Libro de Cielo: Vol 12, Febrero 12, 1918 de Luisa Piccarreta
Los iglesias desiertas y sin ministros.
Continuando mi habitual estado, el siempre amable Jesús se hacía ver muy afligido y yo le he dicho: “Amor mío, ¿por qué estás tan afligido?”

Y Él: “¡Ah! hija mía, cuando permita que las iglesias queden desiertas, los ministros dispersos, las misas disminuidas, significará que los sacrificios me son ofensas, las oraciones insultos, las adoraciones irreverencias, las confesiones pasatiempos y sin fruto; por lo tanto, no encontrando más mi gloria, sino ofensas, ni el bien de ellos, no sirviéndome más los quito; pero este arrancar los ministros de mi santuario significa que las cosas han llegado al punto más malo, y que la diversidad de los castigos se multiplicará.
¡Cómo es duro el hombre, cómo es duro!”

Clérigos afeminados:
En octubre de 1906 Cristo le dijo a Luisa Piccarreta: "En estos tiempos, todo es afeminado. Incluso el clero ha perdido el carácter masculino y ha adquirido modales femeninos. Oh, en qué estado deplorable se encuentra la humanidad". No es de extrañar que Luisa escribiera que no entendía el significado de estas palabras, pero las escribió porque estaba bajo obediencia. No lo entendió, porque era una declaración profética.

It's true a number of her supporters and apologists keep making such claims,

It's a little more complicated than that..
timstaples.com/…/luisa-piccarett…

Now don't worry, laurelmarycecilia, the way the Vatican's "saint factory" works these days, I'm sure she'll get canonized, sooner or later.

Ultraviolet

NB. Everything we need for holiness and increase in faith has been handed on from the Apostles once and for all (cf. Jude 3). What was handed on by the apostles comprises everything that serves to make the People of God live their lives in holiness and increase their faith. In this way the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes. (DV #8).

Contrary to this teaching, Jesus allegedly revealed to Luisa that “everything that serves to make the People of God live their lives in holiness . . .” was not handed on from the Apostles. Rather, Jesus told her that God has waited for this time in history to reveal to the Church a new and better way of holiness unknown to the Apostles. These are allegedly Jesus’ words to Luisa,

timstaples.com/…/luisa-piccarett…

Ultraviolet

We have Sacred Scripture and the writings of the Doctors of the Church. Why is that not sufficient for some Catholics and why must they look for more? Men can and are easily fooled by a look from a pretty woman. However, it seems that more women than men trust in these kinds of visions and visionaries.Why do you think that is?

"However, it seems that more women than men trust in these kinds of visions and visionaries. Why do you think that is?"

Now that is a huge topic, Holy Cannoli . Empircally, I've noticed the same thing. I've never investigated it enough to have a definite answer. It probably stems for the same reasons women tend to be more religious than men in general.

www.pewforum.org/…/the-gender-gap-…

The cause of it is very likely tied to the biological nature of gender itself since wonen's propensity for religion transcends nearly all religious and cultural boundaries. I'll speculate the religious gender gap has to do with people's search for meaning, identity, and sources of confidence. Men are (and again these are sweeping generalities) usually more active, more physical, physically stronger and more aggressive. Such qualities ground them in a temporally focused view of existence. They have self-confidence. Interestingly, the same is true for girls who are "tomboys" and "butch" -namely those who (for whatever reasons) have the same attitude, outlook and interests as those commonly associated with men.

Women, by contrast tend to be less physically active, less physical, physically weaker, and less aggressive. They tend to be more thoughtful and introspective and read more. Again, these are generalities. But I believe they do incline women to seek out more spiritual sources of confidence. How much of that is culturally conditioned as opposed to biological trait, I can't say. Feminism has politicized these subjects so any mainstream discussion or study of them has to conform to the "politically correct" world-view.

"Why is that not sufficient for some Catholics and why must they look for more?"

That's an easy question and if it's a rhetorical one, you probably already know the answer: their current involvement in the Church is spiritually unfulfilling. That's it in one sentence. Consequently, they seek out new sources of spiritual fulfillment. Sadly, many (and from what I've seen) most unfulfilled Catholics seek those sources outside the Church among pagan religions.

This isn't entirely their fault. Unlike the Church, pagans have never had a "Vatican Council II". The "modernization" of the Church stripped away (perhaps even deliberately so) the very sources of atavistic mysticism that make religions so spiritually satisfying. Modern Churches deliberately shun that sense of connecting worshippers to centuries of accumulated history and spirituality. Modern theology is focused on "social justice", not God and His laws. The modern liturgy is built around a communal sharing of worship, not worshipping the Divine. The complex symbolism, the traditional iconography of the Church has been almost totally abandoned.

Have you ever noticed how popular Greek and Russian Orthodox icons are among traditionalist and spiritually leaning Catholics? Why is that? Because they evoke the very sense of an ancient Christian faith that is lacking in the modern Church. That's truly sad because the Western Roman Church hasn't been sitting idly by for the last thousand years either. We too have a huge treasury of symbolism, inconography, and spirituality as well. Cluadius Cartapus' posts are a constant delight in the way they reveal how much the Church truly has and how deep it is.

For many, probably most modern(ist) Catholics, the problem is two-fold. First, familiarity breeds contempt. They've seen that little framed "Prayer Before A Crucifix" hanging in Granny's living-room since they were children, but they've never really studied it. Why should they? They grew up seeing it when they visited so they already know all about it. They believe they do and that's the problem: they don't. The same is true for her lithographs of the Holy Family, the saints, her devotionals, the engravings and prayers in her missals. When Granny passes on, all that 'old stuff' gets boxed and tossed. If they're slightly sentimental, it gets dropped off at the Salvation Army or Goodwill.

...and then they look around and wonder why the Church, the modern Church, isn't satisfying!

The second problem is poor or non-existant catechesis. Simply put, they don't know what they're missing. They sense the vacuum, they yearn to fill it, but they don't know how or where to look. They've never been exposed to the sources of authentic and sound Catholic tradition and doctrine. Both Scripture and the Doctors of the Church have already produced a body of work so vast and so complex one lifetime's study could never exhaust even a tenth of it.

People who seek out this supposed "seer" or similar ones, do so out of ignorance. Why settle for ambiguous, even spiritually dangerous philosophies when the Church already provides sound teachings and in a quantity beyond even the most ardent Catholic's consumption?

There's a third reason. Mystics are vague and this allows people to project their own preferred "feel good" interpretations onto such writings. The Doctors of The Church were rigorously logical, they were trained to be so, which makes their writings very precise, even uncomfortably so. ;-)