A Refutation of the Concluding Paragraph of the Resistance Dominicans
The Resistance Dominicans wrote:
Last advice: Rather than read these novels where errors abound, it would be better to read Holy Scripture with good commentary based on the Fathers of the Church, or even good lives of the saints.
I'd rather take advice about this mystic from a cleric who was the Secretary of the Sacred Congregation of Rites from 1930 to 1960 (which was later renamed the Congregation for the Causes of Saints in 1969), who was in charge of investigating causes for pre-Vatican II beatification and canonization, who was conversant in recognizing true and false sanctity and was of distinguished repute, who was master of ceremonies for Pope Leo XIII and a confidant of Pope St. Pius X, and who many prelates considered to have passed away in the odor of sanctity. This prelate, Archbishop Alfonso Carinci (1862-1963), visited Maria Valtorta three times, said Mass for her, read her writings in depth, wrote many letters back and forth with her (many of which are published), and analyzed her case. He praised Maria Valtorta and The Poem of the Man-God (now entitled The Gospel as Revealed to Me), writing in 1952:146
"There is nothing therein which is contrary to the Gospel. Rather, this work, a good complement to the Gospel, contributes towards a better understanding of its meaning... Our Lord's discourses do not contain anything which in any way might be contrary to His Spirit."
Archbishop Carinci also stated:147
"...it seems impossible to me that a woman of a very ordinary theological culture, and unprovided with any book useful to that end, had been able on her own to write with such exactness pages so sublime."
"Judging from the good one experiences in reading it [i.e., The Poem], I am of the humble opinion that this Work, once published, could bring so many souls to the Lord: sinners to conversion and the good to a more fervent and diligent life. [...] While the immoral press invades the world and exhibitions corrupt youth, one comes spontaneously to thank the Lord for having given us, by means of this suffering woman, nailed to a bed, a Work of such literary beauty, so doctrinally and spiritually lofty, accessible and profound, drawing one to read it and capable of being reproduced in cinematic productions and sacred theater."
I would rather take advice from Fr. Gabriel Roschini (top Mariologist of the 20th century), Fr. Berti, O.S.M., Camillo Corsánego (1891-1963), and others of notable repute who actually investigated Valtorta's work in depth and recommended it wholeheartedly. I would rather trust what St. Padre Pio recommended his spiritual daughter about Valtorta's work: St. Padre Pio and Maria Valtorta.
I especially don't trust the Dominican's analysis and their "advice" since it is obvious that they have a notable level of ignorance on the subject they are writing about and their article is riddled with falsehoods, deficient theology, wrenching of statements out of context with false unsubstantiated insinuations, poor research, ignorance of too many relevant facts, sweeping generalizations, and lack of objectivity. It is readily apparent from their article that they carried out a cursory, non-in-depth investigation into Maria Valtorta's writings, bringing in unsubstantiated subjective impressions which are contradicted by those of greater learning and authority than them (and by "those of greater learning and authority than them", I'm also referring to pre-Vatican II, highly learned, trustworthy theologians who have spent hundreds of hours evaluating her writings, some of whom actually met the author in question).
I feel that the whole anti-Valtorta spirit with which the Dominican article is imbued is addressed, exposed, and refuted in the refutations of the anti-Valtorta articles of Horvat and Anselmo de la Cruz that are addressed here: A Refutation of the Anti-Valtorta Articles Posted on Tradition in Action (TraditioninAction.org).
Antonio Socci is a leading Italian journalist, TV show host, author, and public intellectual in Italy. He is well known among many traditional Catholics because of his book The Fourth Secret of Fatima, which is one of the most prominent books about Fatima (in particular, the Third Secret of Fatima) in recent times. Recently, Antonio Socci wrote an article about The Gospel as Revealed to Me / The Poem of the Man-God that was originally published in an Italian newspaper and which he also published on his blog on April 7, 2012, in which he highly praises it, saying:148
For twenty years, after having laboriously stumbled through trying to read hundreds of biblical scholars' volumes, I can say that – with the reading of the Work of Valtorta – two hundred years of Enlightenment-based, idealistic, and modernist chatter about the Gospels and about the Life of Jesus can be run through the shredder.
And this perhaps is one of the reasons why this exceptional work -- a work which moved even Pius XII -- is still ignored and "repressed" by the official intelligentsia and by clerical modernism.
In spite of that, outside the normal channels of distribution, thanks to Emilio Pisani and Centro Editoriale Valtortiano, the Work has been read by a sea of people -- every year, by tens of thousands of new readers -- and has been translated into 21 languages.
Horvat and Anselmo de la Cruz did a far better attempt than the Dominican article in attempting to refute Valtorta, but they failed as well because, objectively, Valtorta's work is free of error in faith and morals, highly consistent with Scripture, and is tremendously spiritually beneficial for Catholics for generations to come; and their articles (like all the anti-Valtorta articles I've come across) are riddled with falsehoods, deficient theology, wrenching of statements out of context with false unsubstantiated insinuations, poor research, ignorance of too many relevant facts, sweeping generalizations, and lack of objectivity. After accounting for the falsehoods and false insinuations which are easily shown as wrong, most of their remaining arguments are based on unsubstantiated subjective impressions which are contradicted by those of greater learning and authority than them.