The Gospel as Revealed to Me - Maria Valtorta

Well, you know we all have our relationships with our God, which also include our mentors in the faith that God puts in our life. Some personal companions and others through holy writings. What is important is to note, that many mystical writings, many alleged messengers are not going to be "approved" by the church, because this is not what the church does. The church does not govern our spiritual discernment on every point and turn. God gave all of us his Holy Spirit and the gifts and the fruits of his Spirit in order to deepen and direct our journey and not two people are given the same gifts and blessings along the way, many times, because of own doings. Some seem to not accept this. Some feel they are the arbiters and judge of what is good/holy and what is not. Most of the canonized saints were victims of things they did and taught as being wrong, even ones who later were vindicated, such as all those who laughed and mocked St. Bernadette, as she dug in the mud, put it on her face as she was told to dig dirt. They all left and then God raised up the holy water of Lourdes where she was obedient. Same for the children at Fatima who were mocked and ridiculed for what they were doing and saying that wasn't "approved" by the church. So, it is today. Some believe what others cannot. So nothing is new under the sun. Some have been given the grace to believe in what other will reject. One day we will all be judged and know what faith we have accepted as a child and what we have ridiculed that was of God's plan. Maria Valtorta is under the same scrutiny now that many others throughout history have been. Be at peace.

 

This is a young priest speaking about the place that M. V. reading takes in his spiritual journey.
The video is in French with English subtitles -very easy to follow.



In the video that I posted earlier, the same young priest, Fr. Benjamin, responds to the question:
What passages of "The Gospel as Revealed to Me" have touched you most.

 

Absolutely and completely disagree.
We're grown adults here. When someone recommends a movie; I know fairly soon into it whether its appropriate or not. Same applies to a book.
I bought it. And whilst the translation is cumbersome, i find it an exhilarating read.
Plus, the woman may well be a mystic. Saints and holy people appear to have recommended her.
Good God, give it a scan at least...

 

It is interesting that you fail to address any of the concerns. Also interesting that you try to equate those who object to the poem to those who objected to Lourdes and Fatima. I'm really not sure who you think those people are on this board (those who object to Fatima and Lourdes); and I'm equally unsure what issues the objectors had about those two apparitions that contradicted Church teaching. You do realize that the the Immaculate Conception was solid Church doctrine - despite not being declared dogma at the time yet - right? And you do realize that it was the communists and those who sought to appease them/get along that were against Fatima, right?

Can you list any doctrinal objections anybody had/has about either? Can you please list any Vatican intervention against either and the grounds for it?

The answer my friend should tell you all you need to know about trying to use these approved apparitions as a "type" of these unapproved - even condemned - writings.

I also find it quite fascinating the argument that you, and posters like you, keep raising: That those opposed to unapproved apparitions are working against God. Fascinating for the following reasons:

1) You take it upon yourself to be the judge of authenticity. Even in this instance where there has been many official condemnations against the supernatural character of the work.

2) How very protestant of you. Stating that we all have the Holy Spirit and His gifts (while true), you go on to shockingly state that the Church "does not approve" mystical writings/apparitions - which is bizarre at best (and actually flat out wrong):

CCC

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a1.htm

67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.


3) You don't seem to mention the very obvious possibility of the alternative - that you my friend are promoting works/messages that are against God.

This is such a clear case of false teachings that all but the most blind of Catholic will follow along.

You have failed to show a) where the moral authority of the index was lifted (it wasn't), b) how the objectionable material fits with the faith (hint: it doesn't), and how the promoters of the book actually comply with the official decision of the Church and make it known that the work CANNOT be considered supernatural (again they don't, classic case of disobedience for the promoters).

Given the above, all faithful Catholics who actually want to further develop their faith should look elsewhere - for the Church has a great treasure of material and devotions which has both a) been approved and b) bore much good fruit..

 

Thank you, Frodo. You can always say exactly what I feel about these situations, but I am unable to put it into clear-cut words.

 

Are you saying you are more holy and smarter on the subject than two of our holiest saints, St. Pope John Paul II and Saint Mother Teresa of Calcutta who both, according to their closest confidants, had the books as their bedside reading? Sometime one only has to acknowledge that great saints did something and it should be enough for anyone else. I don't buy into hype, I look to what the saints lived as they surely are the great saints of our lifetime and that is good enough for me. Be at peace with it Frodo. You can have your opinion as well, even it if is contrary to great saints.

 

I just did a quick google search to refresh myself. This book was on the Church's list of banned books until VII when the list was done away with. A point made was that even the title is wrong: ' man god' instead of 'god man'. Also, there seem to be salubrious passages such as Jesus kissing St. John while he was half naked on a bed and St. John becoming ardent with love etc etc. There is also a bit where Jesus teases Peter about attempting to spoil Our Lady's virtue by plotting to be alone with her. The passage about the serpent licking Eve's eyes and all over her body and getting her excited does not sit well with me and also Our Lady asking St. Anne and saying she should maybe sin as she would like God to save her is not theologically correct. There would seem to be many such theological errors.
It was obviously not put on a list of banned books for nothing.

 

This was my original point. Thank you for backing it up with examples. It can’t be holy.

 

I've found The Gospel as Revealed to Me, or The Poem of the Man-God, and other works by the Author, to be life-changing reading as well! I look forward to future discussions with you and others on this forum who also recognize that Maria Valtorta was Jesus's spokesperson.

 

You are free to disagree. Yet this group has banned posts of other things that were questionable..
Obedience is the key...
You can recommend this book to friends on your own or start a group that you choose the content but if we do not accept other mystics with questionable writings, then the villagers will revolt.
That's how humans work.. division sows discord. My opinion only...
I just know from my over 60 years on the planet! God bless

 

It truly is. Suggested reading material:

A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work
The Valtorta Enigma
Mathematical analysis of The Gospel as Revealed to Me, or The Poem of the Man-God
Ancient astronomical and meteorological analysis of The Gospel as Revealed to Me, or The Poem of the Man-God
The Current Juridic and Moral Value of the Index (with Maria Valtorta Case Study)

 

This is the bottom line. It has very very questionable passages in it which promote illicit sexuality and theological errors. To me, it’s shameful. I question the authorship of this work. It’s not from Our Lord.

 

I have to agree...

 

I have never gone near it. It was on the list of forbidden books for a reason.

 

Part I

Regarding the Catholic Church and The Gospel as Revealed to Me, or The Poem of the Man-God, their current position is that it can be published, read, and left to each individual to decide if it's of supernatural origin or not. Suggested reading material: The Current Juridic and Moral Value of the Index (with Maria Valtorta Case Study)

How is the term "Man-God" wrong when Jesus was in fact both human and God? Also, in the Book of Timothy, Jesus is essentially referred to as "Man-God": "the man Christ Jesus", for He was in fact God as a man (1 Tim. 2:5). The terms "Man-God" and "God-Man" can be used interchangeably, and have been in Maria Valtorta's writings because, for example, in The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. II, ch. 185, pp. 137-138, Jesus said, "I am the God-Man".

False. The vision that you're referring to described by Maria Valtorta is that of Jesus and the twelve apostles during their seven-day retreat in mountain gorges. Regarding the last day, Maria Valtorta wrote:

« [...] He (Jesus) walks down, as His cave is the highest one, and He enters the various caves, calling the sleeping apostles by their names. Simon, Bartholomew, Philip, James, and Andrew, reply at once. Matthew, Peter, and Thomas, take a little longer to reply. While Judas Thaddeus goes to meet Jesus as soon as he sees Him appear at the entrance of his grotto, as he is already ready, and wide awake, the other cousin, the Iscariot, and John, are fast asleep, so much so that Jesus has to shake them on their beds, made with tree branches, and leaves, in order to wake them up.

John, the last one to be called, is so sound asleep, that he does not realize Who is calling him, and in the haze of his interrupted sleep, he whispers: « Yes, mother, I am coming at once... », but he turns round on his other side. Jesus smiles, sits on the rustic mattress made of foliage picked in the wood, He bends, and kisses the cheek of John, who opens his eyes, and is dumbfounded at seeing Jesus. He sits up, and says: « Do you need me? Here I am. »

« No. I woke you up as I did the others, but you thought it was your mother. So, I kissed you, as mothers do. »

John, half-naked in his under tunic, because he used his tunic, and mantle, as bed covers, clasps Jesus's neck, and lays his head between Jesus's shoulder, and cheek saying: « Oh! You are so much more than a mother! I left her for You, but I would not leave You for her! She bore me to the Earth. You are bearing me to Heaven. Oh! I know! »

« What do you know more than the others? »

« What the Lord told me in this cave. See, I never came to You, and I think my companions said it was due to indifference, and pride, but I am not concerned with what they think. I know that You know the truth. I was not coming to Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, but to what You are in the bosom of the Fire that is eternal Love of the Most Holy Trinity, its Nature, its Essence, its Real Essence—oh! I cannot tell, however, what I have understood in this dark gloomy cavern that has become so full of light for me, in this cold grotto where I have been burnt by a featureless fire that has descended into the depth of my being, and has inflamed with a sweet martyrdom, in this silent cave, which has, however, sung celestial truths to me—but to what You are, the Second Person of the ineffable Mystery, which is God, and which I penetrated because God has drawn to me Himself, and I have always had Him with me, and I have poured all my desires, all my tears, all my requests on Your divine bosom, Word of God. Amongst the many words I have heard from You, there never was one so comprehensive as the one You told me here, You, God the Son, You, God like the Father, You, God like the Holy Spirit, You, center of the Trinity...oh! perhaps I am blaspheming, but that is what I think, because if You were not the love of the Father, and the love for the Father, then the Love, the Divine Love, would be missing, and the Divinity would not longer be Trine, and it would lack the most becoming attribute of God: His love! Oh! I have so much in here, but it is like water gurgling against a dam, and cannot flow out... and I seem to be dying of it, so violent, and sublime, is the turmoil in my heart, since I have understood You... but I would not like to be freed of it for the whole world... Let me die of that love, my sweet God!' John smiles, and weeps, panting, inflamed by His love, relaxing on Jesus's chest, as if he were exhausted by his ardor, and Jesus caresses him, burning with love Himself. » (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. II, ch. 164-165, pp. 55-60)

In summary, John was "half-naked in his under tunic" because "he used his tunic, and mantle, as bed covers". He was kissed by Jesus on the cheek like a mother. He was smiling, weeping, and panting, because he had just concluded speaking of the mystical ecstasy he experienced during his retreat, and was "inflamed by His (God's) love", meaning that his ardor was intensified, and thus relaxed on Jesus's chest while sitting up. As he did this, Jesus caressed him, "burning with love Himself", because He is love. As shown, the excerpts from this scene in the article you are referencing from are taken out of context, and the claim that Maria Valtorta portrayed Jesus and John engaging with each other sexually is a lie.

False. The vision that you're referring to described by Maria Valtorta follows Mary speaking to Jesus about Peter's desire to adopt the child disciple named "Marjiam", his wife's desire to have a child, and advising Him to allow it.

Jesus replied to His Mother saying, « Yes, let it be done, as You wish. » Jesus stands up and calls out loud: « Simon of Jonas: come here. »

Peter starts and rushes down the steps. « What do You want, Master? »

« Come here, you usurper and corrupter! »

« Me? Why? What have I done, Lord? »

« You have corrupted My Mother. That is why you wanted to be alone. What shall I do with you? »

But Jesus smiles and Peter recovers confidence. « Oh! » he says. « You really frightened me! But now You are laughing... What do You want from me, Master? My life? I have but that, because You have taken everything... But if You want, I will give it to You. »

I do not want to take anything from you. I want to give you something. But do not take advantage of your victory and do not disclose the secret to the others, you most artful fellow who defeats the Master by means of the weapon of His Mother's word. You will have the boy, but...»

Jesus can say no more, because Peter, who had knelt down, bounces to his feet and kisses the Master with such delight that he makes the words die on His lips.

« Thank Her, not Me. But remember that this must be of assistance to you, and not an impediment... »

« My Lord, You will not have to repent of the gift... Oh! Mary! May You be always blessed, You holy and good...» And Peter, who has fallen on his knees again, weeps, kissing Mary's hand... (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. II, ch. 199, pp. 180-189)

In summary, Jesus joked with Peter calling him an "usurper" and "corrupter" because he went to His mother about his desire for adopting a child, knowing He could not refuse Her. As shown, the excerpts from this scene in the article you are referencing from are taken out of context, and the claim that Maria Valtorta portrayed Jesus joking with Peter about him corrupting His Mother sexually is a lie.

What's worse than you, @HeavenlyHosts, and others not bothering to verify that Maria Valtorta wrote Jesus and His apostle John engaged with one another sexually, and that Jesus joked to Peter about his attempt to rape His Mother, and so on, is that the anonymous author who said that she wrote those things in this article cited the exact volume and page of each of those scenes, and thus he/she had to have known the actual context, but chose to lie anyway in an attempt to discredit Maria Valtorta.

 

Part II

The dictation by Jesus to Maria Valtorta that you're referring to is about the disobedience of Eve and Adam. Below are excerpts.

"Lucifer was an angel, the most beautiful of all the angels, a perfect spirit, inferior only to God, and yet in his bright essence a vapour of pride arose and he did not scatter it. On the contrary, he condensed it by brooding over it. And Evil was born of this incubation. It existed before man. God had hurled him out of Paradise, the cursed incubator of Evil, who had desecrated Paradise. But he is the eternal incubator of Evil and as he can no longer soil Paradise, he has soiled the earth.

That metaphorical tree proves this truth. God had said to the man and the woman: "You know all the laws and the mysteries of creation. But do not infringe on My right of being the Creator of man. My love will suffice for the propagation of the human race and it will spread among you and will excite the new Adams of the race without any lust of the senses but with purely charitable pulsations. I have given you everything. I am only keeping for Myself this mystery of the formation of man."

Satan wanted to deprive man of this intellectual virginity and with his venomous tongue he blandished and caressed Eve's limbs and eyes, exciting reflections and a perspicacity which they did not have before, because malice had not yet intoxicated them. She "saw". And seeing, she wanted to try. Her flesh was aroused. Oh! If she had called to God! If she had hurried to Him saying: "Father! The Serpent has caressed me and I am upset." The Father would have purified and healed her with His breath, which could have infused new innocence into her as it had infused life. And it would have made her forget the snake's poison, nay it would have engendered in her a disgust for the Serpent, as it happens in those who bear an instinctive dislike for diseases of which they have just been cured. But Eve does not go to the Father. Eve goes back to the Serpent. The sensation is a sweet one for her. "Seeing that the fruit of the tree was good to eat and pleasing and agreeable to the eye, she took it and ate it." »

And "she understood". Now Malice was inside her and was gnawing at her intestines. She saw with new eyes and heard with new ears the habits and voices of beasts. And she craved for them with insane greed.

She began the sin by herself. She accomplished it with her companion. That is why a heavier sentence is laid on woman. Because of her, man has become rebellious towards God and has become acquainted with lewdness and death. Because of her, he was no longer capable of dominating his three reigns: the reign of the spirit, because he allowed the spirit to disobey God; the moral reign, because he allowed passions to master him; the reign of the flesh, because he lowered it down to the instinctive level of beasts. "The Serpent seduced me" says Eve. "The woman offered me the fruit and I ate of it" says Adam. And the triple greed has ruled the three dominions since then.

Only Grace can relax the hold of this ruthless monster. And if Grace is alive, nay thoroughly alive, and kept more and more alive by the good will of a faithful son, it will succeed in strangling the monster and will no longer have anything to fear. It will not be afraid of internal tyrants, which are the flesh and passions; neither will it be afraid of external tyrants, these are the world and the mighty ones on the earth. It will dread neither persecutions nor death. It is as Paul the Apostle says: "I fear none of these things, neither do I care for my life more than I care for myself, provided I carry out the mission and the ministry the Lord Jesus gave me, and that was to bear witness to the Good News of God's Grace." (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. I, ch. 17, pp. 48-52)

Do you now understand what is meant by "Satan wanted to deprive man of this intellectual virginity and with his venomous tongue he blandished and caressed Eve's limbs and eyes, exciting reflections and a perspicacity which they did not have before, because malice had not yet intoxicated them. She "saw". And seeing, she wanted to try." Or, do you still wrongly think it means that Satan just licked Eve all over her body and eyes with his tongue?...

 

Part III

The vision that you're referring to described by Maria Valtorta is that of Mary as a toddler having a conversation with Her parents about the Messiah and prophesied Virgin, because at the time She didn't yet know She had already been chosen by God to be that Virgin. Below are excerpts.

« I shall belong to God. I shall pray in the Temple. And perhaps one day I will see the Immanuel. The Virgin who is to be His Mother must be already born, as the great Prophet says, and She is in the Temple... I will be Her companion on... and maidservant. Oh! Yes. If I could only meet Her, by God's light, I would like to serve Her, the Blessed One. And later, She would bring Me Her Son, She would take Me to Her Son, and I would serve Him too... Just think, mummy!... To serve the Messiah!! » Mary is overcome by this thought that exalts Her and makes Her totally humble at the same time. With Her hands crossed over Her breast and Her little head slightly bent forward and flushed with emotion, She is like an infantile reproduction of the Annunciation that I saw. She resumes: « But will the King of Israel, the Lord's Anointed, allow Me to serve Him? » « Have no doubts about that. Does King Solomon not say: "There are sixty queens and eighty concubines and countless maidens?" You can see that in the King's palace there will be countless maidens serving the Lord. »

« Oh! You can see then that I must be a virgin? I must. If He wants a virgin as His Mother, it means that He loves virginity above all things. I want Him to love Me, His maiden, because of the virginity which will make Me somewhat like His beloved Mother... This is what I want... I would also like to be a sinner, a big sinner, if I were not afraid of offending the Lord... Tell Me, mummy, can one be a sinner out of love of God? »

« But what are You saying, my dear? I don't understand You. »

« I mean: to commit a sin in order to be loved by God, Who becomes the Saviour. Who is lost, is saved. Isn't that so? I would like to be saved by the Saviour to receive His loving look. That is why 1 would like to sin, but not to commit a sin that would disgust Him. How can He save Me if I do not get lost? »

Anne is dumbfounded. She does not know what to say.

Joachim helps her. He has approached them walking noiselessly on the grass, behind the low hedge of vine-shoots. « He has saved You beforehand, because He knows that You love Him and You want to love Him only. So You are already redeemed and You can be a virgin as You wish » says Joachim.

« Is that true, daddy? » Mary embraces his knees and looks at him with Her clear blue eyes, so like Her father's and so happy because of this hope She gets from Her father.

« It is true, my little darling. Look! I was just bringing You this little sparrow, that at its first flight landed near the spring. I could have left it there but its weak wings did not have enough strength to fly off again, and its tiny legs could not hold it on to the slippery moss stones. It would have fallen into the water. But I did not wait for that. I took it and now I am giving it to You. You will do what you like with it. The fact is that it was saved before it fell into the danger. God has done the same with You. Now, tell me, Mary: have I loved the sparrow more by saving it beforehand, or would I have loved it more saving it afterwards? »

« You have loved it now, because you did not let it get hurt in the cold water. »

« And God has loved You more, because He has loved You before You sinned.»

« And I will love Him wholeheartedly. Wholeheartedly. My beautiful little sparrow, I am like you. The Lord has loved us both equally, by saving us... I will now rear you and then I will let you go. And you in the forest and I in the Temple will sing the praises of God, and we shall say: "Please send the One You promised to those who expect Him." Oh! Daddy, when are you taking Me to the Temple? »

« Soon, my dear. But are You not sorry to leave Your father? »

« Yes, very much! But you will come... in any case, if it did not hurt, what sacrifice would it be? »

« And will You remember us? »

« I always will. After the prayer for the Immanuel I will pray for you. That God may give you joy and a long life... until the day He becomes the Saviour. Then I will ask Him to take you to the celestial Jerusalem. »

The vision ends with Mary tightly clasped in Her father's arms.
__________________________________________

Jesus dictated the following excerpt to Maria Valtorta about the scene above:

« I can already hear the comments of the doctors with captious objections: "How can a little girl not yet three years old speak thus? It is an exaggeration." And they do not consider that they make a monster of Me by ascribing adults' actions to My own childhood.

Intelligence is not given to everybody in the same way and at the same time. The Church has fixed the age of reason at six years of age, because that is the age when even a backward child can tell good from evil, at least in basically important matters. But there are children who long before that age are capable of discerning and understanding and wanting with sufficiently developed discretion. Little Imelde Lambertini, Rosa da Viterbo, Nellie Organ, Nennolina, may give you confirmation, o difficult doctors, to believe that My Mother was able to think and speak like that. I have quoted four names at random amongst the thousands of holy children who populate My Paradise, after reasoning on earth as adults for possibly more or fewer years.

What is reason? A gift of God. God can therefore give it as He wishes, to whom He wishes and when He wishes. Reason in fact is one of the things that make you more like God, the Intelligent and Reasoning Spirit. Reason and intelligence were graces given by God to Man in the Earthly Paradise. How full of life they were, when Grace was alive, still intact and active in the spirit of the first two Parents!

In the Book of Jesus Ben Sirach it is stated: "All wisdom is from the Lord, and it is His own forever." What wisdom, therefore, would men have had, had they remained children of God? » (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. I, ch. 7, pp. 22-25)

 

I can’t read this. I want to scream ICK.

 

So, you not only didn't verify your examples of "very, very, questionable passages in it which promote illicit sexuality and theological errors", but you also don't want to read my text that exposes those as lies?

 

Unnecessary discussion in my opinion. Those who want to read it should read it, those who don't, don't need to read it. Everything at your own risk. It is certainly a fact that the passages can be interpreted differently, and that they can perhaps also have different effects on the personal soul. Pope Benedict as Cardinal Ratzinger wrote about this:
...
When some then considered printing and distribution of the aforementioned work to be permitted after the index had been abolished, attention was again drawn to this in the ‘Osservatore Romano’ (15 June 1966)
- as also published in the Official Bulletin of the Apostolic See (1966) - that the Index, although cancelled, retains ‘all its moral validity’;
Therefore, it is not opportune to disseminate and recommend a work whose condemnation is not light-hearted, but for the purpose of protecting the less well-armed believers from the damage that the publication of such a work could cause.
...
There is a lot of edification literature out there, so you don't necessarily have to read a controversial work.
I hope to read it helps your soul, Soul.