Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Matthew on December 23, 2018, 08:46:04 AM

Title: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Matthew on December 23, 2018, 08:46:04 AM
Number DXCVII (597)
December 22, 2018
Heart’s Protection
A corner must be kept in every heart
For the Christmas scene joy always to impart.

Here is a precious account of how Christmas may have protected the Immaculate Heart of Mary from being overcome by her intimate participation in the Passion of her divine Son –
“The ecstatic bliss of my giving birth came over me like the essence of a flower, enclosed in the living vase of my heart, for the rest of my life. An indescribable joy. Human, and superhuman. Perfect joy.
“When my heart was pierced every evening of my Son’s life with the painful reminder, ‘One day less of waiting, one day closer to Calvary,’ and when my soul was smothered in pain as though a wave of torture had swept over it, being a wave in advance from the flood of torment that overwhelmed me on Golgotha, I would in spirit lean over the memory of the bliss of Holy Night that had remained alive in my heart, like one would lean over a narrow mountain gorge to listen to the echo of a song of love, or to see in the distance the home of one’s joy.
“That was my strength through life, especially in the hour of my mystic death at the foot of the Cross. God was punishing the two of us, me and my gentle Son, for the sins of a whole world, but in order not to tell Him that the punishment was too terrible and that the hand of His Justice was being laid too heavily upon us, I was obliged, through the veil of the bitterest tears that ever woman wept, to fasten my heart on that Holy Night, that memory of light, of bliss, of holiness, which rose up before me on Golgotha as a comforting vision from inside my heart to tell me how much God had loved me – the vision had come to me there on its own without waiting for me to seek it out, because it was a holy joy and everything holy is infused with love, and love gives life even to things seemingly lifeless.
“Here is what we need to do when God strikes –
* Recall the times when God gave us joy, so that we can say even amid the torment, “Thank you , God. You are good to me.”
* Accept to be comforted by remembering a gift from the past, to strengthen us in moments of present suffering, when we are crushed to the point of despair, like plants being crushed in a storm, so that we will not despair of the goodness of God.
* Make sure that our joys are of God, in other words not just human joys of our own choosing and all too easily not of God, as is everything we do if it is disconnected from God, from His divine Law and Will. We must look for joy from God alone.
* Keep in mind God’s Law and Will for past joys as well, because recalling a memory that spurs us on to do good and to bless God is not blameworthy, it is to be encouraged and blessed.
* Shine the light of past joy on present darkness to make the darkness so bright that even in the blackest night we can see the holy Face of God.
* Sweeten a bitter chalice with a relished memory so as to be able to endure the horrible taste and drink the chalice down to the last drop.
* Sense by the precious memory that we cherish, the sensation of God’s caress even while the thorns press in on our forehead.
“There you have the seven sources of happiness opposed to the seven swords, such as they pierced my Immaculate Heart. They form my Christmas lesson for you, and together with yourself I make a present of them to my favourite children. I bless them all.”
Kyrie eleison.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 23, 2018, 05:20:27 PM

Could this "Perfect Joy" excerpt be from Maria Valtorta's POEM OF THE MAN-GOD ?  :furtive:
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: klasG4e on December 23, 2018, 08:36:12 PM
Here's your reading assignment Incred.  :)

https://archive.org/stream/Volume1OfThePoemOfTheManGod/Volume%201%20of%20The%20Poem%20of%20The%20Man-God_djvu.txt (https://archive.org/stream/Volume1OfThePoemOfTheManGod/Volume%201%20of%20The%20Poem%20of%20The%20Man-God_djvu.txt)
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 23, 2018, 11:26:05 PM
Here's your reading assignment Incred.  :)

https://archive.org/stream/Volume1OfThePoemOfTheManGod/Volume%201%20of%20The%20Poem%20of%20The%20Man-God_djvu.txt (https://archive.org/stream/Volume1OfThePoemOfTheManGod/Volume%201%20of%20The%20Poem%20of%20The%20Man-God_djvu.txt)

Homework...over Christmas break? :facepalm:
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Nadir on December 23, 2018, 11:46:08 PM
Homework...over Christmas break? :facepalm:
Heaven forbid! I am giving you a dispensation, Incred. :cheers: 
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: hollingsworth on December 24, 2018, 03:33:17 PM

Quote
Incred: Could this "Perfect Joy" excerpt be from Maria Valtorta's POEM OF THE MAN-GOD ?
Your point being......?
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 26, 2018, 11:25:13 AM
Your point being......?

Let's see, what could the points be behind my question?  


1. Why didn't HE make direct reference to his literary source?

2. That Valtorta's works being banned and quite controversial, lacking (1950's) Church nihil obstat and imprimatur approvals are
    questionable sources.

3. That any mystic literary works promoted by Cardinal Bea in the 1950s are suspect.

4. That maybe we should have a Cathinfo poll and a debate on Maria Valtorta's works?

You asketh and I answereth you. :popcorn:

Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: hollingsworth on December 26, 2018, 01:13:31 PM

That Valtorta's works being banned and quite controversial, lacking (1950's) Church nihil obstat and imprimatur approvals are
     questionable sources.

What a joke, Incred. Obviously, Bishop Williamson cares little or nothing about an alleged imprimatur approval of the 1950s. And I probably care less. Maybe it’s because you and I belong to two different Catholic denominations. Yours is heavy into imprimatur approvals, and mine ignores them. I don’t know.
Anyway, Merry Christmas….( And please get a life). This particular passage, shared with us by the good bishop was very touching and lovely, even should it have come from the pen of Martin Luther himself.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 26, 2018, 01:47:17 PM
We'll never win hollingsworth over on this issue, since the homoerotic passages in Valtorta just have too strong of a hold on him.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 26, 2018, 01:54:41 PM
Theologically incorrect to say that God was punishing Jesus and Mary for the sins of the world.  This makes God into some bizarre caricature which has this insatiable lust to punish someone, anyone, for having been offended.  Jesus, along with Our Lady's cooperation, made satisfaction for these offenses as explained by St. Anselm contrary to the legalistic view of punishment-transfer promoted later by the heretical Prots ... and evidently Valtorta.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 26, 2018, 02:04:16 PM
Penal substitution:
Quote

While penal substitution shares themes present in many other theories of the atonement, penal substitution is a distinctively Protestant understanding of the atonement that differs from both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox understandings of the atonement. Many trace its origin to Calvin, but it was more concretely formulated by the Reformed theologian Charles Hodge (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Hodge). Traditionally a belief in penal substitution is often regarded as a hallmark of the evangelical faith and is included as an article of faith by many (but not all) evangelical organizations today.


Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: 2Vermont on December 26, 2018, 02:25:00 PM
That Valtorta's works being banned and quite controversial, lacking (1950's) Church nihil obstat and imprimatur approvals are
    questionable sources.

What a joke, Incred. Obviously, Bishop Williamson cares little or nothing about an alleged imprimatur approval of the 1950s. And I probably care less. Maybe it’s because you and I belong to two different Catholic denominations. Yours is heavy into imprimatur approvals, and mine ignores them. I don’t know.
Anyway, Merry Christmas….( And please get a life). This particular passage, shared with us by the good bishop was very touching and lovely, even should it have come from the pen of Martin Luther himself.
:o
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Nadir on December 26, 2018, 02:30:46 PM
:o
Maybe if he finds some "precious account" from ML he'll publish that.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Stanley N on December 26, 2018, 02:52:38 PM
Since searches for phrases in the text yield nothing, it's highly unlikely to be from any work available on the internet as a text file, which includes Valtorta.

It might be from an old book never scanned to text, or something relatively recent, never before published.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 26, 2018, 04:29:19 PM
We'll never win hollingsworth over on this issue, since the homoerotic passages in Valtorta just have too strong of a hold on him.

My impression is that Valtorta's poem impacts people similar to a Medjugorje conversion?

Have you ever noticed that most Conciliar Catholics who visited Medjugorje become zealous converts in the cult?

TIA provides some good argumentation against the Valtorta cult:


Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God

 Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
Quote
Book review of Peom of the Man-God by Maria Valtorta, 10 volumes, online edition (http://issuu.com/ricardodeleon/docs/poem_of_the_man-god_volume_1)
(https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_ManGod.jpg)
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 homosexual 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 Jewish woman and focuses on Our Lord as being a man “like us.” As Atila Guimaraes points out in Animus Injuriandi I, (https://www.traditioninaction.org/books.htm#AI1) 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.


(https://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 (http://issuu.com/ricardodeleon/docs/poem_of_the_man-god_volume_1). 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 (Vol. 1 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_01.pdf), Vol. 2 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_02.pdf), Vol. 3 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_03.pdf), Vol. 4 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_04.pdf), Vol. 5 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_05.pdf)) .

 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:


(https://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 homosexual tendencies

 Valtorta’s Jesus suspiciously displays homosexual 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.”


(https://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
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 homosexual 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 sexual 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-Godis 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.”


*
(https://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
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 26, 2018, 04:43:53 PM

 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)

This filth alone requires the condemnation of Valtorta.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Nadir on December 26, 2018, 06:59:07 PM
Since searches for phrases in the text yield nothing, it's highly unlikely to be from any work available on the internet as a text file, which includes Valtorta.

It might be from an old book never scanned to text, or something relatively recent, never before published.
Well, I searched: 
Quote
An indescribable joy. Human, and superhuman. Perfect joy.

and up popped 
http://poemmangod.forumotion.com/t2503-1943-mary-s-christmas-ecstasy
Easy peasy!
Isn't it normal practice that when you use a quote you acknowledge the author? I find that sneaky.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Stanley N on December 26, 2018, 08:16:02 PM
Well, I searched: and up popped 
Nice catch! I searched other phrases (including "living vase of my heart" and "seven sources of happiness opposed") and found nothing. Perhaps the text in EC is a translation from Italian rather than a direct lift from an English source. Now, the EC text has been posted around and is itself showing up in searches.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: jvk on December 27, 2018, 08:15:50 AM
 I don't understand why the good Bishop keeps insisting that this is something all Catholics should read.  Does anyone have any answers to this?!
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Last Tradhican on December 27, 2018, 08:39:19 AM
I don't understand why the good Bishop keeps insisting that this is something all Catholics should read.  Does anyone have any answers to this?!
Bishop Wiiliamson himself has said many times that we should not follow the SSPX, Abp. L, Bp. Williamson or any other personality) when they conflict with truth, that we should always follow truth. 
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Last Tradhican on December 27, 2018, 09:52:14 AM
My impression is that Valtorta's poem impacts people similar to a Medjugorje conversion?

Have you ever noticed that most Conciliar Catholics who visited Medjugorje become zealous converts in the cult?

TIA provides some good argumentation against the Valtorta cult:


Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God

 Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
(https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_042_ManGod.jpg)
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 homosexual 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 Jewish woman and focuses on Our Lord as being a man “like us.” As Atila Guimaraes points out in Animus Injuriandi I, (https://www.traditioninaction.org/books.htm#AI1) 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.


(https://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 (http://issuu.com/ricardodeleon/docs/poem_of_the_man-god_volume_1). 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 (Vol. 1 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_01.pdf), Vol. 2 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_02.pdf), Vol. 3 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_03.pdf), Vol. 4 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_04.pdf), Vol. 5 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/Snap/A_042_Valtorta_vol_05.pdf)) .

 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:


(https://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 homosexual tendencies

 Valtorta’s Jesus suspiciously displays homosexual 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.”


(https://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
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 homosexual 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 sexual 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-Godis 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.”


*
(https://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 would anyone read Valtorta's book, when we have Sister Mary of Agreda's  City of God , which has over 400 years of Church approval?

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61iHOmOnDjL._SX480_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: JezusDeKoning on December 27, 2018, 10:35:15 AM
The only place the Valtorta book has in society is in the trash, or better, a fire. It's homosexual pornography disguised as Catholic reading.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: jvk on December 27, 2018, 10:50:00 AM
Thank you, LT.  Of course, we follow the Catholic truth if there's ever any question on human grounds!  I was just wondering why--with such scandalous passages in such a book--he continues to promote it?  I understand he's human, and as such not perfect.  But he's so grounded in solid truth in other ways, it doesn't make any sense to me.  
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 27, 2018, 11:36:15 AM
Thank you, LT.  Of course, we follow the Catholic truth if there's ever any question on human grounds!  I was just wondering why--with such scandalous passages in such a book--he continues to promote it?  I understand he's human, and as such not perfect.  But he's so grounded in solid truth in other ways, it doesn't make any sense to me.  

Bishop Williamson, since I have known him, has always been rather taken by the various private revelations floating around out there ... from Garabandal to Akita to Valtorta to Dawn Marie.  I'm not sure why that is.  He seems predisposed to lend credence to them whereas the Church has always had the opposite attitude ... skepticism until proven otherwise.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: nottambula on December 27, 2018, 04:43:22 PM
https://tradidi.com/abl-on-maria-valtorta



(https://tradidi.com/sites/default/files/abp-lefebvre_0.jpg)
Archbishop Lefebvre on Maria Valtorta
Conference for the Carmelites of Quievrain, 21 July 1986


by Abp. Marcel Lefebvre
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}]
Audio (https://tradidi.com/downloads/abl-valtorta.mp3)[/size][/font][/size]

In the following excerpt of a 1986 conference he gave for the Carmelites of Quievrain, Archbishop Lefebvre cautions us against reading the so called "Poem of the Man God" by Maria Valtorta. He starts of by ridiculing the amount of trivial, insignificant and useless details which causes the book to take up 13 volumes and which exposes us to the danger of abandoning the spiritual level of the Gospel and of "materializing" the life of Our Lord. Towards the end he expresses his disbelief and disapproval of the "gross" nature of a passage he read of a conversation between Mary Magdalen and Our Lady.

In summary, the Archbishop obviously did not believe the book to be inspired in any way, but simply a product of the runaway imaginations of a woman.

Even if you don't understand French, it would still be worthwhile to listen to the audio file in order to appreciate the Archbishop's intonations and the resulting laughter of his audience.


So you see, at the occasion of this Source, which is Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, Source of our knowledge of God, and at the occasion of this contact with the Humanity of God, we will see how Our Lord Jesus Christ has revealed Himself. We will see a little more into the details how He has revealed the knowledge of God. But, at this point, I would like to make a little "parenthesis" concerning the diverse books which speak to us of God. I would like to say a few words to you on the Bible, on the Gospels, the New Testament. With them, we are sure of what we read, of what we learn, of what we discover about God in the Old Testament, in the New Testament. There is no hesitation there because the Bible is the Word of God. It is of faith. We have not the right to doubt an instant because Holy Scripture is the Word of God. It is not the word of the apostles. It is God Who speaks through the apostles. Of course, He uses their intelligence, their memory, their love and all that aid their faculties, but it is He Who is the Principal Author. The apostles are only instruments, as a pen. As a pen is the instrument of our writing, well the apostles have been intelligent instruments – the Good God has used their intelligence, their memory, their knowledge, but they are instruments of God. The words that have resulted in Scripture, God is the Author of them. It is He Who is responsible for all that is written. In consequence, there we have no doubt, when we read Holy Scripture, we know that it is God Who speaks. Therefore, what is there, we have no doubt of.

But, in the libraries of our convents and seminaries, there are how many, many writers who have written on Our Lord. We could fill a library with these books alone. There are certainly things very good, very holy, which have been approved by the Church – The Imitation of Jesus Christ, all these books on Holy Scripture, certain commentaries of Holy Scripture, explanations of Holy Scripture – anyway, these books are not lacking. But we have other books which are not just explanations of Holy Scripture or commentaries of Holy Scripture, but which present themselves in order to be also a certain revelation on Our Lord Jesus Christ. You have, for example, a recent book which has appeared, which is widely read and is easily found in the hands of persons, it is the book of Maria Valtorta. You have surely heard this book spoken of, and, you have perhaps read it yourselves – the book of Maria Valtorta, which is enormous – I believe there are 13 volumes on the Life of Our Lord.

So, what must one think of this? It is necessary to be truly very careful, very careful, and not to accord it immediately to faith because this person who calls herself inspired, who says to have seen all of these writings in vision, in particular, in all their details, very tiny details – truly even details of things very, very insignificant. The apostles are written of to the least of details, the conversations between the apostles and the Most Holy Virgin, between Philip and James, the character of this one and that one, all is written to the smallest of details.

I admit, I read part of it because Father Barrielle was very much in favor of this book of Maria Valtorta. He was convinced that it was absolutely true, that it could not be not true, that it does a lot of good. I don't say that it does not do good, to enter like that into the company of the apostles and the Blessed Virgin, and to see the Blessed Virgin live, to see the Child Jesus live, to see Him growing. It is true, that puts us in an atmosphere that makes us live more perhaps with Our Lord. But, there is a danger, also. It is that that can cause us to somewhat diminish the idea that we form of Our Lord when we read the Gospels. When we simply read the Scriptures and the commentaries on Scripture, we remain on a very spiritual level precisely because the Gospels do not enter into all of these physical, material details – the house of Nazareth in all its details, the preparations in the kitchen, the cooking of the food, all these little details, the little birds that are in the cage, and all that! There is something ravishing; it is captivating. But, there is perhaps this, also, that one causes Our Lord to almost descend to our level. Without doubt, the Good God wanted to live among us; it is clear. He did not want to live as an angel, He wasn't as Raphael, who accompanied Tobias and said "Actually, you believed I ate and I didn't eat because I nourish myself with another nourishment. I am one of the 7 who is standing before the Divine Majesty!" Tobias was on the ground, he was so afraid! And it seemed that he had eaten, yet he did not eat. Can we say that of Our Lord? I believe not! Our Lord has truly wanted to live as one of us, When Our Lord ate, He ate. He didn't have simply an apparent body. He had a True Body like us. He suffered in His Body; His Blood has been shed.

So, there is a little danger to let oneself materialize the Life of Our Lord too much. I even read a bit of Maria Valtorta, and I fell upon a passage which did not please me a lot, I assure you: the conversation of Mary Magdalen with the Most Holy Virgin at the foot of the Cross. Truly, I do not believe that St. Mary Magdalen has said things like that to the Blessed Virgin. It was really almost rude. Mary Magdalen saying to the Blessed Virgin Mary: "You, you are pure; me, all that I know in my life – I have become impure. Me, I am this, I am that, while you are this, you are that." That shocked me – speaking to the Blessed Virgin like that. Why recall her adulteries, her dissolute life, and in a manner almost gross, rude? I do not think that it is possible that Saint Mary Magdalen would address herself like that to the Blessed Virgin at the foot of the Cross. It is not possible.

So, I don't know. But I admit that I put a question mark on her revelations. I am telling you because I believe they are not important. It is necessary to remain on the level of the knowledge of Our Lord, the knowledge of the Gospel, the level of the Gospel, not descending to things...

There are other of these books: Catherine Emmerich, Mary of Agreda. I think that they have things that are very beautiful. They are perhaps a lot more approved than Maria Valtorta. That can do a lot of good, I do not doubt it. However, I think that one must not give to these things the equivalence of the Gospel. I think that we have so many books of saints who have written of their life with Our Lord and all that has inspired them. I believe that I am prolonging a little too much – but let us read those books which are very edifying... We will never replace Holy Scripture. Consequently, we must have great esteem for the words of the Gospel and try to further discover the Good God through the Gospel.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 27, 2018, 06:37:45 PM

Nottambula seems to have made the conclusive, "+ABL reference" post for this forum topic :farmer:
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: cebu on December 28, 2018, 08:01:25 AM
Oh help, the Puritans are out again attributing indecency in The Poem where none is meant because of their dirty minds and using selective quotes to do so. Just think what you could get Holy Scripture to say if were to use selective quotes.

Yet again, IF you are interested in the truth then read this link - http://www.bardstown.com/~brchrys/Summa.pdf  This will answere each and every query any truth seeker is looking for. If you are not interested in the truth and just wanting to push your puritan agenda, please be quiet.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Pax Vobis on December 28, 2018, 10:24:20 AM
And they shall teach my people the difference between holy and profane, and shew them how to discern between clean and unclean.  (Ezekiel 44:23)

The excerpts quoted on this thread are, at best, simply profane, and at worst, blasphemous.  Profane means “not relating to that which is religious or spiritual, but secular”. It also means “to treat something holy with irreverence or disrespect.”

The excerpts quoted debase God, Our Lady and the Saints by bringing them down to “man’s level”, by “humanizing” God, by making Our Lord “normal”.  This is wrong, sinful and utter blasphemy.  As Scripure says above, God is not be understood in a profane/unholy/secular way, but in a spiritual/holy/religious way.  Stories of God and of His Mother are not meant to humanize them, but to spiritualize us.  These stories are subversive and demonic, even if parts are “cute” and emotional.  

As +W always says, “God is not a puppy dog”.  In fact, God is the Lion of the Tribe of Juda.  The puppy dog is not respected and is given attention when a person is “feeling like it”.  A lion demands respect and awe because of His power and majesty.  Treat God like a lion, not a puppy dog. 
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 28, 2018, 10:49:16 AM
Oh help, the Puritans are out again attributing indecency in The Poem where none is meant because of their dirty minds and using selective quotes to do so. Just think what you could get Holy Scripture to say if were to use selective quotes.

Yet again, IF you are interested in the truth then read this link - http://www.bardstown.com/~brchrys/Summa.pdf  This will answere each and every query any truth seeker is looking for. If you are not interested in the truth and just wanting to push your puritan agenda, please be quiet.

Were Puritans in the Philippines too ?  :popcorn:

Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: cebu on December 28, 2018, 11:50:01 AM
Notice how the puritans are not interested in the truth and will not even discuss the article on the link provided. They get worse by saying that Archbishop Lefebvre allowed his saintly spiritual director for Econe, Fr Barrielle, to push the Poem even though they claim it is all so disgusting. So what does that say about Archbishop Lefebvre?

Puritans get everywhere I fear. They are pharisees with dirty minds. 
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Pax Vobis on December 28, 2018, 12:03:57 PM

Quote
They get worse by saying that Archbishop Lefebvre allowed his saintly spiritual director for Econe, Fr Barrielle, to push the Poem even though they claim it is all so disgusting. So what does that say about Archbishop Lefebvre?
+Lefebvre isn't infallible - he did many things right and some things wrong.  To suggest that he is above criticism or that he never erred is a cult-ish, anti-catholic, extremist mindset.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 12:35:09 PM
Oh help, the Puritans are out again attributing indecency in The Poem where none is meant because of their dirty minds and using selective quotes to do so. Just think what you could get Holy Scripture to say if were to use selective quotes.

:laugh1: ... sure, that's what it is.  I guess the Puritans in the Vatican were responsible for getting it put on the Index.  Pay no attention, either, to the various theological errors in Valtorta.

Go ahead an explain the St. Peter "corruption" passage in a non-dirty way.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 12:37:03 PM
Puritans get everywhere I fear. They are pharisees with dirty minds.

+Lefebvre was known for his Puritanism and his dirty mind.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: hollingsworth on December 28, 2018, 01:04:35 PM


Quote
Cebu: Oh help, the Puritans are out again attributing indecency in The Poem where none is meant because of their dirty minds and using selective quotes to do so. Just think what you could get Holy Scripture to say if were to use selective quotes….
 .. If you are not interested in the truth and just wanting to push your puritan agenda, please be quiet.


 
Thank you, Cebu. Finally the voice of sanity emerges. I’ve had a gutfull of that moron, Ladislaus, and his dimwitted ventriloquist dummy Incredulous. It also includes a few other CI fans in the peanut gallery who cheer them on lustily.

I would have answered sooner, but figured that few on CI really cared to pursue the truth. So why should I even make the effort? But finally, one CI member comes through.

 
Yes, the indecency attributed in the Poem where none is meant or intended is truly appalling. Ladislaus has a dirty mind, so a perfectly harmless and beautiful event is filtered through his vilely corrupted mental faculties, and this is what you get. Not only that, the quote is taken completely out of context. In fact, even the cited page number may be wrong, if the quote was taken from the popular translation published by Centro Editoriale Valtoriano,1987. In that edition, N.199 starts on page 300. Lad’s shamelessly lifted excerpt occurs on p. 309.

 
Jesus does not speak angrily to Peter. He gently and lovingly chides the Disciple for having spoken earlier in private to His Mother, in order to gain custody of an orphan child they had picked up in their travels. Peter was seeking to influence Jesus in this regard through an appeal to the Holy Virgin. Jesus is just having a little fun with the future pontiff.

 
But I’ll bet that neither Ladislaus or Incredulous have even read the entire passage, nor do they have any idea what the story is really about. Does Matthew? Matthew lets these turkeys prate on and on. while ejecting other members from the forum who generally have something of substance to say. I have never understood it. I’m not sure, really, that Matthew has a forum standard.

 
BTW, it is Matthew who posts +Williamson’s ECs from week to week. If he opposes the content of a certain EC, why doesn’t he censor it. How about it, Matthew? Are you going to endorse this particular EC, or you going to condemn it, and take sides with that lying piece of kaka, Ladislaus?

 
In closing: No, Cebu, few on this forum are interested in pursuing the truth. They wish only, as you say, to push their “puritan agenda.”

 
Ladislaus has been around for years. He personifies, as I see it, the real “filth” on this forum. I have never gotten him to declare his identity. For all we know, he may be a damn jew. I mean, many of them glory in filth. Just ask St. John Crysostom.

 

 

 
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Pax Vobis on December 28, 2018, 01:26:45 PM

Quote
I would have answered sooner, but figured that few on CI really cared to pursue the truth.

What "truth" are you speaking of?  The truth concerns facts, not your opinion, so let's discuss facts.  

1.  Is the "Poem" accepted by the Church or not?  FACT:  It was on the forbidden index list for years.
2.  Is the "Poem" (or any mystical writing) 100% verifiable or believable?  FACT:  No, such things must be read cautiously, even if no error exists.
3.  Does the Church require any catholic to accept the "Poem"?  FACT:  No, not in any way.  Even the Church doesn't accept it; She only says whether or not something like this contains error.  Saying something is "free from error" is not the same thing as "acceptable and praiseworthy".
4.  Is it wrong to criticize the "Poem" (or any mystical writing)?  FACT:  No, not in any way, because such things are not required for salvation.
5.  Is it wrong to criticize the "Poem" (or any mystical writing) even if the Church has said it's "free from error"?  FACT:  No, because it's a private revelation which is unrelated to Church teaching.
6.  Is the "Poem" above criticism, or infallible, or inerrant?  FACT:  Absolutely, positively, not.  It can contain error and probably does, as pointed out already.


Quote
Yes, the indecency attributed in the Poem where none is meant or intended is truly appalling.
How do you know no indecency was intended?  How do you know that: 
1) the "Poem" was a divine message?  The Church hasn't declared it is, so how do you determine it is, apart from the Church?
2) the "Poem" doesn't have mistakes in its translation?  The Church hasn't approved any translations, so by what authority do you presume it's authentic?
3) the "Poem" isn't full of truth/error, that is, a trick from the devil?  Can the devil not appear to holy people to trick them?  We know he can and has.  

You presume this whole thing is good, in absence of ANY Church ruling and in contradiction to the fact that it was already on the "forbidden" list, much like Sr Faustina and the 'divine mercy' messages.  Until the Church approves such things, we should be cautious, just like She has shown us Her reactions to such devotions/messages like the "Holy Face" or the "Sacred Heart", which took DECADES for the Holy See to act.  Prudence dictates such action.  Your actions are too emotional.


Quote
Ladislaus has been around for years. He personifies, as I see it, the real “filth” on this forum. 
Can you be more specific?  That's quite an uncharitable accusation.  Just because somebody disagrees with you, doesn't make them wrong.  You're being too emotional, once again.


Quote
 I have never gotten him to declare his identity.
What's your identity?  Please post your name, address and social security # so I can do a background check before believing your posts.

You're ridiculous.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 01:49:28 PM
Ladislaus has been around for years. He personifies, as I see it, the real “filth” on this forum. I have never gotten him to declare his identity. For all we know, he may be a damn jew. I mean, many of them glory in filth. Just ask St. John Crysostom.

I've declared my true identity several times here on CI.  I've even given my real name.  I am Hungarian ... no Jewish blood.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 01:53:40 PM
Yes, the indecency attributed in the Poem where none is meant or intended is truly appalling. Ladislaus has a dirty mind, so a perfectly harmless and beautiful event is filtered through his vilely corrupted mental faculties, and this is what you get.

I consider this a compliment coming from you, hollingsworth.

I wasn't speaking of intentions.  Perhaps Valtorta, in fabricating the accounts, didn't consider prolonged homoerotic petting and kissing of various Apostles by Jesus to be indecent, projecting her own feminine sensibilities on it.  She may not have realized that this kind of behavior among men only happens between homosexuals, since women might more innocently engage in such behavior with one another.

You see, this kind of dogmatic adherence to Valtorta, and the vitriolic defense thereof, is one of the biggest alarm bells that something is awry.  Here hollingsworth attacks me more acrimoniously than if I had denied an actual dogma.

I submit that if is you who have the dirty mind if you have no problem with the passages cited.

Even Father Pacwa, of EWTN, not know as a Puritan with a dirty mind, excoriates Valtorta.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 01:57:38 PM
I suppose that +Lefebvre was a dirty-minded Puritan as well.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 02:00:40 PM
Just because somebody disagrees with you, doesn't make them wrong.  You're being too emotional, once again.

Excessive emotion is to be expected of such ardent Valtorta apologists.  I could see how Valtorta's over-emotionalized Christ would appeal to feminine sensibilities, but such dogmatic devotion by a man suggests low testosterone.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Last Tradhican on December 28, 2018, 02:56:04 PM
Ladislaus has been around for years. He personifies, as I see it, the real “filth” on this forum. 
You've just been moved to my nut pile. 
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: hollingsworth on December 28, 2018, 03:07:31 PM
Quote
Quote
Yes, the indecency attributed in the Poem where none is meant or intended is truly appalling.
 
Quote
PV:How do you know no indecency was intended?  How do you know that:

Well, because I bothered to read the entire episode.  Did you?  PV, you can believe that N.199 is a fabrication, an invention of Valtorta's confused and decieved mind.  Be my guest. But the story, real or invented, has absolutely nothing to do with indecency.  There is not an indecent suggestion in it.  Only slugs like ladislaus insert the possibility of it being so.
And is there no other CI member, besides Cebu, who will at least come to the defense of Valtorta, whether or not you believe her account.  Will not one of you timid souls at least admit that there was no evidence in it of an indecent and filthy motive? 
What about you, Matthew?  You posted the EC. Come on, man up!  Cat got your tongue?  It's your forum which assembles all these "traditional Catholics."  Do you have a special place in your heart for certified morons like Lad, Incred, and PV.?  Shameless, despicable bunch that they are.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Pax Vobis on December 28, 2018, 03:20:13 PM
Quote
Will not one of you timid souls at least admit that there was no evidence in it of an indecent and filthy motive?  
Ive never said it was indecent/filthy.  But i can see how it could be interpreted as such.  And it is surely profane, which is not how God wishes to be treated and is not consistent with other, 100% approved apparitions.  Therefore, I reject it.  
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 03:41:38 PM
Will not one of you timid souls at least admit that there was no evidence in it of an indecent and filthy motive?

Did I not just write that I am not in a position to judge "motive"?  I do not judge the internal forum.  I don't care about "motive"; I simply judge this stuff, objectively, to be trash.  And, as a Catholic, I am entitled to agree with the Holy Office's erstwhile judgment that it belongs on the Index.  There's no judgment of the Church which requires that I accept Valtorta as divine revelation.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Ladislaus on December 28, 2018, 03:45:14 PM
Shameless, despicable bunch that they are.

So we're now shameless and despicable for agreeing with +Lefebvre and the Holy Office?
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Pax Vobis on December 28, 2018, 07:40:21 PM
Next week, Hollingsworth will be screaming that +Williamson’s new article is pro-sspx and how +Williamson is pathetic.  But this week, Hollingsworth agrees with him on “the poem”, so no negativity.  ??  So confusing. 
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 28, 2018, 10:22:19 PM

Holly,

In all charity, you've lost your Catholics bearings.

We will pray for you, our once vaunted "Resistance lion", who took on the fallen SSPX.

:pray:
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: JezusDeKoning on December 28, 2018, 10:39:14 PM
Holly,

In all charity, you've lost your Catholics bearings.

We will pray for you, our once vaunted "Resistance lion", who took on the fallen SSPX.

:pray:
Yes. 

This poem is profane, blasphemous garbage bordering on homosexual smut. It sounds like the story of the Holy Gospels through the lens of the Hollywood elite of a certain race/religion that hate Our Lord. It is indecent and there's nothing to defend about it. I said it before, I'll say it again: its only place is in a fire.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Cantarella on December 28, 2018, 11:00:08 PM
There is something really wrong with this Poem, even starting with the tittle itself. Why Man - God? It is supposed to be God - Man.

Another disturbance, besides the homoerotic filth already mentioned, is that this book appears to be encouraged by the Medjujorge cult. Reg flag!


Quote
“ONE MUST READ THEM.”
-Our Lady of Medjugorje, 1982-1983
Words From Heaven

Over the years, Our Lady has asked us to do many things and guided us step by step in our walk of conversion through Her Medjugorje messages. She even tells us what to read. Our Lady has specifically stated three things for us to read:

 

1. “Dear children! Put Sacred Scripture in a visible place in your family and read it...” January 25, 2007
 
2. Her Messages:
“...Therefore, little children, read every day the messages I gave you and transform them into life...” December 25, 1989

3. The book, The Poem of the Man-God, by Maria Valtorta:


1982-1983

Medjugorje visionary Marija (Pavlovic) Lunetti went before Our Lady on behalf of a seminarian and asked the question: "Was it okay to read the book The Poem of the Man-God?" Marija relayed that Our Lady affirmed it was okay by answering:
“One must read them.”1


https://www.medjugorje.com/medjugorje/poem-of-the-man-god.html

Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Quid Retribuam Domino on December 28, 2018, 11:04:20 PM
This poem ... bordering on homosexual smut.

Coming from you, the irony...

Quote
It sounds like the story of the Holy Gospels through the lens of the Hollywood elite of a certain race/religion that hate Our Lord.

Just say Jews. Don't be a coward about it.

Quote
It is indecent and there's nothing to defend about it. I said it before, I'll say it again: its only place is in a fire.

How much longer will your split social justice warrior be dormant, again?
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Quid Retribuam Domino on December 28, 2018, 11:09:52 PM
Just read the Mystical City of God, and dispose The Poem of the Man-God which reads like it was written by a crypto-Jew.

Case closed.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Cantarella on December 28, 2018, 11:11:36 PM
I believe that anything that feminizes Jesus must come from the Devil. Our Lord is the perfect MAN per excellence. Androgyny is satanic.

The crisis of our Holy Religion is directly proportional to the fall of the Patriarchy and the feminization of everything, including Jesus.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Stanley N on December 29, 2018, 05:56:36 PM
“‘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)
I can see how someone could read this as an inappropriate joke, but it's not clear to me that's how it should be read, given the text before and after this.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: cebu on December 30, 2018, 08:23:54 AM
Stanley N,

You are right here. 

The Puritans will use selective quotes and then their dirty minds to see filth where none is intended. What they bring forth as evidence of the badness of the Poem would not stand before any Court, Church or secular. Their so-called evidence using selective quotes would be thrown out in seconds. And if anyone who is a real truth-seeker not a smut-maker, can read the link I posted earlier about the supposed ban of the Poem and placing on the Index.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Incredulous on December 30, 2018, 11:36:12 AM
Stanley N,

You are right here.

The Puritans will use selective quotes and then their dirty minds to see filth where none is intended. What they bring forth as evidence of the badness of the Poem would not stand before any Court, Church or secular. Their so-called evidence using selective quotes would be thrown out in seconds. And if anyone who is a real truth-seeker not a smut-maker, can read the link I posted earlier about the supposed ban of the Poem and placing on the Index.

Ah, the irony of the accusation of trad-Catholics being a Puritans, coming from one carrying the name of a Philippines province.
From a country who's GNP is infamously noted for being heavily dependent upon "sex exports". :facepalm:
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Pax Vobis on December 30, 2018, 11:39:31 AM
Here’s the problem, Cebu, Stanley and Hollingsworth - God has given many other mystics stories and insights into Our Lord’s life which could not, in any way, ever, in ANY sense, be interpreted in a weird way.  This is because God is able to communicate perfectly.  

The fact that the “poem” has any ambiguousity, unclarity or is “open for interpretation” shows it’s not from God (or, at least, it proves that the TRANSLATION or WRITTEN story of what the mystic saw is not accurate, if we want to assume the mystic did receive a true vision).  

God speaks clearly, accurately and without confusion.  The “poem” contains confusion, therefore it’s not from God (as it is written).  
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Stanley N on December 30, 2018, 11:54:34 AM
Just to be clear, I'm no fan of the Valtorta. It doesn't elevate my mind to God.

I just think that it's a stretch to assert that one passage has our Lord joking about something sexual.

As if an Italian woman would think our Lord would talk like a sailor.
Title: Re: Eleison Comments - Hearts Protection (no. 597)
Post by: Pax Vobis on December 30, 2018, 12:13:45 PM
If that was the only questionable passage, then you’d have a point. But there are many questionable passages.  You have to distinguish between the mystic and the writings themselves.  Hollingsworth takes it to the extreme and interprets any criticism of the writings as a criticism of Church dogma.  But that’s another topic...