APOLOGIA PRO MARIA VALTORTA

by Fr Kevin Robinson 1999 (updated 2004)www.sspx.comhttp://valtorta.alphalink.com.au

EXTERNAL SUPPORT OF AUTHORITY

Many conservative and traditional Catholics have been misled by an article circulating since 1992,referring to Cardinal Ratzinger's letter of 1985 and asummary of the seven "reasons” for condemnationof The Poem of the Man God in 1960. There is agood analysis of this in a new book Fireworks(Kolbe Publications Sherbrooke, Canada, 1996, pp.78 9, 87 107). It points out (p. 105) that Father Giraudo of the Holy Office in early 1962

reversed

the previous decision of that Office to place ThePoem on the Index of Forbidden Books. Since thenacceptance of The Poem has spread widely withimprimatur granted by Bishop Roman Danylak inRome for all the approved English translations. Thecanonical approval to publish, given by Pope PiusXII has not been seriously challenged. I received aletter from Cardinal Gagnon in Rome (Jan 3, 1992)assuring me that many good people are benefitingfrom Valtorta's works, but that Cardinal Ratzinger'soffice has only the negative side of the story. Hesuggested that more people write to CardinalRatzinger to request a clarification.Given the genuine approval, widespread growth,and immense spiritual fruit of

The Poem of theMan-God

it would be rash to deny refuse or fightagainst this great gift of God (see Gamaliel's advice,Acts 5:38 9).Let us not forget that even the works of St. ThomasAquinas were at first condemned, as were the personof St. Athanasius and the writings of Saint FaustinaKowalska. Truth will find its way in the end, and the judgement of Pope Pius XII will be clearlyvindicated. In 1978 an anthology was published inPortuguese with the Imprimatur of the Archbishopof Belem, Brazil. In India seven bishops have sentwarm letters of congratulations to the publisher of the Malayan translation One of these bishops gavehis Imprimatur in 1993. Don't forget, the approval of Pope Pius XII was more than an Imprimatur (permission to publish). It was an

instruction

to publish, given at the Vatican beforeofficial witnesses on February 26, 1948.

INTERNAL VALUE OF THE WORK

Now for the intrinsic arguments. Just about all theobjections to The Poem involve taking quotes somehowout of context.I distinguish

three ways to take a text out of context

andthus distort its meaning.First there is

verbal or literal context

. The Bible hasthese words: “…There is no God" (Ps. 52), and "Christdied in vain” (Gal. 2:21). No one can say that the Biblesays (affirms) these statements, because in context wehave:"…The

fool

says in his heart, there is no God”; and "

If justice comes by the law

, then Christ died in vain". Yet theverbal context could also be made clear somewhere else,e.g. St. Paul saying "I would wish to be anathema fromChrist”, in Rom 9:3, can only be understood rightly in thelight of verses 38/9 of the previous chapter, and the rest of Chapters 9, 10 and 11. Likewise with Our Lord's wordsabout cutting off a hand or plucking out an eye (Matt. 5:2930) in a true verbal context we must understand theliterary expression of

hyperbole

. It would be wrong totake it too literally. In the same way, Our Lord has givenMaria Valtorta some surprising expressions. Without putting these into context, one could raise an eyebrowevery few hundred pages! One example might be Christspeaking to the pagan Romans about the human soul. Hecalls it a spark of the divinity, yet if you keep reading it ismade clear that He is not speaking literally, for He tells usthat the soul is created, separate from God yet made in Hisimage and likeness. The spark of the divinity is anallegory, an image that better expresses our understanding.Second is the

cultural and temporal context

. It comes asa surprise for some to realise that Christ our Saviour wastruly human, and with other characters of the Gospel, wasof quite a different cultural stock (from ourselves). Jewishfirst century styles and customs greatly differ fromWestern twentieth century ones. Even today, what isnormal and proper in Palestine or Italy might beconsidered queer and sinful in America or England. Inthese latter countries we know it is not proper for men tokiss each other unless they are of close family, or they areenthusiastic U.K. soccer players kicking a goal. Yet in theEast it is entirely proper and even expected. Sometimesthey even may kiss on the lips as a sign of specialaffection without any unnatural or sexual connotation.Recall Our Lord at the house of Simon the Phariseerebuking him for not giving the customary kiss (Luke