Posted on 02/20/2004 8:22:13 AM PST by Salvation
The Passion of The Christ |
The Mel Gibson movie The Passion of The Christ has caused new interest in the writings of the Catholic mystics Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, and Venerable Mary of Agreda. Although the source of the movie is the Gospels, Gibson nonetheless appears to have taken some inspiration for his artistry from the writings of these two holy Catholic women, whose writings he acknowledges were important to the spiritual journey which lead him to make the movie. Anne Catherine Emmerich was an Augustinian nun who was born 8 September 1774 at Flamsche, in the Diocese of Münster, in Germany and who died at Dulmen on 9 February 1824. During her life she experienced the mystical phenomenon of the stigmata, the wounds of Christ, which after a study ordered by her bishop were judged by a panel of physicians and clergy to be authentic. In addition she had mystical visions, the content of which came to be written down by Clemens Brentano, a man who served as her secretary in this regard. Among the most famous of her writings is the The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. In 1892, well after her death, her Cause for Beatification was introduced by the bishop of Münster. She subsequently attained to the title of Venerable, indicating Rome's recognition that she lived a life of heroic virtue. However, in 1928 Rome suspended the Cause of Beatification when it was suspected that Brentano fabricated material attributed to her. The Holy See has since permitted the Cause to be re-opened on the sole issue of her life, without reference to the possibly doctored writings. On 2 July 2003 a decree of a miracle was promulgated by the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, opening the way for her Beatification (L'Osservatore Romano N. 29, 16 July 2003, 2). Venerable Mary of Agreda was a Spanish Franciscan nun, who lived between 1602 and 24 May 1665. Her Cause was almost immediately introduced after her death, in 1672, as she had lived a life of evident holiness in the eyes of her contemporaries. During her life she had experienced mystical phenomena including private revelations. The content of these revelations were written down under obedience and after her death were widely circulated in Spain. The most famous of these writings is the Mystical City of God: Divine History of the Virgin, Mother of God. However, when Divine History came to the attention of the Holy Office (called today the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), it was condemned on 4 August 1681, on the basis of an evaluation by the University of Paris, and put on the Index of Forbidden Books by Pope Innocent XI. The Pope subsequently suspended its effect, at the request of the King of Spain. Other studies of the work by prestigious Catholic universities in Spain and elsewhere vindicated it, and in 1713 the Holy Office indicated that the suspension of the condemnation applied everywhere. However, certain historical questions still remain concerning possible editorial changes after Mary of Agreda's death. Such questions, as in the case of Anne Catherine Emmerich, may never be adequately resolved. How should such writings be treated today? The answer to this is two-fold. As St. Thomas Aquinas and St. John of the Cross make clear, however, although God can give new lights, most private revelation is "constructed" from the building materials of the memory and knowledge of the person. This means that the mystic's own religious, cultural and educational influences help determine how the visions are presented to them. This accounts, for example, for the variety in the details of the same events among different mystics. Some details may have been supplied by God, others taken from the presuppositions of the mystic. Since God's purpose is not to improve upon Scripture but to inflame the will with love, the source of the details are ultimately irrelevant to that purpose. In the end, the Church judges the authenticity of such writings not by these details but whether anything is contrary to faith and morals. It does not, therefore, guarantee that every detail is true, only that it is theologically safe. Secondly, in addition to the general "problem" of interpreting private revelation there is also the specific problem of the uncertainties associated with these particular writings. Both factors argue for reading the writings of Anne Catherine Emmerich and Mary of Agreda as a means to inflame one's love for God and for neighbor, and not as an appendix to Sacred Scripture. Toward that end they can be very fruitful, just as The Passion of The Christ can lead to a fruitful personal meditation on the sufferings of the Lord, without being historical in all its details. An Example. An example of the principle of God using what is already known by the mystic to form a vision or private revelation is the placement of the nails, and its corollary, the location of the stigmata in those saints who have had them. Scripture doesn't tell us with precision how Jesus was nailed. The Hebrew word in Psalm 22:16 is usually translated hand, but could apply to the wrist or adjacent forearm, as well. Nonetheless, the artistic tradition usually portrays the palm of the hand, while mystics propose a variety of placements from palm to wrist to forearm. On the other hand, the Shroud of Turin and historical studies of crucifixion argue strongly that the Crucified was nailed through the wrist, as the only part which could support a body's weight. Do the differences among mystics, and with the likely actual case (the wrist), make a palm or forearm placement of the wounds inauthentic? Not according to Catholic mystical theology, which recognizes the subjective (personal) element in mysticism, and which therefore allows for differences in such details. In The Passion of The Christ Mel Gibson has chosen to follow Emmerich's placement, a choice which is both artistically and theologically justifiable. For more information on the role of Private Revelation in the Church see: |
Answered by Colin B. Donovan, STL |
|
||
I have a copy of The Life of Jesus Christ which is about the visions of the Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich. However I am told that her visions may not be accepted by the Church. Could you clarify whether the Catholic church recognizes her visions as being authentic? Thank you. |
||
Answer by Colin B. Donovan, STL on 02-19-2004: | ||
This is a timely question, in light of the new movie by Mel Gibson, The Passion of The Christ. The issue is not so much whether the Church recognizes her visions, the declaration of "Venerable" makes her visions credible, but whether the writings accurately reflect her experiences in prayer. The Church at one time suspended her Cause precisely because of questions raised about her writings, more precisely, whether the man who wrote down her descriptions of her visions actually fabricated material. A few years ago her Cause was re-opened, but on the sole issue of her life. The issue of her writings was left unresolved, and therefore unconsidered. So, the Church recognizes that this holy woman is a virtuous witness to her spiritual experiences, but does NOT authenticate the writings attributed to her as representing those mystical experiences. For more information concerning the movie, the mystics and private revelation, please read my FAQ The Passion of The Christ and Anne Catherine Emmerich.
|
My Psalm 22 has 6 verses. Perhaps the author is refering to Psalm 21:17 For many dogs have encompassed me: the council of the malignant hath besieged me. They have dug my hands and feet
Dr. Barbet, "A Doctor at Calvary," notes the wrists are always considered part of the hand.
St. Robert Bellarmine, "A Commentary on the Book of Psalms," simly mentions in response to 'They have dug my hands and feet' that "They drove the nails through."
"A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture" notes that Psalm 21:17 means, "his hands and feet were dug into by nails."
"And they have looked and stared upon me." " To add to the punishment of the cross", St. Robert continues,"there was the ignominy of his nakedness. They inspected my whole person with the greatest curiosity, there being nothing to cover it."
Well, I am now crying...'Nite and God Bless.
Please notify me via Freepmail if you would like to be added to or removed from the Catholic Discussion Ping list.
* the temple guards punching Christ over the bridge at Gethsemane
* several Sanhedrin protesting the proceedings and being expelled from the assembly
* Pilate's wife Claudia (who converted that day, btw) "sending" clean linen to the Blessed Virgin Mary (Emmerich thinks Claudia expected Christ to be released and would need clean garments)
* the Blessed Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene using the linen to mop up the Precious Blood off of the plaza floor
* Pilate's empathy toward Christ and dislike for Caiaphas (even more explicit than in the Gospels)
* the conversion of Abenadar, the commander of the soldiers
* the conversion of Longinus (nee Cassius), who pierced Christ's heart and was baptized directly by the Precious blood mixed with water
[n.b. But in Emmerich we do not have Christ meet Judas after being thrown over the bridge, nor do we have Pilate offering Christ water.]
I haven't read it cover-to-cover yet, either. My brother bought me the book and gave it to me this weekend. I skimmed through with reference to the so-called "non-Biblical" scenes in the film.
Emmerich says that Christ fell seven times. I think He falls five times onscreen. (I'll have to pay more attention next time.
The conversions of Claudia, Abenadar, Longinus "and many other soldiers" -- and, of course, Dismas, the good thief -- are ancient Catholic traditions, and do not originate with Bl. Emmerich. But she does provide some detail of their activites that day.
BTW, she says that Pilate had given Claudia a token when he promised her he would not condemn Christ to death. When Pilte washed his hands, Claudia sent the token to be returned to Pilate, and she left the palace to join the Christians who were in hiding.
She also says that Gethsemane is where Adam wept after his sin. And that after Peter apologized for his denials to the Blessed Virgin, he ran back to Gethsemane and prayed at the same spot where both Adam and Our Lord had wept.
I've found this similarly problematic. I think the best answer is that this crosses over into the mystical, so the exact placement isn't terribly important, except perhaps for the authentication of the Shroud, although someone pointed out here recently that the nail could have gone through the palm and out through the wrist. The same person said that this is indicated in the Shroud.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.