Poem of the Man-God

[Rising_Suns]

Saint Faustina’s writings were placed on the Index the same day as Maria Valtorta’s,

Also placed on the Index was Victor Hugo* (Les Miserables, The Hunchback of Notre Dame)*, Alexander Dumas (Three Musketeers, Count of Monte Cristo), Flaubert, Milton, Stendahl, Lauerence Sterne, and a number of french philosphers. For whatever reason, however, Hitler’s hate filled theology Mein Kempf was not.

It is also interesting to note that Padre Pio was also denounced by the Holy Office, under Cardinal Ottaviani, and virtually placed under “house arrest”. This occured in the 1961, just two years after Saint Faustina and Maria Valtorta were placed on the Index (Padre Pio was also denounced once in the early 1930’s).

-Davide

 

[Joysong]

How do you find Jesus’ statement false and misleading? He said in John 8:17 that “It is written in the Law, the testimony of two witnesses is true”. That is a clear succinct statement, there isn’t room for play in it. So how can the written testimony of three outstanding Priest’s be false? They testified that Pope Pius XII said: “Publish this work as it is; there is no need to say whether it is of supernatural origin, who reads it will understand." Feb. 26, 1948.

Jesus’s words are not false, but your application of them to fit your viewpoint is false. As I stated earlier, it would never stand in today’s court of law, so to quote what held in days of Christ is irrelevant for this age. Look it up. In law, that which is presented to court as verbal evidence of an oral agreement without it being in writing, will be thrown out by the judge. To cite testimony of these priests as evidence of a Pope’s verbal consent without a document to support it, will not be upheld as proof.

Do you see how your reasoning is fallacious? When the Holy Office did not have this evidenciary proof of the Pope’s permission and therefore denied the printing of the book, where is the obedience these priests owed to the Magisterium? What right did that give them to take matters in their own hands and disobey? You will not see that example in Padre Pio, St. Faustina, or any other true saint when they were given an order to desist by those in lawful authority.

Saint Faustina’s writings were placed on the Index the same day as Maria Valtorta’s, by Pope John XXIII as he took Office, at the request of Cardinal Ottaviani. They can now be read at Divine Mercy Sunday Mass because the Index was abolished.

Indeed the Diary may be read, but it is not for the reason you put forth, because of the Index being abolished. That is untrue. The reason for the ban was due to a faulty translation. When the Diary was corrected with St. Faustina’s true meaning, the reason for the ban was no longer valid. The Diary now contains both an imprimatur and nihil obstat, which is not the case for the Poem.

Insight, I have lost all patience in continuing this conversation because you always manage to come back with another jab of falsehood to twist what has been stated time and again. You have proven beyond a doubt that you are highly competent to research your own points of view, but couldn’t seem to find out a simple thing about St. Faustina’s work. Why is that, I ask.

Time to shake the dust and leave you to your own musings, which I believe are fixated.

 

[Joysong]

Rising Suns:

Joysong,
He did authorize it, which has the same implication as if he wrote it personally. Lets also be mindful of the numerous other actions that Paul VI took in favor of the Poem…

You have not produced any proof that he did authorize it, nor can you know this with any amount of certainty. Papal secretaries handle a voluminous amount of correspondence, and for all we know, the pope never saw this. What one may observe through the link you provided and the assertions you personally made as a result of reading it, is that Paul VI approved the Poem, when all that occurred was his secretary gave a blessing for the labor.

What is highly deceptive to an unsuspecting reader is that the letter is placed in the book as though Paul VI signed it and approved the Poem. A casual observer would not know the difference and think it was true. This is a very grave matter that I believe should be brought to the attention of the Holy See.

All the more reason for the faithful to run from this book.

 

[adrift]

I conducted further research on the blonde hair blue eye descriptions of Jesus in the Talmuds.

If you have done research, than you must know that there is a debate on if the Talmud refers to Jesus Christ. Yeshu ( Jesus) was a common name and very well may refer to another.

 

[adrift]

Adrift,
It was Cardinal Ottaviani who made that remark. From the webiste I linked to above;

17

EWTN

In 1959 when the “Poem” was put on the Index of Forbidden Books, it was described as “a badly fictionalized life of Christ” (L’Osservatore Romano, quoted by Cardinal Ratzinger in a letter to Cardinal Siri, 31 January 1985). In 1966 when the Index was abolished many thought this meant the works listed on it could be read. Cardinal Ratzinger addressed this issue with respect to the “Poem of the Man-God,” in the aforementioned Letter saying,

"After the dissolution of the Index, when some people thought the printing and distribution of the work was permitted, people were reminded again in 'LOsservatore Romano' (June 15, 1966) that, as was published in the 'Acta Apostolicae Sedis' (1966), the Index retains its moral force despite its dissolution. A decision against distributing and recommending a work, which has not beeen condemned lightly, may be reversed, but only after profound changes that neutralize the harm which such a publication could bring forth among the ordinary faithful."

In 1993 Bishop Boland of Birmingham, AL wrote the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith about “Poem” on behalf of an inquirer. Cardinal Ratzinger responded by letter, which the bishop then quoted in his response to the person, who shared it with us. The response noted that because of continuing interest in the books the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had requested the Italian Bishops Conference to ask the publisher (who as I noted never in the past has complied with Roman decisions) to have a disclaimer printed in the volumes that “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.” Whether this has been done I don’t know.

Perhaps they both made the comment.
To see the entire comment use the link and it is under general questions. So according to them this comment was made in 1985 by Cardinal Ratzinger

 

[Insight]

Who had a mother named Mary (and a virgin), claimed to be the Messiah and died on cross at 33yrs old the same time as Jesus did?

 

[adrift]

Adrift,

[1948] Pope Pius XII: Granted permission to publish

It is dubious that he granted such permission.

1. Only those who promoted it claim it. If you were in a court of law, you would need neutral witnesses. Witnesses who have a vested interest would not carry much weight.
2. The Pope would be going against Canon Law ( please don’t raise the argument that he could do it. The question is why would he do it. Was it ever done before or since?)
3. There is no evidence that the Pope ever mentioned the book to anyone after his audience with these priest. Strange if he made the statement he was purported to have made.
4. I doubt if the Pope was unaware that Two commissioners of the Holy Office, Msgr. Giovanni Pepe and Father Berruti, O.P., condemned the “Poem,” ordering Berti to hand over every copy and sign an agreement not to publish it. He did nothing which is tacit approval of the condemnation.

[1966] Pope Paul VI: Abrogated the Canon (1385) that was the legal principle for the inclusion on the Index

I get the impression that you believe the Index was abolished for the sake of promoting this work. I see little value in when the index was abolished in regards to this work. The fact remains that the book has never been declared worthy of belief.

[1992] Pope John Paul II: Beatifies an outspoken supporter of Maria Valtorta

This proves nothing. I believe that the person was not beatified but declared Venerable. Even if he were to be made a saint, that would not say anything about the poem. There are saints whose works have been proven untrue.

Thus, we observe three popes, whether directly or indirectly, supporting the writings of Maria Valtorta. The action of the one pope who signed the decree of condemnation, Pope John XXIII, was directly overturned by his successor Pope Paul VI just seven years later (as was the legal principle for the condemnation).

We have no Popes who have said that this is worthy of belief. Again it seems to be trying to link the removal of the index as an approval of the book. That is an illogical conclusion.

 

[adrift]

Nor has it said that it is fiction, as you claim. You are pitting one statement made by Cardinal Ratzinger–in a private letter–against many forms of favorable evidence from popes, and direct support from various bishops. Remember, at the time Cardinal Ratzinger’s principal source of information was his predecessor, Cardinal Ottaviani, who never even oversaw a proper investigation into the life of the visionary. Maria Valorta was never even questioned at the time, yet one of the criterion for judging alleged apparitions is a “full and proper investigation”. You are resting the blunt of your argument on Cardinal Ratzinger’s statement in a private letter–a statement that was made with incomplete facts at the time.

-Davide

I really had to laugh at this one. The web site you quote use to have the following

[1993] Cardinal Ratzinger responds to Bishop Boland of Birmingham, AL in a letter about the book: The response noted that because of continuing interest in the books the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had requested the Italian Bishops Conference to ask the publisher to have a disclaimer printed in the volumes that “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.”

Now they are retreating from it. I can understand why. It had impressed me that the website printed something that undermined their promotion. I am less impressed now. Tell me how do you know what Cardinal Ratzinger’s principal source was? How do you know what his knowledge is? How do you know he had incomplete facts. He actually is in a better position of facts than we are.
No where is there any evidence that the Church considers the book worthy of belief. Nor is there evidence that it is considered authentic but there is opposing evidence.

 

[adrift]

If I may make a secondary comment. After reading through this thread, I think it is important that it remain sober and reasoned, otherwise it will be closed like the other threads have been.

I am specifically speaking to Valtorta promoters in this thread, since I am one myself, and feel a certain obligation to them. We do not want to play into the stereotypes give to followers of this apparition. As promoters of the Poem, one must never cross the line into fanaticism. If the Lord wants Maria Valtorta’s work to be brought to light, then it will happen. One must be at peace about this, and stick to sound reason, and sober discussion, always submissive to the Church.

This is why I believe it is especially important to avoid impugning the character of Church officials, such as Cardinal Ottaviani.

Many blessings,

-Davide

This is something I have not been able to get across. It had made no sense to me to attack a dead priest. Nor to attack those who do not agree. It does not prove the book true. I am surprised this thread has not been closed as promotion of an unapproved apparition is against forum rules.

 

[adrift]

Who had a mother named Mary (and a virgin), claimed to be the Messiah and died on cross at 33yrs old the same time as Jesus did?

I assume that this is about my comment on the Talmud.

First off the Talmud would not have claimed Mary was a virgin. The Talmud claims the opposite. It claims that Jesus’ father was a Roman soldier.

However this article deals with the controversy

 

[Insight]

“The Scroll also states that an elder Essene named Joseph became Yeshai’s ‘religious father’ and guardian.”

geocities.com/nephilimnot/yeshua_ben_pandera.html

"Insults Against Mary, Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus’ mother was a whore: “She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters.”

talmudblasphemy.com/

Both the Jews and the Christian endeavor to disassociate Yeshu from Jesus. The Jews are embarrassed over the insults, and the Christians are offended.

 

[adrift]

“The Scroll also states that an elder Essene named Joseph became Yeshai’s ‘religious father’ and guardian.”

geocities.com/nephilimnot/yeshua_ben_pandera.html

".

The Mehgheehlla Scroll Discovered near Lake Tiberius in 1882 supports this theory . Yeshai and Judas ben Halachmee were the illegitimate twins of a young girl called Stadea. They were taken in, raised and educated by the religious order of Essenes . One of the boys became a student of a Rabbi Hillel , and the other became the leader of the Essenes. The Scroll also states that an elder Essene named Joseph became Yeshai’s ‘religious father’ and guardian. Further research on Hillel reveals that he was a carpenter.

 

[Insight]

“Gamaliel’s Interview” it states concerning Jesus (Yeshua) appearance:

“I asked him to describe this person to me, so that I might know him if I should meet him. He said: ‘If you ever meet him [Yeshua] you will know him. While he is nothing but a man, there is something about him that distinguishes him from every other man. He is the picture of his mother, only he has not her smooth, round face. His hair is a little more golden than hers, though it is as much from sunburn as anything else. He is tall, and his shoulders are a little drooped; his visage is thin and of a swarthy complexion, though this is from exposure. His eyes are large and a soft blue, and rather dull and heavy…’ This Jew [Nazarite] is convinced that he is the Messiah of the world. …this was the same person that was born of the virgin in Bethlehem some twenty-six years before…”

thenazareneway.com/likeness_of_our_saviour.htm

 

[Joysong]

Adrift:

I am surprised this thread has not been closed as promotion of an unapproved apparition is against forum rules.

Rising_Suns is very active on this forum as well, and began a thread innocently asking for “opinions.” However, when people began to share their views, he seized the opportunity to further his agenda and discount their ideas with his so-called true rendition and actual promotion.

 

[Klara_Collins]

Due to the fact that this thread has ventured *repeatedly *into banned territory according to CAF’s Forum Rules (the promotion of unapproved private revelation, the discussion of Medjugorje, and uncharitable dialogue) it is now Closed.

Thank you for your participation,
Klara Collins