The Imitation of Christ. Have you read it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s a wonderful book. As others have said it’s best to read short passages from it daily.
 
That’s almost bizarre that would be a reason someone couldn’t be canonized.
 
I’m going to have to look into that. I just got a copy by Penguin Classics, who are known for publishing classic works with historical importance. I don’t think they would have an agenda. But thanks for the heads up.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I feel very sorry for the author, who can never be canonized because they found evidence that he possibly was buried while still alive and woke up in the coffin, and somebody decided that because of that, they couldn’t be sure he didn’t commit some kind of sinful renunciation of God while trying to get out. Like God wouldn’t write off whatever somebody did in that extreme stressful situation.
Click to expand...
Well… the Church isn’t saying he can’t be in Heaven. After all, overwhelming majority of the saints in Heaven are not canonized Saints.

The Church is simply stating that no one can witness to the end of his life.

But is a HORRIBLE way to die. I pray that God had a tremendous amount of mercy on him.

God Bless
 
I’m in the process of reading the book now. It’s quite good.
 
I’ve seen some non-Catholic versions that basically just leave out Book IV as it is all about the Eucharist. So that’s always the first thing I check for.

I love the book. It’s been a while since I read it. Maybe that’s a good Lenten project for me. 🙂
 
It’s legal to take a work and just omit what you want? That seems really unethical. I didn’t think that was allowed. Imagine how much that would undermine historical writings…
 
I have it and have read it off and on through the years.

It’s not a book you’ll necessarily read from cover to cover, but one you’ll read random chapters after you’ve prayed and asked the Holy Spirit to guide you.

That all being said. Keep in mind it was written for monastics and although it can be used by laypeople, there are a few instances which can be difficult to discern.

Jim
 
jas84173 said:
It’s legal to take a work and just omit what you want? That seems really unethical. I didn’t think that was allowed. Imagine how much that would undermine historical writings…
Click to expand...
I tend to think it’s a sneaky Protestant trick to do things like that. But as far as “legal”, the work is so old it’s in the public domain, so there is no rights owner to sue.

I would note that the link to the one I posted was translated by an Anglican minister. While Anglicans are likely to be thinking pretty close to Catholics, I agree that the Knox translation someone posted above is prettier.

If you want to be sure you are getting a Catholic book, always look in the front for the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur. If you see those, then you’re good.
 
Yah I know. But I mean, could a Protestant just take verses out of the Bible they don’t like in that case? It seems heretical but it wouldn’t be illegal?
 
I was given a copy when I first joined the Church. Honestly, I struggled to understand a lot of it and it seemed harsh at times.
 
The only illegality involved would be if the Protestants took someone else’s translation of the Bible, that they didn’t own. Translations are protected work. The original Bible text isn’t, because it’s too old.

So the Protestants would likely either have to translate the Bible themselves from the originals and include what they want, or else buy a license to use someone else’s translation (presumably a Protestant translation) and remove parts of it. Or possibly if they were using a translation that was old enough, that translation might be in the public domain also. It varies by country as well so they need to make sure they meet the requirements for every country where they want to distribute the book.

Besides, from a Catholic perspective, the Protestants have already taken whole books out of the Bible.
 
Last edited:
They’ve done that. The “apocrypha” includes not only books but some verses too if I recall.
 
I’ve an inherited copy that’s around 80 years old.
It provides challenge to strive beyond ordinary levels of dedication to living gospel truths and of attaining holiness.
 
True regarding the books. However in what they did, they didn’t take verses out they didn’t like. They just excluded entire books that were questioned from the beginning. Of course I am trust the Church that they are inspired , but those texts in question were always somewhat controversial on whether they were inspired or not. Even Jerome had serious questions regarding them when translating the Greek and Hebrew into the Vulgate. He actually kind of separated them like Protestants did. He’s actually one of the reasons Protestants use for them not being inspired. However I believe the Church. Not to mention the Church didn’t reaffirm all those in question. 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manesseh were traditionally in the Vulgate but the Council of Trent didn’t reaffirm them.
The Bible isn’t a book. It’s a library of books. I am way off subject but I think a comparison I could make would be Protestants having James in the Bible but taking out the verse that affirms Faith by Works. They can’t stand that one, to the point Luther wanted to remove that book as well along with Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation.
 
Yes. But it’s not as simple as that. They took out parts of Daniel and Esther however they use the versions found in the Hebrew Bible. Catholics and Orthodox use the versions which were in the Greek Septuagint. Both versions are valid versions depending on the tradition. However they didn’t go knit picking what they didn’t like. Just didn’t use the Greek versions thinking only the Hebrew texts were Canon and Inspired.
 
And thanks for the insight I do understand what you mean totally with the rest. That it is the translator who has the rights. Thank you.
 
Can you expand on your reasoning for that? I’m not looking to argue as I have not read it. I’m just wondering where’s the pitfall and what’s the better option.
 
I use it (along with writings of Saints, Church Doctors, Church Fathers) to listen to, pray on, and meditate as in Lectio Divina.
 
I believe that is the way that spiritual book should be read. Just a couple of pages at a time and ponder it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top