For a while I have been drawn towards reading Anne Catherine Emmerich's Dolorous Passion book (and probably the rest of her works) but something kind of turns me off from doing so. More likely a lingering doubt over the authenticity and soundness of the work. So I was wondering what exactly is her status and that of her revelations in The Church and what, if any, is the opinion of those who have read her. Is it worthwhile to do so? Or do you think not?

I was thinking about getting this edition of her book:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1905574029/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1905574029&linkCode=as2&tag=httpwwwchanco-20

Any comments are appreciated.

Thanks.

I was always put off because I presumed it would be hard going reading her writing.  But recently I thought I would give it a try and am currently reading The life of our saviour Jesus Christ volume IV.

It is beautifully written and I have no doubt at all that it is 100% authentic.  The non-Biblical events depicted really add immensely to the deposit of faith and there is nothing that even feels like an attempt to write something which is not entirely true.

She describes the Apostles in the lead up to and the creation of the Church including describing the last supper and how Christ used it to teach the apostles how to say Mass.  It describes our Lord performing the first consecrations of the Apostles and them going on to do the consecrations on others.

It fits in exactly with tradition and puts into words what we all presume happened anyway.

I believe the earlier volumes describe the history of man from Adam and Eve (I started reading at Volume IV).

I cannot recommend the books enough.

As for veracity, I recall reading somewhere that all of the things she describes that can be verified (such as locations of places, clothing, and foods) are all accurate and are things that Catherine could not have known.  This gives further weight to supporting the books.

Thanks for the comments! What do you both think about the article written by Solanage Hertz on Emmerich?

http://jloughnan.tripod.com/salace.htm

It raises some arguments against her revelations and their authenticity.

Please, read it!!! it´s one of the most wonderful and beasutiful private revelations we have! Anne Catherine is "Venerable". You can´t never recommend this book enough!

Enjoy it and let us know about it, pls!

Cristian

... I have to pick my battles more carefully, and I am staying out of this one.  But briefly, just like another German mystic, Hildegard von Bingen, Emmerich troubles me.  It's not just guilt by association either, though they are both very popular with those who will most likely one day be deemed anti-Popes and other modernists.  

I get a bad feeling just reading about them; not that this is proof of anything.  But Hildegard comes off like a proto-feminist, and Emmerich, at times, like a proto-theosophist.  However, because Brentano was the one who recorded so many of Emmerich's visions, people will always blame the bad aspects of them on him, and attribute all the good to Emmerich.  Brentano is really the perfect alibi.  

I think the devil used certain people to break open a door in the Church and that sometimes these people seemed very holy to their contemporaries.  They were ahead of their time and complex in a way that was fascinating, but were their powers really from God?  

Mind you, I used to think St. Joan of Arc was a witch and now she is one of my favorites.  I am not drawing any conclusions, just expressing an uneasy feeling.

... I have to pick my battles more carefully, and I am staying out of this one.  But briefly, just like another German mystic, Hildegard von Bingen, Emmerich troubles me.  It's not just guilt by association either, though they are both very popular with those who will most likely one day be deemed anti-Popes and other modernists.  

I get a bad feeling just reading about them; not that this is proof of anything.  But Hildegard comes off like a proto-feminist, and Emmerich, at times, like a proto-theosophist.  However, because Brentano was the one who recorded so many of Emmerich's visions, people will always blame the bad aspects of them on him, and attribute all the good to Emmerich.  Brentano is really the perfect alibi.  

I think the devil used certain people to break open a door in the Church and that sometimes these people seemed very holy to their contemporaries.  They were ahead of their time and complex in a way that was fascinating, but were their powers really from God?  

Mind you, I used to think St. Joan of Arc was a witch and now she is one of my favorites.  I am not drawing any conclusions, just expressing an uneasy feeling.

Fair enough. I can understand the way you feel and that unease on reading her is something I have felt myself. I honestly can't put my finder on it, but while I do feel interested in reading her visions, there is something that turns me off. I see a lot of positive feedback on her but there is that instinct in me telling me not to spend time with it.

I don't know, really, maybe my distrust or fear is misplaced and I am missing out of something great to which I feel inclined because it would be a positive influence on my faith.

I'll have to think more about this.

Mike has certain intellectual habits and psychological reference points that tend to prejudice his opinion on certain kinds of mystical writers and theologians.  I think it really comes down to a manner of speaking and an entirely different frame of reference.  Thus, anyone who makes him feel uncomfortable, he automatically suspects.        

Hi there Caminus :)

What is your view on Emmerich and her visions?

  Emmerich believed that our Lady was not conceived in the normal way. Though St. Joachim was her true and biological father, her conception happened through some supernatural phenomena.

Read online. by scrolling down you can read the book chapter by chapter in pdf:

http://www.jesus-passion.com/DOLOROUS_PASSION_OF_OUR_LORD_JESUS_CHRIST.htm