What you write is true private revelation is not required but God does Will it. The point being is Luisa has been most unfairly quoted out of context. Savage slanders are directed at the Catholic Church and Creation in the same vein. Context is that Luisa has a pure mind not sordid not like our own. Mystical and physical are poles apart and here is the problem. Luisa never wanted to write any of the 36 volumes down. Only under obedience, she a grade 1 student has written the absolutely most sublime treatise on the Divine Will. Her Archbishop and Saint Spiritual director agree this doesn’t come from her. Also they studied the first 19 volumes and agree they are Divinely inspired, providing imprimatur’s. Father Mawdsley also, most unjustly maligned her brilliant most most Traditional Spiritual Director Saint. Please read and be edified by him. queenofthedivinewill.org/…Annibale-Maria-Di-Francia-and-Luisa-Piccarreta.pdf

@Scapular Did you actually watch Fr Mawdsley's video? Among other things, he is alerting us to the recent ecclesiastical developments on the status of Luisa Piccarretta and the Divine Will. The President of the Doctrinal Commission wrote to the French Bishops and stated "En s’appuyant sur les informations reçues du Saint-Siège, et face aux difficultés relevées ci-dessus, il conviendra d’éclairer les consciences des croyants pour éviter de possibles confusions." (Translation: Based on the information received from the Holy See, and in the face of the difficulties noted above, it will be appropriate to enlighten the consciences of believers to avoid possible confusion.). Fr Mawdsley's video showed a similar condemnation from the Korean Bishops. Clearly, the Holy See is contacting the Bishops' Conferences throughout the world.

I accept that Fr Mawdsley has no direct ecclesiastical authority in this matter, but he is accepting and promulgating what the Church has declared, by highlighting the "Theological, Christological and Anthropological Difficulties". This is his right and duty as a priest. Daniel O'Connor has no ecclesiastical authority in this matter at all, but he is defying ecclesiastical authorities, as if he knew better. For your information, an important document was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in November 1996 and placed in L’Osservatore Romano. It stated:

“Regarding the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, the Congregation states: The interpretation given by some individuals to a decision approved by Paul VI on 14 October 1966 and promulgated on 15 November of that year, in virtue of which writings and messages resulting from alleged revelations could be freely circulated in the Church is absolutely groundless. This decision actually referred to the “Abolition of the Index of Forbidden Books” and determined that after the relevant censures were lifted, the moral obligation still remained of not circulating or reading those writings which endanger faith and morals. It should be recalled however, that with regard to the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, Canon 823#1 of the current code remains in force: “the Pastors of the Church have the … right to demand that writings to be published by the Christian faithful which touch upon faith or morals be submitted to their judgement”. Alleged supernatural revelations and writings concerning them are submitted in first instance to the judgement of the diocesan Bishop, and in particular cases, to the judgement of the Episcopal Conference and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.” This is the teaching of the Church on these issues. Fr Mawdsley is upholding it. Daniel O'Connor isn't.

@Scapular I'm inclined to agree with @James Manning below. Your comments attacking Fr Mawdsley as 'theatrical' and 'biased' appear to be based more on undermining his character, than accepting the truth, no matter how difficult it is for you. Clearly 'bias' works both ways. And please read my comment above about Daniel O'Connor. He has absolutely no ecclesiastical authority whatsoever to be making declarations which contradict what the Church has stated regarding Luisa and the Divine Will.
The late, great Michael Davies RIP had this to say about alleged apparitions/revelations and those who follow them. Wise words indeed: "Since the Second Vatican Council there has been a grave crisis of authority within the Catholic Church. The ordinary faithful have not received the firm and unequivocal teaching and guidance from their ecclesiastical superiors to which they had become accustomed. Cardinal Ratzinger has noted the extent to which individual bishops have abdicated their authority to national episcopal conferences which, only too often, have been manipulated into propagating the opinions of so-called theological experts of dubious orthodoxy. Parish priests frequently abdicated their authority to parish councils, and Rome itself has sometimes appeared to speak with an uncertain voice. But certainty is what the faithful seek, and when they do not receive it from the Magisterium they will seek it elsewhere.
Some have sought certainty in the charismatic movement which, if examined objectively, renders the Magisterium unnecessary, for what need is there of a teaching authority when each individual Christian can communicate directly with the Holy Ghost?
Other Catholics have put their faith in one of the numerous apparitions which are allegedly taking place in many countries. Once again, if heavenly guidance can be communicated directly through the sect which is witnessing the alleged apparitions, then what need is there of a Magisterium? In the years following the Council a very clear pattern of behavior has emerged among supporters of these apparitions.
It is a tendency to make belief in the authenticity of a particular apparition the criterion of orthodoxy. True Catholics believe in the apparitions, and the faith of those who do not is suspect in some way. Those drawn towards these apparitions tend to be conservative in outlook, the type of Catholic who might have been expected to defend the teaching of the Magisterium. Once such Catholics become “hooked” on an apparition all their efforts tend to be devoted to defending it and propagating it. They have thus been removed effectively from the battlefield for orthodoxy."

@Scapular, yes I also knew Michael Davies. I used to see him on Sundays at Spanish Place (St James) for the morning traditional Latin Mass, and there was coffee downstairs afterwards. Michael would certainly have encouraged people to defend the Faith, however, as he has written above, he would certainly not have encouraged people to disobey legitimate ecclesiastical authority on private revelation - especially in cases where the Church has stated "Nihil Obstat Not Granted, Cause Suspended, Theological, Christological, and Anthropological Difficulties". That is the whole essence of that paragraph from Michael. Again, you are wrongly conflating the Faith with unapproved private revelations.

Just for clarity's sake, the suspension of the Cause came from the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints: "On January 24, Bishop Benoît Bertrand of Mende, president of the French bishops' Episcopal Doctrinal Commission, shared a message from the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints addressed to the bishops of France. The message conveyed the decision to halt the examination of the case of Luisa Piccarreta, initiated in 1994 by the now deceased Italian Archbishop Giovanni Battista Pichierri of Trani." Beatification process of Luisa Piccarreta suspended
Dicastery for the Causes of Saints details:
Prefect: Cardinal Marcello Semeraro.
Palazzo delle Congregazioni, 00193 Roma, Piazza Pio XII, 10
Telephone: 06.69.88.42.44
Fax: 06.69.88.19.35

@Wilma Lopez Fr Mawdsley's video is about half an hour long and well worth watching. It's part one of three. I assume the other two, when they are released, will be about the same length. Sometimes, it's necessary not just to skim through main points, but to get the detailed evidence that is presented. If you just listen to the first couple of minutes of Fr Mawdsley's video, he briefly outlines what issues he will deal with in each video. Hopefully that will give you some idea. NOT FOR CHILDREN. The "Divine Will" devotion is re…

@Luke 817 Exactly. If I had a pound for each of these Catholics who have monetized YouTube 'apostolates', I'd be richer than Bill Gates. I saw the first couple of minutes of his video and he was talking about a 'demon' (possibly someone who disagreed with him) who was inhabiting his comments box. If anyone thinks it was me, not guilty, m'lud. I haven't got a YouTube account so can't make any comments on YouTube. But it seems that not only does Daniel O'Connor know more than the Congregation for the Causes of Saints about Luisa Piccarretta, it also seems that he is a qualified exorcist, who can sniff out actual demons. Honestly, the hubris of this man is risible.