Hmmm, I uprated this, but I do not think this is an opportune time for Bishop Williamson to be promoting this material.
Quote from: TelesphorusHmmm, I uprated this, but I do not think this is an opportune time for Bishop Williamson to be promoting this material.
Precisely! Why promote the Poem at this point of time? Aren't there other approved works such as the Mystical City of God which didn't have as much a colorful past as the Poem?
Read it with my pair of glasses:
Eleison Comments Number CCLXXV (275)
20 October 2012
HOME READING
[..]
From non-electronic reading of the Poem in the home (Excuse me but aren't you reading me now, here, on the internet, on your computer ? - This is the greatest satirical comment of them all) ...
I'm not so sure you and some others here understood Bishop Williamson correctly. His EC isn't satirical. Of course he's usually saying something between the lines, too. But despite the possibility that there's some parallels between Bishop Williamson's fate and what he's writing about this and that, his suggestions are very solid again. Some people here in this thread should take him more seriously!
And that, Ethelred, bring me back to my original post. Let's compile a list of the best books out there.
Eleison Comments Number CCLXXV (275)
Firstly, the Poem was put on the Church’s Index of forbidden books in the 1950’s, which was before Rome went neo-modernist in the 1960’s. ... Secondly the Poem is accused of countless doctrinal errors. Thirdly Archbishop Lefebvre objected to the Poem ...
But firstly, how could the modernists have taken over Rome in the 1960’s, as they did, had they not already been well established within Rome in the 1950’s ? ... And thirdly, with all due respect to Archbishop Lefebvre, I would argue that .....
I think it's a wonderful thing to read together as a family. But Maria Valtorta?
:facepalm:
Our children loved The Martyrs of the Coliseum (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895551926/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0895551926&linkCode=as2&tag=httpwwwchanco-20) or Historical Records of the Great Amphitheater of Ancient Rome by A. J. O'Reilly
I think you have all missed the typical British humor that this column contains. It is just brimming with satire and quite funny and definitely very clever:
Read it with my pair of glasses:
Eleison Comments Number CCLXXV (275)
20 October 2012
HOME READING
When a while back these “Comments” advised readers to fortify their homes in case public bastions of the Faith might, due to the wickedness of the times, prove to be a thing of the past, a few readers wrote in to ask just how homes might be fortified. In fact various spiritual and material means of defending home and family have been suggested in previous numbers of the “Comments”, notably of course the Holy Rosary, but one fortification has gone unmentioned which I think I would try in place of television if I had a family to defend: reading aloud each night to the children selected chapters from Maria Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God. (Of course the topic is controversial - but isn't it the Bishop's controversy that is leading to his ouster - he's poking fun at himself here loud and clear) And when we had reached the end of the five volumes in English, I imagine us starting again from the beginning, and so on, until all the children had left home ! (Yes you have to keep on saying that 2+2=4 until this kid i.e. himself leaves home - and even after)
Yet the Poem has many and eloquent enemies. (Who doesn't around here ?) It consists of episodes from the lives of Our Lord and Our Lady, from her immaculate conception through to her assumption into Heaven, as seen in visions received, believably from Heaven, during the Second World War in northern Italy by Maria Valtorta, an unmarried woman of mature age lying in a sick-bed, permanently crippled from an injury to her back inflicted several years earlier. (Any one for a TV interview and an enforced stay in St. George's House ?) Notes included in the Italian edition (running to over four thousand pages in ten volumes) show how afraid she was of being deceived by the Devil, and many people are not in fact convinced that the Poem truly came from God. Let us look at three main objections.
Firstly, the Poem was put on the Church’s Index of forbidden books in the 1950’s, (and so have I) which was before Rome (SSPX) went neo-modernist in the 1960’s. The reason given for the condemnation was the romanticizing and sentimentalizing of the Gospel events. Secondly the Poem is accused of countless doctrinal errors. Thirdly Archbishop Lefebvre objected to the Poem that its giving so many physical details of Our Lord’s daily life makes him too material, and brings us too far down from the spiritual level of the four Gospels. (Guess who else is about to be put on ice by writing another column for you)
But firstly, how could the modernists have taken over Rome in the 1960’s, as they did, had they not already been well established within Rome in the 1950’s ? (As they are indeed in the Society and for a long time already) The Poem, like the Gospels (e.g. Jn.XI, 35, etc.), is full of sentiment but always proportional to its object. The Poem is for any sane judge, in my opinion, neither sentimental nor romanticized. (But who cares ? He's already been called a crank by the "crow" and others within the SSPX !) Secondly, the seeming doctrinal errors are not difficult to explain, one by one, as is done by a competent theologian in the notes to be found in the Italian edition of the Poem. (Yes and the Fellay regime will explain away all the doctrinal problems of Vatcian II by the new notes in the 16 Council Texts that BXVI will pencil in this year of Faith) And thirdly, with all due respect to Archbishop Lefebvre, I would argue that modern man needs the material detail for him to believe again in the reality of the Gospels. Has not too much “spirituality” kicked Our Lord upstairs, so to speak, while cinema and television have taken over modern man’s sense of reality on the ground floor ? As Our Lord was true man and true God, so the Poem is at every moment both fully spiritual and fully material. (With all due respect to today's Superior General the SSPX has kicked Our Lord upstairs as well)
From non-electronic reading of the Poem in the home (Excuse me but aren't you reading me now, here, on the internet, on your computer ? - This is the greatest satirical comment of them all) , I can imagine many benefits, besides the real live contact between parents reading and children listening. (With switched off computers as the SSPX superiors would dearly love me to stop writing and you reading) Children (You dear reader) soak in from their surroundings like sponges soak in water. From the reading of chapters of the Poem selected according to the children’s age, I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady. And the questions they would ask ! (Aren't you going to start asking what the heck the SSPX bigwigs are up to with a sell out ?) And the answers that the parents would have to come up with ! (Howler !) I do believe the Poem could greatly fortify a home. (Dripping with sarcasm as we say in England)
Kyrie eleison.
And that, Ethelred, bring me back to my original post. Let's compile a list of the best books out there.
Quote from: magdalenaAnd that, Ethelred, bring me back to my original post. Let's compile a list of the best books out there.
Mystical City of God - Ven Mary of Agreda
Introduction to the Devout Life - St. Francis de Sales
The Secret of the Rosary - St. Louis De Montfort
True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin - St. Louis De Montfort
The Secret of Mary - St. Louis De Montfort
The Imitation of Christ - Thomas a Kempis
The Story of a Soul - St. Therese of Lisieux
The City of God - St. Augustine
The Confessions of St. Augustine
The Twelve Steps to Holiness and Salvation - St. Alphonsus de Liguori
Preparation for Death - St. Alphonsus de Liguori
Writings of the Church Fathers
A Treatise on the Spiritual Life - St. Vincent Ferrer
The Spiritual Exercises - St. Ignatius of Loyola
Quote from: Ethelred
I'm not so sure you and some others here understood Bishop Williamson correctly. His EC isn't satirical. Of course he's usually saying something between the lines, too. But despite the possibility that there's some parallels between Bishop Williamson's fate and what he's writing about this and that, his suggestions are very solid again. Some people here in this thread should take him more seriously!
Oh for sure he has a primary reading - exactly what the piece says - but there is a secondary reading and I'm sure it's not too far from what I wrote.
I don't disagree with the primary reading in the slightest - I think the Valtorta has a huge amount of good in it and I have publicly spoken about this work even defending it when many thought I was joking.
Once Bishop Williamson asked what should be done to wake up modern man to his spiritual realities and I responded openly "Read some of the Valtorta to him." They laughed at that but I was deadly serious.
However, since he likes to be "unpredictable" I am certain he has the secondary reading I proposed (but I am not him). Do you really think he would pass up the opportunity of his last EC (possibly) in the SSPX and not stand everybody on their head ? Didn't he just say a few weeks ago how much he "loved the attention" ? I'm sure he does (in so far as he is a man and prone to things temporal) but as a man in pursuit of holiness (I think not). In the sense that attention brings opportunity to convince others of the truth then bring it on, in the sense he seeks personal fame... then you certainly don't know the man.
Oh and as for satire - he has the wit of an Englishman and many people fail to distinguish the ancient arts that a schooling in the classics provide: hyperbole and satire amongst others.
I was just saying this morning that most people need the humor of gutter TV to laugh, but satire is a humor most people today cannot understand.
BTW if you want to get a handle on various readings to a text read a "theologo-novel" by Ratzinger those have many readings and none of them good.
Quote from: rowsofvoices9Quote from: magdalenaAnd that, Ethelred, bring me back to my original post. Let's compile a list of the best books out there.
Mystical City of God - Ven Mary of Agreda
Introduction to the Devout Life - St. Francis de Sales
The Secret of the Rosary - St. Louis De Montfort
QuoteTrue Devotion to the Blessed Virgin - St. Louis De Montfort
The Secret of Mary - St. Louis De Montfort
The Imitation of Christ - Thomas a Kempis
The Story of a Soul - St. Therese of Lisieux
The City of God - St. Augustine
The Confessions of St. Augustine
The Twelve Steps to Holiness and Salvation - St. Alphonsus de Liguori
Preparation for Death - St. Alphonsus de Liguori
QuoteWritings of the Church Fathers
A Treatise on the Spiritual Life - St. Vincent Ferrer
The Spiritual Exercises - St. Ignatius of Loyola
Also,
* The Holy Bible, esp.
- The New Testament
- The Psalms
- Proverbs
* My Imitation of Christ
These are great for adults.
But how about also compiling a list of best books for children (i.e. a list of best books that parents can read and discuss with their children)?
I can start this list:
* The Holy Bible (Children's Bible) DOUAY-RHEIMS!!
* The lives of the saints (Any suggestions for best authors?)
* Aesop's Fables
I think it's a wonderful thing to read together as a family. But Maria Valtorta?
:facepalm:
Our children loved The Martyrs of the Coliseum (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895551926/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0895551926&linkCode=as2&tag=httpwwwchanco-20) or Historical Records of the Great Amphitheater of Ancient Rome by A. J. O'Reilly
What I'd like to begin reading this Advent is Dom Gueranger's, The Liturgical Year, We'll see how it goes. :reading:
It might be well to add some Catholic history to the reading--especially with the teens. Off the top of my head, I would suggest A Heart for Europe by Joanna and James Bogle, and Elena Maria Vidal's Trianon and Madame Royale.
"I love and venerate Hillel, I respect and honour Gamaliel. They are two men through whose justice and wisdom the origin of man is revealed"
In the time of Christ there was an acute controversy between the recent, lax school of Hillel and the strict, conservative school of Schammai about the meaning of the Hebrew phrase ["for some uncleanness"]. Hence the question with which the Pharisees tempted Our Lord: "Is it lawful [for a man to put away his wife] for every cause?" The putting-away of the wife for frivolous reasons had been sharply condemned by God through the Prophets Micheas (ii, 9) and Malachias (ii, 14), but in later days it became very prevalent. (Catholic Encyclopedia, "Divorce")
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05054c.htm
To understand why it's impossible that Jesus would venerate the creature Hillel for "justice and wisdom" we look at Mark 10;2-10 and Matthew 19;3-9 in which the Pharisees attempt to ensnare Jesus on the topic of divorce.
It will be very good to have Bishop Williamson in the resistance.
We can only pray that Bishops Tissier and Alphonso will join it, so that there is no question as to which side is carrying the legacy of the Archbishop.
Catholic Tradition needs new leaders, new consecrations.
With the children being led to believe that Jesus venerated Hillel, among too many other absurdities to list, there will be no resistance worth speaking of.
How could a just man argue that a husband could put his away wife for spoiling supper, as the Pharisee Hillel taught?
It is maddening that the modernists have tried to cast Our Lord as a follower of Hillel. And worse that the ignorant or insane editors of the Angelus would attempt to place him between Isaiah and John the Baptist. Hillel does not appear in Holy Writ. Hillel is not a figure in salvation history. St. Paul asserted plainly that his pharisaic training was useless.
Quote from: Telesphorus
How could a just man argue that a husband could put his away wife for spoiling supper, as the Pharisee Hillel taught?
It is maddening that the modernists have tried to cast Our Lord as a follower of Hillel. And worse that the ignorant or insane editors of the Angelus would attempt to place him between Isaiah and John the Baptist. Hillel does not appear in Holy Writ. Hillel is not a figure in salvation history. St. Paul asserted plainly that his pharisaic training was useless.
Indeed. And how can Bp. Williamson not only promote a work that goes far beyond "Saint of the Sanhedrin" in its outrages and claim that this work is of God?
This is far, far worse than The Angelus article which does not go so far as to make Jesus venerate Hillel or claim an imprimatur from heaven.
But again, someone reading your great posts could be led to believe that you are accusing Bishop Williamson of Judaizing, whereas I think he is really just (imprudently) recommending a book for other literary qualities.
Pax.
Quote from: Seraphim
But again, someone reading your great posts could be led to believe that you are accusing Bishop Williamson of Judaizing, whereas I think he is really just (imprudently) recommending a book for other literary qualities.
Pax.
The Bp. makes no such distinction. He claims it is from God. Children subjected to "the Poem" are unable to distinguish between the 'literary qualities' of the work and the errors it contains.
I don't know what the Bp.'s intention is here. I know that this work he recommends to the children of the resistance is part of the attack.
[Ser. said: ... he is really just (imprudently) recommending a book for other literary qualities.] ... He claims it is from God. Children subjected to "the Poem" are unable to distinguish between the 'literary qualities' of the work and the errors it contains.
... selected chapters from Maria Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God...Does that say the parts of the Poem which contain errors should be read
... many people are not in fact convinced that the Poem truly came from God...Did H.E. say anywhere in this EC that he is not among those who remain so
Secondly, the seeming doctrinal errors are not difficult to explain, one by one, as is done by a competent theologian in the notes to be found in the Italian edition of the Poem.Well, have not the seeming doctrinal errors of Vat.II been the lifetime project for
Firstly, the Poem was put on the Church’s Index of forbidden books in the 1950’s...Was that an afterthought? No, it was his "FIRST POINT" on this question of the
The Poem is for any sane judge, in my opinion, neither sentimental nor romanticized.The Poem is neither sentimental nor romanticized according to the judgment of anyone
The Poem, like the Gospels (e.g. Jn.XI, 35, etc.), is full of sentiment but always proportional to its object.And just what is this object of Scripture? It is the communication of God's
From the reading of chapters of the Poem selected according to the children’s age...Does H.E. recommend here the reading of the entire Poem to all children in
I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady.Learn what about Our Lord and Our Lady? Good things? He doesn't say!
...Has not too much “spirituality” kicked Our Lord upstairs, so to speak,...And now clown-head's 'spirituality' is kicking +W out the door, so to speak,...
And the questions they would ask !Indeed! The questions the children would ask when you've been reading to
And the answers that the parents would have to come up with ! I do believe the Poem could greatly fortify a home.The answers indeed! And answers to whom? Certainly not the children, alone!
MP-
You make very excellent points on the Poem.
But I am pretty sure that Bishop WIlliamson is recommending it for literary qualities, rather than spiritual guidance or doctrinal formation.
I think you have all missed the typical British humor that this column contains. It is just brimming with satire and quite funny and definitely very clever:
Read it with my pair of glasses:
Eleison Comments Number CCLXXV (275)
20 October 2012
HOME READING
When a while back these “Comments” advised readers to fortify their homes in case public bastions of the Faith might, due to the wickedness of the times, prove to be a thing of the past, a few readers wrote in to ask just how homes might be fortified. In fact various spiritual and material means of defending home and family have been suggested in previous numbers of the “Comments”, notably of course the Holy Rosary, but one fortification has gone unmentioned which I think I would try in place of television if I had a family to defend: reading aloud each night to the children selected chapters from Maria Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God. (Of course the topic is controversial - but isn't it the Bishop's controversy that is leading to his ouster - he's poking fun at himself here loud and clear) And when we had reached the end of the five volumes in English, I imagine us starting again from the beginning, and so on, until all the children had left home ! (Yes you have to keep on saying that 2+2=4 until this kid i.e. himself leaves home - and even after)
Yet the Poem has many and eloquent enemies. (Who doesn't around here ?) It consists of episodes from the lives of Our Lord and Our Lady, from her immaculate conception through to her assumption into Heaven, as seen in visions received, believably from Heaven, during the Second World War in northern Italy by Maria Valtorta, an unmarried woman of mature age lying in a sick-bed, permanently crippled from an injury to her back inflicted several years earlier. (Any one for a TV interview and an enforced stay in St. George's House ?) Notes included in the Italian edition (running to over four thousand pages in ten volumes) show how afraid she was of being deceived by the Devil, and many people are not in fact convinced that the Poem truly came from God. Let us look at three main objections.
Firstly, the Poem was put on the Church’s Index of forbidden books in the 1950’s, (and so have I) which was before Rome (SSPX) went neo-modernist in the 1960’s. The reason given for the condemnation was the romanticizing and sentimentalizing of the Gospel events. Secondly the Poem is accused of countless doctrinal errors. Thirdly Archbishop Lefebvre objected to the Poem that its giving so many physical details of Our Lord’s daily life makes him too material, and brings us too far down from the spiritual level of the four Gospels. (Guess who else is about to be put on ice by writing another column for you)
But firstly, how could the modernists have taken over Rome in the 1960’s, as they did, had they not already been well established within Rome in the 1950’s ? (As they are indeed in the Society and for a long time already) The Poem, like the Gospels (e.g. Jn.XI, 35, etc.), is full of sentiment but always proportional to its object. The Poem is for any sane judge, in my opinion, neither sentimental nor romanticized. (But who cares ? He's already been called a crank by the "crow" and others within the SSPX !) Secondly, the seeming doctrinal errors are not difficult to explain, one by one, as is done by a competent theologian in the notes to be found in the Italian edition of the Poem. (Yes and the Fellay regime will explain away all the doctrinal problems of Vatcian II by the new notes in the 16 Council Texts that BXVI will pencil in this year of Faith) And thirdly, with all due respect to Archbishop Lefebvre, I would argue that modern man needs the material detail for him to believe again in the reality of the Gospels. Has not too much “spirituality” kicked Our Lord upstairs, so to speak, while cinema and television have taken over modern man’s sense of reality on the ground floor ? As Our Lord was true man and true God, so the Poem is at every moment both fully spiritual and fully material. (With all due respect to today's Superior General the SSPX has kicked Our Lord upstairs as well)
From non-electronic reading of the Poem in the home (Excuse me but aren't you reading me now, here, on the internet, on your computer ? - This is the greatest satirical comment of them all) , I can imagine many benefits, besides the real live contact between parents reading and children listening. (With switched off computers as the SSPX superiors would dearly love me to stop writing and you reading) Children (You dear reader) soak in from their surroundings like sponges soak in water. From the reading of chapters of the Poem selected according to the children’s age, I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady. And the questions they would ask ! (Aren't you going to start asking what the heck the SSPX bigwigs are up to with a sell out ?) And the answers that the parents would have to come up with ! (Howler !) I do believe the Poem could greatly fortify a home. (Dripping with sarcasm as we say in England)
Kyrie eleison.
Quote from: Ethelred
I'm not so sure you and some others here understood Bishop Williamson correctly. His EC isn't satirical. Of course he's usually saying something between the lines, too. But despite the possibility that there's some parallels between Bishop Williamson's fate and what he's writing about this and that, his suggestions are very solid again. Some people here in this thread should take him more seriously!
Oh for sure he has a primary reading - exactly what the piece says - but there is a secondary reading and I'm sure it's not too far from what I wrote.
I don't disagree with the primary reading in the slightest - I think the Valtorta has a huge amount of good in it and I have publicly spoken about this work even defending it when many thought I was joking.
Once Bishop Williamson asked what should be done to wake up modern man to his spiritual realities and I responded openly "Read some of the Valtorta to him." They laughed at that but I was deadly serious.
However, since he likes to be "unpredictable" I am certain he has the secondary reading I proposed (but I am not him). Do you really think he would pass up the opportunity of his last EC (possibly) in the SSPX and not stand everybody on their head ? Didn't he just say a few weeks ago how much he "loved the attention" ? I'm sure he does (in so far as he is a man and prone to things temporal) but as a man in pursuit of holiness (I think not). In the sense that attention brings opportunity to convince others of the truth then bring it on, in the sense he seeks personal fame... then you certainly don't know the man.
Oh and as for satire - he has the wit of an Englishman and many people fail to distinguish the ancient arts that a schooling in the classics provide: hyperbole and satire amongst others.
I was just saying this morning that most people need the humor of gutter TV to laugh, but satire is a humor most people today cannot understand.
BTW if you want to get a handle on various readings to a text read a "theologo-novel" by Ratzinger those have many readings and none of them good.
.............. a few readers wrote in to ask just how homes might be fortified. In fact various spiritual and material means of defending home and family have been suggested in previous numbers of the “Comments”, notably of course the Holy Rosary, but one fortification has gone unmentioned which I think I would try in place of television if I had a family to defend: reading aloud each night to the children selected chapters from Maria Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God. And when we had reached the end of the five volumes in English, I imagine us starting again from the beginning, and so on, until all the children had left home !
I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady.
Those who were giving it high praise, even adulation, at the time were saying things like "but it fills in the gaps" (in Holy Scripture). What gaps did God leave in His book?
What's wrong with reading the Holy Bible as a family? Beats me!
Q: How can H.E. tell when his EC's satire has been a success?
A: When H.E. goes to CI and sees the discussion going like this -- It's satire.
No, it's not satire.
No, no, it's satire.
No, no, it's not satire.
Yes, it is, see here?
No, it's not: see there?
ETC.
"Neil Obstat," the misunderstanding is on your part. I'm referencing not only this most recent endorsement of "The Poem" from Bp. Williamson but all of the countless endorsements of this Midrash that he's made throughout his entire ministry, most of which go much farther than this most recent Eleison Comments.
Bp. Williamson has gone so far as to say that he stakes his theological reputation on "The Poem of the Man God" being entirely free of error. He has said explicitly in another Eleison Comments (CCI May 21, 2001, "Two Repentances") that he believes "The Poem" is from God.
This is a strange thing: (apart from the alleged literary qualities mentioned on this post)
that the Archbishop did not approve of it,
that it contains countless doctrinal errors
which any of the faithful parents are supposed to censor out, without theological qualifications;
the romanticizing and sentimentalizing of the Gospel events (filling in the gaps in God's word!):
- in spite oftheall these bad or impossible things, Bishop Williamson still saysQuote from: H.E.I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady.
in spite of the all these bad or impossible things, Bishop Williamson still says
Quote:
I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady.
What should children learn about Our Lord and Our Lady that can't be found in the Holy Bible and other reputable souces, such as the saints and Church approved visionaries?
That H.E. should write such a EC makes one wonder if his drinks have been laced. I cannot judge his intent, but there is definitely something amiss here.
Quote from: Neil Obstat
Q: How can H.E. tell when his EC's satire has been a success?
A: When H.E. goes to CI and sees the discussion going like this --
It's satire.
No, it's not satire.
No, no, it's satire.
No, no, it's not satire.
Yes, it is, see here?
No, it's not: see there?
ETC.
I would think that at a point like this Bishop Williamson would say in a mock American accent: "You got it !"
MP-
I think +Williamson knows exactly what he's doing. He could have chosen any number of books, but he chose that one. You're not giving him the credit he's due. The real question is: Why? And, BTW, I like +Williamson, so this isn't a criticism, just an observation.
:idea:
And if you can't decipher satire, don't take the advice of +Williamson!
Quote from: magdalena
MP-
I think +Williamson knows exactly what he's doing. He could have chosen any number of books, but he chose that one. You're not giving him the credit he's due. The real question is: Why? And, BTW, I like +Williamson, so this isn't a criticism, just an observation.
:idea:
I know +W has praised this book in the past (and it has been a scandal to many and a tool of his enemies) but it is really bad timing to do so now, when we were all awaiting a good word! Could EC be in the hands of others, already and now being used to distance the flock- from the shepherd?
I cannot think of any other explanation!
Quote from: Neil Obstat
And if you can't decipher satire, don't take the advice of +Williamson!
Not just satire but hyperbole as well: "I can imagine no end of things they would learn..." etc.)
Single-issue traditionalists who don't care about Augustine Bea's shepherding of the Midrash "of the Man God" past any criticism or his shepherding of Nostra Aetate through Vatican II or his shepherding of textual and historical criticism of Scripture into the Church may be interested to know of his role in shepherding the Novus Ordo Mass into Catholic parishes. Augustin Bea, along with Annibale Bugnini and others, was a member of the secretive Commission for Liturgical Reform from its very beginning in 1948. As we know, the first target of attack was the Holy Week liturgy.
There is a clear trajectory to his treachery for anyone with eyes to see. The Judaizing "Poem of the Man God" is very much in alignment with it.
It's disturbing to see how many traditional Catholics here eat our good Bishop Williamson alive, because on a rare occasion he dares to recommend a controversial book -- which was published in 10 or more volumes, so who can bear all its details in mind.
Folks, that's no way to treat an earned senior bishop -- our last one I'd like to add, as far as we Ex-(?)-SSPX'ers are concerned. Please show respect to this good bishop who's our friend, even when he writes something you don't agree with! And so please say your criticism carefully and with dignity, if it's criticism at all and not just hot air.
Otherwise the brave Bishop Richard "Lionheart" Williamson would have to think: With friends like these, who needs enemies?
I haven't read Valtorta and I just decided not to read it because my spiritual father says it's rather boring despite a few good passages. Yes, the good bishop recommended Valtorta in his writings sometimes, but remember that this "sometimes" is equal to very seldom.
Maybe it was in God's plan that this now controversial EC reaches those souls who liked Valtorta but who weren't aware of the EC? I would hope so... :-)
As a simple layman I can't judge if the good bishop is mistaken in recommending this controversial book. Yes, the brave bishop is having a soft spot for private-revelations. And we all have soft spots. I know however for sure that Bishop Williamson is an extremely good shepherd, and it's not right when traditional Catholics eat him alive here, and several times with "very, very limited intelligence" attacks (*).
Well, indeed the whole world and in particular we Catholics are in need of God's Chastisement, bringing a purification to the global and nearly total mess we are in. We're all doing just too fine, which feeds our arrogance. The burden to oppose bad popes and their hierarchy for 50+ years starts to be just too much for most of us. In the end we would trust no one anymore, not even the best clerics who're still there, because we would deny any authority...
Many here forgot that this EC's main point was the pedagogical aspect, i.e. parents reading out religious books to their children and then having a discussion round, with good questions from the children and even better answers from the parents. And I'm very thankful for that.
Many also forgot the circuмstances when this EC has been written: during the expulsion procedure of Bishop Williamson, when to had to fight the Menzingen betrayers tooth and nail. I heard one result of this fight is a longer and very hard hitting letter to the liberal Bp. Fellay, probably the "open letter" which Bp. Fellay mentioned (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Communiqu-of-the-General-House-of-the-SSPX). Hopefully this open letter will soon be in the open.
P.S. It's interesting to see how few of you commented the excellent Eleison-Comments during the last years... They've all been published here on Cathinfo. Still the echo was mostly very, very limited. Why so? We take it for granted that the good shepherd is publishing high-quality Eleison-Comments in five world languages week after week? We shouldn't.
(*) Like indirectly accusing him of Judaizing, or "Could EC be in the hands of others, already and now being used to distance the flock- from the shepherd?", or "Not just satire but hyperbole as well", or That H.E. should write such a EC makes one wonder if his drinks have been laced., I am not accusing +Williamson of being an infiltrator, but pointing to some facts which should make us to be cautious, to observe and to avoid trusting blindly in anyone..., etc. Oh dear.
Quote from: MiserereMeiDeusQuote from: AdolphusHis recommendation to read Valtorta's book, which was disapproved by the Church en 1949 and then included in the Index in 1959. Bp. Williamson has recommended this book at least two times.
In 1948 Pope Pius XII gave verbal permission for the book to be published according to three credible witnesses who signed a statement to that effect. When it was put on the index, the stated reason was that it hadn't been issued an imprimatur. Apparently the reason for that was that the publisher was in a big hurry to get it published and sent it straight to Rome without getting the local ordinary to sign off on it first. Anyway, it's not a straightforward story, with much more than meets the eye, and Vatican politics involved.
I'm sorry, but the verbal permission is unacceptable. Who says so? Those interested in publishing the book. It is hard to believe that the pope, without having read the whole writing would have ordered to be printed. You call three credible witnesses, but I wonder what makes you qualify them as credible.
What has been docuмented is that, in 1949 the Holy Office refused to give the Imprimatur. The book was printed anyway and then included in the Index.
The book contains confusing ideas, to say the least. Why to recommend it? Aren't there many other books without confusing ideas?
+Williamson said that even Maria Valtorta wasn't sure about who had inspired her the writings: God or Satan.
...a few readers wrote in to ask just how homes might be fortified. In fact various spiritual and material means of defending home and family have been suggested in previous numbers of the “Comments”, notably of course the Holy Rosary, but one fortification has gone unmentioned which I think I would try in place of television if I had a family to defend: reading aloud each night to the children selected chapters from Maria Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God. And when we had reached the end of the five volumes in English, I imagine us starting again from the beginning, and so on, until all the children had left home !
From the reading of chapters of the Poem selected according to the children’s age, I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady. And the questions they would ask ! And the answers that the parents would have to come up with !
an e-mail asking about Maria Valtorta and her Poem of the Man-God.... (from a friend who) received a recent issue of Kyrie Eleison comments of Bishop Richard Williamson titled “Home Reading” (October 20, 2012). In it, he recommends parents read selected chapters of the Poem of the Man-God to children every night.
Marian T. Horvat's book review of Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God published in response toQuotean e-mail asking about Maria Valtorta and her Poem of the Man-God.... (from a friend who) received a recent issue of Kyrie Eleison comments of Bishop Richard Williamson titled “Home Reading” (October 20, 2012). In it, he recommends parents read selected chapters of the Poem of the Man-God to children every night.
here: http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/A_042_Valtorta.htm
I recall reading Father Leonard Feeney's correspondence with Rome in the early 1950s and it was obvious there was a masonic infiltration intercepting his letters to Rome at that time.
This was about the same time that the Poem was brought into Pope Pius XII, by
by-passing normal channels.
It occurred to me that the Pope may have been aware of the masonic insiders and had used the "by-pass normal channels" technique to run Church business?
[/color]
Quote from: Incredulous
I recall reading Father Leonard Feeney's correspondence with Rome in the early 1950s and it was obvious there was a masonic infiltration intercepting his letters to Rome at that time.
This was about the same time that the Poem was brought into Pope Pius XII, by
by-passing normal channels.
It occurred to me that the Pope may have been aware of the masonic insiders and had used the "by-pass normal channels" technique to run Church business?
[/color]
I would say it was the other way around: father Bea by-passed the normal channels to avoid the good Church's defenses. He did so in the case of the Poem and in the case of that person who convinced John XXIII to convoke for a new Council.
Most readers of the EC 275 saw and heard it pretty much as you did, and so I must admit, I did as well -- at first.
Did he suggest reading this Poem in its entirety to children of all ages? No.
Did he recommend that it is better than the Rosary? No.
What did he recommend? He said that INSTEAD of Television, to "defend" your
family (from modern worldliness and associated attacks of the devil) selected
chapters (!) of the Poem could be read aloud. Did he say which chapters? No.
Did he explain how you can know if a given chapter is appropriate for YOUR age?
No, he did not.
If you are familiar with the style of +Williamson, you would know immediately, or at least upon due reflection, that what he is actually saying here is that Reading Vat.II docs because they say you can get an indulgence is just about as safe as reading Valtorta's Poem of the Man God to your children because a bishop says it can "fortify your home" -- for you know that there are DANGEROUS parts of Vat.II docs and there are DANGEROUS parts of the Poem, but you are not qualified to judge which parts those are!!
Does he say here that what they would 'learn' about Our Lord and Our Lady would necessarily be all 'good' things by your reading of even "selected chapters" that MAY be appropriate for their age group (and then again, maybe not!)? No, he does not.
In summary, if you do start reading the Poem to your family, you may:
~ be reading material inappropriate for their age, if you guess wrong;
~ be better off just praying the Rosary together;
~ likely select inappropriate chapters for any age, even your OWN age;
~ soon discover that you just never know when any sentence will scandalize you;
~ find your children learning EVIL things about Our Lord and Our Lady from the Poem;
~ be faced with difficult challenges to answer your children well;
~ discover your reading is pushing your children away from the faith.
Does it still look like he is recommending that you read the Poem to your family?
And furthermore, it is now evident that this EC 275 was a warm-up to his
OPEN LETTER TO BISHOP FELLAY ON AN "EXCLUSION" which is not quite as
cryptic as EC 275, but it does have its own hurdles to share. In other words,
if you could make it through the Poem (poetry often does not say what it seems
to say by looking only at the words it contains!)
know that he is
NOT really expecting you to read that drivel to your children, then you would
most likely be able to read the OPEN LETTER and know that you are not
misunderstanding that too.
However, if you read EC 275 and come away miffed that he's recommending
that you corrupt your family by following his advice, then perhaps you ought to
just take a powder* on the OPEN LETTER, because it's most likely it will go right over your head.
I had posted this on another thread (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=21258&min=20&num=5), but it refers to this one as well. So I just copied and pasted here:Quote from: Neil ObstatMost readers of the EC 275 saw and heard it pretty much as you did, and so I must admit, I did as well -- at first.
Well, this is something +Williamson should be aware of. The language is just a tool to express ideas, and if the language he uses is expressing different ideas of those he want(s) to share, then he needs either to educate his interlocutors (readers in this case) or to change his language.
Quote from: Neil ObstatDid he suggest reading this Poem in its entirety to children of all ages? No.
Did he recommend that it is better than the Rosary? No.
What did he recommend? He said that INSTEAD of Television, to "defend" your
family (from modern worldliness and associated attacks of the devil) selected
chapters (!) of the Poem could be read aloud. Did he say which chapters? No.
Did he explain how you can know if a given chapter is appropriate for YOUR age?
No, he did not.
In fact, H. E. does not even warn us about some chapters to be avoided. Certainly he says "selected chapters", but does not explicitly warn about some chapters being dangerous to the reader.
Quote from: Neil ObstatIf you are familiar with the style of +Williamson, you would know immediately, or at least upon due reflection, that what he is actually saying here is that Reading Vat.II docs because they say you can get an indulgence is just about as safe as reading Valtorta's Poem of the Man God to your children because a bishop says it can "fortify your home" -- for you know that there are DANGEROUS parts of Vat.II docs and there are DANGEROUS parts of the Poem, but you are not qualified to judge which parts those are!!
Sorry, but I don't see where H. E. says or even suggests that the Poem is dangerous. In fact, he makes an apology of the book, a very weak defense, though. And this Eleison comment is not the only one presenting the Poem as a work worth to read.
Quote from: Neil ObstatDoes he say here that what they would 'learn' about Our Lord and Our Lady would necessarily be all 'good' things by your reading of even "selected chapters" that MAY be appropriate for their age group (and then again, maybe not!)? No, he does not.
Does he say that some chapters might be inappropriate? No, he does not.
Does he say the book contains heresies? No, he does not. But he does say the seeming doctrinal errors are not difficult to explain.
Quote from: Neil ObstatIn summary, if you do start reading the Poem to your family, you may:
~ be reading material inappropriate for their age, if you guess wrong;
~ be better off just praying the Rosary together;
~ likely select inappropriate chapters for any age, even your OWN age;
~ soon discover that you just never know when any sentence will scandalize you;
~ find your children learning EVIL things about Our Lord and Our Lady from the Poem;
~ be faced with difficult challenges to answer your children well;
~ discover your reading is pushing your children away from the faith.
Does it still look like he is recommending that you read the Poem to your family?
I just find difficult to believe HE's comment can be summarized as you did. And this does not change whether I read it in English or in another language.
Quote from: Neil ObstatAnd furthermore, it is now evident that this EC 275 was a warm-up to his
OPEN LETTER TO BISHOP FELLAY ON AN "EXCLUSION" which is not quite as
cryptic as EC 275, but it does have its own hurdles to share. In other words,
if you could make it through the Poem (poetry often does not say what it seems
to say by looking only at the words it contains!)
The book is not really a poem. The word "poem" was used only for marketing purposes.
Quote from: Neil Obstatknow that he is
NOT really expecting you to read that drivel to your children, then you would
most likely be able to read the OPEN LETTER and know that you are not
misunderstanding that too.
You seem to be sure you have interpreted EC 275 very well. I wonder why so many persons have interpreted in a very different way. Persons including priests.
Quote from: Neil ObstatHowever, if you read EC 275 and come away miffed that he's recommending
that you corrupt your family by following his advice, then perhaps you ought to
just take a powder* on the OPEN LETTER, because it's most likely it will go right over your head.
I don't have problems reading the open letter. I'm not saying that +Williamson is recommending to corrupt our families. But
~ having signed a letter to thank BXVI for the lifting of the excommunications,
~ having sung the Te Deum to thank the deplorable Summorum pontificuм,
~ having said this motu proprio is favorable to the Tradition,
~ having presenting Maria Valtorta's book as something good to read,
~ having referred to BXVI as a pope with traditional heart but modernist head,
Bp. Williamson does not seem to be very trustable...
That's why I said I didn't know what to think of His Excellency.
But my point is, that +Fellay et. al. are not warning us
that parts of Vatican II ought to be avoided. That seems to be the whole point
of this Poem-that's-not-poetry fiasco here. He is using satire to ridicule falsehood.
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that +W signed the letter in hopes that it
may make some difference toward his punitive treatment in the Society that he
loves. If you are a father, you know that sometimes you may do things that hurt
yourself or someone else in the family, only because there is a greater good to
be had, even if it is a 'long shot.' And the more difficult your situation, the more
extreme your actions may become, respectively.
As for the motu proprio, you certainly can't disagree that in some respects, it was
a help for Tradition, after all, it had a positive effect of squelching the hateful
diatribe against the CTLM. I know for a fact, from people I know, that their
attitudes changed overnight. So while it may not have been perfect, it was not
entirely a BAD thing. So saying it was "favorable" doesn't seem to me to be a
poor choice of words at all. Maybe you could expand on this opinion of yours, that is, that +W's saying the motu proprio was "favourable" to Tradition was a mistake? No?
Regarding his "presenting Maria Valtorta's book as something good to read," I have
to agree that it seems to be a questionable move to give the APPEARANCE of
recommending this piece of TRASH. On the other hand, if he were to come out
saying that it's a piece of 'trash,' it would have been a big fat nothing at this time.
I think he was trying to accomplish something, but exactly what I don't know, and so I'm taking a WAG.
And finally,
~ having referred to BXVI as a pope with traditional heart but modernist head,
+W is saying here something I can completely agree with, and entirely disagree
with you for taking issue with it. It seems to me that the reason this is the case
is, once again, you are misinterpreting what he is saying. By saying his "head" is
Modernist, H.E. appeals directly to his intellect, which can think, provided that
its faculties are still operative, and Modernism tends to deaden faculties, per se.
Let me translate that for you, not because you may not understand me, but
because someone else reading this here public forum might misunderstand me.
It seems to me that +Williamson is effectively saying with this that "IF B16 has
an ounce of sense left in between his ears after a lifetime of having his
thinking noodle deep-fried in the cauldron of the sewer of all heresies (dregs
up a particular fragment of the тαℓмυd don't it?), then perhaps, and this might
be a "long shot," (sometimes a father takes extreme measures when there is a
hope for success) perhaps he might be able to see that Tradition is a better
road than the one the Church has been hijacked onto for the past half century."
But you see, he did not explain the intention behind the 'traditional heart' phrase.
That is, he did not explain his OWN intention, nor did he explain the POPE'S
intention. Now you might well note that nobody can explain someone else's
intention, unless they can show where that someone has explained their OWN
intention. +W is here saying that he is not "at war" with the Pope, and is willing
to give him the benefit of the doubt, in hopes, let us say, that even at this late
stage, B16 may undergo some kind of miraculous conversion. For it is in the heart
that such conversions take place, is it not? It reminds me of a parenting doctrine
that says you don't call your child a "bad boy," because when he hears that over
and over and over again, eventually he will believe it, and then there will not be
any way to reach him. So if you say the Pope has a "traditional heart," and
presuming the Pope ever sees this phrase or hears that you said it, there may be
a chance that it nudges him in the right direction. Let's face it, it would have
more of a positive influence than seeing a growing number of Catholics proclaiming
that he could not possibly BE the Pope, and therefore he is NOT the Pope.
Thank you Maurice, for your insightful and informative posts on this book. I don't have a copy to refer to, but I remember years ago my husband reading and discovering bits which contradicted the Holy Bible, though of course I cannot quote them. Only relating what my husband pointed out at the time.
Those who were giving it high praise, even adulation, at the time were saying things like "but it fills in the gaps" (in Holy Scripture). What gaps did God leave in His book?
What's wrong with reading the Holy Bible as a family? Beats me!
Quote from: curioustradI think you have all missed the typical British humor that this column contains. It is just brimming with satire and quite funny and definitely very clever:
Read it with my pair of glasses:
Eleison Comments Number CCLXXV (275)
20 October 2012
HOME READING
When a while back these “Comments” advised readers to fortify their homes in case public bastions of the Faith might, due to the wickedness of the times, prove to be a thing of the past, a few readers wrote in to ask just how homes might be fortified. In fact various spiritual and material means of defending home and family have been suggested in previous numbers of the “Comments”, notably of course the Holy Rosary, but one fortification has gone unmentioned which I think I would try in place of television if I had a family to defend: reading aloud each night to the children selected chapters from Maria Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God. (Of course the topic is controversial - but isn't it the Bishop's controversy that is leading to his ouster - he's poking fun at himself here loud and clear) And when we had reached the end of the five volumes in English, I imagine us starting again from the beginning, and so on, until all the children had left home ! (Yes you have to keep on saying that 2+2=4 until this kid i.e. himself leaves home - and even after)
Yet the Poem has many and eloquent enemies. (Who doesn't around here ?) It consists of episodes from the lives of Our Lord and Our Lady, from her immaculate conception through to her assumption into Heaven, as seen in visions received, believably from Heaven, during the Second World War in northern Italy by Maria Valtorta, an unmarried woman of mature age lying in a sick-bed, permanently crippled from an injury to her back inflicted several years earlier. (Any one for a TV interview and an enforced stay in St. George's House ?) Notes included in the Italian edition (running to over four thousand pages in ten volumes) show how afraid she was of being deceived by the Devil, and many people are not in fact convinced that the Poem truly came from God. Let us look at three main objections.
Firstly, the Poem was put on the Church’s Index of forbidden books in the 1950’s, (and so have I) which was before Rome (SSPX) went neo-modernist in the 1960’s. The reason given for the condemnation was the romanticizing and sentimentalizing of the Gospel events. Secondly the Poem is accused of countless doctrinal errors. Thirdly Archbishop Lefebvre objected to the Poem that its giving so many physical details of Our Lord’s daily life makes him too material, and brings us too far down from the spiritual level of the four Gospels. (Guess who else is about to be put on ice by writing another column for you)
But firstly, how could the modernists have taken over Rome in the 1960’s, as they did, had they not already been well established within Rome in the 1950’s ? (As they are indeed in the Society and for a long time already) The Poem, like the Gospels (e.g. Jn.XI, 35, etc.), is full of sentiment but always proportional to its object. The Poem is for any sane judge, in my opinion, neither sentimental nor romanticized. (But who cares ? He's already been called a crank by the "crow" and others within the SSPX !) Secondly, the seeming doctrinal errors are not difficult to explain, one by one, as is done by a competent theologian in the notes to be found in the Italian edition of the Poem. (Yes and the Fellay regime will explain away all the doctrinal problems of Vatcian II by the new notes in the 16 Council Texts that BXVI will pencil in this year of Faith) And thirdly, with all due respect to Archbishop Lefebvre, I would argue that modern man needs the material detail for him to believe again in the reality of the Gospels. Has not too much “spirituality” kicked Our Lord upstairs, so to speak, while cinema and television have taken over modern man’s sense of reality on the ground floor ? As Our Lord was true man and true God, so the Poem is at every moment both fully spiritual and fully material. (With all due respect to today's Superior General the SSPX has kicked Our Lord upstairs as well)
From non-electronic reading of the Poem in the home (Excuse me but aren't you reading me now, here, on the internet, on your computer ? - This is the greatest satirical comment of them all) , I can imagine many benefits, besides the real live contact between parents reading and children listening. (With switched off computers as the SSPX superiors would dearly love me to stop writing and you reading) Children (You dear reader) soak in from their surroundings like sponges soak in water. From the reading of chapters of the Poem selected according to the children’s age, I can imagine almost no end to how much they could learn about Our Lord and Our Lady. And the questions they would ask ! (Aren't you going to start asking what the heck the SSPX bigwigs are up to with a sell out ?) And the answers that the parents would have to come up with ! (Howler !) I do believe the Poem could greatly fortify a home. (Dripping with sarcasm as we say in England)
Kyrie eleison.
It makes no sense.
Quote from: NadirThank you Maurice, for your insightful and informative posts on this book. I don't have a copy to refer to, but I remember years ago my husband reading and discovering bits which contradicted the Holy Bible, though of course I cannot quote them. Only relating what my husband pointed out at the time.
Those who were giving it high praise, even adulation, at the time were saying things like "but it fills in the gaps" (in Holy Scripture). What gaps did God leave in His book?
What's wrong with reading the Holy Bible as a family? Beats me!
You are right.
Many years ago I was recommended by my spiritual director to read "The Poem". He said it would change my life. I went to the bookstore (SSPX) to find it only to be told that they were forbidden to sell it by Father Laisney. I was confused due to the fact that my director was an important priest of the Society and he was in disagreement with another important priest of the Society. Well, I was young and I have long since become used to that, realizing that differing of opinions have always existed within the Church, even among holy priests, theologians and even saints.
I never pursued reading the books after that and I have read many things over the years that made me think I should not read them. But after listening to Fr. Robinson's talk on Valtorta's works, I am certainly going to read them! I have heard that Padre Pio recommended them and it may be. But hearing that Fr. Barrielle recommended them so highly is enough for me. I know enough about him to know that anything he recommended is good.
I found the book in pdf form online and that is great since it is expensive!
http://www.advancedchristianity.com/docuмents/pmg_mval17_08_1_e.pdf
But after listening to Fr. Robinson's talk on Valtorta's works, I am certainly going to read them! I have heard that Padre Pio recommended them and it may be. But hearing that Fr. Barrielle recommended them so highly is enough for me. I know enough about him to know that anything he recommended is good.
Pilar:QuoteBut after listening to Fr. Robinson's talk on Valtorta's works, I am certainly going to read them! I have heard that Padre Pio recommended them and it may be. But hearing that Fr. Barrielle recommended them so highly is enough for me. I know enough about him to know that anything he recommended is good.
Good, Pilar. Maria Valtorta is wonderful! Her writings are wonderful! Her insights are wonderful! The Poem is an exquisite work. I recommend it highly to all Cathinfo members, (except, of course, those few who may get a "headache" from reading her.)
There's much too much diabolical disorientation in these evil times to be entertaining controversial private revelations. That's a no brainer. Rome can hardly weigh in to assist us w/ nihil obstat and grant imprimaturs. So, as in all things related to our Faith, be safe with tradition to minimize satanic influence.
From Tradition in Action: Valtorta's Poem of the Man-God
Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God
Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
Book review of Peom of the Man-God by Maria Valtorta, 10 volumes, online edition
A friend recently sent me an e-mail asking about Maria Valtorta and her Poem of the Man-God. She received a recent issue of Kyrie Eleison comments of Bishop Richard Williamson titled “Home Reading” (October 20, 2012). In it, he recommends parents read selected chapters of the Poem of the Man-God to children every night.
He admits the Poem is controversial and has many enemies, but he defends Valtorta’s massive tome (4,000 pages in 10 volumes of supposed visions she received of the life of Christ). The Bishop supports it, despite the objections he lists: that it is riddled with doctrinal errors, that it humanizes Our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the work was placed on the Church’s Index of Forbidden Books in the 1950s.
He lightly dismisses all the arguments against it and concludes children will learn much about Our Lord and Our Lady from the Poem, which “will fortify a home.”
“I have not read this book,” my friend continues, “but, for Heaven’s sake, why didn’t Bishop W. recommend reading the wonderful, approved, written-by-a-canonized saint 4-volume City of God by Mother Mary of Agreda? But that is beside the point. I really do wish to know if you approve of the Poem of the Man-God. Even the title upsets my Catholic sensibilities.”
A humanized Christ
I believe my friend should follow her good Catholic sense. The very title, the Man-God , expresses the spirit of the work. It is Jesus as a man that Valtorta presents: a babe suckling greedily at his Mother’s breasts, a youth hardly aware of Who He is, a Man who laughs and jokes with His Apostles and is constantly kissing them on the mouth and embracing them closely. Yes, at the least, it is difficult not to suspect this showy Jesus pictured in such way as having ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies.
Valtorta’s natural approach is supposed to attract the modern man to the Life of Christ. It is in tune with the progressivist doctrine that tries to deny the supernatural and instead presents Our Lady as a simple Jєωιѕн woman and focuses on Our Lord as being a man “like us.” As Atila Guimaraes points out in Animus Injuriandi I, the progressivist Church aims to de-mythify and de-supernaturalize Christ and His Mother under the guise of presenting a natural “historical” Christ and Mary.” I believe Valtorta’s Jesus and Mary fit this mold.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Jesus.jpg
An illustration of Valtorta's Jesus, a somewhat occult figure with a magnetic gaze
Valtorta’s Man-God depiction is the opposite of the God-Man portrayed by Anne Catherine Emmerich and Ven. Mary of Agreda, whose life of Christ is presented from an elevated, supernatural vantage point. One cannot help but wonder why the traditionalist Bishop would not recommend these works, instead of the Valtorta tomes, which were officially condemned by the Holy Office and placed on the Index in December 1959 and defined by L’Osservatore Romano of January 6,1960 as “a badly fictionalized life of Jesus.”
After Vatican II, Paul VI abolished the Index of Forbidden Books, and Valtorta’s supporters claim this nullifies the suppression of 1959. Unfortunately, the official position of the Church today is less than clear, with important Prelates and Catholic figures on both sides of the issue. Obviously, the progressivists, almost to the man, defend it.
The Poem of the Man-God, I believe, is riddled with banalities, vulgarities, blasphemies and even doctrinal errors. There are endless idle conversations between Our Lord, Our Lady and the Apostles, all on a natural level. I think the best way to confirm these points is simply to cite some texts, which are so revolting that they speak for themselves.
The quotes that follow are taken from an online edition of The Poem of the Man-God. A 48-page critique written in the 1980s – when the Poem’s popularity surged for a period, as it seems to be resurging now – by a Salesian, Brother James, S.D.B., can be read in its entirety here.
An Infant conceived with original sin
Valtorta portrays the Christ Child as a greedy infant of a sentimental Mother. It is difficult to find the respect we owe to Our Lord Jesus Christ in this imaginary immodest description of a nursing scene:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Mary.jpg
The Man-God presents a naturalistic view of Our Lady and the Christ Child
“Jesus opens His eyes, sees His Mother and smiles and stretches His little hands toward Her breast.
“[Mary] ‘Yes, love of Your Mummy. Yes. Your milk. Before the usual time. But You are always ready to suck Your Mummy's breast, My little holy Lamb!’
“Jesus laughs and plays, kicking His feet out of the blankets, moving His arms happily in a typical childish style, so beautiful to see. He pushes His feet against His Mummy's stomach. He arches His back leaning His fair head on Her breast, and then throws Himself back and laughs, holding with His hands the laces that tie Mary's dress to Her neck, endeavoring to open it. …
“Mary nurses Him and Jesus avidly sucks His Mother's good milk, and when He feels that only a little is coming from Her right breast, He looks for the left one, laughing while doing so and looking up at His Mother. Then He falls asleep again on Her breast, His rosy round little cheek resting against Her white round breast.” (Vol 1, n. 35, p. 106).
An Adult with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies
Valtorta’s Jesus suspiciously displays ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies since he is constantly kissing and embracing the Apostles. When Jesus tells James of His approaching Passion, James reacts with great emotion. Jesus comforts him thus:
“’Come, I will kiss you thus, to help you forget the burden of My fate as Man. Here, I kiss your lips that will have to repeat My words to the people of Israel and your heart that will have to love as I told you, and there, on your temple, where life will cease.’ … They remain embraced for a long time and James seems to doze off in the joy of God's kisses that make him forget his suffering.”
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Allegra.jpg
Recently beatified Gabriel Allegra, a Teilhard de Chardin colleague, was a promoter of the Man-God Poem [Chardin was a condemned heretic naturalistic Pantheist and practitioner of witchcraft]
When Valtorta describes the “favorite” Apostle John as having the face of a young girl with the “gaze of a lover,” we can hardly avoid having the impression that they have a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ relationship. Here Jesus is kissing John to awaken him:
“Jesus 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.’ …
“John, half naked in his under-tunic, because he used his tunic and mantle as bed covers, clasps Jesus’ neck and lays his head between Jesus’ shoulder and cheek.”
After John professes his belief and love in Jesus as Son of God, “he smiles and weeps, panting, inflamed by his love, relaxing on Jesus’ chest, as if he were exhausted by his ardor. And Jesus caresses him, burning with love Himself.”
John begs Jesus not to tell the others of what has passed between them. Jesus replies, “Do not worry, John. No one will be aware of your wedding with the Love. Get dressed, come. We must leave.” (Vol. 2, n. 165, pp. 57-58)
Jesus suggests a love-affair between St. Peter and Our Lady
Jesus even jokes with impropriety with his apostles. Here, Jesus stands up and calls out loudly and angrily to Peter:
“‘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?’
“Jesus smiles and Peter recovers his confidence. ‘You really frightened me! Now You are laughing.” (Vol. II, n. 199, p. 185)
Like Luther, Mary thinks: Let us sin to be forgiven
Some passages are tantamount to heresy. For example, Valtorta presents the child Mary as expressing her desire to be a big sinner in order to merit the grace of Redemption:
“[Mary]: ‘Tell Me, mummy, can one be a sinner out of love of God?
“[Anne]: ‘What are you saying, my dear? I don't understand you.’
“[Mary]:’I mean: to commit a sin in order to be loved by God, Who becomes the Savior. Who is lost, is saved. Isn’t that so? I would like to be saved by the Savior to receive His loving look." (Vol. 1, n. 7, p. 23).
A sensual Eve tending toward bestiality
The work is also not without doctrinal errors, such as when Valtorta asserts the sin of Eve was not disobedience, but a sɛҳuąƖ act. There is also an insinuation of a tendency toward bestiality in Eve. This erotic description was supposedly made by Jesus:
“With his venomous tongue Satan blandished and caressed Eve’s limbs and eyes… Her flesh was aroused … The sensation is a sweet one for her. 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.” (Vol. 1, n. 17, p. 49)
These are some excerpts I offer to my readers to evaluate Valtorta’s work. I believe they are sufficient for the reader to make a judgment of the whole.
It is thus understandable that the Holy Office placed the work on the Index of Forbidden Books, which is reproduced below. It is also understandable that the Salesian Brother James concluded his critique of the first two volumes with these words: “Poem of the Man-God is so demonic that without a special grace from Our Lord Jesus, we could be deceived by the seemingly harmless statements by Valtorta’s Jesus, but they enclose lies and heresy, contrary to the teachings of One, Holy Catholic Church.”
*
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Decree.jpg
Supreme Congregation of
the Holy Office
Decree
Proscription of Books
Wednesday, December 16, 1959
The Most Eminent and Reverend Cardinals of the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, to whom the safeguarding of things of the Faith and Moral is confided, after receiving the previous opinions of the Consultors, have unanimously condemned and ordered that the books by an anonymous author, in four volumes, be inscribed in the Index of Forbidden Books, the first of those books being:
Il Poema di Gesù [The Poem of Jesus] (Tipografia Editrice M. Pisani);
followed by,
Il Poema dell'Uomo-Dio [The Poem of the Man-God], (Ibidem).
On Friday of that same month and year, the Most Holy and Dignified Lord John XXIII, Pope by the grace of Divine Providence, in an audience given to the Most Eminent and Reverend Cardinal Secretary of the Holy Office, after hearing the report of the Most Reverend Fathers, approved this resolution and commanded that it be published.
Given in Rome, in the seat of the
Holy Office on January 5, 1960.
Sebastian Masala, Notary
It is best to scroll down in the left hand column and click on the section entitled 'A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work'. That will download a large docuмent by Stephen Austin which will answer every criticism of the Poem. And you critics, I dare you to do the same.
Avis:QuoteIt is best to scroll down in the left hand column and click on the section entitled 'A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work'. That will download a large docuмent by Stephen Austin which will answer every criticism of the Poem. And you critics, I dare you to do the same.
Well finally! Someone comes along with a bit of assistance. I want ladislaus and the other Cathinfo pharisees to go immediately to the site and download that docuмent from Stephen Austin. Read it, and stop calling His Excellency a promoter of "filth" and guilty of "mortal sin." Remember, the original pharisees, whose spirit some have you have imbibed. They said Jesus had a devil. :read-paper:
Quote from: hollingsworthPilar:QuoteBut after listening to Fr. Robinson's talk on Valtorta's works, I am certainly going to read them! I have heard that Padre Pio recommended them and it may be. But hearing that Fr. Barrielle recommended them so highly is enough for me. I know enough about him to know that anything he recommended is good.
Good, Pilar. Maria Valtorta is wonderful! Her writings are wonderful! Her insights are wonderful! The Poem is an exquisite work. I recommend it highly to all Cathinfo members, (except, of course, those few who may get a "headache" from reading her.)
You'd be well-advised to do the exact opposite of what nothingsworth tells you to do. Honestly, nothingsworth needs to be banned for his shamelessly avid promotion of a work that had been consigned to the Index.
She roundly condemns Anna Catherine Emmerich's visions as fantasy, but I think it is her writings that are fantasy. I can't understand why Fr. Barrielle would promote them or why +Williamson does either?
Pilar, do not put God to the test. As PerEvangelicaDicta said wisely on the thread mentioned below:QuoteThere's much too much diabolical disorientation in these evil times to be entertaining controversial private revelations. That's a no brainer. Rome can hardly weigh in to assist us w/ nihil obstat and grant imprimaturs. So, as in all things related to our Faith, be safe with tradition to minimize satanic influence.
There are too many good books written by saints and scholars to even think about immersing yourself in the muck that is Valtorta's writing. Fallible priests have led people astray before this, and in these confused days they still do, some wittingly, some unwittingly.
Valtorta has been discussed here ad nauseam. Have you read the other thread on Valtorta? You can find it here: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=36278&min=0&num=5
This article from Tradition in action sums it up pretty well:QuoteFrom Tradition in Action: Valtorta's Poem of the Man-God
Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God
Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
Book review of Peom of the Man-God by Maria Valtorta, 10 volumes, online edition
A friend recently sent me an e-mail asking about Maria Valtorta and her Poem of the Man-God. She received a recent issue of Kyrie Eleison comments of Bishop Richard Williamson titled “Home Reading” (October 20, 2012). In it, he recommends parents read selected chapters of the Poem of the Man-God to children every night.
He admits the Poem is controversial and has many enemies, but he defends Valtorta’s massive tome (4,000 pages in 10 volumes of supposed visions she received of the life of Christ). The Bishop supports it, despite the objections he lists: that it is riddled with doctrinal errors, that it humanizes Our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the work was placed on the Church’s Index of Forbidden Books in the 1950s.
He lightly dismisses all the arguments against it and concludes children will learn much about Our Lord and Our Lady from the Poem, which “will fortify a home.”
“I have not read this book,” my friend continues, “but, for Heaven’s sake, why didn’t Bishop W. recommend reading the wonderful, approved, written-by-a-canonized saint 4-volume City of God by Mother Mary of Agreda? But that is beside the point. I really do wish to know if you approve of the Poem of the Man-God. Even the title upsets my Catholic sensibilities.”
A humanized Christ
I believe my friend should follow her good Catholic sense. The very title, the Man-God , expresses the spirit of the work. It is Jesus as a man that Valtorta presents: a babe suckling greedily at his Mother’s breasts, a youth hardly aware of Who He is, a Man who laughs and jokes with His Apostles and is constantly kissing them on the mouth and embracing them closely. Yes, at the least, it is difficult not to suspect this showy Jesus pictured in such way as having ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies.
Valtorta’s natural approach is supposed to attract the modern man to the Life of Christ. It is in tune with the progressivist doctrine that tries to deny the supernatural and instead presents Our Lady as a simple Jєωιѕн woman and focuses on Our Lord as being a man “like us.” As Atila Guimaraes points out in Animus Injuriandi I, the progressivist Church aims to de-mythify and de-supernaturalize Christ and His Mother under the guise of presenting a natural “historical” Christ and Mary.” I believe Valtorta’s Jesus and Mary fit this mold.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Jesus.jpg
An illustration of Valtorta's Jesus, a somewhat occult figure with a magnetic gaze
Valtorta’s Man-God depiction is the opposite of the God-Man portrayed by Anne Catherine Emmerich and Ven. Mary of Agreda, whose life of Christ is presented from an elevated, supernatural vantage point. One cannot help but wonder why the traditionalist Bishop would not recommend these works, instead of the Valtorta tomes, which were officially condemned by the Holy Office and placed on the Index in December 1959 and defined by L’Osservatore Romano of January 6,1960 as “a badly fictionalized life of Jesus.”
After Vatican II, Paul VI abolished the Index of Forbidden Books, and Valtorta’s supporters claim this nullifies the suppression of 1959. Unfortunately, the official position of the Church today is less than clear, with important Prelates and Catholic figures on both sides of the issue. Obviously, the progressivists, almost to the man, defend it.
The Poem of the Man-God, I believe, is riddled with banalities, vulgarities, blasphemies and even doctrinal errors. There are endless idle conversations between Our Lord, Our Lady and the Apostles, all on a natural level. I think the best way to confirm these points is simply to cite some texts, which are so revolting that they speak for themselves.
The quotes that follow are taken from an online edition of The Poem of the Man-God. A 48-page critique written in the 1980s – when the Poem’s popularity surged for a period, as it seems to be resurging now – by a Salesian, Brother James, S.D.B., can be read in its entirety here.
An Infant conceived with original sin
Valtorta portrays the Christ Child as a greedy infant of a sentimental Mother. It is difficult to find the respect we owe to Our Lord Jesus Christ in this imaginary immodest description of a nursing scene:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Mary.jpg
The Man-God presents a naturalistic view of Our Lady and the Christ Child
“Jesus opens His eyes, sees His Mother and smiles and stretches His little hands toward Her breast.
“[Mary] ‘Yes, love of Your Mummy. Yes. Your milk. Before the usual time. But You are always ready to suck Your Mummy's breast, My little holy Lamb!’
“Jesus laughs and plays, kicking His feet out of the blankets, moving His arms happily in a typical childish style, so beautiful to see. He pushes His feet against His Mummy's stomach. He arches His back leaning His fair head on Her breast, and then throws Himself back and laughs, holding with His hands the laces that tie Mary's dress to Her neck, endeavoring to open it. …
“Mary nurses Him and Jesus avidly sucks His Mother's good milk, and when He feels that only a little is coming from Her right breast, He looks for the left one, laughing while doing so and looking up at His Mother. Then He falls asleep again on Her breast, His rosy round little cheek resting against Her white round breast.” (Vol 1, n. 35, p. 106).
An Adult with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies
Valtorta’s Jesus suspiciously displays ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies since he is constantly kissing and embracing the Apostles. When Jesus tells James of His approaching Passion, James reacts with great emotion. Jesus comforts him thus:
“’Come, I will kiss you thus, to help you forget the burden of My fate as Man. Here, I kiss your lips that will have to repeat My words to the people of Israel and your heart that will have to love as I told you, and there, on your temple, where life will cease.’ … They remain embraced for a long time and James seems to doze off in the joy of God's kisses that make him forget his suffering.”
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Allegra.jpg
Recently beatified Gabriel Allegra, a Teilhard de Chardin colleague, was a promoter of the Man-God Poem [Chardin was a condemned heretic naturalistic Pantheist and practitioner of witchcraft]
When Valtorta describes the “favorite” Apostle John as having the face of a young girl with the “gaze of a lover,” we can hardly avoid having the impression that they have a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ relationship. Here Jesus is kissing John to awaken him:
“Jesus 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.’ …
“John, half naked in his under-tunic, because he used his tunic and mantle as bed covers, clasps Jesus’ neck and lays his head between Jesus’ shoulder and cheek.”
After John professes his belief and love in Jesus as Son of God, “he smiles and weeps, panting, inflamed by his love, relaxing on Jesus’ chest, as if he were exhausted by his ardor. And Jesus caresses him, burning with love Himself.”
John begs Jesus not to tell the others of what has passed between them. Jesus replies, “Do not worry, John. No one will be aware of your wedding with the Love. Get dressed, come. We must leave.” (Vol. 2, n. 165, pp. 57-58)
Jesus suggests a love-affair between St. Peter and Our Lady
Jesus even jokes with impropriety with his apostles. Here, Jesus stands up and calls out loudly and angrily to Peter:
“‘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?’
“Jesus smiles and Peter recovers his confidence. ‘You really frightened me! Now You are laughing.” (Vol. II, n. 199, p. 185)
Like Luther, Mary thinks: Let us sin to be forgiven
Some passages are tantamount to heresy. For example, Valtorta presents the child Mary as expressing her desire to be a big sinner in order to merit the grace of Redemption:
“[Mary]: ‘Tell Me, mummy, can one be a sinner out of love of God?
“[Anne]: ‘What are you saying, my dear? I don't understand you.’
“[Mary]:’I mean: to commit a sin in order to be loved by God, Who becomes the Savior. Who is lost, is saved. Isn’t that so? I would like to be saved by the Savior to receive His loving look." (Vol. 1, n. 7, p. 23).
A sensual Eve tending toward bestiality
The work is also not without doctrinal errors, such as when Valtorta asserts the sin of Eve was not disobedience, but a sɛҳuąƖ act. There is also an insinuation of a tendency toward bestiality in Eve. This erotic description was supposedly made by Jesus:
“With his venomous tongue Satan blandished and caressed Eve’s limbs and eyes… Her flesh was aroused … The sensation is a sweet one for her. 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.” (Vol. 1, n. 17, p. 49)
These are some excerpts I offer to my readers to evaluate Valtorta’s work. I believe they are sufficient for the reader to make a judgment of the whole.
It is thus understandable that the Holy Office placed the work on the Index of Forbidden Books, which is reproduced below. It is also understandable that the Salesian Brother James concluded his critique of the first two volumes with these words: “Poem of the Man-God is so demonic that without a special grace from Our Lord Jesus, we could be deceived by the seemingly harmless statements by Valtorta’s Jesus, but they enclose lies and heresy, contrary to the teachings of One, Holy Catholic Church.”
*
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_Decree.jpg
Supreme Congregation of
the Holy Office
Decree
Proscription of Books
Wednesday, December 16, 1959
The Most Eminent and Reverend Cardinals of the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, to whom the safeguarding of things of the Faith and Moral is confided, after receiving the previous opinions of the Consultors, have unanimously condemned and ordered that the books by an anonymous author, in four volumes, be inscribed in the Index of Forbidden Books, the first of those books being:
Il Poema di Gesù [The Poem of Jesus] (Tipografia Editrice M. Pisani);
followed by,
Il Poema dell'Uomo-Dio [The Poem of the Man-God], (Ibidem).
On Friday of that same month and year, the Most Holy and Dignified Lord John XXIII, Pope by the grace of Divine Providence, in an audience given to the Most Eminent and Reverend Cardinal Secretary of the Holy Office, after hearing the report of the Most Reverend Fathers, approved this resolution and commanded that it be published.
Given in Rome, in the seat of the
Holy Office on January 5, 1960.
Sebastian Masala, Notary
Why are people still criticising the Poem with out referring to Stephen Austin's excellent piece of work. He easily destroys Horvath's nonsense and all other objections. What are you scared of?
In case you missed it. This is what I said before -
Read this website Valtorta site (http://www.valtorta.org.au/)
It is best to scroll down in the left hand column and click on the section entitled 'A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work'. That will download a large docuмent by Stephen Austin which will answer every criticism of the Poem. And you critics, I dare you to do this.
" WHAT ABOUT NON-CATHOLICS AND NON-CHRISTIANS?
(The Holy Spirit says:)
"Here is the promise. And here is the reply to whoever believes that only a Catholic can save himself...
"God has every power. God has every mercy. And His joy is to communicate Himself to the spirits who yearn for the unknown God (See Acts 17:23-31) - whom they feel exists without knowing how, who, where He is, nor how to go to Him...
"Many. Many. Yes. Because God justifies the uncircuмcised by means of faith, and the circuмcised by means of faith. And truly, many times the uncircuмcised - out of the mysterious faith that inspires them (a divine gift to these with good will), without knowing the works prescribed by the Law - work better than those who know them, by showing thus that faith is even more valuable than the Law in saving man. Because where there is faith in an unknown God, Who loves and rewards for the good done in His honour, there is hope and there is love. And where there is love, there is salvation. Because truly, at the end of time, those who were not baptized with water will be baptized with Fire, that is, with the Love given as a reward for their love."
Why are people still criticising the Poem with out referring to Stephen Austin's excellent piece of work.
Because Abp. Lefebvre disliked it (The Poem).
Because Valtorta herself confessed that she was not sure whether God or Satan had inspired her to write it.
Why are we even having this conversation again?
Traditional Catholics' ignorance of Scripture is legendary. Why not start with that -- read the entire Bible through from cover to cover at least once.
Read the Gospels themselves many times, until you know what's there (and what isn't). Unlike the protestants, we don't need to memorize where each passage came from. You can always look it up later on DRBO.org. But even DRBO won't help you if you don't know what you're looking for! So you need to familiarize yourself with what's in Scripture -- in doing so, you also learn what ISN'T in there, which is equally useful.
Then, read a concordance or Life of Christ based on Scripture. I learned a lot from one of these. I'm trying to remember the author. It's basically all 4 Gospels put together, with Catholic commentary and historical details to really flesh it out.
And once you have that foundation, then it's time for some approved private revelation if you have time.
The Life of Mary as Seen by the Mystics (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895554364/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0895554364&linkCode=as2&tag=httpwwwchanco-20&linkId=J4JSZ6EUTYKACB6J), written by 4 approved Catholic mystics, would be a good start. And then Venerable/Blessed/Saint (take your pick) Anne Catherine Emmerich wrote a 4-volume Life of Christ and Biblical Revelations (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895557916/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0895557916&linkCode=as2&tag=httpwwwchanco-20&linkId=ECNHSIYQVZYXRYIH). The 3rd volume of this series is better known as "The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ". Mystical City of God (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895558254/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0895558254&linkCode=as2&tag=httpwwwchanco-20&linkId=UMYQ2XY3SLDKJICZ) comes to mind as well.
That is PLENTY of reading material there, just restricting yourself to non-controversial, solid, Church-approved visionaries.
If you are done with all of that -- then I suppose cracking open "Poem of the Man God" wouldn't do you much harm -- because anything erroneous or bad in the work would be recognized and repugnant to you, clashing with everything you've read up till now. You will likely end up putting the book down on your own.
But for those who haven't even read the Bible yet? It's vain curiosity, sentimentality, and imprudence talking. DON'T DO IT!
P.S.
And no, you don't have to turn in your "support +Williamson" card if you choose to reject his advice on this matter. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I am one of +W's greatest supporters, but I recognize that no one is perfect and in the scheme of things, this isn't that big of a deal.
Incidentally, he can't really blame me for disagreeing with him on this; I have some pretty good reasons (above) and at least I'm thinking for myself. That's what he taught us to do.
Then, read a concordance or Life of Christ based on Scripture. I learned a lot from one of these. I'm trying to remember the author. It's basically all 4 Gospels put together, with Catholic commentary and historical details to really flesh it out.
If you read enough of the two and make a comparison, you will see two very different types of women portrayed as Our Lady and Agreda's account will lift your spirits and enlighten you and increase your devotion to Our Lady. Valtorta's portrayal will make Her seem like the rest of us or worse, leaving you with no inclination to pray to Her because She seems no different than you or I so why bother? Her dignity as Mother of God is downplayed as is Jesus's as the Son of God. Horvat's assessment is spot on.
It's helpful to meditate on the life of Our Lord and Our Lady, especially while saying the Rosary. A good "Life" comes in very handy and many saints have recommended such books. But please--stay away from Valtorta! In all my years of reading, in all the hundreds or more books and many "Life of..." -- nothing is as despicable as this. I consider it blasphemous. It is an insult to God's sanctity and Our Lady's immaculate soul. Please don't let such thoughts and imaginings as she writes even enter your mind.