praising God) so why would you be a human being?

>>10009733
I didn't say the natural law originated with him, but he's the most prominent theologian I know to have espoused it
I'm about a 1/4 of the way through summa theologica, shit's boring

>>10008920
>He's also the only one that endorses Dante's entire journey and everything that happened therein in the first place
Would you use this logic in the real world?

>>10009767
What Dante is undergoing is an Itinerarium Mentis in Deum, as per the title of the book by Bonaventure.

>>10009749
The natural law is related with just about every figure in Catholic history who dealt with politics and ethics in any way, including Augustine. Later figures include Suarez who more or less was in his entirety copied by Grotius who gave us the international law. So there's a number of key figures here.
The key ters here are substance and being. The substance of a human as well as his being are the same and it is what constitutes him as an entity with an identity which we can abstract and perceive his or her being. This entity begins to exist in the moment of conception and since there's no change of substance or being, it is the same entity in the early stages as it is in the late stages. It is impossible to abstract it as anything other than human, since there's no such thing as a half human, or not yet human, based on act and potency. The things you are mentioning are completely irrelevant here, I don't understand why you would even bring them in the discussion about the internal logic of the natural law and the Catholic Church. It's like judging Kant wrong on Thomist premises when discussing his own system as such. Of course it's not going to fit.
Thomism is in just about every case boring because it is always trying to be clear and systematic, taking into account the objections and having a clearer conclusion because of it. I hope you are completely familiar with Aristotelian metaphysics.

>>10009800
I plan to read Augustine after aquinas, I've never heard of suarez or grotius desu

I'm aware of the whole static entity and essentialism viewpoint, but it's baseless supposition, in reality entities change through the course of their lives and since a person is ultimately the sum total of their experiences, opinions and thoughts, a person is never the same person as they were unless they do nothing new, think nothing new and become nothing new. The only theological valid justification for essentialism is the soul, but there's no clarity with when it comes into being as there is in islam
Genetically of course, it's human, but that does not make it a person since so are my buttocks. Becoming a human person is more than just genetics (which is what essentialism translates to materialistically)
I think the ability to praise God is extremely relevant to a discussion on what constitutes a human in the eyes of God, and a human person must surely be that which serves the purpose that God intended. And a person that has their ability to praise God halved, hypothetically through some kind of mental damage, could and should be said to be half the person they were in the eyes of God

Yes but the Greeks were very many books ago so I may be rusty

>>10009864
>could and should be said to be half the person they were in the eyes of God
How about you stop playing God lmao

>>10009864
It's not a static entity, it's an entity that actualises various potencies, but has an identity that doesn't change. It's hardly baseless, the alternative is that you are not a person with a continuity and that you become a completely new being within a course of xy years. Human intellect naturally percives the being of things and can abstract its qualities, identity being the most important one for the discussion. X who has brain damage does not become Y because of it, it is the same person, that essentially doesn't change, but the potency of brain damage has been actualised.
The soul is not a theological proposition here at all, there's no need to go into theology when discussing the natural law. It's completely irrelevant as far as being human and being a substance goes, and Islam is even more irrelevant for the discussion. Essentialism has no simple materialist transcription, it rests on ontological realism. Genetics are a part of the being which we abstract, not being itself, your buttocks cannot be abstracted as being humans, only parts. There's no such thing as a human at all with your position, human isn't a universal, it's just a name and the conclusion is it's the same for God. There's absolutely no basis, and I've never even seen it mentioned in no theology whatsoever that the ability to praise God would for him be the feature which is the most important or very important for measuring humanity. You call the idea of the natural law baseless and embarrassing (even if it's the strongest ethical and political theory that's in various forms reiterated by everyone from Plato to Aqunas), but then introduce this materialistic view that denies universals into the discussion of both what a human is and who God is in the context of God.

>>10009925
Should if we continue to go by the teleological definition of what it means to be a person in extending the logic of that principle

>>10009959
Or maybe we could start by acknowledging God as the summun bonum, so that we don't halven his benevolence and opinion over a creature of his whose temporary bodily form is presently suffering from some manner of speech impairment?

Clown.

>>10009959
The definition of a person isn't teleological. The definition is what something is, not what is the role of that something. The is contains the telos, but is not contained by it. Especially because there are natural and supernatural ends and here we are talking about natural ends (the natural law), not eschatology.

>>10009864
A triangle is a three-sided polygon with three angles. It is *always* a three-sided polygon with three angles, no matter if in some instantiation of a triangle we see a change in color, size, material, etc. That's what its essence is, and for it to be otherwise would just mean that it was no longer a triangle but some other object or polygon.

>>10009955
I obviously meant in terms of the assigned identity it's a static entity.
And that alternative is true, people aren't the same people they were as time goes on. It's still useful to consider them as the same people, but that's just a simplification of reality, and the human brain prides itself on using myriad useful simplifications of reality. Theseus' ship is not the same ship if it isn't composed of the same parts.
X with brain damage does of course become Y, brain damage to certain parts of the brain changes the personality. A person with the same personality is not the same person as they were before, this is basic law of identity stuff. Inventing an unchangeable identity doesn't (successfully) circumvent the law of identity

But the genetics are the only part of the being that don't change (ignoring mutations and epigenetics), so they are the only part of a person that doesn't change with time. They are simply the only tangible part of a person which even comes close to a static identity, and even then barely
How is there no such thing as a human at all with my position?
The entire initial point of the Adam and eve is widely reputed to be mankind was fundamentally created to worship and praise God, I haven't heard any other interpretations of that. And by seeking knowledge for themselves and through focus on themselves rather than God, they chose to distance themselves from God such that they could not praise him and to ignore his words which is the antithesis of praise. The fact that humanity was served to ultimately serve God seems self-evident, and as you are known to God by what you believe and do, you are only known as "human" by the beliefs and acts that praise Him

>>10009990
How are you known to God except by the role(s) he created you to serve, natural ends among those?

>>10009982
There's no reason to think his benevolence would half, that's your leap of logic, not mine.

>>10010001
Quite a shit example desu, since essentialism is essentially saying if you add another side to that triangle (like if you cause brain damage to someone such that they behave like a rabbit), that not-triangle is still a triangle

>>10009667
>How is birth control prohibited by the Bible?
>prohibited by the Bible
you're thinking of the protestants, m8. Catholics can only take birth control if it makes their health better, which it often doesn't. And "having babies" isn't seen as an illness but a sign of health.

>>10010001

the Texas triangle is not a triangle

>>10010021
I'm known to God because he's omniscient. He doesn't know me by my telos, he knows me by everything there ever was is will be related to me in fullness. You really have a strange way of twisting Aquinas.

>>10010021
>There's no reason to think his benevolence would half, that's your leap of logic, not mine
>could and should be said to be half the person they were in the eyes of God
then how do you halven a soul

forget metaphysics, start over from mathematics as plato would have it

∞/2 = ?

>>10010021
You are basing all of this that every entity must be unchangable to be something, which is completely false. A triangle that has a 3x60 that changes to 90 and 2x45 is still a triangle. You ignore the potency of things and imply that any actuallisation of potency is a change in essence. A ship that changes a single piece of wood is indeed the same ship that has been changed somewhat.

>>10010021
>Quite a shit example desu, since essentialism is essentially saying if you add another side to that triangle (like if you cause brain damage to someone such that they behave like a rabbit), that not-triangle is still a triangle
That's not what it's saying at all. If the essence of a triangle is as I had defined it, then adding an additional side would no longer make it a triangle, because the essence of a triangle is that it *always* has three sides.

You need to study the difference between essences and accidents. That's where you're having problems.

>>10010093
>>10010113
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zITXtvstHBk&t=320s
Great lecture on the subject.

Are there any great living Catholic authors?

I feel that post Vatican II the church hasn't been able to produce anywhere near the calibre of artists it once did. Any exceptions I should know of.

>>10010207
>Are there any great living Catholic authors?
Gene Wolfe in fiction. Plently in philosophy tho.
>I feel that post Vatican II the church hasn't been able to produce anywhere near the calibre of artists it once did. Any exceptions I should know of.
Yup, V2 killed the aesthetic of Catholicism, which for obvious reasons impacted art.

>>10010039
>>10010039
Of course, but what about you specifically marks you out as important? What about you does God in particular recognise is worthy of recognition and reward in Heaven?

>>10010042
An infinity that is half the size of the original infinity

>>10010093
If it's false, then prove it is. Support the supposition of an identity that is static as the entity it is assigned to changes. We have a fundamental disagreement where I bow to the law of identity, and you to your invention, and analogies will not break the impasse


>>10010113
And what is the essence of a human? Protip: that it praises God, and has traits granted to it that allow it praise God like intellect and reason above that of other animals. That's the key distinction made by the Bible and often in tradition

>>10010250
>Of course, but what about you specifically marks you out as important? What about you does God in particular recognise is worthy of recognition and reward in Heaven?
we do not deserve it that's the whole point

>And what is the essence of a human? Protip: that it praises God
we're not angels

>An infinity that is half the size
>I bow to the law of identity
whoa

>>10010297
No, that's not the point, rewards can be attained for your good thoughts deeds, your fatalist stance seems to be suggesting there can be no reward, which is dumb

But angels and humans are both creations of God, and as such are created to praise God. The only distinctions are in how the praise is done

Infinities can be different sizes, that's not revolutionary. Consider the set of the non-zero naturals, and the set of the even naturals
I'm not sure what you're objecting to with the second meme arrow

>>10010134
Is there a transcipt of this?

File: 6963088.jpg (125KB, 306x475px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 306x475px

Anyone read this?

Any good for someone whos just slightly familiar with St. Aquinas?

>>10000928
Obviously biased towards Catholicism, but I would say to you to stay away from all the Protestant lies.

>>10010320
>No, that's not the point, rewards can be attained for your good thoughts deeds, your fatalist stance seems to be suggesting there can be no reward, which is dumb
all of this presupposes a loving God going out of his way to save sinners who know they're not worthy to ignore this is dumbest
>angels and humans are both creations of God, and as such are created to praise God
in which you prove that doesn't make one human as it is a property of the genre (aristotelian sense) not the particular species
>the set
a set is not the number ∞ or a soul either

>>10010364
And that would be true, because omnibenevolence means a neverending supply of love, so God would go out of his way to save all, especially because the knowledge of the individual is fallible but God's is not, so just because a sinner "knows" they're not worthy doesn't mean they truly aren't. But desu I don't see how I presuppose that in the first place

If you read the entire sentence, I do clarify. The method of praise is different for humans and angels, so specifically, humans are created to serve god through worship and helping the fellow man, and angels through worship and guiding humans and whatever else they do. Just because one aspect of their teleological essence is shared does not mean they have the same essence.

>start over from mathematics
>no wait, ignore mathematics
hmm

>>10010364
>∞
>a number

>>10010392
>I don't see how I presuppose that in the first place
rewards presuppose a salvation program
>one aspect
goalpost moving
>ignore mathematics
in which you answered ∞/2=? wrong

>>10010478
Not necessarily for everyone though as you said. But you should believe everyone can be saved anyway, unless you're a filthy Calvinist

Not goalpost moving at all, you didn't read the full sentence and started to get reductionist when essence can be multifaceted

How did I answer it wrong? Different sized infinities are perfectly mathematically valid. That's even ignoring the fact that I've said nothing about a soul halving, that's your point entirely

>>10010497
>essence can be multifaceted
essence is essence and accident is accident
>How did I answer it wrong?
no number multiplied by 2 is = ∞ except ∞
>I've said nothing about a soul halving
take your religion of the body someplace else

>>10010522
Nice trite truism, but not an argument

Infinity x 2 is 2 x that infinity, the result of the multiplication will not be the same infinity, it will be an infinity that is double the original. Infinity is not invariant in magnitude upon multiplication or any mathematical operation. You should denote the different infinities with subscript notation to show they're different, and also learn mathematics

God doesn't have perceive an individual as simply their body if he doesn't perceive them as their soul, though I'm not saying he doesn't perceive them as their soul, it was just an observation that you're the one who made the halbing soul argument
And, it seems you've also assumed that the soul is infinite, which seems unsupported

>>10010322
It's the best place to start.

>>10010540
you're making shit up

>>10010540
*doesn't have to perceive

>>10010569
Where do you think so, and why?

Going to take a shit brb

>>10010250
What's there to prove? A triangle is still a triangle as long as it has 3 angles, regardless of the degree of the angles inside, that's the essential property. It stops being a triangle only when you have less or more angles.
Man is a man as long as he has his essential property, changing accidents doesn't change essence. Is this really so hard to understand?

>>10010579
don't come back

>>9995836
We need to make a proper chart for thomism, who knows how to make charts that aren't shitty mspaint?

>>10010604
My modest proposal for the contents:

NABRE Bible
A Plato Reader @ Hackett
Basic Works of Aristotle @ Modern Library Classics
Confessions by St. Augustine @ Oxford World's Classics
City of God by St. Augustine @ Cambridge
Aquinas (A Beginner's Guide) by Feser
Aquinas's Shorter Summa: Saint Thomas's Own Concise Version of His Summa Theologica

I think these 7 books should be more than enough to get you started with St Thomas. The full Summa is very large and expensive.

>>10010586
I'm back, thanks for your non-argument though, uneducated child

>>10010581
>his essential property
which is?

>>10010669
Maybe it would be worth adding the Timaeus by Plato

>>10010680
>which is?
Being the image of God.

>>10010680
I literally say what's the essential property of a triangle, are you dense?

>>10010697
>his
>triangles have genders
I fear you are the dense one

>>10010696
And what evidence do you have to say that that is the essence of man rather than being created to praise God in how men can praise him being the essence of man?

>>10010696
>>10010697
see you tomorrow cucks

>>10010707
>>10010718
not an argument

>>10010707
Where do I gender a triangle in the sentence "I literally say what's the essential oroperty of a triangle"?

>>10010604
The Greeks:
Aristotle, Ethics, Politics, Organon, Categories, Metaphysics
Introductory:
Copleston, History of Philosophy, vols 1,2,3
Aquinas by Feser
God, Philosophy, Universities by Alasdair MacIntyre
Intermediary:
After Virtue by Alasdair MacIntyre
Reality: A Synthesis of Thomistic Thought by Reinald Garrigou Larange
Summa Contra Gentiles by Aquinas
Scholastic Metaphysics by Feser
Real Essentialism by Oderberg
Whose Justice? Which Rationallity? by Alasdair MacIntyre
Advanced:
Summa Theologica by Aquinas
God, His Existence and His Nature vol 1,2 by Reginald Garrigou Larange

I've still got to read a lot of it so others could complete the list

>>9995836
Rule 34 on christchan

File: 130211085036-pope-benedict-generic-head-on-view-story-top.jpg (71KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 640x360px

I miss him so much.

>>10011363
He's going to outlive Francis. Mark my words.

>>10010938
This.

>>10010938
I would rather see art of her happily married and pregnant with her fourth child.

>>10010728
Because the only reference to an essential property in my reply to you was in >his essential property, referring to the property of man

American Pope when?

>>10012565
Burke, Dolan, or DiNardo? Certainly not fucking Cupich.

File: Max Patrician6.jpg (950KB, 1065x1360px) Image search: [Google]

950KB, 1065x1360px

>>9995836
>recommended Catholic reading
>two C.S. Lewis books, and one book not about theology

OP, you need a lot of work.

File: Max Patrician4.jpg (577KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

577KB, 1000x667px

>GENERAL

The Bible (Ignatius Study Bible Recommended)
The catechism of your denomination

>accepted English versions of Bible

NABRE
Douay Rheims
RSV

>THEOLOGY

>novice

Introduction to Christianity by Joseph Ratzinger
The Last Superstition by Edward Feser
The Everlasting Man by G.K. Chesterton
Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton
Mere Christianity
CATHOLICISM by Robert Barron
The Orthodox Way by Kallistos Ware
Outlines of Moral Theology by Francis J. Connell

>intermediate

Scholastic Metaphysics by Edward Feser
God: His Existence and His Nature by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange
Natural Theology by Bernard Boedder
The Spirit of Medieval Philosophy by Etienne Gilson
Against Heresies
City of God
Christianity for Modern Pagans
The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church

>advanced

Apologia Pro Vita Sua
Summa Contra Gentiles
Summa Theologiae
On the Incarnation
The Didache
Divine Names by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite

>SPIRITUAL LIFE

>novice

The Introduction to the Devout Life by St. Francis de Sales
Story of a Soul by St. Therese
The Seven Storey Mountain by Thomas Merton
Nihilism - Fr Seraphim Rose

part 1/2

File: DO YOU SEE A CRESCENT MOON HERE HEATHEN.jpg (2MB, 4288x2848px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4288x2848px

>>10012608

part 2/2

>intermediate

The Interior Castle
Spiritual Exercises by St. Ignatius
Dialogues by St. Catherine of Sienna
True Devotion to Mary
True Devotion to the Holy Spirit

>advanced

The Cloud of Unknowing
The Dark Night of the Soul by St. John of the Cross
The Desert Fathers
The Philokalia
The Ladder of Divine Ascent
New Seeds of Contemplation by Thomas Merton
The Imitation of Christ by Thomas Kempis

>MEMETICS

Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World by Rene Girard
I See Satan Fall Like Lightning by Rene Girard

>HISTORICAL/BIOGRAPHICAL

Rome Sweet Home
The Long Loneliness by Dorothy Day
After Virtue
Christendom I: Founding of Christendom
Theology and Social Theory by John Millbank
Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy by Bernard Williams
Life of St.Anthony by Saint Athanasius
Life of St Francis of Assisi by Saint Bonaventure
Silouan the Athonite by Archimandrite Sophrony
The Autobiography of St. Ignatius Loyol
The Formation of Christendom by Christopher Dawson
The Dividing of Christendom by Christoper Dawson

>FICTION

Don Quixote
Diary of a Country Priest
The Divine Comedy
Paradise Lost
Silence by Shusaku Endo
A Canticle for Leibowitz
Faust
Les Miserables
The Canterbury Tales
The Man Who Was Thursday
The Brothers Karamazov
A Man for All Seasons
The Pillars of the Earth
The Lord of the Rings
The Chronicles of Narnia
Lord of the World
Parzifal
Joseph of Arimathea: A Romance of the Grail
The Arthurian Cycle
Quo Vadis

>>10012608
The "Catholic" part doesn't include Schismatics and certainly not Milton and Goethe.

>>10012612
You could add a "virtuous pagan" category.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtuous_pagan
Greeks are important to read.

I'd add Beowulf, J. F. Powers (probably his Morte d'Urban if you had to choose one), Shakespeare (probably Hamlet), and Moby Dick to the fiction.

>>10012749
This

Also >>10012612 where's Flannery O'Connor?

File: MINE EYES HAVE SEEN THE GLORY OF THE COMING OF THE LORD.png (4MB, 2039x1350px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2039x1350px

>>10012690
Milton has great fiction, as does Goethe. As with the virtuous pagans, people who are not Catholic can still make quality work. The only explicitly non-Catholic things I add are:

>Catechism of your denomination

It would likely be better as the Catholic Catechism but you need some place to start in conversion so at least begin with what you believe.

>The Orthodox Way

The only explicitly anti-Catholic book in the list. It is mostly reaffirming of Catholic theology but I find it important to know the larger apostolic traditions to understand our own in comparison. This book is a good overview.

>>10012781
Cannot say I know of her.

>>10012749
Could you justify those fiction choices to me? That sounds pretty strange, honestly. The only one that seems loosely related is Moby Dick.

>>10012788
Great fiction isn't fit for the list that's being made. There's no point in including even anti Catholic writers on it because it defeats the purpose. And Flannery O'Connor is the most famous American Catholic author of the 20th century. I don't know many who would fit that title other than her.

Redpill me on Mormonism /clg/

>>10014012
They aren't theists.

Redpill me on Catholicism /clg/

>mom is super catholic
>takes everything in the bible literally
What do?
I haven't gone to mass in about 6 months. Feelsgood desu

>>10014243
Why?

>>10014300
I don't think Catholicism is really conducive to biblical literalism, if it contradicts science it can't be interpreted literally. Like genesis' creation fable
When you mean everything, is she a creationist too?

>>10014327
yes everyyyyythiiiiiiinnnnng

>>10014332
Have her read the Summa, or specifically: First Part, Question 1, Article 10.

>>10014012
This is still the best introduction on the topic I could find:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzXazxES4mk

>>10014300
>Redpill me on Catholicism /clg/
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

>What do?
Get her to talk to your priest about biblical literacy and interpretation ASAP, what are you even waiting for?

>>10014327
They don't believe in a transcedental single absolute being.

>>10014543
Education for priests is kinda awful tho so it might not help at all.

>>10014597
wat

>>10014603
Their education of Biblical interpretation is abysmal and they for the most part aren't aware of any writings of the Fathers, as in they can become priests without ever reading Aquinas or Augustine at all. They are so focused on V2 they don't even know the dogmas of the First Vatican Council on how the Scripture is to be interpreted.

>>10014612
u made that up

>>10014613
I wish I did, just just glancing at the General Superior of the Jesuits, half of the cardinals and even the pope or talk to your average parish priest.

File: 0815140_6_.jpg (312KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1500x1000px

>>9996807
So I did the open minded thing and watched both videos.

You can upvote each other and despise White, the state of Arizona, evangelical protestants, and calvinism all you want, but if the H2BC kid were to be debate White in public, he'd get eaten alive over the multiple meanings and usages of the word kόσμος in Johannine writings alone.

Then things get worse in Romans 8:29 where you have people who are προώρισεν συμμόρφους τῆς εἰkόνος τοῦ Υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ since the beginning, and White is right to ask: "Where did you get 'Called' that is not 'Predestined'?" This is the central issue here but is not addressed by H2BC. THIS is what needs to be PROVEN to the calvinists, and any video debunking calvinists and their golden chain of redemption business needs to work on this. Not to mention the "Justified" cup suddenly finding itself inside a "Called" cup outside the chain.

PROTIP: props, "production value" (i.e.: wasting hours on editing) in the video, what passes for "witty banter" these days like the comments on the color of the chain, and using his favorite English translation cannot compensate for this.

Of course you don't believe in sola Scriptura, etc. but since the discussion is within the limits of Scripture, if you want to prove James White wrong about the interpretation of word of God, you probably want to keep a copy of pic related around. And a Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, too, for good measure.

PROVE THAT THE οἰkονομία OF GOD WORKS THE WAY YOU SAY IT DOES

NOT JUST TO EASILY IMPRESSIONABLE REDDITORS

>>10014612
>Their education of Biblical interpretation is abysmal
m8, this story isn't believable at all. It reeks of Protestant to be frank, because every child and its mother knows that Literalism is Protestant.
It's like calling Mass "going to Church" or saying the wrong version of the Our Father. If both your mother and your priest believes in literalism or bible based religion, you're probably a Lutheran. Hate to break it to you, but you're going to Hell.

>>10015031
This is probably the dumbest post in the thread, completely missing the mark on everything I just wrote.

>>10015082
Your mum's a Prod. It's pretty simple.

>>10015110
My mum doesn't think everything in the Bible is literal and I'm not sure what kind of a Protestant prays 5 rosaries every day, I'm not the same person and I was responding to the take her to a priest to teach her exegesis claim. One should take her to a very specific priest, not any priest, especially if you are from any Western country.

>>10015495
Nobody said that they should take her to a priest for exegesis, because everyone familiar with Catholicism knows that if she's relying on the scripture as a support, she's basically Lutheran and risking her eternal soul.
Everyone is recommending "stop biblical interpretation by observing church authority" not "find church authority in biblical interpretation to teach her how to read hebrew and tell her the ever changing history of heresy and Origen".

You're retarded at being Catholic because you seem to be missing a massive cultural meme about Protestantism and how to avoid it. Nobody is recommending teaching her exegesis except you, who is missing her rather large Protestant heresy in place of ones that nobody cares about from the 3rd century that she's probably not even committing. The problem is that she's acting like a Lutheran and not that she's acting like a Cathar, because post Reformation heresy somehow had more bearing on the modern Church.

>>9996732
Luther believed in the real presence. This meme is retarded.

>>10011363
Someone give me a rundown on why he left
Whenever I look stuff up it gets into Jew conspiracy stuff which I'm not sure about

Luther is legitimately a massive hypocrite and a huge piece of shit. It's entirely possible he's currently in Hell.

File: 8.jpg (59KB, 500x410px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x410px

>The inaugural sermons of Thomas Aquinas

I don't understand any of this.

>>10012749
I'm a brainlet and haven't read it, but what relation does Moby Dick have to Christianity? I always see it mentioned but don't know anything about it past the basic plot

>>10015016

Go to bed James

File: zpage070.gif (82KB, 800x1095px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 800x1095px

>>9995836
>The Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan
The book's pretty anti-Catholic. See pic-related.

>>10016095
The guy you're responding to is the real brainlet. Moby-Dick if anything is more about material determinism than Christianity. Some of the language and characters' names are borrowed from the King James Bible, but Melville was writing more from the perspective of a jaded cynic who believed there were no laws higher than nature. There is no God in Moby-Dick.

>>10016183
F-

>>10016537
Typical catholic rebuttal.

>>10016629
How? Typical is for the state of lit pretty decent, even if there's always a retard around.

>>10016537
Did I hurt your feelings, snowflake? Did you think that just because there are characters named Ahab and Ishmael in Moby-Dick that that makes it a Christian book? If I name my dog Muhammad, does that make him a Muslim dog?

Yes, there is Christian symbolism in the book, but it's not about Christianity. Get over it.

Also, these book recommendations are rubbish: Kierkegaard, Lewis, Hugo, and so on. Their writing has nothing to do with Catholicism. In the case of John Milton, John Bunyan, and Tolstoyevsky, OP is actually recommending anti-Catholic literature! All four of the aforementioned wrote anti-Catholic polemic in their fiction and in the press.

If someone is new to Catholicism and wants to learn about the Church, they should just attend RCIA and go to Church on Sundays if they choose to convert.

But no, this is /lit/. Start with the Greeks. Then read Summa Theologica. Then you'll know if you're REALLY prepared to become a Catholic.

>>10016970
While the Tridentine mass was recommended around 20 times in this very thread by various persons, have you ever heard of anyone converting via RCIA? And compare that with, at least here, Wolfe, Aquinas, Flannery O'Connor and other popular Catholic writers?
And yes, recommending Tolstoy, late Hugo, Milton, Kierkegaard and so on is really fucking dumb.

>>10016991
RCIA is how normal people convert; it worked for my father and my aunt who were both Anglicans.

Vatican 2 is for normal people. The Tridentine is not compulsory and its recommendation on here and pol is just another variety of fedoraism.

Orthodoxy is also a meme. Can you just imagine some fat neckbeard wandering into muh based Orthodox church only to have the Romanians, Greeks, Syrians etc. wondering who's dis white boy?

It's strange how the edgelords have become Christians. It's just another form of empty "virtue-signaling," as you're all so fond of saying about the lefties.

>>10017032
not any of the anons in this quote chain but
>Orthodoxy is also a meme. Can you just imagine some fat neckbeard wandering into muh based Orthodox church only to have the Romanians, Greeks, Syrians etc. wondering who's dis white boy?
Orthodox is harder to meme. They kick out their catechumens for a lot of the mysteries afaik. It does however make some of the Orthodox bros highly well versed.
I'm from a traditionalist background and the recommendations to become a traditionalist/Catholic seem bizarre and smell of LARPing to me too; there's some anon ITT saying ex ecclesiam nulla salus and that's not even considered current by traditionalists. It would ignore all the Popes who've said that inculpable ignorance makes invisible members, and doesn't uphold preV2 tradition.

I would say though that the real religious are probably more common here because education in either the Orthodox or Roman Churches demands a lot of reading, so the LARPing problem isn't probably as bad here as other boards

>>10016991
Also, as for the Catholic writers you mentioned, their word, even Aquinas', is not Gospel, although at least Aquinas has apostolic succession. Nonetheless, no beginner should read Aquinas. The complexity of a writer such as Aquinas may turn a layperson away.

As for the other writers, though they may be followers of the faith, it's not like they are theologians. Sometimes I see Cervantes and Shakespeare on lists of "Catholic literature" and just roll my eyes. Answer me this: if I found some Catholic themes in the Quran, does that make it Catholic literature?

If one wants to learn about Catholicism, read the Nicene Creed and learn about the sacraments from a priest. If you don't like it but still want to be a Christian, look around for a different church. The Catholic Church is a good church, especially since on paper it is not meant to be an ethnic church such as the Eastern Orthodox churches are, although obviously in America you're going to be making friends with a lot of Mexicans and Filipinos if you're Catholic...

>>9995836
hi i am a catholic but have not read the bible.
i know the OP post says new american bible but i hate americans. what is a better one thanks

>>10017050
>Orthodoxy
The only reason why I say it is a meme is because a lot of /pol/ fags cherrypick some stupid quotes from them to make them seem like they're le based redpilled church that normies don't know about.

I'm sure there is no problem with Orthodoxy and they have a sincere faith. But I imagine joining one of their churches would be a bit harder than others unless you belong to the same ethnicity as the congregation.

>>10017091
It's harder anyway, because they are like the French Government with language, and kept Old Slavonic and other Church languages. I know more Orthodox who were told "you can't name your child that" because it wasn't a Church spelling than I've heard from other branches. /pol/ probably doesn't LARP here as them because it's asking to have someone speak an obsolete form of Greek at you.

>>10017114
That's funny. I wasn't aware they were so clannish like the way Jews are. Must have something to do with being rules by Muslims for centuries. It was how they were able to preserve kinship as dhimmis.

>>10017032
They didn't convert because of the RICA, they went through it because they decided to convert.
Tridentine mass isn't compulsory, but it's infinitely more beautiful than the NO which is just a banal version of it. They also have Orthodox churches for most nations and while their internet presence is larpy as fuck, there's no reason to assume it's always like that. Especially because, unlike modern Catholicism they actually widely offer the liturgy of the ages, that's harder to come by in the Catholic Church outside of Eastern Europe.

>>10017032
And as far as Aquinas goes, as the probably most well read person in the thread, as far as he goes, I never recommend him before at least 6-7 other books because he's incredibly difficult.

>>10017078
And reading the whole Denzinger won't help you in what the Catholic literature offers, which is an aesthetic that helps you settle in the mindset of the faith, which is why it's so important. And you certainly aren't getting an emotional response from reading the dogmas of the first Vatican council or the Tridentine declarations on the liturgy. You learn things, but not with your heart. Those books are meaningful only to people who already accept the authority of the Church.

>>10017259
>I never recommend him before at least 6-7 other books because he's incredibly difficult.

I feel like this is a meme perpetuated by people who have never read anything written by Aquinas. Like they hear other people say that his metaphysics is difficult to grasp so they just repeat this without ever attempting to read his work or realizing that the man has written on a variety of topics.

>>10017390
Do you seriously believe that it's possible to grasp him without having an understanding of his mindest that's completely different to the contemporary, or even modern one, where the gap is so large that Hume, Kant, Russell and a number of others completely missed his points?
I tried reading him without preparation, got lots, read MacIntyre and Feser and when I actually started reading the Summas I was able to properly interpret it within the context of a different account of causality with the understanding of core terms.
Yeah, sure, de Rationibus fidei and Against the errors of the Greeks or some of his political writings may be understood more easily, but even those are much clearer once you grasp his metaphysics.

>>10017407

Well first off, I didn't make any sort of claim that Aquinas is simple to understand. I'm simply saying that he's not the incomprehensible juggernaut that people who never read him think he is. Your argument is essentially that because people misunderstood him in the past, everyone who reads him will continually misunderstand him. This is bollocks because people in the past have also misread Plato and Aristotle. It doesn't mean anything. As far as complexity or readability goes, how is Aquinas any different from Aristotle or Kant? My answer is that he's not. You have to put in the work just like you would with anyone else.

>>10015016

Are you James White? He's the only one that I know of that s=acts like debates mean anything. His ego won't even allow him to admit defeat like when Trent Horn knocked him around. Rhetoric and debates are fun but I'm interested in finding the truth, and that's not what debates are for.

You indirectly pointed out that the argument can't even be made without presupposing the Solas, which nobody should be willing to do if they're interested in the truth. You want a debate to happen but you want it to happen on your terms. You can easily win debates by doing that but you can't find the truth, because if the Solas are wrong then the argument is pointless. So you must first argue the Solas.

>>10017436
>Well first off, I didn't make any sort of claim that Aquinas is simple to understand. I'm simply saying that he's not the incomprehensible juggernaut that people who never read him think he is.

He is a juggernaut that's not easy to understand. It's the same with every big system builder.

>Your argument is essentially that because people misunderstood him in the past, everyone who reads him will continually misunderstand him.

I neither claim nor imply that everyone will. But many will. Just looking up any discussion on him online, hell even in this thread earlier indicates that many will.

>This is bollocks because people in the past have also misread Plato and Aristotle.

Which is why secondary helps with them as well, but due to the nature of their writing most of their famous works are easier to understand than Aquinas.

>It doesn't mean anything. As far as complexity or readability goes, how is Aquinas any different from Aristotle or Kant? My answer is that he's not. You have to put in the work just like you would with anyone else.

And the work includes secondary lit as preparation or enhancing of understanding. This isn't different for Kant or any other metaphysician. Jumping into 1500-4500 page works without having at least a basic understanding of his terminology is going to lead to bad results. Copleston and Feser are both excellent authors and the process of reading will be much smoother with their help. Opposing this is like saying that people shouldn't take classes on Aquinas because he can be understood if you just put in enough work. Sure, but it's probably not going to be as effective as having someone who's devoted his entire life to it explain the basics.

>>10017702

I don't read the posts of people who greentext me. If you want a response from me try again.

>>10017705
You are that retard, I see.

>>10017831

What are you talking about?

>>9995845
A Hard Man Is Good To Find.