Refutation of Their Eighth Failed Attempt to Demonstrate Error

The Resistance Dominicans made a list in which they attempted to demonstrate errors in Valtorta's work. Here is their eighth listed item:

Satan became flesh in the form of Judas.

The Resistance Dominicans again fail to provide the relevant quotation or context. However, I was able to find the passage in Valtorta's work that they are most likely referring to. Here is the relevant citation with surrounding context (at the scene of the Last Supper), with Jesus first speaking in this excerpt:92

« [...] Do not say: "So, if You chose us, why did You choose a betrayer. If You know everything, why did You do that?" Do not even ask who he is. He is not a man. He is Satan. I said so to My faithful friend and I let My beloved son say so. He is Satan. If Satan, the eternal mimic of God, had not become incarnate in human flesh, this possessed man could not have escaped My power of Jesus. I said: "possessed". No. He is much more: he is annihilated in Satan. »

« Since You have driven demons away, why did you not free him? » asks James of Alphaeus.

« Are you asking that for your own sake, fearing that you are the one? Be not afraid of that. »

« I, then? »

« I? »

« I? »

« Be quiet. I am not mentioning that name. I am being merciful, do likewise. »

« But why did You not defeat him? Could You not do that? »

« I could. But in order to prevent Satan from taking bodily form to kill Me, I should have had to exterminate the human race before Redemption. So what would I have redeemed? »

There is absolutely no problem with the above passage when you read it in context and understand hyperbole, which the canonized Scriptures itself also employs.

First, let us see what the canonized Scriptures say about whether Judas Iscariot was possessed by Satan:

"When Jesus had said these things, He was troubled in spirit; and He testified, and said: Amen, amen I say to you, one of you shall betray Me. [...] Jesus answered: He it is to whom I shall reach bread dipped. And when He had dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. And after the morsel, Satan entered into him [Judas Iscariot]." (John 13: 21, 26-27)

The canonized Scriptures affirm very clearly that Satan entered into Judas Iscariot and that consequently he became possessed.

Jesus affirms the same thing in Valtorta's work. However, what the Resistance Dominicans seem to be objecting to is the use of hyperbole in Our Lord's words in Valtorta's work, when He says:93

Do not even ask who he is. He is not a man. He is Satan. I said so to My faithful friend and I let My beloved son say so. He is Satan. If Satan, the eternal mimic of God, had not become incarnate in human flesh, this possessed man could not have escaped My power of Jesus. I said: "possessed". No. He is much more: he is annihilated in Satan.

Fr. Kevin Robinson, FSSPX, wrote:94

With Valtorta, as with the canonical Scriptures, there are difficulties that are easily resolved by distinction from Thomistic philosophy such as: general vs. specific, strictly vs. broadly, properly vs. allegorically, in fieri vs. in facto esse, ad esse vs. ad melior esse, simpliciter vs. quodammodo. These distinctions are usually not needed for the simple faithful as the context gives them the truth without danger.

Does Holy Scripture use allegory or hyperbole similar to the literary device used in the above passage in Valtorta? Well, let's see. This is from the Book of James:

"Even so the tongue is indeed a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold how small a fire kindleth a great wood. And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity. The tongue is placed among our members, which defileth the whole body, and inflameth the wheel of our nativity, being set on fire by hell. For every nature of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of the rest, is tamed, and hath been tamed, by the nature of man: But the tongue no man can tame, an unquiet evil, full of deadly poison." (James 3: 5-8) [emphasis added]

St. James is referring to the tongue being "a fire", "a world of iniquity", and an "unquiet evil, full of deadly poison". I have yet to see inside someone's mouth a tongue which is literally "a fire". And according to the logic of the Resistance Dominicans, that might be unacceptable or quite an exaggerated term to call a tongue "a world of iniquity." These quotes and terms are from the canonized Scripture and their literary use is not too far off from Maria Valtorta's use of the term "annihilated in Satan" in her personal description of her authentic vision in reference to Judas Iscariot's complete possession by Satan, which the canonized Gospels also refer to: "Satan entered into him." (John 13:27)

Or what about this hyperbolic expression of Our Lord:

"And if thy right eye scandalize thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee. For it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than that thy whole body be cast into hell. And if thy right hand scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than that thy whole body be cast into hell." (Matthew 5: 29-30) [emphasis added]

It goes without saying that our critic is criticizing a type of literary device (allegory/hyperbole) that is used in the canonized Gospels themselves.

So now let us go back to what Jesus said in the passage in Valtorta. When Jesus said, "He is not a man. He is Satan." Did He mean this properly and literally or allegorically? It is obvious from the context that He meant this allegorically (a.k.a. hyperbole). Jesus Christ has used hyperbole in the canonized Scriptures itself, as I just demonstrated above. Therefore, the Resistance Dominicans cannot "play dumb" and take it too literally here and cast out the possibility of allegory/hyperbole here and at the same time accept the allegory/hyperbole in the canonized Gospels. If they take the phrases above in Valtorta's work only literally and insist that everyone must interpret it only literally, then if they ever sinned with their eye or hand at some point in their life, they better start plucking their eyes out and cutting off their hands right now because Jesus told us to do this in the canonized Gospels:

"And if your right eye scandalizes you, pluck it out and cast it from you. [...] And if your right hand scandalizes you, cut it off, and cast it from you." (Matthew 5: 29-30) [emphasis added]

I think their poor argument and lack of distinction and scholarly work is more than refuted and that this is obvious to anyone with at least average common sense and critical reading skills.

What about what Jesus said later on in that passage? What He said here:95

« I could. But in order to prevent Satan from taking bodily form to kill Me, I should have had to exterminate the human race before Redemption. So what would I have redeemed? »

This above phrase is merely a reference to Satan completely possessing Judas Iscariot. Satan did indeed take bodily form to kill Jesus insofar as he took possession of Judas Iscariot's body. I advise the Resistance Dominicans to watch an exorcism and they will see very quickly that a demon does indeed take possession of the body of the one they inhabit. The canonized Gospels also relate this fact and this reality.

A demon could be said to "take bodily form" (at least in terms of allegorical speech) when it completely possesses a human body. In fact, it is well known that evil spirits can sometimes have power over matter. Just read about any exorcism (and there are hundreds of testimonies, videos, books, etc. about exorcisms). With possessed people (or even outside of them such as in haunted houses), demons are able to move objects, make objects fly in the air, make the possessed person speak in other languages, make the possessed person float in the air, cause strange smells and sights, and do all sorts of crazy activity that defies the normal laws of gravity, physics, and the normal laws of nature. Even canonized Scripture attests to how evil spirits can perform amazing feats to deceive people:

"Now there was a certain man named Simon, who before had been a magician in that city, seducing the people of Samaria, giving out that he was some great one: to whom they all gave ear, from the least to the greatest, saying: This man is the power of God, which is called great. And they were attentive to him, because, for a long time, he had bewitched them with his magical practices." (Acts of the Apostles 8:9-11)

The apocryphal "Acts of Peter" gives a legendary tale of Simon Magus' death: In order to prove himself to be a god, Simon performed magic in the Forum, and levitated up into the air. The apostle Peter prayed to God to stop his flying, and he stopped in mid-air and fell, breaking his legs.96 Jesus encountered many possessed people in the Gospels, and remember how the demon-possessed man of the Gadarenes, who was possessed by a multitude of demons (Legion), had superhuman strength:

And they came over the strait of the sea into the country of the Gerasens. And as He went out of the ship, immediately there met Him out of the monuments a man with an unclean spirit, who had his dwelling in the tombs, and no man now could bind him, not even with chains. For having been often bound with fetters and chains, he had burst the chains, and broken the fetters in pieces, and no one could tame him. And he was always day and night in the monuments and in the mountains, crying and cutting himself with stones.

And seeing Jesus afar off, he ran and adored Him. And crying with a loud voice, he said: "What have I to do with Thee, Jesus the Son of the Most High God? I adjure Thee by God that Thou torment me not." For He said unto him: "Go out of the man, thou unclean spirit". And He asked him: "What is thy name?" And he said to Him: "My name is Legion, for we are many." (Mark 5: 1-9) [emphasis added]

No normal man could burst chains like that unless he had preternatural help (in this case, by evil spirits). Now, could one allegorically (or by hyperbole) say that demon(s) took bodily form by entering into this possessed man and imparting to him superhuman strength? Yes, one could.

Yet how much more could one say the same of Judas Iscariot, which Scripture relates "Satan entered into him" (John 13:27), and about whom Christ said, "But woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed: it were better for him, if that man had not been born"! (Matthew 26:24) The expression "annihilation in Satan" is a very apt description of someone who was completely possessed totally (arguably more than any other man ever was or will be).

It goes without saying that the Resistance Dominican's very weak, subjective argumentation is both absurd, unfounded, and is criticizing a type of literary device used in the canonized Gospels themselves, not to mention is in contradiction to the opinion of world-renowned theologians who have found Valtorta's writing truly phenomenal.

As Msgr. Maurice Raffa, Director of the International Center of Comparison and Synthesis, wrote:97

...I found therein incomparable riches...Wanting to express a judgment on its intrinsic and aesthetic value, I point out that to write just one of the many volumes composing the work, it would need an author (who today does not exist) who would be at once a great poet, an able biblical scholar, a profound theologian, an expert in archaeology and topography, and a profound connoisseur of human psychology.

Camillo Corsánego (1891-1963), former national president of Catholic Action in Italy, Dean of the Consistorial Lawyers, and a professor at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome, wrote:98

"Throughout my life, by now fairly long, I have read a very large number of works in apologetics, hagiography [saints' lives], theology, and biblical criticism; however, I have never found such a body of knowledge, art, devotion, and adherence to the traditional teachings of the Church, as in Miss Maria Valtorta's work on the Gospels.

"Having read those numerous pages attentively and repeatedly, I must in all conscience declare that with respect to the woman who wrote them only two hypotheses can be made: a) either she was talented like Manzoni or Shakespeare, and her scriptural and theological learning and her knowledge of the Holy Places were perfect, at any rate superior to those of anyone alive in Italy today; b) or else 'digitus Dei est hic' ['God's finger is here'].

"[...] Anyone who reads [even] a limited number of these wonderful pages, literally perfect, if he has a mind free of prejudices, cannot not draw from them the fruits of Christian elevation."

In fact, I wrote a refutation of another critic who tried to argue that the use of the literary expression "annihiliated in Satan" was somehow a problem. If you want to see this refutation, follow these steps:

1. Download the June 2017 edition of the e-book here

2. Go to page 948.

The above refutation will reinforce this present refutation and will make it even more clear just how absolutely fine and completely acceptable these hyperbolic expressions in the passage in Valtorta under question are and how they are very much like literary devices used in the canonized Gospels themselves (in fact, they are also like the often-used allegories and hyperboles often seen in the writings of canonized saints and other approved mystical writings). Just look at St. John of the Cross's mystical writings for starters...

I don't hear many people criticizing The Spiritual Canticle of St. John of the Cross for its use of allegories and hyperboles, which are often used in his writings, as explained in this introduction to his Spiritual Canticle:99

Although these canticles resulted from a love flowing out of abundant mystical understanding, they cannot declare fully the understanding or experience. John asks in the Prologue: "Who can describe in writing the understanding he [the Beloved] gives to loving souls in whom He dwells? And who can express with words the experience He imparts to them? Who, finally, can explain the desires He gives them? Certainly, no one can! Not even they who receive these communications." Always, as John explains in stanza 7, there is an "I-don't-know-what" that strives to be articulated, something further to say, something unknown, not yet spoken, a sublime trace of God still uninvestigated but revealed to the mystic. The effort to convey the contents of the experience becomes sheer stammering.

Faced with an inability to make their experience clearly known and at the same time feeling a loving impulse to convey it outwardly, these persons who speak of mysteries and secrets seem to be uttering absurdities. But the apparent absurdities of the poetic images and similes are a more powerful means than rational explanations for expressing the mystical experience; they can suggest so much more about its contents. John, in fact, points out that his is the method of the Holy Spirit who, "unable to express the plenitude of His meaning in ordinary words, utters mysteries in strange figures and likenesses," as for example in the Song of Songs.

In fact the Song of Songs is the principal source of The Spiritual Canticle. In this biblical work John found an expression of his own profound experience, and also found the scenes, images, and words, even though sometimes foreign to his environment, with which to create his own work.

I would advise the Resistance Dominicans to take measures to try to further develop their common sense and critical reading skills and to educate themselves a bit more about writing styles and the issues of context when trying to interpret texts before they wrench isolated quotations out of context and, using the same feigned scandal that the Pharisees used in Christ's day to distort His words and take His words out of context to calumniate Him, actually apply honest, objective analysis, instead of being so quick to calumniate a saintly victim soul and her profound writings in an unbalanced and unjustified witch hunt. I also encourage humble, honest, open-minded Catholics to thank God rather than fall into a pharisaical, close-minded, ill-disposed mindset, which disposes one to not want to be "confused with the facts" or properly research things and reject one of God's greatest gifts to our generation.