Catholic Candle note: The false visions of Maria Valtorta have become a contagion infecting a small number of Traditional Catholics. But this number could grow because of misguided recommendation of these false “visions”, by influential persons in Tradition. To attempt to head-off the spread of this evil, we present a short analysis of these false visions, to warn people to stay far away from them. In the original version of this article, Catholic Candle inadvertently gave the wrong citation for a quote. We have now corrected this error.

Condemned by the (pre-Vatican II) Catholic Church; Beloved by many conciliars

Although these visions themselves are objectively evil, we do not (and should not) judge the subjective, interior culpability of anyone connected with them, just as we must not judge the subjective culpability of anyone else committing evil. Summa, IIa IIae, Q.60, a.4, ad 1-2; see also our treatment of rash judgment.

The book’s countless evils begin with its title.

The disturbing features of Valtorta’s (false) visions, begin with the title itself: The Poem of the Man-God. This title is not traditional, fitting or reasonable! Catholics refer to our Lord’s natures in order of their dignity—and the Divine nature is infinitely greater in dignity, than the human nature. Catholics refer to our Lord as the “God-man”, not as the “man-God”. However, this title accurately reflects the books “earthy”, humanistic focus, which fits well with conciliar humanism.

Note about the title: the book originally was published anonymously over a several year period (one volume per year). The first volume was originally published under title “The Poem of Jesus”. The subsequent volumes were published under the title “The Poem of the Man-God”. (See the Wikipedia article.) For the rest of this article, we will refer to the entire book as “The Poem of the Man-God”.

Pre-Vatican II condemnation by the Church

The Holy Office (which was in charge of safeguarding the Catholic Faith) condemned The Poem of the Man-God before Vatican II and placed the book on the Index of Forbidden Books.

Shortly after the book was first compiled, it was condemned (in 1949) by Holy Office commissioners, Msgr. Giovanni Pepe and Father Berruti, O.P.. (Source: catholicculture.org.)

The Holy Office examined a new edition of the Poem and again condemned it, on December 16, 1959. The book was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books, with the decree published in the January 6, 1960 edition of the L’Osservatore Romano (reproduced below).

[Latin text from L'Osservatore Romano]

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

[Permanent volume: Acta Apostolicae Sedis LII (1960), p. 60].

This Holy Office condemnation was accompanied and explained by a front-page article in the L’Osservatore Romano, entitled “A Badly Fictionalized Life of Jesus”. (Source: catholicculture.org.)

Enthusiasm of conciliars

After Vatican II, the Index of Forbidden Books was abolished. The Poem of the Man-God began to acquire conciliar advocates, who liked the book for its “earthy”, chatty, approachable, humanistic style.

For example, one conciliar advocate was Fr. Gabriele Allegra, who has been (supposedly) “beatified” by the conciliar church, and who was a collaborator and co-author with the Arch-heretic Teilhard de Chardin. See their book: My conversations with Teilhard de Chardin on the primacy of Christ, by Gabriele Maria Allegra and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Franciscan Herald Press, 1971, p.8. Fr. Allegra loved The Poem of the Man-God and wrote about it often. (Source: valtorta-maria.com.)

Another conciliar advocate is (false) “visionary” of Medjugorje, Vicka Ivankovich, who declared:

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.

1988 Vicka Ivankovich interview.

Evil and scandalous contents

Perhaps no more need be said beyond that the book was condemned by the pre-Vatican II Church, was on the Index of Forbidden Books, and is beloved by many prominent conciliars.

Further, The Poem of the Man-God is riddled with banalities, vulgarities, blasphemies and doctrinal errors. There is continual idle talk between Our Lord, Our Lady and the Apostles.

However, we include (below) a very few examples from this shocking book, demonstrating beyond any doubt that it is evil and not from God. All citations are from the online book (to allow the reader to confirm the quotes).

Valtorta portrays Our Lord joking with St. Peter about committing impurity with His Most Pure, Ever-Virgin Mother.

Valtorta writes:

Jesus stands up and calls out loud: “Simon of Jonas, come here.”

Peter starts and rushes down the steps. “What do you want, Master?”

“Come here, you usurper and corrupter!”

“Me? Why? What have I done, Lord?”

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

Jesus smiles and Peter recovers his confidence. “You really frightened me! Now You are laughing.”

Vol. 2, p. 185.

Valtorta slanders Our Lady’s knowledge of her own sinlessness.

Valtorta (falsely) quotes Immaculate Mary as saying “I did not know I was without stain!” Volume 1, p.50.

Valtorta asserts that Our Lady thought (like the Arch-Heretic Luther) that it is good to sin out of love of God.

Luther declared: Sin boldly, but believe more boldly. Letter #99, Saemmtliche Schriften.

Valtorta (falsely) has Our Lady uttering the similar blasphemous thought that God loves us more for sinning:

[supposed BVM]: “Tell Me, mummy, can one be a sinner out of love of God?”

[supposed St. Anne]: “What are you saying, my dear? I don't understand you.”

[supposed BVM]: “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.

Valtorta falsifies the sin of our first parents.

In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve had original justice and innocence, and their passions could not be aroused to act against reason. Summa, Ia, Q.95, a.2.

Contradicting this Catholic dogma, Valtorta writes that Our Lord gave this erotic description of Eve’s first sin when she sees the snake:

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.

Valtorta’s heretical opinion about the essential joy of heaven

The Church teaches that the essential joy of heaven is the intellectual vision of God in His Essence. Summa Supp., Q.90, a.3. Any other joy of heaven is an “extra” which is merely accidental. Id.

Contradicting this, Valtorta declares that half the joy of heaven is being with Our Lady:

the joy of Paradise would be halved … if Paradise in future should not have the living Lily [Our Lady] in whose bosom are the three pistils of fire of the Divine Trinity— the light, perfume, and harmony …

Vol. 3, p. 367.

Valtorta falsely says Our Lady is second, below St. Peter, in the Church hierarchy.

Valtorta (falsely) has “Our Lord” tell His mother that she will “be second to Peter with regard to ecclesiastical hierarchy”. Vol. 4, p.146.

This is utterly false! Although Our Lady surpasses St. Peter (and all other creatures) in holiness, she has never had any part in the hierarchy of the Church.

Valtorta’s scandalously portrays Our Lord as taking revolting, unnatural liberties with the Apostles.

Valtorta becomes especially disgusting in her false portrayal of Our Lord’s relationship with His Apostles.

Let one disgusting incident suffice:

Valtorta describes Our Lord as kissing St. John while he is “half-naked”, lying on his bed. She says St. John is “panting”, “inflamed by his love” and “exhausted by his ardor”. She says Our Lord “caresses him, burning with love Himself.”

Vol. 2, pp. 57-58.

Of course, the book’s blind defenders will say that all of this was meant in a (supposed) “spiritual” sense. We trust you (the reader) will not be blind and not be led by the blind, because we don’t want you to fall with them, into the pit.

Conclusion

Stay far away from this evil book and this false visionary!

See also Bishop Williamson’s latest Valtorta quote shows why the Church condemned Valtorta’s false “visions”