The Gospel as Revealed to Me - Maria Valtorta

***continue from previous post:

Maria Valtorta’s work or parts of her work have also received imprimaturs from multiple bishops, and Bishop Roman Danylak, S.T.L., J.U.D., issued a letter of endorsement of the English translation of The Poem of the Man-God. (Note that he has a License in Sacred Theology and Doctorates in both Canon Law and Civil Law from the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome). The conclusion of his letter states: “This major work of Maria Valtorta, The Poem of the Man-God, is in perfect consonance with the canonical Gospels, with the traditions and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.” Bishop Roman Danylak also wrote:

“I have studied The Poem in depth, not only in its English translation, but in the original Italian edition with the critical notes of Fr. Berti. I affirm their theological soundness, and I welcome the scholarship of Fr. Berti and his critical apparatus to the Italian edition of the works. I have further studied in their original Italian the Quaderni or The Notebooks of Maria Valtorta for the years from 1943 to 1950. And I want to affirm the theological orthodoxy of the writings of Maria Valtorta.”​

Furthermore, if Maria Valtorta’s work contained an error against faith or morals or was condemned by the Church, most faithful Catholics would be inclined to think that the Magisterium wouldn’t beatify or canonize individuals who have been known to publicly read and support her work such as Fr. Gabriel Allegra, O.F.M. (beatified in 2012), who wrote extensively in favor of her writings; Mother Maria Inés Teresa of the Most Blessed Sacrament (beatified in 2012), who avidly read Valtorta’s work and sent her writings to her 35 missionary houses around the world; and Mother Teresa of Calcutta (canonized in 2016), about whom Fr. Leo Maasburg has testified that she carried Valtorta’s work with her during her travels, and that she read it and recommended him also to read it. There is also evidence that Padre Pio of Pietrelcina (canonized in 2002), Pope Pius XII (declared Venerable in 2009), and George La Pira (declared a Servant of God in the 1980s) also approved of Maria Valtorta’s work.

As far as a more thorough approval beyond permission to publish her writings and the imprimaturs that various bishops have given to her work or to anthologies of her work, the Church has not yet investigated Maria Valtorta’s person and writings and ever pronounced a statement in a canonical or ecclesiastical form of an official and universally binding decree of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as to whether it is of supernatural origin; and so Catholics are free to form their own opinion as to the supernatural character of her writings. Many bishops, renowned Catholic theologians, prominent Catholic lay faithful, and even a beatified person have publicly affirmed their belief in the supernatural character of her writings, and they and all Catholics are entirely at liberty to do so.

 

Thank you, Deacon Ed, for sharing your own experience of the goodness and the power of the Poem. I fully endorse your opinion through my own experience of reading it.

 

Thank you Kyle, you are so right

We are not pushing this Work with any particular label. We are just sharing how powerful it is and how much we recommend others to read it. Whether they read it as "pious fiction" or as "private revelation", it's truly not the core of the issue.

I just would like people to READ IT, as Pope Pius XII, Padre Pio, and others said.

 

I tried reading it for one brief spell and it made me feel oogy. Enough said. I kept my response short and sweet here.
To me, it’s TMI and I distrust that. I rely on my discernment.

 

Thank you WCWTS for your thorough research on this treasure of a work.

 

Thanks for your clarification, HH. We are all entitled to our own likes and dislikes.
That is very different from declaring a book harmful to readers, and declaring "disobedient' to Catholics who read it.

 

I’m not sure, even after all you posted, that it is not harmful. You have misunderstood me.
You are pushing your agenda to see if I will go back on what I originally claimed.
I urge prudence and avoidance of Maria Valtorta. We had a long thread on this subject in the past.
I answered your post that you would like people to read it. It’s dangerous. It has nothing to do with being entitled to our likes and dislikes.
Obviously you are not going to change your mind. I will not, either, but as this is a public forum, I maintain that there are errors in this book, and that the Holy has been corrupted. End of my claim.

 

Of course you are entitled to your own opinion and I appreciate the clarification so that people reading this thread can discern its value.
But that is NOT the official opinion of the Church -as it was being stated.
And is not, either, the opinion of a long list of holy people -including canonized saints- and Church authorities, cardinals, bishops, theologians etc. as shown in some quotes and links earlier in this thread



You can see the example of Saint Mother Teresa who not only recommended the reading of the Poem but she herself carried a volume with her in her travels, together with the Bible and her Breviary.

I will transcribe here what the picture says for the sake of non members who can't read it in a picture:

According to Fr. Leo Maasburg, National Director of the Pontifical Mission Societies in Austria and Mother Teresa's confessor for 4 years, she always traveled with three books: The Bible, her Breviary, and a third book. At Fr. Leo's question, she told him that it was a book by Maria Valtorta. Upon his inquiries about the content of it, she told him, "read it" and simply repeated that.

Interviewed in 2009 by Christian Magazine on the advice of Mother Teresa on the work of Maria Valtorta, Fr. Leo Maasburg confirmed: "For what is the attitude of Mother Teresa about Valtorta, I clearly remember her positive reaction without recalling more details". (Extract from Christian Magazine, No. 218 of 03/15/2009, page 5).​

There is a fotocopy of Fr. Leo's declaration, signed on April 25, 2016, here.

 

It’s not approved. Read what ewtn says about it. I can’t link from my phone. As I said before, it’s not approved. That is all I am going to say about it. Go ahead and post another flurry.

 

Yet these books were the bed side books for two known saints: St. Pope John Paul and St. Mother Teresa of Calcutta. That's a good enough endorsement for me to read them.

 

Approval by association is a weak argument. Let the work rise or fall on it's own merits.

And besides, let's be honest - those "approvals" are hearsay and nothing more. If JPII really truly wanted to lend any sort of credence/approval to the book then he would have certainly done so. The fact of the matter is that the opposite happened - his CDF chief - future Pope Benedict - urged extreme caution once again and stated it could not be considered supernatural .

There are saintly figures who urge extreme caution that is documented. Those have been posted time and time again.

Let's also remember that saints endorsing heretical thinking has happened before (i.e. St, Bernard arguing against the Immaculate Conception before it was proclaimed as dogma). A Saint is proclaimed a saint for the virtue and holiness they displayed in life, not for discernment of private revelations.

Father Mitch Pacwa has some very convincing arguments after he studied the poem. He's very orthodox and is no slouch (2 PHDs and fluent in 13 language I believe) . Instead of claiming this or that saint - which is exactly what people who have no real argument do (so, so many false visionaries try to do this), let's discuss the objections.

Let me ask you this - has the book been obedient to the CDF request to clearly indicate from the very first page that the 'visions' and 'dictations' are simply literary forms and cannot be considered supernatural in origin?

 

Well said, Frodo. There are sections of the book that clearly are not in line with Catholic teaching. One of the things that sticks in my mind is that Eve sinned sexually after eating the forbidden fruit.
That’s truly appalling and not in Catholic teaching at all.
The thing is, I can’t un-read that. And it was just one example used by EWTN to demonstrate the fact that this book should be avoided. I’m still appalled several hours later after reading it.

 

I’m not sure why that’s appalling, it parallels the virgin birth...unless you’re taking it too literally; lusting after the flesh of the fruit is what is meant, methinks.

http://www.bardstown.com/~brchrys/OriginalSin.html

 

It was graphic. Why don’t you look it up on ewtn yourself. I’m finished.

 

You quite clearly aren’t finished; you do this every time she is brought up.

 

How quaint of you to notice. I was responding to your comment. You’re being uncharitable.

 

Lol

 

Ah you edited that after I responded. Wow