In some books like "Holy feast and holy fast", " wounds of love, mystic marriage of saint Rose" the author speaks about the spirituality of catholic mystics, whose visions were mixed with s***al imagery. Although the authors' claim that it was all a hysteria or holy anorexia is obiviously blasphemous, the quotes of saints they mentions may be true. they state that nuns and monks didn't actualy curb their libido, but rather sublimized it and gave it to Jesus. Throughout the book you see how Jesus asked nun to uncover their breasts and nurse him, How He filled them with actual milk as St. Gertrude van Oosten nursed the Chrit child.The amazing thing is that in some visions of this kind He is adult( He even invites a mexican beata to have inter*****e with him) :faint:
 St. ludwina gives her milk to her confessor and our Lady gives her's to Sts. Dominic and Cajetan! How can this be? Isn't it a balant immodesty???In 4 marks forums I asked some lay catholics about this and their answers were:

"It is all figuritive language"---But the nun's milk was actual and it fed many people.

"it is blasphemous"---then how could the church canonize those saints who acted in this way

"it is good and OK, because s** is holy"---But Jesus is supposed to be without libido

What book is that? Good grief that is dreadful. Sounds like some of the anti-Catholic crap that came out decades ago.

show me the link. I will be back later.

That is the best advice Matthew.

A quick glance at both tells me that they are bad. They are both looking at the lives of the Saints coming from the assumption that they Saints were mental cases. And, therefore anything that they experience was a manifistation of their insanity.

Listen to Matthew, he is correct and has much knowledge of what books are good for you to read when studying these subjects.

Spouse, as a student of literature I come across this sort of thing all the time. The amount of trash out there which masquerades as literary criticism and scholarship is astounding. "Scholars" make bold assertions about the Church and go unchallenged by their peers. Many of them simply do not get their facts right. They are willfully ignorant of the correct Catholic teachings and interpret perfectly wholesome texts with a perverted and illogical mind. In studying the Medieval writings on Our Lady I have read the most outrageous untruths from modern critics. I can think of five or six such books off the top of my head that I've seen in recent weeks. Some of the stuff is just too disgusting to mention here but you have to take it for what it is- blasphemous and full of lies. It takes modern perverted ideas and applies them- totally anachronistically- to Catholics texts or Saints. I have personally witnessed published critics making the most outrageously false statements in conferences and seminars, and when I've challenged them, they have got very uncomfortable and had to modify or retract their words. There is a tendency to look at the academic credentials of professors and so-called "historians" and be impressed that they went to a top university or have published so many articles and books- but that doesn't mean a thing. Anti-Catholicism is rife in literary, religious and historical studies, so don't be alarmed when you come across trash, even if it's written by a widely-renowned scholar.

Do not read these sort of books- if it is not written by a good Catholic (as opposed to critics who claim to be Catholic but who are lapsed or dissenters) ignore it! Do not look for information about Catholicism and especially about female Saints in modern secular books. It's a waste of time. Read the good stuff, we have the monopoly on good books!