!? St. Padre Pio and the "French Monarchy" prophecies written by Luigi Gaspari in the "Notebook of Love" etc.
EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS, CONTAINING DOCTINRAL ERRORS - FAKE REVELATIONS
After recently discovering (on Sept. 16, 2019) that St. Pio was forbidden by his superiors from writing anything from the year 1924 onward, which he dutifully obeyed, this led me to discover that the prophecy he allegedly made of the Three Days of Darkness is a hoax. (Read more about that, click here.)
Once discovering this, I realised I had better take another look at the other prophecies he was supposed to have made - i.e. the 'French Monarchy' Prophecies.
A certain Luigi Gaspari clamied to be a close confidant of St. Pio and that he had dictated letters from conversations he had from St. Padre Pio about the French Monarchy, that is, revelations how the world and the Church would not have peace until the French Monarchy was restored among other 'spiritual revelations'.
I fell for this one, even the 'Marquis' de Franquerie was taken in by these claims made by Gaspari.
I've now recently discovered that that these supposed conversations and revelations by St. Pio allegedly 'given' to Gaspari were obviously NOT literal face to face conversations that were written down as we were led to believe on various Internet sites, but that Gaspari claimed he heard these messages from an 'interior voice' or 'inner locutions and visions', which Gaspari claimed to be that of St. Padre Pio, but without any proof. THERE ARE ALSO SEVERAL STRANGE INCIDENTS metioned in the book, which I previusly did not know about, including DOCTRINAL ERRORS which show it to be fake.
According to a site reporting information on a conference held by GRIS (Gruppo di Ricerca e Informazione e Socio-Religiosa, info about the group, click here) in San Giovanni in April 18 / 19, 2009, there is no proof these mystical experiences took place, and apparently no religious investigation into Gaspari's locutions and visions took place.
Also, according to the site giving the info on the GRIS report, there are major doctrinal errors in Gaspari's book - which is a sign it is a fake.
Here is what the site reports:
Luigi Gaspari, “Book of Love”- sequence of events how this book came about.
Report to the GRIS conference, 18/19 April 2009 at San Giovanni Rotondo
(This brief history on Gaspari's bio and supposed 'visits' to St. Pio are taken from the Book of Love).
Luigi Gaspari was born in
San Felice sul Panaro on 9 April 1926 and died in Cesenatico on 15 March 1995.
Reading attentively the account of the meetings Luigi Gaspari had with St. Padre Pio
it can be seen that there are two parts: the meetings which took place at San
Giovanni Rotondo and those at Decima a Chianciano with the "apparition" of St. Padre
Pio.
Luigi Gaspari had his first real meeting with Padre Pio as a boy, on 15 March
1940. At first, St. Padre Pio turned him away, but then accepted him as a spiritual
son. Shortly after, on 5 May 1940, Olimpia Pia Cristallini, who had given
hospitality to the boy in San Giovanni, wrote to him saying that Padre Pio was
displeased with his lack of enthusiasm for his studies and of fervour in taking
communion.
Luigi Gaspari lost this letter but found it once more in the attic, in September
1954, and this inspired him to return to San Giovanni Rotondo. He was welcomed
by Padre Pio with paternal benevolence.
From
this time onwards, Luigi Gaspari made frequent journeys to San Giovanni.
On 6
June 1956 he met Padre Pio in the vestry. Padre Pio told him to go home at once.
He did so, and found his mother dying. After his mother’s death Luigi Gaspari returned to San Giovanni.
At
Christmas 1967 he once more made his confession to Padre Pio. Luigi Gaspari
notes, without living the context of the words, that Padre Pio said to him: “We
are going to have to work very hard in 1968. there is no time to waste”. Apparently, according to the website, St. Pio must have simply meant it as a New Year's resolution for Gaspari to do better in his spiritual life for 1968, but it seems that Gaspari made a personal interpretation of what this 'work' was meant to be. It is possible Gaspari construed more out of this than was meant and assumed a 'great spiritual mission' was what the 'great work' was.
(NOTE: from here we can see this fuelled Gaspari's imagination, for we have a load of strange allegations after this according to the GRIS report.)
At
the beginning of April, 1968 Luigi Gaspari said he began to hear a voice, which he believed
was inspired by Padre Pio, probably because Padre Pio, in a "vision", caused him
to hear a voice which in the writings say represented the
voice of Christ. (Apparently, St. Pio was passing on Christ's words to him.)
By
the end of April a manuscript had been prepared supposedly of these 'inner locutions', and a copy was allegedly sent to Padre
Pio. Luigi Gaspari however showed no proof of approval from San Giovanni Rotondo,
and without mentioning any visit he made there he states that Padre Pio defined
the notebook “Testament to the promise of grace”. Basically, there is no proof he received approval from St. Pio or that he even visited St. Pio on that occasion. We only have Gaspari's word.
Then, Gaspari claims Padre Pio exhorted him to
publish it as soon as possible and to send it to the Holy Father, the Church
hierarchy, and the whole world. “The Pope will understand it all”, he is supposed to have said. As Gaspari made no visit to San Giovanni we are led to conclude that Padre Pio
appeared to him in a "vision". It should also be noted that before publishing it,
the book should have been submitted to a Bishop (the Bishop of the place where
publication took place) for the imprimatur.
(NOTE: in other words, St. Pio is telling him to publish this book and send it out without having submitted it to the Bishop for approval, which is something St. Padre Pio would NEVER do. For example, eventhough it is said St. Pio declared the visions of Heroldsbach Germany were true, once the local bishops had made a negative decision against those visions, he told the people to obey their bishops. It is the local bishop that has to approve a vision or manuscript. Going over their head straight to the Pope first is usually the sign of a fake mystic attempting to thwart Church procedure and force an approval. Also, as St. Pio did not have permission to write himself since 1924 by order of his superiors which he was completely obedient to. If he was bi-locating and giving inner locations to Gaspari, this would indicate he was making someone else write on his behalf - which would make someone else an accomplice to his disobedience to his superiors. Another red flag these revelations of Gaspari are fake. )
Returning to the sequence of events, on
May 25 the feast day of the Sacred Heart was to take place in St. Louis, USA,
and Padre Pio (here again there was no journey made to San Giovanni Rotondo)
allegedly asked to have the 'Book of Love' printed; but nothing happened. Padre Pio, according to
Gaspari, “was very grieved”.
(Notice the contradiction: on the one hand there is
reference to the ecclesiastical authorities, while on the other hand the
authorities are set aside without waiting for their judgement before printing. Very odd for St. Padre Pio to act this way for and yet against superiors!)
In
June 1968 the book was published for the first time, edited by Michele
Famiglietti of Rome. Luigi Gaspari said that he had asked St. Padre Pio to “remove a
few words” and that he be able to print the text anonymously. Gaspari said St. Padre Pio opposed both requests. Again no proof Gaspari made a visit to San Giovanni to see St. Padre Pio, so how did he ask him about the text to be printed unless by another 'unseen vision' which we have no proof of and must take Gaspari's word for it?
In
August 1968 a new edition was published in Rovigo, edited by Primo Capponcelli
of Decima di San Giovanni in Persiceto, near Bologna. It was said that Padre Pio
had requested that the book be published in May 1968, but here too there is no
mention of a visit to San Giovanni Rotondo, which suggests that all took place
in a vision of which there is no proof and we have to take Gaspari's word for it, again.
Already, a group of followers was forming around the figure of
Luigi Gaspari.
Primo Capponcelli went confidently to San Giovanni Rotondo and began to
distribute the book, but distribution was suspended and he was forbidden to
speak of it - so the text was officially forbidden at some point.
Meanwhile, Luigi Gaspari was at Chianciano Terme Spa and on 20 September at
6p.m. St- Padre Pio allegedly “appeared” to him at the Sant'Elena spa (that it was an
apparition is stated explicitly.) Padre Pio "told" him that he would have to bring
forward the date of his departure for Heaven in order to save “what could be
saved”, and complained that he was no longer listened to, even by many of his
most faithful followers. He said that the words of the “Testament Promise of
Grace” had not been believed, and what could have been saved in June could no
longer be saved. The “Testament Promise of Grace” could however benefit
individuals.
(NOTE: So, Gaspari claims St. Pio himself was hastening his own death so people would believe and thereby 'save' the manuscript? This is VERY ODD. A true text from a true mystic can lie hidden for years! Even for a whole century, be rediscovered and remain relevant. How could this be 'out of date' simply because it was published a month late? True prophecies and spiritual lessons are always relevant! Also, we learn God prepares visions way long in advance of when they will actually be needed, as Our Lord pointed out to Marie-Juie Jahenny that He was preparing the world in her visions in the 1800s because if He waited util the very moment they were needed, they would not be spread in time. So, if this book was meant to save something in the Church why the sudden haste in that it would HAVE to get out in a month? Something seems off. And, Why would St. Pio hasten his death to make people believe in it? True prophecies will stand the test of time on their own. We have many examples of saints leaving their lives and work in the hands of God, and do NOT HASTEN THEIR OWN DEATH. A saint recognises only God has the power and authority over life and death.)
At
about 5 p.m. on 22 September Gaspari claimed to have had a dream which he defined
“prophetic”. In his dream Padre Pio appeared, surrounded by a host of angels.
Padre Pio embraced him and exhorted him to be strong and not to mourn his death.
Padre Pio promised to place at Gaspari’s disposal “my host of angels”, who would
obey Luigi Gaspari in all things. Padre Pio would help him staying close to him
and guiding him in all he would say and do.
(NOTE: St. Pio is granting Gaspari his angels who will 'obey' Gaspari in all things? Even St. Pio's own guardian angel once seemed deaf to his prayers and didn't save him from the beatings of a demon, he did not obey him when asked to help. So, this claim of Gaspari that St. Pio's angels would obey him in all things is another red flag - angels only obey GOD in all things, not man! )
In
the night of Sept. 22, Luigi Gaspari claimed to hear “in my heart” the voice of Padre Pio
asking him, Gaspari, to read the book aloud to him; and he read it, again and
again, until dawn broke. At about seven o’clock that morning a telephone call
from Rome informed him that Padre Pio was dead.
On
17 October 1968 Luigi Gaspari attempted to send his notebook to Pope Paul VI
through Monsignor V. D'Andrea. Ten days later he asserts Monsignor D’Andrea told him that
Paul VI had said: “This is high mysticism. How beautiful, this meeting between
Father and son. There is not one word which needs to be removed.”
HOWEVER, NO WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF APPROVAL FROM ST. POPE PAUL VI WAS EVER GIVEN.
It is altogether implausible that St. Pope
Paul VI would have gone against the canonical procedures requiring approval by
the Bishop of the town where it was published (Rovigo), and that he should have
expressed an opinion without sending the book to the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith.
The conclusion is: Luigi Gaspari made no more visits to San
Giovanni Rotondo from late 1967 to early 1968 - these 'letters' that made up the 'Book of Love' was communicated only through alleged "apparitions" and "inner locutions" of St. Padre Pio, but there is NO PROOF ANY OF THIS HAPPENED. There are also some wild claims in the book that show this to be false.
It is obvious Gaspari's book and his prophecies about the French Monarchy have nothing to
do with St. Padre Pio, and are either a man-made fabrication, or, something that may have been preternaturally inspired.
TEXT EXCERPTS SHOWING THE BOOK TO BE A TANGLED CONFUSION and CONTAINS DOCTRINAL ERRORS
An examination of the text
::::
(Page 20-21)
“Your heart is never entirely mine. Often you give me a piece of it, but you
always save a part for your desires, for searching for other things which are
not mine (...) I often hide in that little corner that you save for me. I keep
watch. What do I see? I see you hungry, tired, disappointed and discontented
(...) I watch you and wait for a sign, an invitation to come out of my hiding
place, the place where you have put me. I am present when you call me, but even
more present when you love me”.
The language is a continuing mixture, in the same passage, of the mystical and
the down-to-earth.
::::::::
(Page 24)
“There would be no life without my warmth. My warmth compensates for the ice in
your arid hearts. The heart of each one of you should preserve a spark of
creation. When your heart is arid, that spark of creation disappears, because it
is the love in your hearts that keeps all thing alive. And what do I do? I warm
you with my warmth. I compensate with my heart the aridity of yours. I keep you
and I keep life with the warmth of my Heart (...). I am the reserve of energy
which intervenes to prevent a disaster caused by the waste you make of yours, of
the one I gave you”.
Here is a confused mix of the concept of divine omnipotence and the concept of
physical energy, and confusion between mystical warmth and physical warmth.
:::::::::::::::::::
(Page 27)
“I
defend your rights over those you have loved and who try to escape from you”.
Union in Christian charity presupposes liberty, but this union is changed into a
right of possession over other followers as a right to be defended. Sounds strangely tyrannical. We are not required to believe provate revelations anyway, so a mystic does not have 'right' over those who do not believe their messages.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
(Page 31)
“I
return to the memory of those who did not befriend me. Now that I have his
friendship, I feel certain within myself that I shall have all the friends I
desire. All the friends I desire, to share with him (...). it is he who guides
my every step and he will not want those he chose for himself to distance
themselves, using the excuse that they wish to distance themselves from me. All
those he called shall return. Now there will be a roll-call, and woe to those
who do not answer”.
Friendship should be a meeting of two free persons in Christian love; but here
it is seen as coercion of one free person towards another. Woe to those who refuse his friendship and 'distance' themselves! Not very charitable-especially, was we are not required to believe in private revelations. Also this seems a departure from the teachings of true mystics, i.e. the importance of DETACHMENT FROM ALL CREATURES on the road to spiritual perfection for the love of God, even human friendships now matter innocent if they keep us from God.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
(Page 37)
“I
will not allow anyone to judge what you do. The moment has arrived to speak
clearly and with authority. It is necessary that I give you authority”.
Our Lord will not allow 'anyone'? Our Lord always tells a true mystic to submit to the authority of the Church, be it through their spiritual director, the superior, bishop or archbishop. However, here it seems Our Lord is telling Gaspari he will not allow ANYONE judge his work, and that would include the Church! Gaspari claims Christ has been given 'direct authority' to him - which a true mystic would not have.
:::::::::::::::::::::::
DOCTRINAL ERRORS ON THE MATTER OF THE CREATION OF SPIRIT AND FLESH
(Page 44) -
“My
energy has formed the flesh which served to give a face to your spirit”.
It is stated that divine omnipotence does not express itself through the power
of the Word, but by means of the emanation of "energy" (!?) Also, next quote claims the spirit (soul) existed first before the flesh - DOCTRINAL ERROR.
(Page 44)
“Your spirit existed before it put on your flesh”.
Here is professed the pre-existence of the spirit before the formation of the
body - and that the spirit puts on the flesh - DOCTRINAL ERROR. The soul does not exists until the moment of conception.
(Page 44)
“your being is My spirit infused into the first man; it is that same spirit
which in giving life to Adam, by diverse means has come down to you. It is the
means used which have contaminated the spirit which was mine”.
Here is professed the existence of a "universal soul" common to all men
(Averroes) passed on by means of generation (traducianism) - this is NOT CATHOLIC TEACHING
(From information written 20/06/2007, updated 21/04/2009)
Considering all of this - I am now counting Gaspari's 'prophecies' and revelations as EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS, CONTAINING ERRORS - FAKE REVELATIONS - and have REMOVED it from the Timeline.
NOTE: the "Thee Days of Darkness" prophecy by St. Padre Pio is a HOAX as well - click more for info.
