The Father William Most Collection
Kingdom of the Divine Will
[Published electronically for use in classes taught by Fr. Most and for private theological study.]
1. Basic theology of the kingdom (hereinafter KW): St. John of the Cross and other great Saints and mystics have given us a sketch of what is, at least in general, the route from the start to the greatest conceivable perfection.
There are three stages or ways: 1) purgative; 2) illuminative; 3) Unitive.
In the first stage, the purgative way, the soul works by its own faculties which God gave it, and also by actual graces given at the time of acting, to lead and to enable a soul to do a particular good thing God wishes the soul to do. The goal is to eradicate the faults whose roots lie in our sensory side--the same goal for the faults in the spiritual side comes in the second night, which is the border between illuminative and unitive ways.
The guide a soul follows in making its decisions at first is the whim of the moment. But Aristotle (Ethics 1.6) calls this a life fit for cattle, who do just what they happen to feel like doing. The soul can however make reason its guide- which in practice is aided by actual graces, even though the soul does not realize that fact.
In the earlier parts of the purgative way--using whim or reason + actual grace as guide--the soul is largely active, though God, as the First Cause, does contribute even in the natural order, the ontological power to do things. But as the soul continues to advance, still within the purgative way, the divine action takes over more and more of the decision making as well as giving the ontological power as the First Cause.
This development comes along with growth in humility and mortification, and in mental prayer.
In the most typical early form, meditation is discursive, that is, it moves from one consideration to another, usually with the help of a book. Both mind and will are active, but the activity of the mind, in considerations, takes up more of the meditation period. The will and feelings fill up the remainder of the period, either on a sandwich pattern, or in two separate time periods.
The next stage of the development of mental prayer, typically, is what is called affective prayer. Here the proportion shifts, so that the work of the mind grows less, while the work of the will, chiefly in free conversational prayer, grows larger.
If the soul grows still more - still within the purgative way--it reaches the prayer of simplicity. Then there is no discursive running back and forth: just one thought will suffice for 25 or 30 minutes, e.g. a line from Psalm 8: "O Lord, my Lord, how great is your name in all the earth, ." The mind is absorbed with the thought of the infinite majesty of God; the will is in admiration of Him. This thought and matching attitude may last a few minutes before it trails off into reverie. When the soul realizes it, it can go back to the starting line, and use it all over again. When the soul first reaches this prayer of simplicity, anything pertaining to divinity will suffice. But as time goes on it finds that only a general, almost abstract thought of God, will work. Even the thought of the Sacred Humanity of Jesus does not help--temporarily that thought must be left aside, to return better after a bit.
Within this period of development there will come, at unpredictable moments, not only during prayer, but even when occupied with other things, a bit of infused light. E.g., the soul gets a deep realization (not just a feeling) and understanding of the complete nothingness of all the things of earth. This will continue for at most a few minutes and then fade into reverie. The soul should drop all else, should not even use vocal prayer: but should just pay attention, and as it were soak it in. Such a flash of light is not brought on by the soul, nor can it bring it back by its own activity. It comes when and if God decides to give it.
Also at this stage three signs, according to St. John of the Cross, should appear. 1) Inability, ordinarily, for discursive type prayer; 2) The thought of God is persistent. If one must give full attention for a while to something, e.g. teaching, the thought of God will return of its own accord; 3) A total aridity. i.e. lack of pleasure or satisfaction in things of the earth, and even spiritual things.
The three signs show that God is about to give the first experience of infused contemplation. There is no vision or sound, and not necessarily any feeling. It may be either arid or sweet. The soul perceives a contact with God as real as one's hand placed on the table. The soul knows without being told that it should not pray or do anything but pay attention. It usually lasts only a few minutes, then fades out. The soul cannot have it at will, it comes when God so wills--the next time might be far in the future or very soon. It does mark the crossover into the illuminative way, in which there are more and greater experiences of infused contemplation.
Many fine theologians think a soul will not reach perfection without going through infused contemplation. Others consider it as a sort of side excursion.
But it is clear that at the end of the illuminative period there is a second night, the night of the spirit, in contrast to the previous night of the senses. That second night is very difficult, and regularly involves extreme temptations against any virtue, even faith, even violent sexual temptations. After that night, the soul may have the spiritual espousals and then later, the spiritual marriage. St. John of the Cross describes the very peak:
Ascent of Mt. Carmel III. II. 10; Living Flame 1.4; 1.9; and 2.34): "God alone moves the powers of these souls to do the things that are right, and they cannot be moved to any others... . . Such were the actions of the most glorious Virgin, Our Lady, who being elevated from the beginning [of her life] to this lofty state never had the form of any creature impressed on her, nor was moved by such, but was always moved by the Holy Spirit."
It is obvious that this is the ultimate takeover of the human will by the divine will, the Holy Spirit. One could not even imagine anything more. God Himself, alone, moves the will of one in the Mystical Marriage. The soul is not dead, it is still human. But all it contributes is the consent to be moved in this way.
In actual graces in general, God by His movement causes the soul to see something as good: That almost automatically causes the soul to be favorable to what God proposes. At this point could the soul decide to accept the divine movement? No, for Phil 2.13 says of souls even at a lesser stage: "It is God who works in you both the will and the doing."
Similarly, the soul could not make a decision not to reject, for that would be a good decision, ruled out by Phil 2.13. We must add, however that in the actual decision, the soul is not totally passive. For the Council of Trent defines in DS 1554: "If anyone shall say that the will of man, moved and aroused by God, does not cooperate at all in assenting to God calling and arousing, by which it might prepare itself to obtain the grace of justification, and that neither could it dissent if it willed, but that like a lifeless thing it does not act at all but is merely passive: Let him be anathema." There is no way to conceive less activity on the part of the soul: but it is not lifeless and passive.
What we have just explained pertains to the soul even in the highest possible state.
The proponents of the Kingdom theory insist there is something more and higher: the will is taken over by God. On pp. 10-11 of a letter to me: "Our Lord responds... moreover it is certain that I have called you [Luisa Picarreta] first over other souls. Because to no other souls, however much I have loved them, have I shown How to Live in My Will, the Effects, the Marvels, the Riches that the Creature receives Who acts in my Supreme Will. Search the lives of the Saints as much as you wish or in books of doctrine and you will not find the wonders of My Will Operating In the Creature and the Creature Acting in My Will. The Most You will find will be Resignation, Abandonment, the Union of Wills. But the Divine Will working in the Creature and The Creature in My Will, You will not find This in Anyone."
Living in the Divine Will excels living in sanctifying grace, they claim. We possess the Divine Will as our own. We possess God's will. You can't say that about sanctifying grace. When a soul is in sanctifying grace, his human will produces activities and directs them.
We note that the Divine will is working in the Creature and the Creature in God's Will. --What does the in mean? It cannot be local presence, for a Spirit does not take up place. Nor could it mean ontological identity--then the soul would be God. Nor could it mean identity of action: for all God's actions are identical with His Being. Then the soul would be identical with God. There remains only identity of objects willed. But this amounts to conformity with the will of God.
2. The general picture, and the definition of the Council of Trent make clear that the highest point, the spiritual marriage, comes only after a long and difficult process of development. Yet there is some confusion: Fr. Celso in a video said when he first considered entering the KW it seemed very difficult; but he found all he needed to do was desire it. Could God dispense with the long process and give the KW without the intermediate steps? By omnipotence He surely could. If that is the case, then why is it said that God had to wait 2000 years to find souls capable of taking in this KW? And why would He refuse to give it to St. Joseph and all the greatest Saints of the past--many were intellectually developed like St. Thomas Aquinas and St. John of the Cross. Many were entirely mortified, giving up their own desires, like St. John of the Cross, St. Anthony of the desert and so many others. Were none of them capable, while today many are supposed to be capable, so as to start a new era--which presupposes many entering? One swallow does not make a Spring. Further, Fr. Celso said that in the KW a soul may sin, even sin mortally, but to get back in KW only a good confession would suffice. So why was 2000 years of "preparation" required?
However another competent authority has said that there is no instantaneous sanctity, although God is so generous He "is more than eager to give the gift of the Divine Will to anyone disposed provided one desires it with all one's being."
3. Luisa claimed that it was revealed to her that the only soul that ever entered heaven, after Our Lady, after living in the Divine will, was Bl. Hannibale. Again, this downgrades the Saints of 2000 years. God wanted souls to be in KW--why did He not simply give it?
4. Our Lady is quoted as saying this living in the KW is the sacrifice of sacrifices. How then can it be had by merely desiring it, as Fr. Celso said?
5. Many times the claim is made by proponents of KW that Adam and Eve had the gift of the KW. We know they had sanctifying grace--but neither Scripture nor the documents of the Church says even once that they had KW. And if the will is so thoroughly taken over by God in the KW, how could Adam and Eve so quickly sin?
6. The claim is made that in the Our Father we have been praying, "thy Kingdom come" for this gift for 2000 years? But no exegete ever saw that idea in the Our Father--it is a prayer that the kingdom, the Church, those doing God's will, may be increased. And Jesus Himself over and over went about preaching that the kingdom is at hand--but was He so wrong as to miss it by 2000 years? This helps us to see that the word kingdom in the Our Father does not have the meaning of the KW.
7. Letters of Gold, 14, from the House of the Divine Will (4451 Iroquois Ave.Jacksonville,Fla.32210), August,1996, p. 2: "For years and Years the Writings which are to renew the face of the earth, the Writings which will bring a glorious New Era for the World, the Writings which disclose the Original Purpose for which God created us, the Writings which are given to the world in 36 volumes known as "the Book of Heaven" have not received their deserved attention.... It is our opinion that this unveiling of the original words of the "Book of Heaven" was a greater event than Moses coming down from Mount Sinai with the ten commandments. For these writings will renew the Face of the Earth and provide the certain means for the return of mankind to the original spiritual state of our first parents, Adam and Eve."
p. 17: "Those who will welcome it with love will be the first fortunate children to belong to the Kingdom of the divine Fiat." But priests who work against it will be punished.
8. In vol. 23, March 8, 1928 Jesus says: "These [Luisa's] writings cost me more than creation and redemption. They [the writings] have within them all the value of My will."
9. Jesus said He came to redeem, not to sanctify. This is to be a new era. As Jesus suffered and died for the era of redemption, Louisa suffered and died for the era of sanctification. There are three fiats: first was creation; Second :Our Lady's fiat brought the incarnation and redemption; Luisa brings sanctification.
10. The Apostles stayed with Our Lady for instruction after Christ's death. In the Kingdom of the divine Fiat Luisa is the "new mother" because these truths are now in her. She will guide priests in her and they will have a great love for Luisa. She will intercede for priests who hear and understand.
11. Since God was not given the proper glory, Jesus according to Fr. Celso had to "redo" all previous acts. Then Our Lady did the same. Now Luisa does the same.
12. Jesus told Luisa there is nothing against faith or morals in these writings. And: an Imprimatur guarantees them. But Imprimaturs today no longer guarantee freedom for error, sadly.
Hugh Owen, Thy Kingdom Come!: the Life and Mission of Luisa Picaretta, 1997
1. Meaning of living in the divine will:
p. 36: "Eleven months after the grace of the mystical marriage... Jesus whisked Louisa out of her body and took her to paradise to renew their marriage.... On this occasion, the Divine Will of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, actually became the animating principle of Luisa's thought, words and actions. 'We took possession of your heart and made our permanent home there we took control of your mind, your heart, all of you. All that you did expressed our creative Will within you.... Your will was animated by our eternal will.... We cannot say we have finished the work of Creation if our Will... does not act in creatures, and if the creatures do not live with our freedom, our power, and our holiness.... And to accomplish them, [divine decrees] We want to use another woman--you. A woman precipitated man's fall into misery. Now we want to use a woman to restore order and to help man regain the respect, honor and divine likeness that he lost by Original Sin'"
Above we asked what it meant to live in the divine will. It would not mean a local presence; nor could it mean the soul would be God. Nor could it mean identity of actions, for God is identified with His actions, so again, the soul would be God. Nothing is left but to say the Actions of the soul correspond to those of God, conformity to the will of God. But that is just traditional doctrine.
What does it mean to say God is the animating principle? In the natural order, as First Cause, He provides the rise from potency to act, the ontological power in all actions. In the supernatural order there is the same. Can He take-over, possessing the human will--comparing mentally to possession by the devil? But in any "possession" the soul must consent with its will. Cf. the quotes from John of the Cross given above. The Council of Trent in DS 1544: "If any one shall say that the free will of man, moved and aroused by God does not at all cooperate with God who arouses and calls, by which it disposes itself and prepares itself to obtain the grace of justification [sanctifying grace] and that it could not dissent if it willed but like a sort of lifeless thing it did nothing at all but kept itself merely passive. . let him be anathema." Therefore in any take-over or animation, the soul does something, it is not like a lifeless thing, merely passive. The human will is still operating, though in unison with God's will. What is does is to conform itself to the will of God, positively willing what He positively wills, accepting what He merely permits--but again, this is the classic doctrine of conformity of our will to the will of God. The closest to passivity possible is expressed in the prayer of St. Ignatius: Take O Lord, and receive all my liberty, my memory understanding and all my will. You have given me all that I am and all that I have. I give it all back to you to be entirely subject to your will. Only grant me your love and your grace. and I will have enough and have nothing more to desire." Compare the motto and policy of St. Francis de Sales: Ask for nothing--refuse nothing.
Compare the animation or take-over to the heretical quietism of Molinos in the following condemned propositions: "It is right that a man annihilate his powers and this is the interior way.... To will to operate actively is to offend God. who wants to be the sole agent." DS 2201-22.
p. 38: "And as the Divine Will animated all of the voluntary and involuntary actions of the young Italian virgin, she in turn entered into the center of the Divine Will of the Most Holy Trinity ands shared in all of Their activities, past, present, and future. COMMENT: She could not enter into the Divine Will in all of its past and future decisions without in some way being present to them. She could at most say in a general way: I will all that God wills. But that is not the animation spoken of above.
p. 39: Beginning in 1889 [she died 1947] Luisa's life took on a regular pattern and rhythm, controlled and animated by the Divine Will. At about midnight or one o'clock in the morning, she entered into what she called her 'usual state.' Her body petrified, her breathing stopped, and her soul was separated from her body [COMMENT: That would be death, and yet she calls It her usual state.] From midnight until six on the morning, her body lay, leaden and immovable, while her soul ranged with Jesus across time and space and beyond them both into eternity with Jesus as her guide, Luisa visited Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory. At six in the morning, Luisa's soul returned to her body and her confessor came to her room. With his thumb, he made the sign of the Cross over her hand or her forehead while reciting the words of the 'Trisagion' prayer from the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.... with these words Luisa's body relaxed and she regained control of her head and her arm." COMMENT: We wonder about what Owen reports on pp. 8-9 where he says that from age 3 she had nightmares, so she was afraid to stay alone. Many times she dreamed that the devil tried to grab her and drag her off. When relatives came to visit, she would run upstairs, and hide behind the bed and pray, refusing to come out until the relatives had gone. Remarkable predispositions?
p. 79: "The Gift of the Divine Will enabled Jesus not only to atone for the sins of mankind but to perfect even the good and indifferent actions of every rational creature, past, present and future by redoing [emphasis added] every one of their actions in the Divine Will during His life on earth. By giving the Divine Will again to men in the era of the Third Fiat, Jesus would enable creatures to do what He did. In this way the primary purpose of creation would be fulfilled."
"In fulfilling the Second Fiat of God, Jesus became man and instituted the seven sacraments as channels of sanctifying grace. As a participation in the life of God, the gift of sanctifying grace far surpassed the greatest of natural gifts. However, the gift of sanctifying grace fell as far short of the Gift of the Divine Will as the rays of the sun fall short of the sun in all its splendor.… Jesus taught His disciples to pray for the future coming of the Kingdom when God's will would be done on earth as it is in Heaven.--To Luisa, Jesus explained the vast difference between doing God's Will as it is done on earth and doing God's Will as it is done in heaven. In the former case a person uses his human will to carry out God's commands. In the latter case, the Divine Will of the Most Holy Trinity divinizes and carries out all of the person's actions, voluntary and involuntary together with him.
COMMENT: What is it to redo all actions of creatures, even indifferent ones? Something done in the past is finished, cannot be brought back as if in a time machine. One might repeat, but that is not redoing. But when we act, our faculties use the standing powers God gave them, and He adds His own actualization of their potencies. In the supernatural order, when the soul is in the lower reaches of the purgative way, the role of the inherent powers of our faculties is relatively large. But always God's action must actualize potencies. When a soul grows, still within the purgative way, the part played by its inherent faculties diminishes and is in larger extent replaced by the divine actualizing action. Yet always the human will is operative. The Council of Trent defined, as we saw above that even in receiving sanctifying grace, the soul is not completely passive. If it were, the action would not be the action of that particular human being. So the redoing spoken of cannot mean that the work of the human faculties in the past is canceled out completely. Really, what is once done cannot be undone.--The physical being of an act has been done, cannot be changed. If it could, God could empty hell. And the role, even though relatively small, of the human will in the past cannot be undone. But that component that may have been largely human could be modified so that to a larger extent the divine movement could replace it. Perhaps that process could be called redoing, making the total act give more glory to God. Jesus as God could do such a thing. Luisa being merely human could not do it at all.
p. 80: Delay for 2000 years: Jesus says that if there had been a teaching in the Church about this kingdom, Jesus would have told more--"it would have been quite strange if I had kept hidden the thing I loved the most." So we comment: Why could He not have revealed it? It is even easy to get into the kingdom according to p. 104: Luisa wrote to one person: "to live in the divine volition is not something difficult as some people believe, nor does sweet Jesus wish to impose impossible burdens. My child all depends on a strong, firm and constant decision to consign our will into the hands of Jesus, to make our acts His acts." And on. p. 122: "the Gift of the Divine Will and the Kingdom are ours for the asking." Fr. Celso cited earlier had said the same thing. So--why was Jesus not able to give it for 2000 years if He loved it so greatly. Was Luisa more brilliant in mind than Thomas Aquinas? Or more detached from everything than St. John of the Cross?
p. 81: The millennium: "Other objections have been raised on the grounds that the Parousia or Second Coming of Christ which Luisa linked to the Third Fiat, will coincide with the Final Judgment.... In recent decades however a closer study of Scriptural and patristic writings about the Second coming of Christ show that the explicit teaching of the Apostolic Fathers and the implicit teaching of the Magisterium ever since has been that the final judgment and the destruction of the world will be preceded by an earthly Reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus." COMMENT Text by Owen goes on to appeal to Revelation 20 and the way the Apostolic Fathers took it But they did not unanimously teach that. It is found only in St. Irenaeus (not in all five books as Owen thinks, but only at the end. And in St. Justin--who says he believes it but notes many good Christians do not, and in Lactantius, a minor figure, not an apostolic Father. No others of the early Fathers have it: Not First or Second Clement, not the Didache nor Quadratus, nor Theoplilus, nor Athenagoras. Nor does the Magisterium teach it or imply it. It has explicitly rejected it. The Doctrinal Congregation on July 19, 1944 rejects it--though Owen tried to twist that text. Doctrinal Congregation rejects even mitigated millenarianism, and so Owen thinks the reign of Christ will not be on earth but spiritual--which is not what any of the early Fathers thought. The CCC cited the rejection of the millennium in §676. Cardinal Ratzinger in his The Theology of History p. 96 wrote: "... both Chiliasm [same as Millennium teaching] and Montanism were declared heretical and were excluded from the universal Church...." Yet Owen says all the Fathers approved it!
Link to Pentecostalism? p. 82: "in 1909 in London a group of laymen prepared a remarkable description of what had come to be called the 'Baptism of the Holy Spirit'.... Many recipients of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit also experienced a joyful longing for the Second Coming of Christ and His reign on earth.... the authors of the London Declaration described their experience of he Spirit as leading them to the 'threshold' of perfect holiness, although not to its possession. It was to Luisa that Jesus showed what lay beyond the threshold and how to arrive there." COMMENT: The experiences in 1909 were Pentecostalism, which was not well accepted by Protestant churches, and led to splinter churches. The contact with them led Catholics into the Charismatic movement. That is far different from the Kingdom of the Will.
Link to fundamentalistic Creationism pp. 84-85: "A second development that has placed Luisa's timetable in a more favorable light has been the advent of an organized movement of distinguished scientists who reject the accepted evolutionist chronology for human civilization on scientific grounds." COMMENT: This is called the second: The first is the millenarian theory discussed above in comments on. p. 81 above. We should distinguish those who propose shorter chronology from those who treat Genesis as a textbook of science and argue that since the word day elsewhere means 24 hours, it must mean the same in Genesis.
Transubstantiation comparison. p. 88: Owen argues that "if God can replace the substance of bread with His substance, there is no reason to deny that He can replace the will of a human being as the primary agent of the person's acts." COMMENT: The comparison limps much. In consecration of the host, the substance of the bread is gone completely--to say it stays is the heresy of impanation. But in the Kingdom theory the human will still is present, even though it is no longer the primary agent of that person's actions. The primary agent of a person's actions can be the divine causality--in the ontological order. but in the order of determination of what is to be done, the human will is always primary. Otherwise God would be the primary determinant in sinning. In doing good, God could be the primary determinant provided that the human will consents to let Him do that--which is conformity to the will of God--cf. the quotes from St. John of the Cross on Unitive Way given above on p. 2.
Sanctifying grace is much less than the Gift of Kingdom. p. 88: "... . sanctifying grace, being created grace, falls far short of the uncreated Will of God as the light of the sun falls short of the sun in all its splendor."
COMMENT: Uncreated grace, in standard theological distinctions, means the presence of the Three Divine Persons within the soul. But presence of the three is not of course spatial, since spirits do not take up place. So when we speak of created grace we really mean the effect produced by that presence. The effect is divinization, giving the soul a share in the divine nature by making it capable of the face to face vision of God in the next life.
Kingdom greater than divine Motherhood and Immaculate Conception. p. 92: "According to the Blessed Virgin, the grace which exalted her highest above all other creatures was not her Divine Maternity or her Immaculate Conception but the Grace of all Graces, the Gift of the Divine Will."
COMMENT: But Pius XI taught: (Lux veritatis. AAS 23. 513) "... from this dogma of the divine motherhood as from the font of a hidden gushing spring flows the singular grace of Mary, and her dignity second only to God. In fact, as Aquinas writes: 'the Blessed Virgin from the fact that she is the Mother of God has a sort of infinite dignity from the infinite good that God is." We note her dignity is singular, no one else like her, and it is quasi infinite. But should we then think Luisa and a host of ordinary souls have a dignity greater than Our Lady? And Leo XIII in ASS 22. 66: "Certainly the dignity of the Mother of God is so lofty that there can be nothing greater."
Chastisement will not touch. p. 93: "... my dear Jesus showed me the Queen of Heaven... traveling through all nations and marking with a special mark those that should not be touched by the chastisement." But Akita says it will strike good and bad alike.
Last words: 107: "Now I see a long beautiful spacious road illuminated by infinite and resplendent suns; oh yes, I recognize them; they are the suns of my acts fulfilled in the 'Divine will... ."
Article by Hugh Owen: "Luisa Piccarreta--the Gift of the Divine Will"--In: Signs and Wonders for Our Times, 2nd quarter, 1966
1. p. 20: "In the Book of Heaven Jesus explained how the loss of the gift of the Divine Will rendered man incapable of doing God's will.... Nevertheless the Holy Trinity promised to restore the Kingdom of the Divine Will to earth through a Messiah, the son of a sinless woman."
COMMENT: Incapable of doing god's will would mean a person had to sin, lacked all freedom. That would contradict Trent DS 1554 & 1557.
1. p. 20: "According to the Book of Heaven, the Gift of the Divine Will enabled Jesus not only to atone for the sins of mankind but to perfect even the good and indifferent actions of every rational creature, past, present, and future, by redoing [emphasis added] every one of their actions in the Divine Will during his life on earth... According to Tom Fahy, 'Jesus, the God-Man redid [emphasis added] everyone's life in the divine order by means of the Divine Will. COMMENT: Cf. comments above on redoing.
.... in the era of the third Fiat, creatures would be enabled to do what Jesus did.... According to the Second Plan of God, Jesus became man, suffered, died, rose from the dead and opened heaven to mankind. Jesus also established the Catholic Church and instituted the seven sacraments to [sic] sanctifying grace. As a participation in the life of God, the gift of sanctifying grace far surpassed the greatest of natural gifts.... However the gift of sanctifying grace falls as far short of the Gift of the Divine Will as the rays of the sun fall short of the sun. COMMENT: Sanctifying grace makes the soul part divine: cf. 2 Pet 1.4.
... He taught His disciples to pray for the future coming of His kingdom when God's will would be done on earth as it is in heaven.... In the Book of Heaven, Jesus explained the vast difference between doing God's will as it is done on earth and doing God's will as it is done in heaven. In the former case, a person uses the human will to carry out God 's commands. In the latter case, the Divine Will of the Holy Trinity divinizes and carries out all of the person's actions, both voluntary and involuntary [emphasis added]. [from p. 22] Jesus gave this explanation to Luisa Picarreta: 'My daughter, in order for a soul to be able to forget herself everything she does or has to do must be done as if I wanted to do it in her. If one prays, she should say: "It is Jesus who wants to pray, and I pray together with Him." If she works, "It is Jesus who wants to work; it is Jesus who wants to eat; who wants to sleep; who wants to get up; who wants to enjoy Himself" And it should be like that for the rest of her life, excluding errors." COMMENT: All the actions of the human become divine actions. Even if one brushes his teeth, it is a divine action. It is not merely done according to God's will, it is done by God's will working in the human.--The proviso is added "excluding errors"--how could there be errors when all acts of the human will are divine acts? And what of the definition of the Council of Trent in DS 1554 that under the movement of grace the souls is not entirely passive?
p. 21: Luisa asked Jesus why, since He so desires it, is there need for souls to ask for it. He replied: "Therefore to establish the Kingdom of my Will on earth, there must be sufficient acts by creatures to keep my Kingdom from remaining suspended and unable it to descend and take form upon the very acts which creatures have formed.... The actions of the saints, martyrs, and holy men and women of the past 2000 years have all contributed to one overriding purpose--the hastening of the third Fiat of God and the coming of God's Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven..... what past generations have not done and those in the future will not do, the good souls in this era of My Will will do. They shall complete the love, the glory, and the honor which all creation owes Me; and I will give them astonishing and unheard of graces."
p. 22: "the following three steps are open to anyone interested in applying the teachings: 1) Ask for the gift of the Divine will. 2) Begin to live in the Divine will by calling it to reign in all your actions. 3) Study the Divine will teachings.... In a conversation with Luisa, Jesus assured her: 'My daughter, you don't need doors, nor keys to enter into My will.... to enter, creatures need but remove the pebble of their own will.
In the Divine Will, Jesus and the soul together repair the sins and imperfections of all creation by offering the Holy Trinity perfect acts of love, thanksgiving and adoration on behalf of all creatures --rational and irrational--past, present and future. Through these prayers-- which Jesus referred to as 'making the rounds of creation'--the soul in the Divine Will recapitulates the prayers of Jesus Himself."
p. 23: "In the Book of Heaven Jesus stressed the importance of knowledge and study of the divine teachings. 'These truths, according to whether they are known, will form the different categories of the souls that live in My Will. One degree of knowledge more or less will let one rise or remain in a different category. Knowledge will be the means for making one rise to a higher category and there will be the same life of the fullness of My will in them."
Data from The Virgin Mary in the Kingdom of the Divine Will, by Luisa Piccarreta
A new era of graces, p.10: "I want to tell you my secrets which until now I have not revealed to anyone because the hour of God had no yet sounded. God wanted to bestow surprising graces upon creatures which in all the history of the world He had not conceded to anyone."
A test on one who is inseparable?, p.10-11: "scarcely conceived, I put the Divinity into festivity. Heaven and earth welcomed me and [ p.11] they recognized me as their Queen. I was so identified with my Creator that I felt myself as an owner in the divine dominions. Indeed, I did not know what separation from my Creator was, because that same divine Volition which reigned in me reigned in them [the Divine Persons], and rendered us inseparable." But the inseparable needed to be tested: "They saw that They could not trust Me if They did not have a proof from me.... The test matures and disposes the soul to acquire great conquests.... without the test one can never say it. [You have loved me, and I have loved you.]" "It was the test that God wanted to confirm his innocence, sanctity and happiness.... But Adam was not faithful in the test; and not being faithful, God could not trust him.... he turned the work of creation upside down."
Living without a will, p.15: ".... perhaps it does not seem that my sacrifice was great, that of living without my will... all the other sacrifices of all the history of the world can be called shadows compared to mine. To sacrifice one's self for a day, now yes, and now no, is easy; but to sacrifice one's self in each instant, in each act, in the very good that one wishes to do for all one's life without ever giving life to one's own will is the sacrifice of sacrifices. It is the greatest proof one can offer and the purest love, drawn from the Divine Will Itself that can be offered." p.17: "it was not even fitting that He find in Me a human will operating. It would have been too unbecoming for God to descend into a creature in which the human will reigned." [the soul begs p55:] "and shut the door in such a way that, even if I wanted, I could no longer go out of it."
Humility? p.36: "My dear child, my only desire is to keep my child near Me. Without you I feel alone and I do not have the one in whom to confide my secrets."
p. 43: "... learn from Me to thank the Lord for all that He disposes for you, and in all  that you are about to do, let your word be: 'Thank You Lord, I place all in your hands.'"
Human feeling: p. 53: [Before the espousal to St. Joseph]: I had never loved anyone in the world, and since the Divine Will had its extension in all my being, my human will never had one act of life. Therefore in Me the seed of human love was lacking. How could I love a man, for however great a saint he might be, in the human order?" COMMENT: Pius XII in Haurietis aquas, on Sacred Heart, teaches Jesus had a triple love: 1) that which is part of the divine nature; 2) willing good to us in His human will; 3) a love of feeling, for He had a true humanity. And so He wept at the tomb of Lazarus, not even a relative. St. Francis de Sales, in a letter of spiritual direction to a married woman, in Epistle 217 told her that as her devotion grew, so should her warmth to her husband increase--that was part of the duties of her state in life. The Preface for Masses of St. Joseph says that "with a husband's love" he cherished Our Lady. In Gethsemani Jesus prayed: If it be possible let this chalice pass--that was His human will, not dead, but acting, and yet fully obedient even though the redemption would have been infinite even if He had been spared death.
Writings of Luisa Piccarretta
Condemnation: On July 14, 1938, Pope Pius XI approved the decision of the Holy Office to condemn and place on the Index of Forbidden Books, three writings of Luisa Piccaretta. The decree is published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1938 volume, p. 318.
The semi-official L'Osservatore Romano in reporting this said: "The principal subject…is the Divine Will conceived in an exaggerated, erroneous manner and presented in a language and with a terminology where often absurd inaccuracies and extravagances abound…."
The Kingdom website now says that a Professor Resta of a pontifical theological institute has read all Luisa’s writings, declares them free of error and even admirable. So, the Kingdom website says this is a "giant step" forward for her cause but it is important to know that the institute to which Professor Resta belongs is not at the Vatican, it is a local institute near Bari.
Moreover, he does not answer any of the objections raised. Earlier when I first noticed the kingdom, I phoned Tom Fahy, and gave my chief objection, listed below at #3. He could not answer it; he consulted an Italian theologian who also could not answer. And Fr. Brown also admits he cannot answer it. If they cannot, their whole system is destroyed, for it rests on the claim that there is something higher than the spiritual marriage. Below, I show this is theologically impossible. On the phone Tom Fahy told me it is unsuitable for me to criticize it when Rome has not spoken—yet he is working worldwide without Roman approval.
A reading of her writings indeed does show things that match the description given in the L'Osservatore Romano: which called them "EXAGGERATED, ERRONEOUS...with OFTEN ABSURD INACCURACIES AND EXTRAVAGANCES in abundance."
We offer examples of such passages:
1. Jesus said (Book of Heaven, p. 119): "I wish to emit the third FIAT….this will complete the work that poured forth from Me. Otherwise, the work of Creation as well as Redemption would remain incomplete."
2. Book of Heaven p. 12: "Now daughter, you also [i.e. along with Mary] are unique in my Mind; and you will be unique in history. There will not be – either before or after you—any other creature for whom I will obligate through necessity the work of My Ministers. How much attention is required from you and them. You, in receiving from Me, as a second mother, The Great Gift of My Will and to know all its qualities and My ministers in receiving It from you, To fulfill in My Church the Fiat Voluntas Tua in Heaven as It is on earth."
3. Book of Heaven p. 19: …"to no other souls, however much I have loved them, have I shown how to live in my Will…..Search the lives of the Saints as much as you wish or in books of doctrine and you will not find the wonders of My Will working in the creature and the creature acting in My Will. The most you will find will be resignation, abandonment, the union of wills, but the divine will working in the creature and the creature in my will, you will not find this in anyone."
We still wish to compare this state with that described by St. John of the Cross in Ascent of Mt. Carmel III.II.10 and Living Flame 1.4;1.9; and 2.34. In the spiritual marriage, "God alone moves the powers of these souls to do the things that are right, and they cannot be moved by any others.....Such were the actions of the most glorious Virgin, Our Lady, who being elevated from the beginning [of her life] to this lofty state never had the form of any creature impressed on her, nor was moved by such, but was always moved by the Holy Spirit."
It is obvious that this is the ultimate takeover of the human will by the Divine will, the Holy Spirit. One could not even imagine anything more. God Himself, alone, moves the will of one in the Mystical Marriage. The soul is not dead, it is still human, but all it contributes is the consent to be moved in this way.
In actual graces in general, God by His movement, causes the soul to see something as good: that almost automatically causes the soul to be favorable to what God proposes. At this point could the soul decide to accept the divine movement? No, for Phil 2.13 says of souls, even at a lesser stage: "It is God who works in you both the will and the doing."
Similarly, the soul could not make a positive decision not to reject, for that would be a good decision, ruled out by Phil 2.13. We must add, however, that in the actual decision, the soul is not totally passive. For the Council of Trent defines in DS 1554: "If anyone shall say that the will of man, moved and aroused by God, does not cooperate at all in assenting to God calling and arousing, by which it might prepare itself to obtain the grace of justification, and that neither could it dissent if it willed, but that like a lifeless thing it does not act at all but is merely passive: Let him be anathema." There is no way to conceive less activity on the part of the soul : but it is not lifeless and passive.
Compare Book of Heaven p. 23: "abandoning oneself completely in my Will destroys one’s own essence and causes one to reacquire the Divine Essence." And also in Book of Heaven p. 86: "When a soul acts in my Will her humanity is as it were suspended. Then the Divine Life of my Love takes its place."
What we have just explained pertains to the soul even in the highest possible state.
4. Book of Heaven p. 38: Jesus to Louisa: "My will is the sanctity of sanctities. Therefore the soul that does my will according to the perfection that I teach you, that ,on earth as it is in Heaven, no matter how little, unknown, or ignorant she may be, she will surpass all the other Saints despite their prodigies, striking conversions and miracles….The souls that do my Will in this manner appear as though they do nothing, yet they do everything. Because by remaining in my Will they act divinely, secretly, and in a surpassing way…Whereas those doing the miracles are only channels".
5. Book of Heaven pp. 3,4: "I see that these writings will be for my church as a new sun that will rise in her midst."
6. "When I am sacrificed, the soul that lives with Me in my Will is sacrificed 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. And Book of Heaven p. 106: "…my Will is Sacrament and surpasses all the sacraments together."
CONCLUSION: The Article in L'Osservatore Romano on the Condemnation of the writings of Luisa spoke of them as putting things in "an exaggerated, erroneous manner and presented in a language and with a terminology where often absurd inaccuracies and extravagances abound…." After reading the above, one may conclude that in spite of any claims of rehabilitation, the strictures of 1938 are still true.