**CATHERINE OF GENOA, Saint.** — Born in Genoa in 1447, posthumously, to Giacomo Fieschi and Francesca di Negro; died there on 14 (or 15) September 1510.
At barely thirteen years of age, she had sought in vain to be admitted to the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie, where her sister Limbania resided; instead, three years later she was given in marriage to Giuliano Adorno, a choleric and prodigal man. After the first five years of marriage spent in deep melancholy, she wished to emerge from her isolation and participate in worldly life, until the interior illumination she received on 22 March 1473 during sacramental confession, and the vision of Jesus streaming with blood, which determined her swift conversion. She subjected herself to extraordinary penances, which, in her own words, “seemed like things that would kill one,” while at the same time devoting herself to the service of the sick, including lepers, first in their homes with the Dames of Mercy, and later in hospitals. Soon thereafter (1476), Giuliano himself was induced to live with her in chastity and, later, to become a Franciscan tertiary. Though there is no documentary proof that she herself was a tertiary, apart from tradition and the logical force of inference, this might be indicated by the mention of two tunics of Franciscan cloth found in the inventory of objects discovered at her death; Franciscan traits in her—quite apart from intellectual affinities—are also her love for creatures, testified to in the *Vita* at chapter 42, and her joyful conception of death as “sweet, gentle, gracious, beautiful, rich, strong, worthy” (ibid., ch. 20).
In 1482, she moved with her husband into quarters adjacent to the Pammatone Hospital (in the adjoining church of Santa Caterina in Portoria her intact body is preserved), and in 1489 she was elected rector for the female ward. While attending a tertiary afflicted with plague, she contracted the disease in 1493. Four years later, she was widowed. Thereafter, until her death, she suffered from an infirmity that the most illustrious physicians declared to be of a supernatural nature: one of its characteristics was the excessive heat that manifested itself externally, especially in the cardiac region, accompanied by an unquenchable thirst and other exceptional phenomena, which might suggest neurotic symptoms were it not for the study of her doctrine and the knowledge of her beneficent activity, leading instead to a judgment of profound admiration for the acumen and culture, rectitude and spiritual vigor of this noblewoman of the Renaissance, to whom her contemporaries gave the name of “seraphic” and posterity that of “doctor of Purgatory.” She was canonized by Clement XII on 16 June 1737. Feast day: 22 March.
**Doctrine.** — Catherine’s thought unfolds around the following pillars:
a) the goodness of God, which manifests itself even in Hell, and constitutes the secret of His justice—“so much so that the name most frequently used by her is ‘God is Love’”;
b) the abomination of sin, not only mortal but also venial, as an irreconcilable antithesis to God and an obstacle to the soul’s reception of its glorification;
c) the importance of free will, which contains within itself eternal life and death, and cannot be coerced by any creature, nor even by God, but is only disposed along the paths of love through illuminations;
d) the weight of self-love, tenacious in its perfidy, a thief and hypocrite that knows how to do evil under the guise of good, whence arises the absolute necessity of freeing oneself from it through deliberate or at least resigned mortification of the will and senses, in order to attain the total annihilation of all that is not “pure, upright, and clean love.” The theme of pure love, illustrated with varied and ingenious imagery, may be said to be the alpha and omega of the spirituality of “Madonna Caterinetta.”
**Purgatory.** — The dispossession of the self, in all its faculties, for the conquest of the sovereignty of the spiritual soul (Catherine distinguishes subtly between soul and spirit) must not be the concern only of militant souls, but also the rule for those in purgation. As has generally been noted, there is a very close connection between the statements in her treatment of the state of souls in Purgatory and her own experiences, especially of passive purification, which rendered her a most refined and effective interpreter of that otherworldly realm. For this reason, she does not dwell on the crass representation of the pains of sense, though she does not exclude them, but ranges instead within the elevated sphere of the pain of loss, which constitutes the most perfect purgation—the loving fire that gradually consumes the rust of sin and is fed by the pain of the deferred fulfillment of desire, while the soul nonetheless rejoices, because in Purgatory it enacts the divine will to the point that, even had it the power, it would not diminish its sufferings, by which it satisfies the debt contracted.
It is precisely in this, as well as in duration, that Purgatory differs from Hell; the souls in purgation find a tempering in their suffering in the desire to identify themselves with the will of God, whereas the damned are exacerbated by rebellion. The sublime indifference of the souls in purgation is reflected in their attitude regarding suffrages, which they do not crave, though they are owed, by justice and charity, by the survivors. The pain may be shortened in time, but not diminished in intensity; indeed, it increases the closer one approaches its end, because the heightened knowledge of God makes the desire more vehement. Nor does this disturb their peace, for the souls “remain unmoved by all that God gives them.”
And this is the apex of the transforming union, already attained on earth by the great mystic and described by her in bold expressions that recall the teaching and the cry of St. Paul: “I find myself (as in the *Vita*, ch. 22), by God’s grace, in a contentment without nourishment, an love without fear—so much so that I fear never lacking it; faith seems to me entirely lost, hope dead; because what I once believed and hoped now seems to me certain and held fast. I no longer see union, because I neither know nor can see anything except Him alone, without me... I am almost always outside of myself.” Or again: “My self is God, and I know nothing else but my own God...” (ibid., ch. 14).
**Her Writings.** — Against the traditional attribution to St. Catherine of the *Treatise on Purgatory* and the *Dialogue between the Soul, the Body, Self-Love, the Spirit, Humanity, and God*, in 1908 F. von Hügel argued that the two works, together with the *Vita*, were the result of a slow elaboration carried out between 1495 and 1551, that is, from an initial draft written by Ettore Vernazza, her spiritual son, to the book by L. Sertorius, *Katharina von Genoa. Lebendbild und geistige Gestalt. Ihre Werke*, Munich 1939, based on the volume by F. von Hügel, *The Mystical Element of Religion as Studied in St. Catherine of Genoa and Her Friends*, London 1908. A fundamental discussion of the writings of the Saint is that of Fr. Umile himself, a specialist in the matter: *L’Opus catharinianum et ses auteurs*, in *Revue d’ascétique et de mystique*, 16 (1932), pp. 351–80. Notable contributions on particular topics were promoted in Genoa by the Capuchin friars, editors of the journal *Vita cateriniana* (1929–1934) and of biographies and texts, among which are to be noted: *Il Trattato del Purgatorio*, with an introduction by Fr. Valeriano da Finalmarina, Genoa 1929; Fr. Teodosio da Voltri, *S. C. da Genova, la grande santa dell’amore*, ibid. 1929; Fr. Gabriele da Pantazion, *Vita di S. C. Fieschi Adorno con ricordi e documenti*, ibid. 1929; M. Castiglione-Humani, *C. Fieschi Adorno*, in *Freie Francisco*, Rome 1941, pp. 199–204; E. Lucatello, *La patrona degli ospedali e la patrona delle infermiere*, ibid. 1944.
BIBL.:
F. von Hügel, *The Mystical Element of Religion as Studied in St. Catherine of Genoa and Her Friends*, London 1908.
L. Sertorius, *Katharina von Genoa. Lebendbild und geistige Gestalt. Ihre Werke*, Munich 1939.
Fr. Umile, *L’Opus catharinianum et ses auteurs*, in *Revue d’ascétique et de mystique*, 16 (1932), pp. 351–80.