Marie d'Agréda and Maria Valtorta

Venerable Mary of Ágreda (1602-1665)

María Jesús de Ágreda (1602-1665) is not the first seer to receive visions of the Gospel. However, she is the first to receive such comprehensive visions (relayed in approximately 1,800 pages), even though entire sections of the Public Life of Jesus are not mentioned. She thus inaugurates the monumental visions later received by the Blessed Anne-Catherine Emmerich (Anna Katharina Emmerick; 1774-1824) and Maria Valtorta (1897-1961). Unfortunately, the late writing (thirty-three years apart) of her visions very likely allowed personal memories to interfere with the initial vision, which she herself acknowledges. While the historical part of the accounts may have been influenced, it remains that the theological value of her work, innovative in several areas, makes it a reference book in revealed lives.

Her life

María Fernandez Coronel, better known as María Jesús de Ágreda, was born in Ágreda, Province of Soria (Castile and León), on April 2, 1602, into a family of four children, of Francisco Coronel and Catalina Arana (Catherine de Arana). The Province of Soria is one of the most deserted in Spain.

Her entire existence took place in her hometown. On January 13, 1619, at just over sixteen years old, she entered a Franciscan order: the Order of the Immaculate Conception (Discalced Conceptionists, under the jurisdiction of the Friars Minor). She took the habit in her family home (bequeathed to be transformed into a convent), with her mother and sister, while her father and two brothers entered another Franciscan order, the Brothers of the Blessed Sacrament. It was indeed before her father, who had become a Franciscan friar, that she pronounced her vows on February 2, 1620. She never left the cloister until her death.

Her early years of convent life were marked by many temptations and extraordinary difficulties, such as mystical external phenomena that attracted the curiosity of those around her (ecstasies, levitations, bilocations…). She asked the Lord to deliver her from these, and she obtained it.

The second phase of her life began when she was elected abbess in 1627; she was twenty-five years old. She was re-elected until her death, except for the three years from 1652 to 1655, at her request. During her thirty-five years of governance, she maintained the life and regular observance and prospered the goods of the community. She built a new convent inaugurated in 1633; at the same time, she notably increased the revenues to the point of supporting thirty-three nuns, instead of the twelve she directed at the beginning of her abbacy.

She had as spiritual advisors two Franciscan theologians and scholars: Friar Francisco Andrés de la Torre, from 1623 to 1647, and Friar Andrés de Fuenmayor, from 1650 until her death.

The era of visions

The year of her election (1627, when she was 25), Mary of Ágreda received her visions. Tormented inwardly, she waited ten years before writing her revelations. An occasional confessor made her burn her writings because "women should not write in the holy Church". however, the ordinary confessor of the community ordered her to rewrite it. She did so, from December 8, 1655 to May 6, 1660, shortly before her death, overcoming revulsions, conflicts, and intense temptations.

Her trial by the Spanish Inquisition first took place in 1635. It concerned what was said about the nun. At that time, they limited themselves to questioning various witnesses and informants. But in 1649, the trial resumed, and Mary of Ágreda participated directly. On January 18, 1650, her interrogation began at the convent of Ágreda and lasted until January 29, six hours a day except Sunday. Mary's answers satisfied the qualifiers of the Holy Office; they approved Mary's holiness and knowledge, and the Grand Inquisitor confirmed their approval. Her epistolary relations, begun in 1643, with King Philip IV of Spain must have played a role in the verdict, but this does not lessen the stress caused by an appearance before the Spanish Inquisition, which still felt the fires of the Reconquista period.

Mary of Ágreda died on May 24, 1665, Pentecost Day. Such a crowd surrounded the monastery to venerate her remains that the Governor had to use force to clear it. Following the miracles due to her intercession, her cause was introduced on November 21, 1671, and declared Venerable by decree of Pope Clement X on September 2, 1679. He introduced her cause of beatification shortly thereafter.

Her work

Her work was one of the longest religious controversies of the late 17th century and lasted until the mid-18th century. Considering the controversies raised, her beatification process remained pending.

Three historical writings are particularly significant of Mary of Ágreda’s fruitful life:

• La Mistica Ciudad de Dios (The Mystical City of God), her main work started in 1637,
• her correspondence with Philip IV of Spain, begun in 1643,
• and the report of the personal examination carried out by the tribunal of the Spanish Inquisition in January 1650.

The Mystical City of God

The eight books of the Mystica Ciudad de Dios, rewritten thirty-three years after the original visions, follow the order of the life of the Virgin Mary. The work comprises three parts:

1. from the predestination of the Virgin to the Incarnation (Books 1-2),
2. from the Incarnation to the Lord's Ascension (Books 3-6),
3. from the Ascension to the Assumption and the crowning of Mary in heaven (Books 7-8).

Each part is:

• preceded by an introduction,
• followed, from chapter 16 of the first book, by a "Doctrina que me dio la Reina del cielo" (Instruction that the Queen of Heaven gave me).

Each chapter describes an episode in the life of Jesus (Books 3 to 6) and Mary (Books 1 to 8). However, the subject of this history remains Mary, the Mystical City in whom God dwells and delights.

The second version, the only one we know, is probably enriched with more important spiritual teachings than the first:

15. "I wrote a second time by the will of the Lord and by the order of obedience, this divine history because, the first time, the light by which I knew its mysteries was so abundant, and my incapacity so great, that the tongue could not express all things, nor the terms or the lightness of the pen be sufficient to declare them. Therefore, I left some things out, and today I find myself, with the help of time and the new knowledge I have received, more disposed to write them; and yet I will always omit much of what is revealed to me and what I have known; for it is absolutely impossible to say everything in such abundance. Besides this reason, the Lord made me know another: that the first time I wrote, the care of the material and arrangement of this work occupied me greatly, and then temptations and fears were so great, the storms that fought and agitated me so excessive that, fearing to seem rash for having undertaken such a difficult and important work, I resolved to burn all I had written; and I believe this was not without a singular permission of the Lord, because, in the troubles I was, my soul was not disposed to receive all the suitable preparations that the Most High wanted to provide me so that I might write, engraving His Doctrine in me; and to oblige me later to write it as He now commands, which can be inferred from the following event (Introduction, § 15)."

Style

It is not a doctrinal and theological exposition (although it contains much theology and spiritual doctrine). The narration of episodes in the lives of Jesus and Mary alternates with teachings given by Mary for a spiritual and universal scope.

But the vicissitudes of the narration of the visions, notably the long interval between their writing and the initial visions, as well as the psychological pressures to which Mary of Ágreda was subjected, have introduced elements of the era, as Jesus later confirmed to Maria Valtorta.

Some desire to know more about the enigma of Maria de Jesús de Ágreda. What spoiled the truly holy work of Maria de Ágreda: the haste of men [the intervention of her director]. It attracted attention and resentments. It forced this enlightened woman to revise the descriptive part. Regarding the instructive part, the Spirit provided, and her teaching remains the same. But what were the consequences of this revision? Great suffering, fatigue, and troubles for Maria de Ágreda, as well as the corruption of the magnificent original work.

Anyone who describes, every prophet, is a slave to their time. When they write and see (I speak of those who write by God's will), they do so describing perfectly, even against their own way of seeing, conforming to their era. They are surprised, for example, not to see this or that, or to notice objects and forms of life different from those of their time, but they describe them as they see them. However, if they have to repeat a whole series of visions no longer in front of them, after a long interval, they constantly fall back into their own personality and habits of their time. Those who come later are shocked by some overly human traces in the description of divinely originating imagery.

Thus, in her descriptive part, Maria de Ágreda fell into the flourishes of Spanish humanism: she makes the life of my Mother in her holy poverty, her sublime creation on earth, and her reign in heaven a jumble of elements of the resplendent pomp of the Spanish court in its most pompous era. This Spanish tendency, and Spanish of her time, as well as the suggestions of others—who, as good Spaniards of that time, tended to see, dream, think, transpose into eternity and the supernatural what was temporal and human—all this pushed her to surround the descriptions with flashy flourishes that damage the work without honoring God.

It is a grave error to impose certain revisions! The human spirit! Both perfect and very imperfect, it can repeat nothing without error, especially in such a work and of such scope. These errors are certainly involuntary, but they spoil what was perfect because illuminated by God. (The Notebooks of 1944 – September 24, p. 568).

Hence three faults:

• artificially re-composed language,
• an abundance of superstructures,
• with an excess of the marvelous.

However, the clear, methodical, almost "Cartesian" exposition in its demonstration captivates its reader. It presents a life of Mary proper to teaching and spirituality. In Mary of Ágreda, the "catecheses" of the Virgin Mary stand out especially. They carry a deep and fruitful spiritual meaning that the Virgin Mary explains to Mary of Ágreda:

In past centuries some of the mysteries concerning me have been successively revealed; but the fullness of this light has been communicated to you, [...] so that men may seek their remedy and eternal salvation through my intercession.

The text adopts a narrative, clear, and methodical genre. The authoritative situation in which Mary of Ágreda lived all her life and the era in which she wrote give a particular tone to her style. The French translation, 1715, dates her work, which is nevertheless easy to read.

The sufferings of its author

Mary of Ágreda explains herself about the torment that was the elaboration of this work:

The Most High crucified my heart throughout my life with a continual fear I cannot express, caused by the uncertainty I was in, not knowing if I was on the right path, if I was losing His friendship or if I was in His grace.

The testimony of her last confessor, Fr. Fuenmayor, recorded by the Inquisition tribunal, confirms that the composition of this work "was a painful passion and a cross for its author".

The theological value of the work

In Mary of Ágreda's work, the doctrine relative to the prerogatives and functions of the Mother of God is inspired by Scripture, notably the Apocalypse of John. Julio Campos, in the encyclopedic notice devoted to her, defines Mary de Ágreda’s work in terms that apply perfectly to the work of Maria Valtorta:

The text adopts a narrative genre; it is not a doctrinal and theological exposition, although there is much theology and spiritual Doctrine. This narration overflows the framework of history and ventures into the transcendent domain of time and space.

He concludes:

Among Mary of Ágreda’s teachings on the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption, the Co-Redemption, universal mediation, royalty, on the role of mother and mistress the Virgin Mother fulfills towards the Church, some were later confirmed dogmatically.

Without any doubt, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between what belongs to private revelation and what is the fruit of knowledge. Mary of Ágreda sometimes says she cannot well discern one from the other. But she is very aware of the clarity, more or less great, of the lights she receives.

The controversy

The theological battle triggered around Mary de Ágreda's work lasted almost a century. It was condemned by the Roman Inquisition (1681), but approved by the Spanish Inquisition (1686) following theological commissions working on the work since the Venerable's death (1665). The kings of Spain obtained from Pope Innocent XI then Innocent XII that the publication of the decree of prohibition be suspended where it had not been proclaimed. Quickly, the controversy crystallized around the Immaculate Conception, between those for whom Mary was Most Holy for having resisted sin, and those who, like Mary of Ágreda, said so because she was preserved from original sin.

The Sorbonne fired broadsides against Mary of Ágreda's affirmation while the universities of the Spanish empire defended it tooth and nail. At the court of Versailles, Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, bishop of Meaux and Eusèbe Amort in Germany, were fierce opponents of Mary of Ágreda's work.

The rest is known: the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was proclaimed by Pius IX in 1854 and confirmed by the Marian Apparitions at Lourdes four years later. The battle was hard: popes succeeded one another to defend Mary of Ágreda’s work without success, because the weight of the Magisterium does not hold in the balance of private revelations. Sometimes Heaven must come to reinforce.

1. Clement X (1670-1676) introduced the cause of Mary of Ágreda and lifted the defense made by the Congregation of the Index.
2. Alexander VII (1689-1691) declared that the work could be read with full safety: "licitly and without penalty."
3. Clement XI (1700-1721) ordered that her work be completely removed from the Index of Prohibited Books where it had been placed.
4. Clement XIII (1758-1769) declared valid the apostolic process opened 95 years earlier in Spain.
5. Benedict XIII (1724-1730) ordered the beatification to proceed and ruled that the work should no longer be subject to further examination.
6. Benedict XIV (Lambertini) (1740-1758) was very interested in the work and reserved judgment that would recognize the authenticity of the text (May 7, 1757), but left a paper found after his death soon after, requesting that the cause of the Venerable be left pending for fear of seeing an endless controversy between opponents and supporters of the Immaculate Conception—a dogma proclaimed a century later and confirmed by the Lourdes Apparitions!
7. Clement XIV (1769-1774), who supported the resumption of the beatification cause, preferred to leave it there.

In the 19th century, Dom Prosper Guéranger, abbot of Solesmes, was a great defender of Mary of Ágreda. This restorer of the Benedictine order in France is the author notably of The Liturgical Year, a reference work for several generations, and promoter of the liturgical movement which was "like a passage of the Spirit in the Church," said Pius XII in 1956 in his closing speech of the international congress in Assisi.

In the last of his conferences on Mary of Ágreda (the 28th), he settles accounts, with real relief, with the Sorbonne which had virulently attacked the Immaculate Conception promoted by The Mystical City. Strangely, it is the same subject that recently returned in charge Against Maria Valtorta, but the Liturgy cannot be "heretical"!

The letters exchanged with Philip IV of Spain

The Cartas del Rey nuestro Señor para Sor María de Jesùs y sus Respuestas form 614 letters published in two volumes. They have been studied under historical, political, and spiritual aspects as witnesses of the Spanish Golden Age. Mary of Ágreda, in a letter preserved at the Ágreda convent, gives their origin.

"The king [...] passed through this place and entered our convent on July 10, 1643, and commanded me to write to him; I obeyed."

Perhaps this monarch sought consolation through the misfortunes that afflicted his reign.

Bibliography

Besides the sources cited in the article, note concerning the works of Mary of Ágreda:

• Mistica Ciudad de Dios. First Spanish edition in 1670. This work has led to 168 various translations. The French translation by Fr. Thomas Croset, "The Mystical City of God", dates from 1715. It has recently been reissued in facsimile by Téqui editions. It can be consulted online on the monastic library website.
• Divine life of the Most Holy Virgin Mary. Summary of The Mystical City of God, made by Canon Victor Viala. In facsimile by Téqui editions.
• Cartas del Rey nuestro Señor para Sor María Jesús y sus Respuestas. Two volumes, Ágreda convent. Partial first French edition: La S. Marie d'Agréda et Philippe IV… Unpublished correspondence – Manuscript by A. Germond de Lavigne, National Library, Paris 1855 (42 letters).
• The bilocations of Sister María Jesùs de Ágreda {es} - Account of the trial and of the bilocations she was responsible for.

In-depth research on God, faith, religious Doctrine.

Preliminary stage to canonization recognizing that a deceased person can be called Blessed because of their holiness.

In a Christian sense, study concerning God and divine things in the light of Revelation.

Manifestation of the Holy Spirit after the Bible to a person or particular group. It is individual and relative.

Authority in matters of faith and morals exercised over the Catholic faithful by the pope and all bishops in communion with the pope.