Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Fighting Errors in the Modern World => The Earth God Made - Flat Earth, Geocentrism => Topic started by: Merry on April 16, 2022, 02:41:12 PM
-
Maybe this has already been covered in another thread, but today in reading from the Mystical City of God and Holy Saturday, Ven. Mary of Agreda discusses the shape of the world. She also goes on to describe Limbo - and the part reserved for unbaptized children still "tainted with Original Sin." Thought these were useful to share.
A Blessed Easter to everyone.
The Mystical City of God – by Ven. Mary of Agreda
From Book Six Chap. 25
748. These were the occupations of the heavenly Queen during a part of the sabbath. At the approach of evening She again retired, leaving the Apostles now renewed in spirit and full of consolation and joy in the Lord, yet also full of grief for the Passion of their Master. In her retirement during this evening the great Lady contemplated the doings of the most holy soul of her Son after it left the sacred body. For from the first the blessed Mother knew that the soul of Christ, united to the Divinity, descended to limbo in order to release the holy Fathers from the subterranean prison, where they had been detained since the death of the first just man that had died in expectance of the advent of the Redeemer of the whole human race. In order to speak about this mystery, which is one of the articles of faith pertaining to the most sacred humanity of Christ our Lord, it seemed best to mention that which has been given me to understand about this limbo and its situation. I say then, that the diameter of the earth's sphere, passing through the centre from one surface to the other, measures two thousand, five hundred and two leagues; and from the surface to the centre, one thousand, two hundred and fifty-one leagues; and according to the diameter is to be calculated the circuмference of this globe. In the centre is the hell of the damned, as in the heart of the earth. This hell is a chaotic cavern, which contains many darksome dwellings for diverse punishments, all of them dreadful and terrible. All of these together form a vast globe like a huge round jar, with an opening or mouth of vast expansion. In this horrible dungeon filled with con fusion and torments were the demons and all the damned, and shall be there for all eternity, as long as God is God; for in hell there is no redemption (Matth. 25, 41).
749. To one side of hell is purgatory, where the souls of the just are purged and where they cleanse themselves, if they have not satisfied for their faults in this life, or have not departed from this earthly life entirely free from the defects incapacitating them for the beatific vision. This cavern is also large, but not so large as hell; and though there are severe punishments in purgatory, they have no connection with those of hell. To the other side is limbo with two different divisions : The one for the children, who die unbaptized and tainted only with original sin, without either good or bad works of their own election. The other served as a retreat for the just, who had already satisfied for their sins; for they could not enter heaven, nor enjoy the vision of God until the Redemption of man was accomplished and until Christ our Savior should open the gates of heaven closed by the sin of Adam (Ps. 23, 9). This cavern is likewise smaller than hell, and has no connection with it, nor are there in it the pains of the senses like in purgatory. For it was destined for the souls already cleansed in purgatory and implied only the absence of beatific vision or pain of privation; there also stayed all those who died in the state of grace until the death of the Redeemer. This is the place to which Christ s soul descended with the Divinity and which we refer to in saying that He descended into hell. For the word “hell” may be used to signify any of the infernal regions in the depths of the earth, though commonly we apply it only to the hell of the demons and the damned. This is the most notable meaning of this word, just as “heaven” ordinarily signifies the empyrean, the habitation of the saints, where they are to dwell forever, while the damned remain forever in hell. The other parts of hell have also the more particular names of purgatory and limbo. After the final judgment heaven and hell only are to be inhabited, since purgatory shall become unnecessary and since even the infants shall be transported to another dwellingplace.
750. To this cavern of limbo then the most holy soul of Christ our Lord betook itself in the company of innumerable angels, who gave glory, fortitude and Divinity to their victorious and triumphant King. In accordance with his greatness and majesty they commanded the portals of this ancient prison to be opened, in order that the King of glory, powerful in battles and Lord of virtues, might find them unlocked and open at his entrance. At their command some of the rocks of the passage were rent and shattered; although this was not really necessary, since the King and his army were immaterial spirits. By the presence of the most holy Soul this obscure cavern was converted into a heaven and was filled with a wonderful splendor; and to the souls therein contained was imparted the clear vision of the Divinity. In one instant they passed from the state of long-deferred hope to the possession of glory, and from darkness to the inaccessible light, which they now began to enjoy. All of them recognized their true God and Redeemer, and gave him thanks and glory, breaking forth in canticles of praise saying: “The Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive power and Divinity, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory and benediction. Thou hast redeemed us, Lord, in thy blood, out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation; and hast made us to our God a kingdom and priests, and we shall reign on the earth (Apoc. 59, 12). Thine is, O Lord, the power, thine the reign, and thine is the glory of thy works.” Then the Lord commanded the angels to bring all the souls in purgatory, and this was immediately done. As if in earnest of the human Redemption they were absolved then and there by the Redeemer from the punishments still due to them, and they were glorified with the other souls of the just by the beatific vision. Thus on that day of the presence of the King were depopulated the prisonhouses of both limbo and purgatory.
751. But for the damned in hell this was a terrible day; because by the disposition of the Most High all of them were made to see and feel the descent of the Redeemer into limbo, and also the holy Fathers and the just were made witnesses of the terror caused by this mystery to the demons and the damned. The demons were yet terrorized and oppressed by the ruin which they had undergone on Mount Calvary, as related above ; and when they heard (according to their manner of hearing and speaking) the voices of the angels advancing before their King to limbo, they were confounded and terrified anew. Like serpents pursued, they hid themselves and clung to the most remote caverns of hell. The damned were seized with confusion upon confusion, becoming still more deeply conscious of their aberration and of the loss of salvation, now secured to the just. As Judas and the impenitent thief had so recently and signally shared this misfortune, so their torments were greater; and the demons were the more highly incensed against them. Then and there the infernal spirits resolved to persecute and torment more grievously the Catholics, and chastise more severely those who should deny or repudiate the Catholic faith. For they concluded that these merited greater punishment than the infidels, to whom it is not preached.
-
Clearly not inspired, diameter too short. Her work has been controversial, anyway.
FE proponents should go and watch the sun go down from a beach, and turn on their brains.
-
FE proponents should go and watch the sun go down from a beach, and turn on their brains.
GE proponents should go watch a sunset in a desert, where, due to the dryer air, it shrinks in size until it's out of sight, and they need to turn off the (programmed part of) their brains.
-
Clearly not inspired, diameter too short. Her work has been controversial, anyway.
Only Sacred Scripture is inspired. As with a lot of these "visions," there's an admixture of maybe real things and then interpretation through the eyes of the visionary. In this particular passage, she prefixes "I say" to the statement, and does not attribute it to Our Lord or Our Lady. I believe that issues with her visions are one reason the Church has hesitated to canonize or even beatify her (as she's only a "Venerable"), or Anne Catherine Emmerich (who was only "beatified" by JP2). There were some contradictions between her account and those of Mary of Agreda. So who really knows?
Both their works are edifying to read, but then women tend to have active imaginations, and these types of things are always produced by women, never men. St. Theresa of Avila, when told that this or that nun was having visions, ordered that she be given more meat in her diet. Many, many details about the life of Our Lord and Our Lady were left out of the Sacred Scriptures, and I find it a bit implausible that God would dictate dozens of volumes of detail to visionaries when the Holy Spirit didn't see fit to inspire that they be written in the first place.
-
GE proponents should go watch a sunset in a desert, where, due to the dryer air, it shrinks in size until it's out of sight, and they need to turn off the (programmed part of) their brains.
Have you seen this with your own eyes in real life, or just on YouTube? Part of the problem in these discussions is that observations of the heavens are made by watching YouTube, not by observing the heavens.
The other problem is that light is presumed to move in a straight line over long distances. I spent a lot of time following the earth-shape debates here that took place about a couple of months ago, trying to see if there was any merit to the flat earth position. From what I could discern, they only have one solid argument, which is that objects are able to be seen farther away than they should be able to if the earth were a sphere. Now, this is an intriguing fact, but it just doesn't prove anything since it would only be dispositive if light certainly moved in a straight line indefinitely, or at least for long distances on the earth's surface, and that is provably false. Therefore it doesn't prove anything to say that you can see farther away than you should be able to.
That, and the flat earthers are strikingly helpless to explain even the most basic features of their theory, such as what keeps the sun and moon above the earth, how satellites stay up, why objects are drawn towards the earth, how the sun can move in a circle, why people can't see the sun when it's night time, what casts the shadow on the moon when it waxes or wanes, why the distances between places are correct on a globe and not on the flat earth map, what Antarctica is, or any one of dozens of obvious problems with their theory for which they cannot even attempt an answer.
Sorry, flatties, I gave you a fair hearing with an open mind, and that's my assessment of the whole thing, right there.
-
Oh, and most flatters' belief is more political than scientific. Their belief that the earth is flat is more a rejection of NASA and modern false science than it is a scientific observation or deduction. This is a fallacy because:
1. what NASA or the media says does not determine the shape of the earth, and also because
2. the idea that the earth is a globe was not invented by NASA, but is an idea that has been almost universally held by educated men since the beginning of western civilization, starting with Aristotle, the father of philosophy and almost all true science.
3. On the contrary, the flat earth theory of today was invented and popularized by cranks and leftists in England in the 19th century. The recent resurgence in flat earth awareness in popular culture the last few years is due to a black rap artist named B.o.B. (https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/jan/25/bob-rapper-flat-earth-twitter) who popularized the idea on Twitter in 2015.
-
Clearly not inspired, diameter too short.
By my count her diameter is long, but only by a little. She says diameter is 2502 leagues which equals 8637.5 miles, while a quick Google search says the Earth is 7917.5 miles. Google in leagues says the Earth is 2296 vs Mary of Agreda 2502. She is only 8.2% long, if one trusts modern measurements. I'd say that's very accurate considering she said it in the early 1600's.
Her work has been controversial
Approved by like 400 years of popes does not sound controversial, except likely to all non-Catholics and "Catholic" modernists/progressivist/liberals.
-
By my count her diameter is long, but only by a little. She says diameter is 2502 leagues which equals 8637.5 miles, while a quick Google search says the Earth is 7917.5 miles. Google in leagues says the Earth is 2296 vs Mary of Agreda 2502. She is only 8.2% long, if one trusts modern measurements. I'd say that's very accurate considering she said it in the early 1600's.
Except that God is not wrong, so the point is that these numbers didn't come from God.
-
By my count her diameter is long, but only by a little. She says diameter is 2502 leagues which equals 8637.5 miles, while a quick Google search says the Earth is 7917.5 miles. Google in leagues says the Earth is 2296 vs Mary of Agreda 2502. She is only 8.2% long, if one trusts modern measurements. I'd say that's very accurate considering she said it in the early 1600's.
Approved by like 400 years of popes does not sound controversial, except likely to all non-Catholics and "Catholic" modernists/progressivist/liberals.
.
To my knowledge Agreda's work (Referring to The Mystical City) was never approved by any pope, and was actively suppressed by several. Its use, as far as the Holy See was concerned, was at best tolerated sometimes. Where did you read it enjoyed papal approval?
-
Oh, and most flatters' belief is more political than scientific. Their belief that the earth is flat is more a rejection of NASA and modern false science than it is a scientific observation or deduction.
That's utter nonsense, and is a total strawman of your fabrication. FE is based on myriad observations and experiments which show that people can see too far vs. what would be allowed by the numbers provided by scientists. There's also the issues we'd experience with aviation if the surface of the earth were moving at about Mach 1 (on average), the need to adjust downward constantly during any flight to stay at the same altitude, the issue of a pressurized atmosphere being able to exist in a vacuum adjacent to a (nearly infinite) vacuum, etc. etc.
FE movement was very prominent in the 19th century, long before NASA even existed.
NASA only figures in to the extent that they have proven themselves liars and hoaxers, and therefore the "evidence" they provide for globe earth is not reliable. So take away the NASA artwork, and what's left is what people can reliably consider science.
-
.
To my knowledge Agreda's work (Referring to The Mystical City) was never approved by any pope, and was actively suppressed by several. Its use, as far as the Holy See was concerned, was at best tolerated sometimes. Where did you read it enjoyed papal approval?
Yes, it was suppressed by a couple popes. There was a commission of scholars who studied the work and 102 out of 150 or so (if my memory serves me) voted that it should be condemned due to various errors in it. It wasn't released until 5 years after her death, and some argued that parts were clearly added by various confessors who were trying to promote Scotism over Thomism (at times elevating a number of Scotist opinions to the level of revelation). There were stylistic inconsistences between sections. So we have doubts about how much of it was even her work ... not unlike with Brentano's edition of the visions of Anne Catherine Emmerich.
-
3. On the contrary, the flat earth theory of today was invented and popularized by cranks and leftists in England in the 19th century. The recent resurgence in flat earth awareness in popular culture the last few years is due to a black rap artist named B.o.B. (https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/jan/25/bob-rapper-flat-earth-twitter) who popularized the idea on Twitter in 2015.
That's a completely false mischaracterization of the history of the flat earth movement. Among those in England who promoted Flat Earth were many credible scholars, and not just a few "leftist cranks", and many of them made serious scientific arguments and conducted experiments to back up their contentions. Nor was B.o.B. the reason for FE becoming popular. I attribute that largely to the release of the Nikon P900 camera which allowed people to conduct "see too far" experiments, which was in early 2015. Vast majority of FE proponents were skeptical and set out to debunk the notion until they conducted some of their own experiments. But these are just ad hominems on your part, and you're simply philosophizing, and not addressing the scientific evidence for Flat Earth.
It's also ridiculous to say that the idea became "popular" as the result of a Tweet by a rapper. FE is universally held in derision, and FE advocates are constantly subjected to ridicule and derision. Most of the FE proponents spent a year or two looking at the evidence before reluctantly "coming out," many of them for fear of the derision and ridicule. FE is hardly "popular".
No, the reason FE grew is because there's a heck of a lot of solid evidence casting doubt on the "heliocentrist" globe earth model, suggesting that the earth is motionless and that we live on a flat plane beneath a dome. Lots of people attest to the fact (and I do as well) that initially they just laughed it off and thought that the arguments would be ridiculous and tin-foil, but when they decided "OK, I'll have a look to see what this is about," they were thrown for a loop. Some of them set out deliberately to debunk it. When I saw some of the first posts in the FE forum here on CI, I thought it was ridiculous, but then I decided in the interests of keeping an open mind to have a look, and I too was thrown for a loop. It took me about a year and a half of looking before I realized that the preponderance of the evidence suggested that we live on a motionless plane.
-
For all the billions that NASA have at their disposal, a simple experiment could put FE to bed immediately. Simply cirumaviate Antarctica. According to the globe model, it has a circuмference of approximately 9,900 miles (shorter if you cut a few corners on the Antarctic circle), which many commercial airliners can travel without refueling (current record is about 13,423 miles for a non-stop) ... and I bet that NASA and the military have planes that can go a lot farther. Have the leading FE people on the plane, taking readings and observations, making sure that the coast of Antarctica stays on the same side of the plane the entire time. You could position observers on ships at the halfway point, and perhaps at the quarter and three quarter points as well. Done. End of the FE movement. Would probably just cause a couple million dollars to pull off.
As an aside, same thing could be said of Michelson-Morley, as Sungenis poited out. If NASA could get to the moon, all they'd have to do is to get an M-M apparatus onto the moon and check out the results. If it showed movement, then the earth is stationary and all the BS they came up to explain it away would go out the window. But they won't do it. Too busy trying to (allegedly) dig up rocks on Mars. That simple experiment would completely change all of physics, but I guess it's not worth a try.
-
Except that God is not wrong, so the point is that these numbers didn't come from God.
Or the modern measurements are wrong. Like I said "She is only 8.2% long, if one trusts modern measurements". I trust her more than I trust Google.
-
.
To my knowledge Agreda's work (Referring to The Mystical City) was never approved by any pope, and was actively suppressed by several. Its use, as far as the Holy See was concerned, was at best tolerated sometimes. Where did you read it enjoyed papal approval?
See the very beginning the book volume 1 in PDF http://themostholyrosary.com/mystical-city-vol-i.pdf (http://themostholyrosary.com/mystical-city-vol-i.pdf) Here is a snippet:
APPROBATIONS THE first Pope officially to take notice of "Ciudad de Dios" was Pope Innocent XI, who, on July 3, 1686, in response to a series of virulent attacks and machinations of some members of the Sorbonne, known to be Jansenists, issued a breve permitting the publication and reading of the "Ciudad de Dios." Similar decrees were afterward issued by Popes Alexander VIII, Clement IX and Benedict XIII. These decrees were followed by two decrees of the Congregation of Rites, approved by Benedict XIV and Clement XIV, in which the authenticity of "Ciudad de Dios" as extant and writ ten by the Venerable Servant of God, Mary of Jesus, is officially established. The great pope Benedict XIII, when he was archbishop of Benevent, used these revela tions as material for a series of sermons on the Blessed Virgin. On Sept. 26, 1713, the bishop of Ceneda, Italy, objecting to the publication of the "City of God," was peremptorily ordered by the Holy Office to withdraw his objections as interfering with the decree of pope Innocent XI for the universal Church. The process of canonization of Mary of Agreda was promoted by the Spanish bishops and other eminent men of the Church soon after her death in 1666. It has re sulted so far in securing her the title of VenerabUis, thus clearing the way to her beatification, for which, let us hope, God will soon raise a promoter among the many pious and eminent men who hold in esteem her writings xxi xxii APPROBATIONS and have learned of her holy life and of the miracles wrought at her tomb. The Redemptorist Fathers published a new German translation in 1885, which was approved and highly recommended by the Bishop of Ratisbon in the follow ing* terms : "We take pleasure in giving our episcopal approba tion to the annotated translation of the Spanish original "Ciudad de Dios" of Mary of Jesus and recommend this book, which will surely edify all readers and be the occa sion of great spiritual blessings." Ratisbon, September 29, 1885. )j( IGNATIUS, Bishop of Ratisbon. Notable is the high recommendation of the PrinceArchbishop of Salzburg, Apost. Legate, Primate of Ger many, etc. "According to the decrees of Pope Innocent XI and Clement XI the book known as Ciudad de Dios written by the Venerable Servant of God, Maria de Jesus, may be read by all the faithful." "A number of episcopal approbations, the recommen dations of four renowned universities, namely, of Tou louse, Salamanca, Alcala and Louvain, and of prominent members of different orders, coincide in extolling the above-named work. The learned and pious Cardinal D Aguirre says that he considers all the studies of fifty years of his previous life as of small consequence in com parison with the doctrines he found in this book, which in all things are in harmony with the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Fathers and Councils of the Church. The Ven erable Superior-General of St. Sulpice, Abbe Emery, adds: "Only since I read the revelations of Mary of Agreda do I properly know Jesus and his Holy Mother." APPROBATIONS xxiii "We therefore do not hesitate in granting our epis copal approbation to "Ciudad de Dios" and wish to recommend it to the faithful and especially to our clergy." ^FRANZ ALBERT, Archbishop. Archiepiscopal Chancery, Salzburg. September 12, 1885. A more recent official approbation of "Ciudad de Dios" is from the Bishop of Tarazona, prefacing the new edi tion of 1911-1912. "We, Dr. James Ozoidi y Udave, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See, Bishop of Tarazona, Admin istrator Apostolic of the Diocese of Tudela, etc., etc. Having charged the priest Don Eduardo Royo, chaplain and confessor at the convent of the Immacu late Conception of Agreda, carefully and exactly to compare the manuscript which is to serve as copy for the printing of the new edition of the "City of God" now about to be published by the religious of the abovenamed convent, with the authenticated autograph manuscript of that work there preserved, and hav ing ascertained by a personal revision of a great part of the manuscript that the said priest has diligently and faithfully fulfilled this charge imposed upon him by us: We now therefore certify that this present edition of Ciudad de Dios/ with the exception of a few mere orthographic modifications, is entirely conformable to the autograph of that work as composed and written by the Venerable Mother Mary of Jesus of Agreda. Tarazona, April 7, 1911. [Diocesan Seal] %JAMES, Bishop of Tarazona. xxiv APPROBATIONS Finally follows the official approbation of the Right Reverend Bishop of the Fort Wayne Diocese, where this English translation is published. Rome City, Ind., Aug. 24, 1912. The Rev. George J. Blatter, Dear Rev. Father: My Imprimatur is herewith granted to your English translation of the work entitled Ciudad de Dios. Wish ing you every blessing, I remain, Devotedly in Domino, )JiH. J. ALERDING, Bishop of Fort Wayne. The author has made use of capital letters in the text slightly at variance with common usage, in order to avoid complication and se cure greater clearness. The paragraph numbers are those of the newest Spanish edition of "Ciudad de Dios" in 1912. In the abridg ment they vary slightly. City of God is divided into three Parts and eight Books. Part I contains Books 1 and 2. Part II contains Books 3, 4, 5 and 6. Part III contains Books 7 and 8. As circuмstances compel a serial publi cation of the four volumes, the author judged it best to head these divisions as follow : THE CONCEPTION, Books 1 and 2. THE INCARNATION, Books 3 and 4. THE TRANSFIXION, Books 5 and 6. THE CORONATION, Books 7 and
(http://themostholyrosary.com/mystical-city-vol-i.pdf)
-
Or the modern measurements are wrong. Like I said "She is only 8.2% long, if one trusts modern measurements". I trust her more than I trust Google.
8% is not a question of "only".
You have to be careful not to be too naive about private revelation. There's a reason the Church hasn't so much as beatified her, and that reason is likely due to no wantng to give too much weight to her work.
You can find puffed up "APPROBATIONS" for any such private revelation, half of which is fictional. No, this work wasn't just attacked by the "machinations of ... Jansenists". There's a fair bit of falsehood in that section which shows bias.
Here's you'll find a more balanced view that show both sides of the controversy.
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01229a.htm
-
From Catholic Encyclopedia (link above):
It had already been condemned in Rome, 4 August, 1681, by the Congregation of the Inquisition, and Innocent XI had forbidden the reading of it, but, at the instance of Charles II, suspended execution of the decree for Spain. But Croset's translation transgressed the order, and caused it to be referred to the Sorbonne, 2 May, 1696. According to Hergenröther, Kirchengeschichte (trad. franc., 1892, V, vi, p. 418), it was studied from the 2d to the 14th of July, and thirty-two sessions were held during which 132 doctors spoke. It was condemned 17 July, 102 out of 152 members of the commission voting against the book. It was found that
it gave more weight to the revelations alleged to have been received than to the mystery of the Incarnation; that it adduced new revelations which the Apostles themselves could not have supported; that it applied the term 'adoration' to Mary; that it referred all her graces to the Immaculate Conception; that it attributed to her the government of the Church; that it designated her in every respect the Mother of Mercy and the Mediatrix of Grace, and pretended that St. Ann had not contracted sin in her birth, besides a number of other imaginary and scandalous assertions.
This censure was confirmed on the 1st of October. The Spanish Cardinal Aguirre, although a friend of Bossuet who fully approved the censure, strove to have it annulled, and expressed his opinion that the Sorbonne could easily do so, as their judgment was. based on a bad translation. Bossuet denounced it as "an impious impertinence, and a trick of the devil." He objected to its title, The Divine Life, to its apocryphal stories, its indecent language, and its exaggerated Scotist philosophy. However, although this appreciation is found in Bossuet's works (Œuvres, Versailles, 1817, XXX, pp. 637-640, and XL, pp. 172 and 204-207), it is of questionable authenticity. As to the reproach of indecency, her defenders allege that, although there may be some crudities of expression Which more recent times would not admit, it is absurd to bring such an accusation against one whose sanctity is generally conceded. Near investigations of the book were made in 1729, under Benedict XIII, when her canonization was again urged. On 16 January, 1748, Benedict XIV, in a letter which La Fuente, in his Historia eclesiástica de España, finds "sumamente curiosa", wrote to the General of the Observantines instructing him as to the investigation of the authenticity of the writings, while conceding that the book had received the approbation of the Universities of Salamanca, Alcalá, Toulouse, and Louvain. It had meantime been fiercely assailed by Eusebius Amort, a canon of Pollingen, in 1744, in a work entitled De revelationibus, visionibus, et apparitionibus privatis, regulae tutae, which, though at first imperfectly answered by Mathes, a Spaniards, and by Maier, a Bavarian, to both of whom Amort replied, was subsequently refuted in another work by Mathes, who showed that in eighty places Amort had not understood the Spanish text of Maria de Agreda. With Mathes, in this exculpation, was P. Dalmatius Kich, who published, at Ratisbon, 1750, his Revelationum Agredanarum justa defensio, cuм moderamine inculpatae tutelae. Hergenröther, in his Kirchengeschichte (trad. franc., VI, p. 416 — V. Palmé, Paris, 1892), informs us that the condemnation of the book by the Roman Inquisition, in 1681, was thought to have come from the fact either that, in its publication, the Decree of Urban VIII, of 14 March, 1625, had been disregarded, or because it contained apocryphal stories, and maintained opinions of the Scotist school as Divine revelations. Some blamed the writer for having said that she saw the earth under the form of an egg, and that it was a globe slightly compressed at the two poles, all of which seemed worthy of censure. Others condemned her for exaggerating the devotion to the Blessed Virgin and for obscuring the mystery of the Incarnation. The Spaniards were surprised at the reception the book met with in France, especially as the Spanish Inquisition had given it fourteen years of study before pronouncing in its favor. As noted above, the suspension of the Decree of Innocent XI, condemning the book, was made operative only in Spain, and although Charles II asked to have the permission, to read it extended to the whole of Christendom, Alexander VIII not only refused the petition, but confirmed the Brief of his predecessor. The King made the same request to innocent XII, who did nothing, however, except to institute a commission to examine the reasons alleged by the Court of Spain. The King renewed his appeal more urgently, but the Pope died without having given any decision.
La Fuente, in his Historia eclesiástica de España (V, p. 493), attributes the opposition to the impatience of the Thomists at seeing Scotist doctrines published as revelations, as if to settle various Scholastic controversies in the name of the Blessed Virgin and in the sense of the Franciscans, to whose order Agreda belonged. Moreover, it was alleged that her confessors had tampered with the text, and had interpolated many of the apocryphal stories which were then current, but her most bitter enemies respected her virtues and holy life, and were far from confounding her with the deluded illuminatae of that period. Her works had been put on the Index, but when the Franciscans protested they were accorded satisfaction by being assured that it was a trick of the printer (supercheria), as no condemnation appeared there.
-
You have to be careful not to be too naive about private revelation. There's a reason the Church hasn't so much as beatified her, and that reason is likely due to no wantng to give too much weight to her work.
There are innumerable private revelations, I do not personally even bother to read 99% of them. I have a good eye for errors. Mary of Agreda's book is very good. Fatima is another private revelation that I studied and believe. The Catholic Encyclopedia, I take with a grain of salt, too many errors of the Americanists variety. I trust Mary of Agreda MUCH more than I trust the Catholic Encyclopedia, it is not even close.
Anyhow, what is important is where the rubber meets the road, real life and how we deal with the real world. This debate is all just speculative, anyone can believe anything, and it has little effect on our lives. Like your personal speculation "There's a reason the Church hasn't so much as beatified her, and that reason is likely due to no wantng to give too much weight to her work". It means nothing.
-
See the very beginning the book volume 1 in PDF http://themostholyrosary.com/mystical-city-vol-i.pdf (http://themostholyrosary.com/mystical-city-vol-i.pdf) Here is a snippet:
APPROBATIONS THE first Pope officially to take notice of "Ciudad de Dios" was Pope Innocent XI, who, on July 3, 1686, in response to a series of virulent attacks and machinations of some members of the Sorbonne, known to be Jansenists, issued a breve permitting the publication and reading of the "Ciudad de Dios." Similar decrees were afterward issued by Popes Alexander VIII, Clement IX and Benedict XIII. These decrees were followed by two decrees of the Congregation of Rites, approved by Benedict XIV and Clement XIV, in which the authenticity of "Ciudad de Dios" as extant and writ ten by the Venerable Servant of God, Mary of Jesus, is officially established. The great pope Benedict XIII, when he was archbishop of Benevent, used these revela tions as material for a series of sermons on the Blessed Virgin. On Sept. 26, 1713, the bishop of Ceneda, Italy, objecting to the publication of the "City of God," was peremptorily ordered by the Holy Office to withdraw his objections as interfering with the decree of pope Innocent XI for the universal Church. The process of canonization of Mary of Agreda was promoted by the Spanish bishops and other eminent men of the Church soon after her death in 1666. It has re sulted so far in securing her the title of VenerabUis, thus clearing the way to her beatification, for which, let us hope, God will soon raise a promoter among the many pious and eminent men who hold in esteem her writings xxi xxii APPROBATIONS and have learned of her holy life and of the miracles wrought at her tomb. The Redemptorist Fathers published a new German translation in 1885, which was approved and highly recommended by the Bishop of Ratisbon in the follow ing* terms : "We take pleasure in giving our episcopal approba tion to the annotated translation of the Spanish original "Ciudad de Dios" of Mary of Jesus and recommend this book, which will surely edify all readers and be the occa sion of great spiritual blessings." Ratisbon, September 29, 1885. )j( IGNATIUS, Bishop of Ratisbon. Notable is the high recommendation of the PrinceArchbishop of Salzburg, Apost. Legate, Primate of Ger many, etc. "According to the decrees of Pope Innocent XI and Clement XI the book known as Ciudad de Dios written by the Venerable Servant of God, Maria de Jesus, may be read by all the faithful." "A number of episcopal approbations, the recommen dations of four renowned universities, namely, of Tou louse, Salamanca, Alcala and Louvain, and of prominent members of different orders, coincide in extolling the above-named work. The learned and pious Cardinal D Aguirre says that he considers all the studies of fifty years of his previous life as of small consequence in com parison with the doctrines he found in this book, which in all things are in harmony with the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Fathers and Councils of the Church. The Ven erable Superior-General of St. Sulpice, Abbe Emery, adds: "Only since I read the revelations of Mary of Agreda do I properly know Jesus and his Holy Mother." APPROBATIONS xxiii "We therefore do not hesitate in granting our epis copal approbation to "Ciudad de Dios" and wish to recommend it to the faithful and especially to our clergy." ^FRANZ ALBERT, Archbishop. Archiepiscopal Chancery, Salzburg. September 12, 1885. A more recent official approbation of "Ciudad de Dios" is from the Bishop of Tarazona, prefacing the new edi tion of 1911-1912. "We, Dr. James Ozoidi y Udave, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See, Bishop of Tarazona, Admin istrator Apostolic of the Diocese of Tudela, etc., etc. Having charged the priest Don Eduardo Royo, chaplain and confessor at the convent of the Immacu late Conception of Agreda, carefully and exactly to compare the manuscript which is to serve as copy for the printing of the new edition of the "City of God" now about to be published by the religious of the abovenamed convent, with the authenticated autograph manuscript of that work there preserved, and hav ing ascertained by a personal revision of a great part of the manuscript that the said priest has diligently and faithfully fulfilled this charge imposed upon him by us: We now therefore certify that this present edition of Ciudad de Dios/ with the exception of a few mere orthographic modifications, is entirely conformable to the autograph of that work as composed and written by the Venerable Mother Mary of Jesus of Agreda. Tarazona, April 7, 1911. [Diocesan Seal] %JAMES, Bishop of Tarazona. xxiv APPROBATIONS Finally follows the official approbation of the Right Reverend Bishop of the Fort Wayne Diocese, where this English translation is published. Rome City, Ind., Aug. 24, 1912. The Rev. George J. Blatter, Dear Rev. Father: My Imprimatur is herewith granted to your English translation of the work entitled Ciudad de Dios. Wish ing you every blessing, I remain, Devotedly in Domino, )JiH. J. ALERDING, Bishop of Fort Wayne. The author has made use of capital letters in the text slightly at variance with common usage, in order to avoid complication and se cure greater clearness. The paragraph numbers are those of the newest Spanish edition of "Ciudad de Dios" in 1912. In the abridg ment they vary slightly. City of God is divided into three Parts and eight Books. Part I contains Books 1 and 2. Part II contains Books 3, 4, 5 and 6. Part III contains Books 7 and 8. As circuмstances compel a serial publi cation of the four volumes, the author judged it best to head these divisions as follow : THE CONCEPTION, Books 1 and 2. THE INCARNATION, Books 3 and 4. THE TRANSFIXION, Books 5 and 6. THE CORONATION, Books 7 and
(http://themostholyrosary.com/mystical-city-vol-i.pdf)
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2F08%2F04%2F29%2F080429f0a1fc72a71e025c0e6bd3df43.gif&f=1&nofb=1)
-
Only Sacred Scripture is inspired. As with a lot of these "visions," there's an admixture of maybe real things and then interpretation through the eyes of the visionary. In this particular passage, she prefixes "I say" to the statement, and does not attribute it to Our Lord or Our Lady. I believe that issues with her visions are one reason the Church has hesitated to canonize or even beatify her (as she's only a "Venerable"), or Anne Catherine Emmerich (who was only "beatified" by JP2). There were some contradictions between her account and those of Mary of Agreda. So who really knows?
Both their works are edifying to read, but then women tend to have active imaginations, and these types of things are always produced by women, never men. St. Theresa of Avila, when told that this or that nun was having visions, ordered that she be given more meat in her diet. Many, many details about the life of Our Lord and Our Lady were left out of the Sacred Scriptures, and I find it a bit implausible that God would dictate dozens of volumes of detail to visionaries when the Holy Spirit didn't see fit to inspire that they be written in the first place.
Yeah, I sort of doubt Maria of Agreda....
(https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/B_017_Body1.jpg)
She's only been in-corrupt for 420 years. :popcorn:
Link (https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/B_017_Agreda_5.html)
-
CI has mostly recovered from too many naive Trump- and Q-Fans.
But CI has done and finished since the FE-pest broke out.
-
Yeah, I sort of doubt Maria of Agreda....
(https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/B_017_Body1.jpg)
She's only been in-corrupt for 420 years. :popcorn:
Link (https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/B_017_Agreda_5.html)
I've had a devotion to her for years now. Her works, per the Church, are worthy of belief and LT has done a good job supporting that end, as the Church has had no problem praising the Mystical City of God and affirming its orthodoxy. As for her support of GE: whatever. It doesn't prove anything when you have people like JTolanMedia providing infrared footage of locations hundreds of miles beyond where the supposed "curve" should be.
If you want to know more about Ven. Maria's life, read Maria of Agreda by Marilyn Fedewa. She was a very holy woman who performed a lot of incredible miracles.
https://youtu.be/MyusTdiN_yA
-
Yeah, I sort of doubt Maria of Agreda....
All agreed with her personal sanctity (although her state of incorruption is debated). Issue was with her works and why, despite her sanctity, the Church never so much as beatified her.
Not only is there a question of whether or not her work were tampered with (as they were released only 5 years after her death after they had been in the hands of some Franciscans who may have tampered with the text to promote Scotism ... over Thomism ... with regard to a number of disputed questions) but there are stylistic inconsistencies that suggest tampering. [Same thing, BTW, with Anne Catherine Emmerick, that Brentano's work may have had significant embellishments.]
Then, even in the visions of holy mystics, there are issues with the mystic's interpretation of things that they say, and in the passage quoted above, she prefaces a lot of it with "I say".
There are contradictions between Mary of Agreda and Anne Catherine Emmerich on quite a few details, and the Church has not beatified (much less canonized) either one of them, if you don't count JP2's beatification of Mary of Ageda (which I don't), despite both of their personal holiness being widely acknowledged. Church does not want to give the impression that their visions are inspired work and cause confusion about their relationship with Sacred Scripture. As I said, there are some contradictions between the two, and that might cause a lot of scandal regarding the Church's implicit endorsement of them.
In fact, one of the criticisms from the faculty that first examined and rejected her works was her description (somewhere else than the passage cited) of the earth as being shaped like an egg that's flattened at the edges (the poles) ... which actually contradicts the passage cited by OP.
-
77. "Take notice also, my spouse, that very often I permit and cause differences of opinions among the doctors and teachers. Thus some of them maintain what is true and others, according to their natural disposition, defend what is doubtful. Others still again are permitted to say even what is not true, though not in open contradiction to the veiled truths of faith, which all must hold. Some also teach, what is possible according to their supposition. By this varied light, truth is traced, and the mysteries of faith become more manifest. Doubt serves as a stimulus to the understanding for the investigation of truth. Therefore controversies of the teachers fulfill a proper and holy end. They are also permitted in order, to make it known, that real science dwells in my Church more than in the combined study of all the holy and perfect teachers, and that she can make them wise above the wisdom of the worldly wise; that there is above them One, who is the Prompter of the wise (Wis. 7, 15), namely, Myself; who alone knows all and comprehends all ; who weighs and measures, without ever being measured or comprehended (Wis. 9, 13) ; that men, although they may search my judgments and testimonies ever so much, cannot attain them, unless I give the intelligence and light (Job 32, 8), who am the beginning and the Author of all wisdom and science. I desire that men, in acknowledging all this, give Me praise, exaltation, confession, supremity and glory forever."
-
There are many reasons to read Agreda, but saints are provided views of things that may appear different than intended.
Mystical City of God by Mary of Agreda was condemned by a pope for these reasons.
1. It violated the decree of Pope Urban VIII (March 13, 1625)
2. It narrated apocryphal stories.
3. It presented opinions of the Duns Scotus theological school as divine revelation.
4. Mary of Agreda pictured the earth in the form of an egg, i.e. that the earth has a spherical shape.
5. It exaggerated the cult of Our Lady to the extent of obscuring the great Mystery of the Incarnation.
152 Masters of the Barbonne discussed the Mystical City on thirty-two sessions, July 2-14, 1696.
102 of the 152 Masters voted against the book.
At all events, Blessed Innocent signed the condemnation on June 26, 1681.