I Need Help with Poem of the Man-God

[DreadVandal]

Character Zero:

The arguments against it derive from a campaign against it led by Joseph Cardinal Siri, Archbishop of Genoa, who thought it made Our Lord seem too human. It is true that you see His sacred humanity quite clearly but you are also overwhelmed by His awesome divinity. The story has three phases.

First, the Poem was brought to Pope Pius XII who read it in its entirety and said: “Publish this work as it is. There is no need to give an opinion on its origin, if it be extraordinary or not. Whoever reads it will understand.” Thereafter, it was published throught Italy and other countries in various forms e.g. 14 thinner volumes in Italian in excerpts in magazines and Catholic newspapers, etc. This publication was very popular in Italy (and elsewhere) with clergy and laity. The fact that they were published in Italy with the papal imprimatur is quite exceptional.

The second phase began when two priests, who later, in retirement, admitted that they were modernists, asked Blessed Pope John to put it on the Index 'til the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Pope Benedict’s old bailiwick) could review it. Their problem, and the problem of many modernists, was that it portrayed Our Lord as clearly Divine, which is not acceptable to modernists.

When Pope Paul abolished The Index, it was still “under review”; so there was never an opportunity for it to be taken off The Index, as many books were -which icluded writings of Thomas Aquinas and John of the Cross. Publishers started publishing it again and started publishing more books which derive from it. Its resurgence in popularity bothered Cardinal Siri’s coterie and Siri decided to play a shrewd gambit. He asked Card. Ratzinger whether or not the old principle that one should be cautious about reading books that had been on the Index but had been taken off. Cardinal Ratzinger replied that in most cases, the cautionary practice should still apply, implying that this would be good for pastors dealing with individuals who were “less-well prepared”, i.e. the uneducated or imbalanced.

Siri published this response in his archdiocesan newpaper and the campaign against it resumed. Fr. Mitch Pacwa spoke and wrote against it on EWTN. He dislikes it, doesn’t recommend it and is quite honest about it. I love Fr. Mitch but I disagree with him.

Anyone who reads The Poem can see that it is of supernatural origin, either diabolical or divine. One critic, a French scientist, actually started to write a book to disprove it by using his astronomical computations as contrasted with the considerable number of observations reported by Valtorta. It turned out that her observations were invariably correct. Valtorta also gave place names of many of the towns and villages where Our Lord stopped with his apostles which were unkown to any experts when she died but which have subsequently been excavated exactly where Valtorta said they were. (This book, by Jean Aulagnier, is called The Diary of Jesus, a Day by Day Account of the Life of Jesus based on the writings of Maria Valtorta. It is published by Kolbe Publications.)

Fr. Gabriele Roschini, the greatest Mariologist of the 20th century, reviewed The Poem for its treatment of Mary, and became a believer and promoter of Valtorta. His approbation was very influential at the Holy See and throughout traditional circles in Europe.

Once, when Padre Pio was asked by one of his spiritual daughters for permission to read Valtorta, which had been highly recommended to her, he said "I do not permit you; I command you to read Valtorta."

Do you have valid documentation that Pius XII, John Paul II, Padrio Pio and others approved of this stuff?

 

[Eliza10]

DreadVandal:

Oh good Lord help us and have mercy on us! I did some searching got some info on this poem of the Man God. Its all gnostic heretical nonsense. I would even call it Satanic. Jesus is portrayed as a homosexual who shares physical intimacy with the apostles (kisses and caresses). Mary is called the second born of God. It also seems to suggest that Eve had sex with the snake in the garden and that this was original sin. I was reading some other “revelations” to this crazy woman and she has Jesus telling her that no one understands the truth like she does and that she is part of a spiritual elite. Clearly, its all pagan, gnostic rubbish and will lead souls into the fires of hell. Anathema Sit!

Wow, Dreadvandal, you were are quick to believe what you heard said about this, and quick to pass harsh judgement. You hear one extreme judgemnt on something you have never read, and you’ve made up your mind! I hope you are not judged one day in the same manner you judge here.

If you had read the discussion in this thread as well as the links posted you would see it is not as clear cut as the extreme website you found. Having nearly finished the five volumes, I can tell you that Jesus is in no way a homosexual in the books and Eve doesn’t have sex with the snake. It may be fun to repeat statements like that, but they are not true - even if perpetuating them by repeating them seems to lend them some credibility.

 

[Eliza10]

*Yet another example of a Valtorta supporter splitting hairs to justify their disagreement with Church authorities. Thanks for making my earlier point. *
Mike

Where do you get that I am in disagreement with Church authorities?? Do you mean that some critics of Valtorta are Church authorities?

Because then you, too, are in disagreement with Church Authorities. There are plenty of reputable Church authorities who support Valtorta’s books.

You also wrote:

*"Since Pope Benedict XVI hasn’t renounced any of his earlier decisions and statements, we are morally bound then to take heed of everything he’s said and done as an Apostle and not discount or dismiss any of them…*Many book stores are currently featuring books written by then-Carl Ratzinger that wouldn’t be worth the read according to your logic since he was only a bishop at the time he wrote them. In fact, I guess everything Pope Benedict XVI wrote and said up until he became pope aren’t worth a hill of beans then. It’s a wonder he was ever elected pope!"

And you are taking a broad leap concerning my logic, and its not flattering. Its your logic, not mine.

Some people use discussion forums to put down others’ opinions in order to elevate their own. I hope you are not one of them. The forum should be used for understanding the opinions of others while also stating your own.

 

[Eliza10]

Mike, I am reading over your post in this thread (#14) in order to understand where you are coming from better.

About Eve - you certainly misunderstood what you read. Eve did not have sex with the serpent!

The discussion on Eve is pretty far into the book. It surprises me that you read that far. Or did you skip about, like I did?

Also, did you read it with skepticism, looking to prove it wrong? Because thats how many people approach the Catholic Faith, or Christitanity in general. They look for good reasons not to believe - and they always find what they are looking for.

As far as Medjagorie, you say you don’t trust in it now. I myself don’t feel I know enough to disbeleive it. I see evidence of great and true faith in those who do believe - some well-known, like Bob and Penny Lord, and some not. I would need a strong reason to make a judgement of disbelief on it. I say that beause if it IS of God, I know I do NOT want to disbelieve the things of God.

Did you consider that you have the option to withhold judgement on Valtorta and Medjagorie?

You may have more reasons for rejecting Medjagorie than the one you stated. I just want to comment on the one you stated. You said:

**It seems like many of these “private revelations” encourage disloyalty to Church teaching among the revelations’ enthusiasts. No one need look any further than dcdurel’s postings on this thread to see what I mean. … example given here]
… It is this type of rebellion agianst the Church that I did not want to get caught up in by being taken in by others’ private revelations.

Mike

I think you make harsh misjudgement when you say that private revelations “encourage disloyalty to Church teaching”!

And, also, how unjust off you to implicate dcdurel here. That was not right.

The example you used to support this statemnent makes my point, which is: It is fallible people who may choose disloyalty or other sin - it is not the fault of God’s revelalations.

What is true for the full public revelations is also true for the private revelations, when they are of God.

It seems the adult seer you mentioned was asked a question about a difficult hypothetical situation. He answered faithfully to what he knows is true. But God has not put him in the situation to have to make such a choice. Perhaps God is sparing him, in case he would make the wrong choice. Perhaps when faced with such a choice someday, God would give him the grace to do the right thing, and perhaps He is withholding that grace until it is needed.

So all you have is on him is what he might do in a hypothetical situation.

Perhaps the questioner was much like the Pharisees of Jesus’ day - asking hypothetical questions about difficult situations, hoping to trip Him up.

So I am saying, for myself, personally, I could not make a negative judgment on Medjagorie based on the hypothetical situation you gave.

You accused dcdurel of concluding "…therefore bishops should not be heeded…". But he did not say that. You, too, are not heeding certain bishops who do endorse it. Not all bishops agree on all things.

As far as Cardinal Radzinger banning the book, the story of that Characterzero has laid out plainly. Then you say:

"Would dcdurel be convinced if now-Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed his decision? My guess is that dcdurel would find a way to rationalize away any such reaffirmation… …Dcdurel seems to have an aversion for factual argumentation."

Mike, this is such an unfair and harsh judgement! You are making up a hypothetical situation and forecasting that dcdurel would take the low road. I say you have taken the low road here with the judgements of writers here at this forum. Its not nice.

I don’t see how you can be so quick to pronounce the damning judgement of “satanic lie” on sometihnng which you have not even read through. Pope Pius XII read all ten volumes before he made his judgement. This is a work that many reputable Catholics - like John Haffert, co-founder of the Blue Army, who read through all the volumes many times - finds to be truly of God and without any theological error.

You said: "…since I stopped placing my faith in aparitions and private revelations, and instead placed my faith in the sacraments, the bible and the magisterium, my love for Christ has and continues to grow daily."

You have every right to stop believing in private revelations. If it is causing your faith and love to grow then stick with it! But you also need to bear in mind that our Church allows us to believe in private revelations. Have respect for those of us whose love for Christ is growing in light of these.

 

[DreadVandal]

Eliza10:

Wow, Dreadvandal, you were are quick to believe what you heard said about this, and quick to pass harsh judgement. You hear one extreme judgemnt on something you have never read, and you’ve made up your mind! I hope you are not judged one day in the same manner you judge here.

If you had read the discussion in this thread as well as the links posted you would see it is not as clear cut as the extreme website you found. Having nearly finished the five volumes, I can tell you that Jesus is in no way a homosexual in the books and Eve doesn’t have sex with the snake. It may be fun to repeat statements like that, but they are not true - even if perpetuating them by repeating them seems to lend them some credibility.

The exerpts that I read seemed to suggest as much. But even if they could be interpreted in a less scandalous manner, they are still worded in a very poor and imprudent manner. I don’t see how attributing long kisses on the lips and caresses between Our Lord and the disciples can be anything else but blasphemous.

 

[DreadVandal]

Here is a small excerpt regarding Jesus’ baptism:

“John looks at Him with his eyes sweetened by tears and precedes Jesus towards the bank of the river. Jesus takes off His mantle and tunic, and is left with a kind of pair of short trousers. He then descends into the water, where there is John, who baptises Him, pouring on His head some water from the river by means of a cup, tied to his belt. It looks like a shell or a half pumpkin dried and emptied. Jesus is really the Lamb.”

Are these mystical visions supposed to be literal descriptions of what happened? Because of they are then they are clearly wrong. This is historically inaccurate. While this portrait makes for a beautiful painting, it is not how ancient Jews baptized.

 

[DreadVandal]

Look at these excerpts:

"Page 95 Valtorta’s dream: John smiles and weeps, panting, inflamed by love, relaxing on Jesus’ chest, as if he were exhausted by his ardour. Jesus caresses him, burning with love Himself.

V’s Jesus: “Do not worry, John. No one will be aware of your wedding with the Love. Get dressed, come. We must leave.”

Iscariot looks at Jesus with a shy smile, marked by tears. Jesus caresses him passing by."

“Page 650 V’s James weeps on Jesus’ chest. V’s Jesus: “Come I will kiss you thus, to help you forget the burden of My fate as Man. You will remember alt this at the right moment, as you asked. I kiss your lips that will have to repeat My words to the people of Israel.” They remain embraced for a long time and James seems to doze off in the joy of God’s kisses.”

You can read more of this blasphemy here:

jloughnan.tripod.com/4mchomo.htm

 

[Character_Zero]

DreadVandal:

Here is a small excerpt regarding Jesus’ baptism:

“John looks at Him with his eyes sweetened by tears and precedes Jesus towards the bank of the river. Jesus takes off His mantle and tunic, and is left with a kind of pair of short trousers. He then descends into the water, where there is John, who baptises Him, pouring on His head some water from the river by means of a cup, tied to his belt. It looks like a shell or a half pumpkin dried and emptied. Jesus is really the Lamb.”

Are these mystical visions supposed to be literal descriptions of what happened? Because of they are then they are clearly wrong. This is historically inaccurate. While this portrait makes for a beautiful painting, it is not how ancient Jews baptized.

A word about some distinctions: There are three general categories of supernatural phenomena to understand when dealing with private revelations: Visions, Allocutions and Apparitions. Visions and Allocutions are in the mind of the seer, either in images (visions) or words (allocutions). Apparitions are actually seen with the eyes, as happened at Fatima and Lourdes. Apparitions are very clear events. Visions and Allocutions are less so since they are filtered through the filter of pre-existing images and vocabulary and thus contain a subjective element which may distort the visionary’s report.

Valtorta’s Poem is primarily Apparitions (in which she was taken to the scene, which is the opposite of normal) but she also has sections that are clearly Allocutions, usually introduced by some indication that Our Lord is speaking specifically to her. These latter clearly reflect Valtorta’s cultural and educational limitations, although they are still accurate and honest reports. She only had a high school education and lived a very holy life. She had been severely beaten by a mob of Fascist thugs and was an invalid for the rest of her life. She wrote down what had been revealed to her on the orders of her Spiritual Director, to whom she was always obedient. Her Cause has been introduced at the Congregation for Causes.

Maria died in 1961 at the age of 65. With ecclesiastical permission, her mortal remains are now venerated in the Capitular Chapel in the Grand Cloister of the Basilica of the Most Holy Annunciation, in Florence, Italy. Chiseled on her tomb are the words: “DIVINARUM RERUM SCRIPTRIX” (Writer of Divine Things).

 

[Character_Zero]

DreadVandal:

Do you have valid documentation that Pius XII, John Paul II, Padrio Pio and others approved of this stuff?

Did you read my earlier post?

My uncle is a priest, he used to live at the Vatican, and he was good friends with a lot of the cardinals. His bishop, Bishop Hnilica, was friends with Pope John Paul the Great, and that is how my uncle found this out.
So, I suppose you could say it is purely anecdotal, and I don’t expect opponents of the book to believe me, but I know that it is true.
Anyway, yes, it does not surprise me one bit that they would be devoted to these books.

Frankly, from your attitude in this thread, your insults, and the painfully obvious fact that you have not read these books, and have only gleaned propaganda from anti-Valtorta websites (which quite honestly reminds me of anti-Catholic tactics in their attacks against the Church… scanning Jack Chick or Bart Brewer sites) - I do not think it is possible that any documentation I found for you would be considered “valid” in your mind. Your mind already seems made up on this issue.

Pope Pius XII ordered for it to be published in 1948. Feb. 26, 1948 he said: “Publish this work as it is. There is no need to give an opinion about its origin, whether it be extraordinary or not. Who reads it will understand.” Three Servant of Mary (OSM) priests witnessed the Holy Father saying this, and the Vatican has never denied it. The meeting is clearly documented on the first page of the February 27, 1948 edition of L’Osservatore Romano, where the three OSM priests are specifically named for a private audience with the Pope. I think that if they had lied about what the Pope said, we would have heard something about that. Do we have an audio recording of that meeting? No. But the facts speak for themselves.

The works have been given 4 Imprimaturs by bishops to be translated in India (Bishop Sooser Pakiam M. enthusiastically granted it his Imprimatur, March 17, 1993); the approval of Archbishop George H. Pearce in 1987; and the full endorsement of Bishop Roman Danylak,in 2001. As I’ve also said, Fr. Gabriele Roschini, the most prominent Mariologist of today, also gives it his hearty approval.

Pope John XXIII abolished the Index of Forbidden Books, and permitted the publishing of prophecies without requiring an Imprimatur, as long as they do not contain moral or doctrinal error.

Pope John Paul the Great has never made comments in public about it, but he did grant permission for the books to be read and distributed while he was pope. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (at thee time headed by Cardinal Ratzinger) has implicitly acknowledged that the work is free of moral and doctrinal error, otherwise they would never give permission for printing & distribution.

 

[Eliza10]

Just the title page of that link tells you something about that writer. Valtorta is Medjagorie’s gospel?

Commenting on the above quote you pulled from that offensive website as “proof”: Yes, taking this passage completely out of context can possibly get one to imagine all kinds of sexual images. But doing so is dishonest (I know you do this out of ignorance, having never read the book), since clearly, in context, it is not at all what is happening.

God is love. Jesus was loving. We also know that different cultures have different standards for touching. In our highly charged sexually-immorral culture, any form of touching is suspect. If you look at the touching in Jesus’ time and culture in the light of ours, one might misread into it. Unless you read the whole thing, (or just any of those passages in their entire context), you cannot see the obvious truth that it is not sexual.

So, yes, quotes pulled out of context can make it appear sexually exciting, and by repeating the most exciting quotes you can find from such a provocative website here, you can get some people to think you have found some real dirt!

The quote of from the excerpt on John’s “wedding of love” had to do with a prayer retreat he took, and his “wedding vow” of love to God - similar to the vows nuns take, and the ecstatic intimacy he experienced we can see also in the lives of Saints, like St. Theresa of Avila. It was too much for the others to understand at the time, and John, like the Saints, wanted to keep the expereince between him and God.

You should know that initimacy with God is not sexual intimacy! There are similarities, but it is different. The website author you quote tries to change the meaning of intimacy here, making it into something blasphemous. Why do people do that? They prefer to be accusors rather than beleivers it seems.

That website takes tons of qutoes out of context and piles them together one after another to make it appear as if Valtorta has presented something that she hasn’t.

I really take offense to that. It particularly bothers me as a former Evangelical who was taught all kinds of bad things about Catholic beliefs in the very same manner that the author of this website uses to denounce Valtorta.

I’m familiar with that routine. Perhaps you are not.

Here are a couple of examples of “scandelous” quotes from Valtorta’s books that that website author pulls, to make my point. I could discuss many but that webwriter is not worth the time:

Page 462 Valtorta’s John: “Yes, it is Master” who has taken his habitual posture with his arm round the Master’s neck and his head reclined on His shoulder.

We know from scripture that John, “the Disciple whom Jesus loved” liked to recline with his head resting on Jesus’ chest. Doesn’t the author of that webste know this? So why does he find this proof of homosexuality?

Page 490 Valtorta’s dream: The Zealot, on whose chest Jesus’ head is resting, bends to kiss His hair saying: “We love You so much!”

The author seems to find something tantilizing about kissing someones head or hair. God is love. Jesus was love. He was Lord, Master, Father to his Disciples. Why does the author find a problem with these fatherly, loving gestures?

I am thoroughtly disgusted with that website you quoted. I don’t see how you would want to associate with it any way. I am sorry, Dreadvandal, that you fell for the author’s slanderous suggestions and accusations, and that you yourself think you have discovered some blaspheme.

Don’t you want to be sure, before you call blaspheme something that reputable Catholic authorities say is of God?

 

[Eliza10]

Character Zero:

Frankly, from your attitude in this thread, your insults, and the painfully obvious fact that you have not read these books, and have only gleaned propaganda from anti-Valtorta websites (which quite honestly reminds me of anti-Catholic tactics in their attacks against the Church… scanning Jack Chick or Bart Brewer sites) - I do not think it is possible that any documentation I found for you would be considered “valid” in your mind. Your mind already seems made up on this issue.
.

I am glad I am not the only one having a problem with the attitude portrayed by the detractors on this thread. Yes, that offensive website that DreadVandal linked here stinks in the the very same way that Jack Chick and Bart Brewer websites do! I agree completely!

 

[adrift]

Character Zero:

I will take the opinions of Mother Theresa, Padre Pio, and Pope John Paul the Great over Mitch Pacwa any day.

They all read this book with great devotion, though it will never really be publicized because there are some elements in the Church who are being deceived about it.

May I have your source for this information?

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Excerpts from this web page:

Some ten to fifteen years ago I acquired a forty-eight page document, critical of “Poem”, written by a Salesian Brother who was then stationed in San Francisco. The last two paragraphs comprise the comments of his proof-reader, and of Bro. James, S.D.B. himself:

Proofreader for this critique: ‘If I had not promised to proof read this for you, I would have stopped reading . I do not know if I can contain my last meal. Very disturbing! Dangerously blasphemous material. Scary that many persons will believe this. Valtorta’s Jesus is homosexual!’

Bro. James: “I will critique Volume V when it is available. Poem of the Man-God is so demonic that without a special Grace from our Lord Jesus, we would be trapped in seemingly harmless statements by Valtorta’s Jesus, but they enclose lies and heresy, contrary to Teachings of our One, Holy, Catholic Church. ‘The gates of hell shall not prevail against Me: My Church!’”
Theological Errors

Book 1 pp. 7 claims Mary can be called the second-born of the Father. Christ was not born. He was begotten from all eternity. There is a big difference. Mary was conceived in the mind of the Father from all eternity, but She was born in the normal manner. She cannot be called the second-born. Page 30 claims Eve’s temptation consisted in arousing her sexual desires as the serpent sensuously caressed her. Eve’s sin was not sexual. It was pride leading to editing the commandments of God, and then to disobedience. Concupiscence is the result, not the cause. Valtorta calls Mary second to Peter with regards to ecclesiastical hierarchy in Book 4, pp. 240. The hierarchy of the Church are servants of Jesus and Mary. Mary could never be a servant, and therefore, could never be in the hierarchy.

And this…

In 1993 Cardinal Ratzinger said the books cannot be considered supernatural in origin. He said that the best that could be said of them is that they were a badly fictionalized life of Jesus.

Caritas of Birmingham, the American promoters of “The Poem” wrote a pleading letter to Cardinal Ratzinger on July 21, 1992 [more on that later]. Cardinal Ratzinger felt that the bishop of Birmingham, Alabama should answer the letter, and in 1993 Bishop Raymond J. Boland restated that they cannot be considered supernatural in origin."

Rome condemned the books in 1949, 1959, 1960,1985, twice in 1993. What more do people want?

From an excerpt in the “more on that later” section on Caritas and Poem of the Man-God.

Cardinal Ratzinger did not think the letter worthy of a personal response, since “Caritas” was under the theological jurisdiction of the Bishop of Birmingham. It is Bishop Boland’s responsibility to see to it that his children keep the faith and obey the Church. However, his letter of response was so ambiguous and stupid that it caused more confusion than help. He left “Caritas” the impression that if they did not claim any supernatural influence in the “Poem” it could be sold as simply the imagination of the writer, and therefore outside the jurisdiction of the Church. This is fine, if you overlook that fact that the book states on every page, “Jesus said = Jesus told me - Mary said - Mary told me that, etc.” Even if these references were removed, everyone knows private revelation is claimed. They continue to publish the books as they were written.

People will believe what they want to believe. More than enough red-flags have been raised by authorities on this material warrant assent to the Holy See on the matter.

Then again, all to many people feel they have the theological background (probably through osmosis) to make determinations on what is sound and not all on their own. Our decisions to read or not to read need to be in light of the Magisterium, not in the absence of her position. It is highly dangerous and prideful to press forward in this material simply because people think they know better than Holy Mother Church.

As far as other non-related arguments go, they do not apply to the subject and that is probably why they are not answered. Stick to the specific topic.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

I will add further, that all it takes is a single heretical statement for the church to declare something as, “not of divine origin”. If it is not of divine origin, then it is of some other origin - human or diabolical.

When we have something of divine origin, time will eventually weed out all that could potentially be heretical. In cases such as Padre Pio and Sr. Faustina, it was far better to have their cases challenged.

Padre Pio was fully obedient in not saying Holy Mass for what? 15 years? Obedience is another test the Church looks for because Satan cannot obey. Obedience is a gateway through which only the Holy Spirit may pass and it is an obstruction to the Angel of Darkness. For this reason, it is used as “criteria”. Sometimes those authorities who cause delays such as those with Padre Pio and Sr. Faustina play right into the hands of this particular criteria. Jesus predicted the delay with Sr. Faustina and it was prudent for the faithful to follow the authorities at the time. There is a good reason for this:

Another piece of criteria often used is the obedience and behavior of followers. I have to run off to a funeral, but later will find a 1978 document from the CDF on discerning apparitions and personal revelations.

conyers.org/conyers/19780225-Church_Norms.htm

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/maryd8.htm

 

[pnewton]

From This Rock:

catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9410ltrs.asp

Fr. Mitch Pacwa and Fr. Philip Pavich have spoken and written against the Poem. The former emphasizes its theological errors, the latter the author’s psychological disabilities. (Valtorta reportedly suffered from echolalia during her last years–generally a consequence of earlier psychotic conditions.)…Lastly, is it possible that bishops, priests, and laymen who oppose the Poem are in error? Yes, in theory. But I’ll place my bets with Frs. Pacwa and Pavich, with Cardinal Ratzinger, with those who ran the now-defunct Index, and with my own instincts.

 

[Eliza10]

Just to maintain balance, and show there are strong staements by strongly credible experts on BOTH sides of this issue, here are some excerpt from this website:
valtorta.org/the_poem_of_the_man_god_reviews_and_critiques.asp

**THE POEM OF THE MAN-GOD **

Athoritative Testimonials

His Holiness Pope Pius XlI, February 26 1948
"Publish this work as it is. there is no need to give an opinion about its origin, whether it be extraordinary or not. Who reads it, will understand." The names of the three Servite priests were listed the next day in l’Osservatore Romano as having had the private audience with the pope: Fr. R. Migliorini (Maria’s spiritual director), Fr. C. Berti, professor of Dogmatic and Sacramental Theology at Marianum, Pontifical Faculty of Theology, in Rome, and Fr. A. Cecchin, Prior of the Servites International College. Fr Peter Mary Rookey, a well known healing priest based in the Chicago area, had a conversation with Fr. Cecchin in the 1990’s who recalled that the pope did indeed order the work to be published, but that the pope also advised them to try to find a bishop who would give it an Imprimatur.

Archbishop Alfonso Carinci, Secretary of the Congregation of the Sacred Rites (1946):
***" There is nothing therein which is contrary to the Gospel. Rather, this work, a good complement to the Gospel, contributes towards a better understanding of its meaning." ***

Fr. Dreyfus, of the French Biblical and Archeological School, Jerusalem (1986)
"I was greatly impressed on finding in Maria Valtorta’s work the names of at least six or seven towns, which are absent from the Old and New Testaments. These names are known but to a few specialists, and through non-biblical sources… …] Now, how could she have known these names, if not through the revelations she claims that she had?"

John Haffert, author, (1995)
"I have the 10 volumes of The Poem of the Men-God in Italian and French. It is the most wonderful work I have ever read and I consider it a blessing of God. I’m in my seventies. And in my entire life, among all the books I’ve read, The Poem of the Man-God is the one that has done me the most good in my spiritual life."

Msgr. Ugo Lattanzi, dean of the Faculty of Theology of the Lateran Pontifical University, adviser to the Holy Office (1951)
***“The author could not have written such an abundant amount of material without being under the influence of a supernatural power.” ***

Fr. Agostino Bea (future Cardinal), Jesuit, rector of the Pontifical Biblical Institute and advisor to the Holy Office (1952)
***“I have read in typed manuscripts many of the books written by Maria Valtorta …] As far as exegesis is concerned, I did not find any errors in the parts which I examined.” ***

Fr, Marco Giraudo, 0.P. Commissioner of the Holy Office in 1961, to Fr, Berti, representing the Order of the Servants of Mary, and made responsible for her writings by Maria Vallorta herself (1961)
***“You have our complete approval to continue the publication of this second edition of Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God” ***

Sister Monica Foltier, Cincinnati, Ohio (1987)
***“lt is fantastic. I could hardly let it out of my hands. After I finished it once, I immediately began to read it again. It is going to have a terrific impact on those who wish to live a more religious life.” ***

Jean Aulagnier, specialist in ancient calendars, author of a book on Valtorta’s work (1995)
"Having established a scientific chronolgy of all events and occurrences in Maria Valtorta’s work, I cannot but say it remains unexplainable otherwise than by divine intervention." Wayne Weible, International reporter and Christian preacher, South Carolina (1987)
***“I must tell you that I consider this book to be the greatest book I have ever read outside of the holy scriptures. It is a full amplification of the gospel stories of Jesus. I am forever indebted to Maria [Valtorta] for this tremendous work. I am promoting it as the best source for details of the life of Christ and His BIessed Mother. Everywhere I speak I recommend it.” ***Roulie Stadelmen, Great Modowa, N.J, (1987)
"The Poem of the Man-God, I LOVE IT. My only regret is that I have not read it before."

 

[Eliza10]

More from the above website:

David Ottman, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada (1987)
***“The Poem of the Man-God should be put into the hands of as many sincere people as possible …] It is a wonderful book and I have been so deeply touched by the simple beauty of the account of Our Lord’s Life.” ***

Msgr. Macchi. private secretary of Pope Paul VI, to Fr. C. M. Berti OSM, in an hour long interview (1963)
***“When His Holiness (Paul VI) was Archbishop of Milan, he read one of the books of The Poem of the Man-God. He told me how he appreciated it, and had me send the complete work to the Library of the diocesan Seminary.” ***

Msgr. Gianfranco Nolli, director of the Vatican Museum, author (1971)
***“Whoever reads The Poem of the Man-God is favored with spiritual blessing and inner peace.” ***

Fr. Gabriel M. Roschini, professor at “Marianum”, Pontifical Faculty of Theology in Rome, famous mariologist, author of 130 books, and advisor to the Holy Office (1972)
***“I must candidly admit that the Mariology found in Maria Valtorta’s writings, whether published or not, has been for me a real discovery. No other Marian writing, not even the sum total of all the writings I have read and studied were able to give me as clear, as lively, as complete, as luminous, or as fascinating an image, both simple and sublime, of Mary, God’s masterpiece.” ***

Dr, Vittorio Tredici, geologist and mineralogist, Italy (1952)
"I wish to underline the author’s unexplainably precise knowledge of Palestine in its panoramic, topographic, geological and mineralogical aspects."

Fr. A.S. Rosso, ofm, missionary, professor, editor (1974)
***“I always find something new in it, even after reading it eight times.” ***

Prof, Fabrizio Braccini, University of Palermo (1979)
***“What constitutes the finish line for others, so to speak, is, on the contrary Maria Valtorta’s ascetic starting point.” ***

Fr. Gabriel Allegre, Servant of God, OFM, , Macao/Hong-Kong (1970). Father Gabriel was the first to transtlate the entire Bible into Chinese. He started the first Biblical institute in China. The title “Servant of God” shows that this pre-eminent scripture scholar has passed the first test in the process of becoming a recognized saint of the Roman Catholic Church. Mandarin Chinese is the most spoken language in the world.
"The finger of God is here. As for theological justification of a book as convincing, as charismatic, as extraordinary even from a merely human point of view, as is Maria Valtorta’s POEM OF THE MAN-GOD, I find it in St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians 14,6 where he writes: Take me, for instance brothers, of what use could I be to you, if I were to come to you speaking tongues, but without revelation or knowledge, prophecy or doctrine?"

H.E. George H. Pearce, s.m., former Archbishop of Suva, Fiji, now active in Providence, Rhode Island (1987)
***"***I first came in contact with the work of Maria Valtorta in 1979 …] I find it tremendously inspiring. It is impossible for me to imagine that anyone could read this tremendous work with an open mind and not be convinced that its author can be no one but the Holy Spirit of God."

**Fr. Gino C. Violini, Calgary Alberta, Canada (1987)
“lt is the gospel proclaimed with new vigor and detail. It is a powerful light beamed on the person of Jesus Christ and his eternal teachings. Indeed this work appears to be the only true vision-and-word revelation on the gospels ever granted to mankind.” **

Rev. E. Vitchkoski, M. I. C., Thompson, Connecticut (1987)
***“I have read the story of the Adoration of the Shepherds… at least 8 times… to individuals, small groups, and even a group of 24. The reaction is amazing. All are touched profoundly. …] All are enthusiastic. I believe that this is the age to know more about Our Lord and Lady. The time is ripe and the people ready and thirsting to know and love.” ***Fr. Brendan O’Keefe, St Louis, Missouri (1987)
***“lt seemed to have a mystifying effect on me bringing a deep inner peace.” ***

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Just like with the Medjugorje issue, people must ask themselves who has jurisdiction? All kinds of people with scholarly backgrounds may have opinions on something, but that does not mean they have jurisdiction to make or clarify a decision. People cite Fr. Ralph Laurentin on Medjugorje and he is simply a theologian and one without jurisdiction. However, the same people will completely disregard and throw mud at the local Ordinary of Mostar for not supporting Medjugorje and HE is the one with jurisdiction. And, HE applied the 1978 criteria provided by the Holy See on discerning apparitions revealing just how out-of-bounds Medjugorje is. You cannot judge on good fruits alone and attacking a bishop or other competent authority is a bad fruit - period.

This is the letter I spoke of, above, that addresses the concerns raised by the founder of Caritas in Alabama, Terry Colafrancesco. He wrote to the Holy See looking for support. Instead, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote to the man who had jurisdiction - Mr. Colafrancesco’s Bishop to explain to the man, the Holy See’s position.

Mr.Terry Colafrancesco May 11, 1993
Caritas of Birmingham
P.O. Box 120
4647 Highway 280 East
Birmingham, AL 35242

Dear Mr. Colafrancesco:

His Eminence, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, in a letter which I received from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith this week, has asked me to inform you about the position of the Church regarding the writings of Maria Valtorta called The Poem of the Man-God.

The Cardinal wants you to know that the Congregation in the past has issued certain “Notes” on this subject for the guidance of the faithful and these were published in L’Osservatore Romano. [The CDF is now referring us, the faithful to that L’Osservatore Romano piece previously quoted in this long thread]

In the light of the recent recurrance [sic] of interest in the work, the Congregation has come to the conclusion that a further clarification to the “Notes” previously issued is now in order. Thus it has directed a particular request to the Italian Bishops’ Conference to contact the publishing house which is concerned with the distribution of the writings in Italy in order to see to it that in any future reissue of the work “it might be clearly indicated from the very first page that the ‘visions’ and ‘dictations’ referred to in it are simply the literary forms used by the author to narrate in her own way the life of Jesus. They cannot be considered supernatural in origin**.”**

The implications of this most recent decision of the Holy See (Prot.N. 144/58 i, dated April 17, 1993) are obvious insofar as those who use, publish or sell the writings in question should know and clearly express the judgment of the Holy See as indcated in the underlined section of my previous paragraph.

Hoping that this letter will serve as an authoritative response to the question which you addressed to His Eminence Cardinal Ratzinger in your letter of July 21, 1992, I am, Sincerly in Christ,
(Signed)
Most Rev. Raymond J. Boland, D.D.
Bishop of Birmingham in Alabama

Now, it is clear that as late as 1993, the Church has spoken quite authoritatively that the “visions” and “dictations” are not of supernatural origin. If this is the case, then of what origin are they, if not human or diabolical?

While even private revelation which has been confirmed to be of supernatural origin (i.e. apparitions at Lourdes, Fatima, for example), we are not required to assent to them. However, whenever the Church states clearly that something is not of supernatural or divine origin, we are seriously erring in believing that, in this case, the visions and dictations are real.

Even if one humbly submits their will to that of the Church, but reads these texts anyway, places themselves at serious risk of believing something that has been shot down.

This information has been taken from this website.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

I won’t use the silly, childish oversized text to try to shout back a response and making the thread into an electronic billboard. I think normal size and using bold and color to emphasize key points is adequate without insulting anyone’s intelligence (or harm their eyes). Forgive me for saying so, but such large text is the equivalent of an e-tantrum.

Here is the original letter sent from Cardinal Ratzinger back in the 80s. With the wording that Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI used below, I think it would be foolish for any Catholic to take this thing [Poem of the Man-God] and read it. Unlike many in the long list of supporters for this work, the CDF does have authority and jurisdiction.

SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

Prot. N. 144/85 Roma, 31 January 1985

Most Reverend Eminence,

With a letter of 18 May [1984], Father …] asked of this Sacred Congregation a clarification about the writings of Maria Valtorta, collected under the title of “The Poem of the Man-God”, and if there exists any evaluation of the Church’s Magisterium on the publication in question with the corresponding bibliographical reference.

**On this subject I have the honor of expressing to Your Eminence – you will judge the opportuneness of informing the Father …] – that in fact the Work in question was placed on the Index on 16 December 1959 and defined by “L’Osservatore Romano” of 6 January 1960, as “A Badly Novelized Life of Jesus.” The provisions of the Decree were re-published with an explicit note again in L’Ossservatore Romano of 1 December 1961, as can be reviewed in the documentation herewith enclosed. **

Since some have subsequently held that after the abrogation of the Index, the printing and diffusion of the Work in question is licit, L’Osservatore Romano (15 June 1966) had presented what was published in A.A.S. (1966) Acta Apostolicae Sedis]: **that, although abolished, the “Index” retained “all its moral value,” for which [reason] the diffusion and recommendation of a Work is not held to be opportune when its condemnation was not taken superficially, but after weighing its purposes, to the end of neutralizing the damages which such a publication could bring to the more unprepared faithful. **

With gratitude for your every kind arrangement, I profit by this occasion to confirm my sense of profound esteem

For Your Most Reverend Eminence,
Most Devotedly,
(signed) Joseph Card. Ratzinger (with enclosure)

 

[Eliza10]

Lux_et_veritas:

I won’t use the silly, childish oversized text to try to shout back a response and making the thread into an electronic billboard. I think normal size and using bold and color to emphasize key points is adequate without insulting anyone’s intelligence (or harm their eyes). Forgive me for saying so, but such large text is the equivalent of an e-tantrum.

Diane, I copied the text from the website whose address I included, as i assume yuou also copied your text from somewhere? That was the size the text came in. I don’t know how to change it to a different size. There was definately no tantrum involved here!