- Sexual Pleasure and the Various Sexual Acts in Marriage
- Most Holy Family Monastery Heresies, Contradictions and Lies Exposed!
- Antipope Francis approves of Atheism, False religions, and Homosexuality, teaching that they all saves a person!
- The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II
- Natural Family Planning, the Marital Sexual Act, and Procreation
- Sinful sexual pleasure and lust within marriage exposed
- Foreplay is intrinsically evil and a mortal sin against the natural law
- Masturbation is intrinsically evil and a mortal sin against the natural law
- About sinful sexual thoughts and fantasies inside and outside of the marital act
- Kisses and touches performed for sensual motives are condemned as mortal sins by the Catholic Church
- About Receiving the Sacraments From Heretics and Prayer in Communion with Heretics
- SSPX and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre Exposed!
- SSPV, Bishop Clarence Kelly and The Daughters of Mary Exposed
- The amazing lies, heresies and contradictions of Peter and Michael Dimond of Most Holy Family Monastery caught on tape and writing exposed
- Chastity and Virginity increases one’s chance of reaching Heaven according to the Holy Bible
Maria Valtorta and The Poem of The Man God Exposed, Reviews and Facts
Maria Valtorta (14 March 1897 – 12 October 1961) was a “Catholic” Italian writer and poet who is most well known for her controversial book The Poem of the Man God. She is considered by many to be a mystic. Her work centers on Catholic Christian themes. Her followers believe that she had personally conversed with Jesus Christ in her visions of Jesus and Mary, while her critics believe she had conversations and visions of the Devil.
Maria Valtorta’s principal work “The Poem of the Man-God” was translated from the original Italian into English, and the 1st English edition was published in 1986 as a hardcover 5-volume set entitled The Poem of the Man-God. In 2012, this was officially replaced with the new 2nd English edition, a softcover 10-volume set entitled The Gospel as Revealed to Me.
According to her supporters, “Maria Valtorta is considered to be one of the most edifying visionaries of our time, in that she recorded the most comprehensive and detailed Private Revelation of the Gospels ever; "The Gospel as it Was Revealed to Me" in Italy, and later published in English as the "Poem of the Man-God" after her death... She was born in Caserta, Italy in 1897, passed away in Viareggio in 1961 and is buried under the altar of the Capitular Chapel of the Servants of Mary at The Basilica of the Annunciation in Florence, Italy. Her dictations and visions took place during the times of WWII and give a wonderfully detailed account of the lives of Jesus and Mary.” (Maria Valtorta-The Authoritive Websites)
History of Maria Valtorta and the Poem of the Man-God
Maria Valtorta was an Italian “Catholic” mystic who is famous among her supporters for her personal “holiness” and her extensive writings, the most notorious of them being The Poem of the Man-God (now entitled The Gospel as Revealed to Me in the newest edition). This work is claimed to be similar in some ways to Venerable Mary of Agreda’s Mystical City of God and Anne Catherine Emmerich’s writings on the life of Jesus and Mary. However, it is unique in that it surpasses both of these works in its sheer volume and revolting passages (we will look at some of those passages soon).
Maria Valtorta was born in 1897 in Caserta, Italy. In her youth, she received a strong classical education, before moving to Viareggio, Italy in 1924, where she spent most of her remaining life. Maria Valtorta was a member of the “Third Order Servites of Mary”. She is said to have been well-educated, industrious, intelligent, and gifted.
In 1920, at the age of 23, while walking down the street with her mother, she was struck in the back with an iron bar by a communist anarchist delinquent. She was confined to a bed for three months, and then recovered enough to be able to move around again. In 1925, she read the autobiography of St. Thérèse of the Child Jesus, and, inspired by it, offered herself as a victim soul to the “Divine Merciful Love”. Five years later, she took private vows of virginity, poverty, and obedience, and then (after much deliberation and preparation) offered herself also as a “victim” to Divine Justice.
As a result of complications from her injury in 1920, as well as having contracted numerous, terrible illnesses which caused her great pain, she was bedridden beginning in 1934, and was forced to remain bedridden for the remaining 28 years of her life. She is said to have suffered excruciatingly.
On the morning of Good Friday, April 23, 1943, Valtorta reported a sudden voice speaking to her and asking her to write. From her bedroom Valtorta called for Marta Diciotti (her live-in companion), showed her the sheet in her hands and said that something “extraordinary” had happened. Marta called Father Migliorini (Valtorta’s spiritual director) regarding the dictation Valtorta had reported and he arrived soon thereafter. Father Migliorini asked her to write down anything else she received and over time provided her with notebooks to write in.
Thereafter, Maria wrote almost every day until 1947 and intermittently in the following years until 1951. She did not prepare outlines, did not even know what she would write from one day to another, and did not reread to correct. At times she would call Marta to read back to her what she had written.
One of Valtorta’s declarations reads:
“I can affirm that I have had no human source to be able to know what I write, and what, even while writing, I often do not understand.”
From 1943 to 1951, Valtorta produced over 15,000 handwritten pages in 122 notebooks. She wrote her autobiography in 7 additional notebooks. Her total writings include a series of almost 700 claimed visions of Jesus’ earthly life with Mary, the Apostles, and many contemporaries of His, about 800 dictations from “Jesus”, and around 300 other revelations, many of which supposedly were from “Our Lady” and her “guardian angel”. These handwritten pages became the basis of her major work, The Poem of the Man God, which constitutes about two thirds of her total literary work.
The Poem of The Man God Exposed
Maria Valtorta’s multi-volume life of Jesus The Poem of the Man God teaches heresy and exhibits bad taste. Its claim to authenticity have been rejected even by the Vatican II sect under Antipope John XXIII. In 1959, the “Holy Office” examined The Poem of the Man God and condemned it, recommending that it be placed on the “Index of Forbidden Books”. “L’Osservatore Romano” (the Vatican’s official newspaper), on Jan. 6, 1960, printed the condemnation with an accompanying front-page article, “A Badly Fictionalized Life of Jesus,” to explain it. “Catholics” were warned that it was not to be considered as revealed by God.
Further, Valtorta did not claim to write a novel, but called herself a “secretary” of Jesus and Mary, so, in all parts one reads the words “Jesus says. . .” or “Mary says . . .” The Church takes this claim to revelation very seriously, since it has the God-given duty to discern what is or is not truly from the Holy Spirit. In Valtorta’s case, even the “Holy Office” under the liberal Antipope John XXIII, decided against Divine inspiration. The best that can be said for “The Poem of the Man-God” is that it is a bad novel inspired by the devil. This was summed up in the “L’Osservatore Romano’s” headline, which called the book “A Badly Fictionalized Life of Jesus.” In short, her writings are false and should be avoided.
The satanic “Jesus” of Maria Valtorta suggests a love-affair between St. Peter and Our Lady
One could almost not think that the Devil and his servant (Maria Valtorta) would dare to present Jesus in such an evil light, but the “Jesus” of Maria Valtorta is a liar and slanderer, pure and simple. 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)
To the contrary, this is what Jesus said in the Bible: “But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil.” (Matthew 5:37) To claim that Jesus, the Son of God, and God Himself, would act in this way, is abominable.
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.”
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)
More on The Poem of the Man God by Maria Valtorta
Maria Valtorta is author of The Poem of the Man God and other nauseating books. The Poem is contained in several thick volumes. The Poem was condemned several times by the pre-Vatican II church. Its printing was forbidden… Yet “Our Lady” of Medjugorje recommended the Poem as “a good read.”
I don’t think her work is something people should waste their time with. There were a lot of red flags that came up when I was looking for information about it. For example: it was on the “Index of Forbidden books”, it was supported by Paul VI and it is in direct opposition to the Holy Scripture. Her work also contains a lot of geographical, theological and historical blunders. For example it said in Vol 1 pp 195, 223 Jesus was using screwdrivers and screws didn’t exist until centuries later. So unless Jesus invented it centuries earlier for Himself, this is clearly a blunder. Maria Valtora also claimed that the first sin was sexual and scripture does not teach that. That can be found in Vol 1 pg 30. In Vol 1 pg 7 it claims that “Mary can be called the ‘second born’ of the Father” and Vol 4 pg 240 claims that she is second to Peter with regard to the ecclesiastical hierarchy.
One thing that I found interesting about Maria Valtora was that her spiritual advisor claimed that she had written the text without correction, revision or review and often without even understanding what she had written. I find this interesting because it sounds like automatic writing which is a form of spirit communication very popular with people involved with the occult. The definition of automatic writing is: Writing performed without conscious thought or deliberation, typically by means of spontaneous free association or as a medium for spirits or psychic forces.
I visited the site www.valtorta.org in order to get a glimpse of this “poem”. I was shocked with what I found. Here I quote just two examples.
On extraterrestrial life:
“But how is it that they have never considered that the ‘great Babylon’ is the whole Earth? I would be a very small and limited God the Creator if I had created only the Earth as an inhabited world! With a beat of My will I have brought forth worlds upon worlds from nothing and cast them as luminous fine dust into the immensity of the firmament.
“The Earth, about which you are so proud and fierce, is nothing but one of the bits of fine dust rotating in unboundedness, and not the biggest one. It is certainly the most corrupt one, though. Lives upon lives are teeming in the millions of worlds which are the joy of your gaze on peaceful nights, and the perfection of God will appear to you when, with the intellectual sight of your spirits rejoined to God, you are able to see the wonders of those worlds.”
Well, I could expect these passages to come out of a Star Trek fan’s mouth, not from a mouth of God’s prophet. By the way—the perfection of God is obvious from EVERYTHING we can see in creation.
“Oh, let fathers and mothers not profane the innocent holocaust of their clipped flowers with their imprecations! Let fathers and mothers know that not a tear of their children, not a moan of these immolated innocents remains unechoed in My Heart. Heaven opens to them, for they do not differ at all from their distant little brothers, killed by Herod out of hatred for Me. These, too, are killed by the sinister Herods, stewards of a power which I have given them so they would use it for good and for which they must give Me an accounting.
“I would come for all. But especially for these, just born to life, a gift of God, and already uprooted from life by cruelty, a gift of the devil. You should know, however, that to wash the contaminated blood which fouls the earth, which is shed with rancour and cursing against Me, Who am Love, this dew of innocent blood is needed, the only blood still able to flow forth without cursing, without hating, just as I, the Lamb, shed My Blood for you. The innocents are the little lambs of the new era, the only ones whose sacrifice, gathered in by the angels, is completely pleasing to My Father.”
These passages promote the so called baptism of blood apart from water baptism, and is a direct heresy against the divine law. The power of original sin over humanity is so great that Pope Eugene IV, in the Council of Florence, infallibly declared that all children are born under “the domination of the Devil” through original sin and that the only way to save them from this lamentable state of servitude to our eternal foe, the devil, is the sacrament of Baptism, “through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil [original sin] and adopted among the sons of God”.
THE UNBAPTIZED CHILDREN AND THE LIMBO OF THE CHILDREN
The Catholic Church teaches that aborted children and infants who die without baptism descend immediately into Hell, but that they do not suffer the fires of Hell. They go to a place in Hell called the limbo of the children. The most specific definition of the Church proving that there is no possible way for an infant to be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism is the following one from Pope Eugene IV.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442, ex cathedra: “Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil [original sin] and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people…” (Denz. 712)
Pope Eugene IV here defined from the Chair of Peter that there is no other remedy for infants to be snatched away from the dominion of the devil (i.e., original sin) other than the Sacrament of Baptism. This means that anyone who obstinately teaches that infants can be saved without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism is a heretic, for he is teaching that there is another remedy for original sin in children other than the Sacrament of Baptism.
Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415 - Condemning the articles of John Wyclif - Proposition 6: “Those who claim that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental baptism will not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this.” - Condemned statement
The arch-heretic John Wyclif was proposing that those (such as ourselves) are stupid for teaching that infants who die without water (i.e., sacramental) baptism cannot possibly be saved. He was anathematized for this assertion, among many others. And here is what the Council of Constance had to say about John Wyclif’s anathematized propositions, such as #6 above.
Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415: “The books and pamphlets of John Wyclif, of cursed memory, were carefully examined by the doctors and masters of Oxford University… This holy synod, therefore, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, repudiates and condemns, by this perpetual decree, the aforesaid articles and each of them in particular; and it forbids each and every Catholic henceforth, under pain of anathema, to preach, teach, or hold the said articles or any one of them.”
So those who criticize Catholics for affirming the dogma that no infant can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism are actually proposing the anathematized heresy of John Wyclif. Here are some other dogmatic definitions on the topic:
Pope St. Zosimus, The Council of Carthage, Canon on Sin and Grace, 417 A.D.- “It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said: ‘In my Father’s house there are many mansions’ [John 14:2]: that it might be understood that in the kingdom of heaven there will be some middle place or some place anywhere where the blessed infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is life eternal, let him be anathema.” (Denz. 102, authentic addition to canon 2.)
Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema.” (Denz. 791)
This means that anyone who asserts that infants don’t need the “laver of rebirth” (water baptism) to attain eternal life is teaching heresy. St. Augustine was perhaps the most outspoken proponent of the apostolic truth that infants who die without Baptism are excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven (since they have original sin).
St. Augustine, A.D. 415: “Anyone who would say that infants who pass from this life without participation in the Sacrament [of Baptism] shall be made alive in Christ truly goes counter to the preaching of the Apostle and condemns the whole Church, where there is great haste in baptizing infants because it is believed without doubt that there is no other way at all in which they can be made alive in Christ.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 2016.)
The Revelations of St. Bridget also corroborates this infallible dogmatic truth revealed by God in Book 5, Interrogation 6:
First question. Again he appeared on his ladder as before, saying: “O Judge, I ask you: Why does one infant emerge alive from the mother’s womb and obtain baptism, while another, having received a soul, dies in the mother’s belly?” Answer to the first question. The Judge answered: “You ask why one infant dies in the mother’s belly while another emerges alive. There is a reason. All the strength of the child’s body comes, of course, from the seed of its father and mother; however, if it is conceived without due strength, because of some weakness of its father or mother, it dies quickly. As a result of the negligence or carelessness of the parents as well as of my divine justice, many times it happens that what was joined together comes apart quickly. Yet a soul is not brought to the harshest punishment for this reason, however little time it had for giving life to the body, but, rather, it comes to the mercy that is known to me. Just as the sun shining into a house is not seen as it is in its beauty - only those who look into the sky see its rays - so too the souls of such children, though they do not see my face for lack of baptism, are nevertheless closer to my mercy than to punishment, but not in the same way as my elect.” (The Revelations of St. Bridget, Book 5, Interrogation 6, Question 1)
“But consider my goodness and mercy! For, as the teacher says, I give virtue to those who do not have any virtue. By reason of my great love I give the kingdom of heaven to all of the baptized who die before reaching the age of discretion. As it is written: It has pleased my Father to give the kingdom of heaven to such as these. By reason of my tender love, I even show mercy to the infants of pagans. If any of them die before reaching the age of discretion, given that they cannot come to know me face to face, they go instead to a place that it is not permitted for you to know but where they will live without suffering.” (The Revelations of St. Bridget, Book 2, Chapter 1)
These fascinating sentences clearly affirm infallible Catholic dogma by teaching that no one can see God’s face without water baptism. Yet, they also give us explicit confirmation that these children are in a state of light and mercy, though not in the same way as those in Heaven.
What does the Holy Catholic Church teach on the Necessity of Baptism, specifically Infant Baptism, and the Fate of those who die in Original Sin only?
Pope Innocent III (1206): “The punishment of original sin is deprivation of the vision of God....” (Denzinger 410)
Council of Florence (1438-1445): “...the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds.” (Denzinger 693)
Pope Zosimus (confirming Canon 2 of Council of Carthage): “It has been decided that, likewise, if anyone say that it might be understood that in the kingdom of Heaven, there will be some middle place or some place anyhere infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven, which is life eternal, let him be anathema. For the Lord says:‘unless a man is born again of water and of the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter the kingdom of God.’”
It is of most importance therefore that the babies are baptized as soon as possible. Baptized babies go straight to Heaven and are part of the elect.
Council of Trent (1545-1563): “If anyone denies that infants newly born from their mothers’ wombs, are to be baptized, even though they be born of baptized parents, or says that they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which must be expiated by the laver of regeneration for the attainment of life everlasting, whence it follows, that in them the form of baptism for the remission of sins is understood to be not true, but false: let him be anathema. For what the Apostle has said: ‘By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Romans 5:12], is not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it.” (Denzinger 791)
Catechism of the Council of Trent, a.k.a “Roman Catechism” (16th century): “Since infant children have no other means of salvation except Baptism, we may easily understand how griveously those persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the Sacrament longer than necessity may require....”
Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex cathedra: “But the sacrament of baptism is consecrated in water at the invocation of the undivided Trinity – namely, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – and brings salvation to both children and adults when it is correctly carried out by anyone in the form laid down by the Church.”
Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the sacrament of water baptism] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”
A Book Review of Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God
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 of the Society of the SSPX 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 “Index of Forbidden Books” in the 1950s under the Vatican II sect.
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, 4-volume City of God by Venerable Mother Mary of Agreda or The Revelations of St. Bridget by St. Bridget of Sweden? 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 condemned progressivist or modernist 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.” The progressivists 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.
Valtorta’s Man-God depiction is the opposite of the God-Man portrayed by St. Bridget of Sweden, 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 supposedly “traditionalist” Bishop Williamson would not recommend these works, instead of the Valtorta tomes, which were officially condemned by the “Holy Office” under Antipope John XXIII 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,” and for good reasons. The Poem of the Man-God 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 (in addition to the above), which are so revolting that they speak for themselves.
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 sinner in order to merit the grace of Redemption:
“[Mary]: ‘Tell Me, mummy, can one be a sinner out of love
“[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).
This is blatantly heretical. Mary did not need “to commit a sin in order to be loved by God… to be saved by the Savior to receive His loving look” since it is of faith that God has always loved Mary, who was free from all sin, both actual and original, from her conception until her death, more than any other creature, even before she was created by Him. And Mary also said about God her savior in God’s Holy Word, the Bible, that she already had a Savior, Jesus Christ: “And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” (Luke 1:47). Hence, she did not need to desire to receive this, for she already had it.
Gods Holy Word also says concerning the statement “to be a sinner in order to be loved by God and to be saved”: “For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie, unto his glory, why am I also yet judged as a sinner? And not rather (as we are slandered, and as some affirm that we say) let us do evil, that there may come good? whose damnation is just.” (Romans 3:7-8)
St. Augustine explains: “Let us do evil that good may come? A thing which you see how the Apostle detests.” (To Consentius, Against Lying)
Is is of faith that Mary was infinitely more holy and enlightened by the will of God than any other creature (even more so than all the creatures combined) that has ever lived on this earth. Therefore, there is no possible way she could ever have been ignorant of the fact that “evil should not be done that good may come of it...” or that she ever would have asked or even considered to “be a sinner out of love of God”. So this is just pure evil and satanic since sin offends God and is directly contrary to the love of God. Hence that Mary could not have loved God more or been loved more by God than when she was living her angelic, sin-free life.
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 [the Serpent] 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” under Antipope John XXIII placed the work on the “Index of Forbidden Books.” Indeed, the Poem of the Man-God is so demonic that without a special grace from Our Lord Jesus Christ, ignorant people could easily be deceived by the seemingly harmless statements by Valtorta’s Jesus, but they enclose lies and heresy, contrary to the teachings of the One, Holy Catholic Church.
In short—Maria Valtorta is the Devil’s servant, promoting a false gospel and Jesus.
Furthermore, here’s more proof that Medjugorje is totally fake: the “visionaries” reported that people were encouraged to read Poem of the Man God in one of their “apparitions.”
In an interview with Attorney Jan Connell of the Pittsburgh Center for Peace on January 27, 1988, Connell asked the Medjugorje “visionary” Vicka Ivankovich (who have been proven to be inspired by the devil by teaching heresies) if there were any other books “Our Lady” had told her about. Vicka replied:
“Yes. The Poem of the Man-God by Maria Valtorta, ten volumes. Our Lady says The Poem of the Man-God is the truth. Our Lady said if a person wants to know Jesus he should read Poem of the Man-God by Maria Valtorta. That book is the truth.”
During a broadcast interview on Mother Angelica’s EWTN cable network, which aired an interview with Medjugorje seer Marija Pavlovic, Bob, a call in viewer from Milwaukee asked Marija, on the air, “What exactly did our Lady say regarding the Poem of the Man-God?” Marija responded that our Lady told her, “You can read it”.
As Marija Pavlovic recalled in an interview conducted by Sister Emmanuel Maillard, in 1982 a Franciscan from Mostar, Father Franjo, asked her to ask Our Lady if this book is true. Marija then describes how she received a positive affirmation from the Madonna: “Our Lady says The Poem of the Man-God is the truth.” [cf. R. Laurentin, Dernieres Nouvelles de Medjugorje No 15, OEIL, 1996, p. 19]
All in all, those passages shown in this article contain obvious heresies against the faith and are so revolting that they speak for themselves. They are definitive proof that her messages are not from God.