The Imitation of Christ. Have you read it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ah yes those are all great reads. Confessions was great. Others I would definitely add to the list are the Apostolic Fathers collection, Against Heresies by Saint Ireneus, and I’m currently reading the First Apology of Saint Justin Martyr, and I love it!
 
Why then has it been a staple of Catholic life, praised by many as being “The fifth Gospel”? Of course it’s not but I can’t see it being borderline heresy and having such a rich history. It’s somewhat a treasure of the Church somewhat like Dante Aligiheris Divine Comedy. Both have fascinated Catholics for centuries.
 
Yes, I have read it. I think Saint Therese read it so much that she was able to recite many of the passages from her memory.
 
Last edited:
Aren’t there any saints who died without other people at their sides then? I’m sure some of them must have died alone without anyone there to witness what they did right before their death.
 
But why do you think they chose the Hebrew canon decided after Christ’s Resurrection? Could it be because the other canon lends more credence to popish beliefs?
 
I don’t know.
I’ve never really understood why say 1 and 2 Maccabees are in Catholic Bibles because we follow the Septuagint yet 3 and 4 Maccabees are not. They also are in the Septuagint. And are in Orthodox Bibles.
 
They never had any claim to canonicity. To say that we use the texts of the septuagint is a bit of a simplification.
 
It seems some religious writers in the modern era embrace this viewpoint as well, such as Elizabeth Kindelmann (who was a lay Carmelite and I think had a culturally dour outlook based on her nationality, even when things were finally going decently in her life). I can understand the viewpoint better coming from somebody centuries ago, in an era when sin and eternal punishment were very heavily emphasized.
 
Last edited:
Yah but what claim do the first two books have to it? I was reading Jeromes history and the most likely reason 3 and 4 Maccabees aren’t in our Canon is just that he obtained a copy of the Septuagint that for whatever reason did not have 3 and 4 Maccabees in it. That’s it. That’s how fragile our Canon was. Had he they would be in our Bibles I can’t be sure but I bet that’s how simple the reason they aren’t is.
 
I’m not rejecting what the Church has defined. It’s just a fact that 3 Maccabees is part of the Canon in Orthodox Churches. 4 Maccabees isn’t strictly Canon but it does appear in an appendix to the Greek Orthodox Bible. We must remember Scripture isn’t viewed the same way among Orthodox as Catholics. Some books even in the Bibles of the Orthodox have more of a special place than others. In Catholicism it’s more that these books are all on equal par. Though I guess one could say the Gospels take precedence over all other texts.
I am just saying 3 and 4 Maccabees never made it to the west. Had It, Jerome would have put it in the Vulgate with questions of its canonicity just as he did the first two. He translated the Septuagint and Hebrew Bible and made note of the differences. Had 3 and 4 Maccabees been in the Septuagint he was using he would have put them in as well.

This is for another topic board though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top