/clg/ - Catholic Literature General

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

...

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

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).
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.

Well stop it.
t. Catholic

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

what an embarrassment. imagine showing this shit to a priest

imagine telling a priest you go on Veeky Forums

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

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
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Cajetan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Suárez
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Garrigou-Lagrange
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Maritain
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Étienne_Gilson
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edith_Stein
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Copleston
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Anscombe
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Geach
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alasdair_MacIntyre
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Feser
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?

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

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

archive.org/stream/Garrigou-LagrangeEnglish/Predestination - Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald, O.P_#page/n5/mode/2up

that character reminds me of this

...

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?

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

I can recommend you books.

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.

Where do I start?

With the Septuagint

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

you could become one
join uuuus

Manalive, Heretics and Napoleon of Notting Hill.

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

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?

>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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

>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.

>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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

Do Catholics really believe this?

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

>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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

>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.

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.

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.

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

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

>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.

this
If you come to Veeky Forums and are surprised that the christians here are spergy weebs I don't know what to tell you

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

This^2
Nothing more to say.

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

Hilarious image.

mods are prickly over here at halfchin

We don't have mods

Yes, why shouldn't you?

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.

Please.

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

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

Not the user 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.

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

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.

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

Who makes these stupid charts?

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.

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

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.

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

Some one answer this man

EASY

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.

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

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.
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.

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.

Go to Latin mass.

You know, user, 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.