Before looking at other errors in the Divine Will books, I repeat the problem of the heresy of Monothelitism:
from the History of Christian theology
Malmesbury Abbey’s 1407 Bible from Belgium from wiki
“Monothelitism or monotheletism (from Greek μονοθελητισμός “doctrine of one will”) is a particular teaching about how the divine and human relate in the person of Jesus. The Christological doctrine formally emerged in Armenia and Syria in 629. Specifically, monothelitism is the view that Jesus Christ has two natures but only one will. That is contrary to the Christology that Jesus Christ has two wills (human and divine) that correspond to his two natures (dyothelitism). Monothelitism is a development of the Neo-Chalcedonian position in the Christological debates. Formulated in 638, it enjoyed considerable popularity, even garnering patriarchal support, before being rejected and denounced as heretical in 681, at the Third Council of Constantinople.”
In other words, Christ’s human and divine wills worked together and the one was not superior to the other–He is truly God and Man and more
“The Christological definition of Chalcedon, as accepted by the Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, and Reformed churches, is that Christ remains in two distinct natures, yet these two natures come together within his one hypostasis. More simply, Christ is known as “both fully human and fully Divine, one in being with the Father”. This position was opposed by the Monophysites who held that Christ possesses one nature only. The term Monophysitism of which Eutychianism is one type, held that the human and divine natures of Christ were fused into one new single (mono-) nature. As described by Eutyches, his human nature was “dissolved like a drop of honey in the sea”, and therefore his nature is really divine. This is distinct from Miaphysitism, which holds that, after the union, Christ is in one theanthropic (human-divine) nature and is generated from the union of two natures. The two are thus united without separation, without confusion, and without alteration, and with each having a particularity. Miaphysitism is the christological doctrine of the Oriental Orthodox churches.” “This council met from 680 to 681. Apart from the Roman representatives, it also hosted representatives from the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Jerusalem, while the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch were present in person. It almost unanimously, with the exception of two individuals, condemned the Monothelite doctrine as one that diminished the fullness of Christ’s humanity, and asserted that Dyothelitism was the true doctrine, with Christ possessing “two natural wills and two natural energies, without division, alteration, separation or confusion”. It also anathematized the chief representatives of the discredited doctrine, including Pope Honorius. The churches condemned at Constantinople included the Oriental Orthodox churches and the Maronite church, although the Oriental Orthodox deny that they ever held the Monothelite view (describing their own Christology as Miaphysite), and the Maronites accept the Chalcedonian formula being in communion with the Roman Catholic Church. This brought to an end the controversy over Monothelitism.”
Moving on to the other errors, and this is not an exhaustive list, I want to mention these two, returning to Fr. Staples’ article. And then I shall give the current Church’s stand on this seer.
• “Jesus said to me [Luisa]: ‘My dear one, look at how for the one who lives in my Volition there is no grace that goes forth from my Will toward all the creatures in Heaven or on earth in which he [i.e. the one who lives in the Divine Will] is not the first to take part. This is natural because he who lives in the house of his father abounds in his possessions. And if those on the outside receive anything, it is in virtue of him who lives inside.” (p.25, BH).Comment: Evidently, to live in the Divine Will is to join Our Lady as mediatrix of all graces!
• Living in the divine will: your soul is consecrated in all the Hosts. Luisa: “I complained to Jesus that I couldn’t even hear Holy Mass, and Jesus said: ‘My daughter, aren’t I the sacrifice? When I am sacrificed, the soul that lives with Me in my Will is sacrificed together with Me, not only in one Mass, but in all Masses from the first to the last. Since she lives in my Will the soul is consecrated in all the Hosts. Never leave my Will and I will take you wherever you want. Furthermore, such an electric current of communication will pass between us that you will not do one act without Me. Nor will I do any act without you. Therefore, when you have need of something, such as to hear Mass, enter into my Will and you will immediately find what you seek: as many Masses as you wish, as many Communions as you wish, as much love as you wish. Nothing is lacking in my Will. Not only will you find all things, but you will find them in a divine and infinite manner.” (BH, pp. 86-87).Comment: To participate fruitfully in the Mass we must be conscious of what we are doing, a human act is involved at some level. We cannot be unconsciously offering ourselves and consecrating ourselves in every Mass all over the world and certainly not in all the Masses which were ever offered before we were born!
• After Jesus tells Luisa how her sufferings and prayers were instrumental in the establishment of the new “Kingdom of the Supreme Fiat,” He adds: “The same thing occurred in the Redemption. If our Justice had not found the prayers, the sighs, the tears, the penances of the Patriarchs, Prophets and all the good people of the Old Testament and, moreover, a Virgin Queen who possessed our Will integrally and who took everything upon Herself with so many unceasing prayers, taking upon Herself the work of making satisfaction for all the human race, our Justice never would have conceded to the descent of the desired Redeemer among creatures. Our Justice would have been inexorable and would have given a resounding NO to my coming to earth.” (BH, p. 18).Comment: Luisa is claiming that God had to first satisfy His justice by looking to the merits of human beings before He could send his Son. This is totally false. The Incarnation and Redemption was completely unmerited. If the Patriarchs, Prophets, Mary, etc…, did anything meritorious it was by the foreseen merits and grace of Christ!
I want to add that Luisa states also that all the saints who have lived before did not have this grace of the Divine Will and that those who follow her now will be greater in heaven than St. John the Baptist or St. Joseph. This is obviously wrong. In addition, she states the the grace of the Eucharist Mass is trumped by the grace of the Divine Will. Again, this is heretical as the grace of the Eucharist is the greatest grace we can receive.
“I [Luisa]…said to myself: ‘Soon He will say that his Will is more
than Sacramental Communion Itself.’ Then He immediately
added: ‘Right! Right! Because Sacramental Communion lasts a few minutes.
It is temporary. My Will, on the other hand, is perennial Communion.
…[M]y Will is Sacrament and surpasses all the sacraments together’.”
– “Book of Heaven,” pp. 36-37, 106.
This is obviously heretical. The Will as described by Luisa is not a new sacrament and does not surpass the others. This is why I call this a Broad or Wide Gate, as the members think they can jump to a holiness which only comes to those who go through purgation, illumination and unity, beginning with complete accordance of mind and will to the Teaching Magisterium of the Church. If one wants to achieve unity with God, one must pursue the arduous task of the purgation and other steps as described by St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila, among others. But, those who follow the movement of the Divine Will think this revelation of Luisa’s will make them holier than all the saints before except Mary.
This is a sort of Gnosticism, a cult which appeals to those who do not want to study the CCC or who do not know the dogmas of the Church.
WHAT DOES THE CHURCH SAY ABOUT THESE WRITINGS?
Only two books are approved by the Archbishop of Trani and NOT the 36 volumes. In addition, I know of many people who are buying and passing around these unauthorised, heretical editions. In fact, there is a man who travels around the world who pushes these books which are illegally according the the Vatican, being published.
As of the end of 2017 the status of the Cause remains the same as in recent years. The Communique of the Archbishop of Trani of 1 November 2012 remains his most recent official statement on the status of Luisa’s Cause. In order not to prejudice the Cause and scandalize others, he reiterated that all things be done in communion with the local Ordinaries (e.g. prayer groups, reading of the writings etc.), that unauthorized translations not be promoted, and that explanations inconsistant with the teaching of the Church not be promulgated, that the critical edition of the writings with theological explanations be awaited, as well as other requests previously made in prior communications.
At this time there are still NO official English translations of any of the volumes. As previously stated to EWTN by the Postulation, the complexity of translating from the dialect used by the author into Italian, and then from Italian into other languages, and doing so consistent with the doctrine of the faith, makes it absolutely necessary that the prohibition of unauthorized translations be observed. When the critical edition with theological notes is completed, and approved by the Holy See, only then will the Postulation authorize translations, and then only from the critical edition.
1. The life and virtues of Luisa Piccarreti are being examined at the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, following approval of the positive result of the documentary process by the Archbishop of Trani in 2005, and then committed to the Congregation at that time.
2. Her writings are being examined on a separate track, in view of producing a critical edition with appropriate commentary in keeping with the teaching of the Magisterium.
3. No change in the norms and guidance provided by the Archbishop of Trani in previous official communications has occurred.
2003 EWTN Meeting with Fr. Bernadino Bucci, OFM. Cap.:
One more note from me—although the Vatican states that prayer meetings are fine, these are not to spread the cult of sainthood for Luisa. This is because the title of the Servant of the Lord is not infallible and the Church has made mistakes before using this title too quickly. Her life, as well as her writings, is still being examined.
There is more I could write, but let me end this series by stating that we should always err on the side of obedience. And, we all need to study Church doctrine so as not to fall under the spell of false seers and false messages.
JMJ, pray for us!
God is good,