Father Piotr Pawlus of Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts: Jesus had warts and was bested intellectually by the Canaanite Woman

As this EWTN article explains:

"Jesus possessed, in His human soul, the same immediate vision of God which all the saints and angels in heaven have. This means that Jesus was, at the same time, both a pilgrim on earth like us and a possessor of the immediate vision of God. Even His human nature is endowed with an abundance of supernatural gifts. He knows all things - past, present and future.

This truth was not acknowledged by Father Piotr Pawlus in a homily given during the Vigil Mass at Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts on the Gospel reading (Matthew 15: 21-28).

On the contrary, in his homily on the Canaanite woman, Father Pawlus asserted that the Gospel passage shows a "Jesus with warts" and that this passage reveals the only time Jesus was "bested in an argument."

I'm sure this nonsense appeals to the feminist man-hating status quo at Saint Mary's Church, a Church crippled by misandry and fear of masculinity.  It is, nevertheless, asinine theology.

As the Haydock commentary explains:

"Our Lord crosses the wishes of the Canaanite woman, not that he intended to reject her, but that he might bring to light the hidden and secret treasure of her virtue. Let us admire not only the greatness of her faith, but likewise the profoundness of her humility; for when our Saviour called the Jews children, so far from being envious of another's praise, she readily answers, and gives them the title of lords; and when Christ likened her to a dog, she presently acknowledges the meanness of her condition. (St. Chrysostom, hom. liii.) He refused at first to listen to her petition, says the same saint, to instruct us with what faith, humility, and perseverance we ought to pray. To make his servants more sensible of his mercy, and more eager to obtain it, he often appears to pay no attention to their prayers, till he had exercised them in the virtues of humility and patience. Ask, and you shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened to you..."

Since Jesus is God, we must say that from the very beginning of His life He knew all things and all possible things.

Pope Pius XII, in his great Encyclical on the "Mystical Body" - Mystici Corporis - given on June 29, 1943, taught: "By that blessed vision which He enjoyed when just received in the womb of the Mother of God, He has all the members of the Mystical Body continuously and perpetually present to Himself." In other words: His human soul saw the vision of God at once, and in it all knowledge is at hand. In another Encyclical, "Sempiternus Rex," in 1951, the same Pope complained many were not accepting his teaching. Then in still another Encyclical, "Haurietis aquas," in 1956, he clearly repeated his earlier teaching. Further, on July 24,1966, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Pope Paul VI, complained that many were still not accepting. Clearly, the repeated teaching shows the Church means to make this definite and definitive, namely, that the human soul of Jesus, from the first instant, saw the vision of God, in which all knowledge is accessible.

The notion that a sinful woman, a mere creature, somehow bested Our Lord in verbal contest is the sort of liberal bovine scatology that only the mentally ill, and radical feminists (in truth the same thing) can swallow.

Pray for this confused priest.  His warts are showing!

The Devil is inciting radical Islamists to lash out against the Catholic Church because he knows Our Lady will convert the Muslim people...

NJ.com notes:



A 25-year-old Jersey City man is accused of pushing over a Virgin Mary statue outside Our Lady of Victories Church at Kennedy Boulevard and Ege Avenue.

Omar J. Ibrahim, of Fairview Avenue, is charged with desecration of a venerated object and criminal mischief for allegedly pushing the statue over and breaking it on July 18, the criminal complaint states.

Probable cause for the charge is identification of Ibrahim from security video, according to the court document.

The Devil hates and fears Our Lady.  For Our Lady will, one day, lead Moslems to her Son Jesus by converting to the Catholic Faith.  We are now in a religious war.  Even though Francis refuses to acknowledge this fact.


In 1952, Archbishop Fulton John Sheen, in his classic book, “The World’s First Love, Mary, the Mother of God," devoted an entire chapter to this subject entitled, "Mary and the Moslems." He wrote:


"At the present time, the hatred of the Moslem countries against the West is becoming a hatred against Christianity itself. Although the statesmen have not yet taken it into account, there is still grave danger that the temporal power of Islam may return and, with it, the menace that it may shake off a West which has ceased to be Christian, and affirm itself as a great anti-Christian world power. Moslem writers say, “When the locust swarms darken vast countries, they bear on their wings these Arabic words: *We are God’s host, each of us has ninety-nine eggs, and if we had a hundred, we should lay waste the world with all that is in it.”

Sheen continues:


"The Koran, which is the Bible of the Moslems, has many passages concerning the Blessed Virgin. First of all, the Koran believes in her Immaculate Conception and, also, in her Virgin Birth. The third chapter of the Koran places the history of Mary’s family in a genealogy which goes back through Abraham, Noah, and Adam. … The Koran has also verses on the Annunciation, Visitation, and Nativity. Angels are pictured as accompanying the Blessed Mother and saying: “Oh, Mary, God has chosen you and purified you, and elected you above all the women of the earth.” In the nineteenth chapter of the Koran there are forty-one verses on Jesus and Mary. There is such a strong defense of the virginity of Mary here that the Koran, in the fourth book, attributes the condemnation of the Jews to their monstrous calumny against the Virgin Mary.

 

Mary, then, is for the Moslems the true Sayyida, or Lady. The only possible serious rival to her in their creed would be Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed himself. But after the death of Fatima, Mohammed wrote: “Thou shalt be the most blessed of all the women in Paradise, after Mary” In a variant of the text, Fatima is made to say: “I surpass all the women, except Mary.”

 

Archbishop Sheen then explains the significance of Mary’s choice of Fatima for her apparitions.

 

“This brings us to our second point, namely, why the Blessed Mother, in this twentieth century, should have revealed herself in the insignificant little village of Fatima, so that to all future generations she would be known as ‘Our Lady of Fatima’. Since nothing ever happens out of heaven except with a finesse of all details, I believe that the Blessed Virgin chose to be known as ‘Our Lady of Fatima’ as a pledge and a sign of hope to the Moslem people, and as an assurance that they, who show her so much respect, will one day accept her Divine Son, too.

 

Evidence to support these views is found in the historical fact that the Moslems occupied Portugal for centuries. At the time when they were finally driven out, the last Moslem chief had a beautiful daughter by the name of Fatima. A Catholic boy fell in love with her, and for him she not only stayed behind when the Moslems left, but even embraced the faith. The young husband was so much in love with her that he changed the name of the town where he lived to Fatima. Thus, the very place where Our Lady appeared in 1917 bears a historical connection to Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed.”

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

In the latter times right up to the Reign of Antichrist, the enmity between the children of Mary and the children of the Devil will intensify.  St. Louis de Montfort:

"Mary must become as terrible as an army in battle array to the devil and his followers, especially in these latter times. For Satan, knowing that he has little time - even less now than ever - to destroy souls, intensifies his efforts and his onslaughts every day. He will not hesitate to stir up savage persecutions and set treacherous snares for Mary's faithful servants and children whom he finds more difficult to overcome than others.


It is chiefly in reference to these last wicked persecutions of the devil, daily increasing until the advent of the reign of anti-Christ, that we should understand that first and well-known prophecy and curse of God uttered against the serpent in the garden of paradise. It is opportune to explain it here for the glory of the Blessed Virgin, the salvation of her children and the confusion of the devil. 'I will place enmities between you and the woman, between your race and her race; she will crush your head and you will lie in wait for her heel' (Gen. 3:15).

God has established only one enmity - but it is an irreconcilable one - which will last and even go on increasing to the end of time. That enmity is between Mary, his worthy Mother, and the devil, between the children and the servants of the Blessed Virgin and the children and followers of Lucifer.

Thus the most fearful enemy that God has set up against the devil is Mary, his holy Mother. From the time of the earthly paradise, although she existed then only in his mind, he gave her such a hatred for his accursed enemy, such ingenuity in exposing the wickedness of the ancient serpent and such power to defeat, overthrow and crush this proud rebel, that Satan fears her not only more than angels and men but in a certain sense more than God himself. This does not mean that the anger, hatred and power of God are not infinitely greater than the Blessed Virgin's, since her attributes are limited. It simply means that Satan, being so proud, suffers infinitely more in being vanquished and punished by a lowly and humble servant of God, for her humility humiliates him more than the power of God. Moreover, God has given Mary such great power over the evil spirits that, as they have often been forced unwillingly to admit through the lips of possessed persons, they fear one of her pleadings for a soul more than the prayers of all the saints, and one of her threats more than all their other torments." True Devotion, Nos 50 - 52).

The Spotless Virgin, the Immaculata, has a special "ingenuity" in exposing the Devil's plans and tactics.  Which is why the Devil often uses others - sometimes other Catholics - to try to influence us to abandon our devotion to Mary, or at least to water it down under the pretext that it is "excessive" or "harmful to ecumenism."

The Devil knows that those consecrated to the Immaculata will be protected in a special way in this time of Apostasy.  Which is why he attacks their true devotion.  Again St. Louis de Montfort: "Since Mary alone has crushed all heresies, as we are told by the Church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (Office of B.V.M.), a devoted servant of hers will never fall into formal heresy or error, though critics may contest this.  He may very well err materially, mistaking lies for truth or an evil spirit for a good one, but he will be less likely to do this than others.  Sooner or later he will discover his error and will not go on stubbornly believing and maintaining what he mistakenly thought was the truth." (True Devotion, No. 167),

In other words, those who practice true devotion to Mary will be better disposed toward the truth and will receive special graces against error.

The Devil knows this.  So he tries desperately to undermine such true devotion: "It's harmful to ecumenism," "It is excessive," "It is too pre-Vatican II," "It is Medeival."

Don't you believe the lies.  Consecrate yourself daily to the Immaculata.  Pope John Paul II, in a General Audience of November 15, 1995, said that to honor Mary is to go to Jesus.  How then can our devotion to Mary be said to be "excessive"?  During the same General Audience, the Holy Father places "such as Lourdes, Fatima, Loreto, Pompei, Guadalupe and Czestochowa" [this list is not exhaustive]...are "a wonderful testimony to God's mercy, which reaches man through Mary's intercession.."

Why no similar statement from the Vatican after Pope Francis' meeting with a sodomite?

Writing for The New York Times, Jim Yardley notes that the Vatican issued a statement indicating that Pope Francis’ Meeting with Kim Davis wasn’t an endorsement of her views.

One has to wonder why no such statement was issued by the Vatican after Francis met with radical homosexual activist Simon Cazal who agitated for the Church to change her teaching relative to the sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance.

The Sentinel & Enterprise publishes homosexual agitprop from Bonnie J. Toomey

It's Easter Sunday.  Catholics and other Christians are celebrating the Resurrection of their Savior.  And on this sacred day, when Christ's disciples remember the historic event of His reuniting His human body and soul which had been separated by His death on the Cross, the Fitchburg Sentinel & Enterprise has decided to publish homosexual agitprop in the form of an article written by Bonnie J. Toomey and entitled "Why should pink have us seeing red?"

Responding to the controversy which erupted when the president of Abercrombie & Fitch, Jenna Lyons, painted her five year old son's toenails pink, Ms. Toomey writes, "...pink is a beautiful color, and I think it looks great on a guy.  It doesn't mean anything.  But why do we get so uncomfortable when it comes to boys and pink?  Traditions, religions and a patriarchal society have put pink where they want it, not necessarily where it rightfully belongs.  My sons wore their sister's costumes and dresses many times..But did it change their gender?...And what if it did?  Nature is not nurture, and no matter how hard you try, you can't hold back nature..."

But this is to suggest that homosexuality is genetic, dominant and irreversible.  If this were true, then no one would be responsible for deviant sexual acts.  The fact remains, however, that psychological therapy has proven to be very successful in diminishing, and in many cases even eliminating, same-sex attraction.  Personal testimonies from former homosexuals who were healed from the psychopathology may be found here and here.

Ms. Toomey insists though that, "homosexuality is determined by innate characteristics that contribute to sexual orientation and that cannot be changed through medical or psychiatric treatment."  That would indeed come as news to those who have recovered from the psychopathology.  But Ms. Toomey wouldn't be interested in their testimonies.  For these would produce a crack in her wall of conviction.  And Ms. Toomey is not interested in truth.  The fact remains, homosexuality is not innate. In fact, Dr. Francis S. Collins, one of the world's leading scientists who works on the cutting edge of DNA, has said that, "Homosexuality is not hardwired..." and "..there is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits.  For virtually none of them is heredity ever close to predictive."  See here. 

It is unfortunate that homosexual propagandists like Bonnie Toomey continue to ignore the hard science about homosexuality.  Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D., a specialist on homosexuality (unlike Ms. Toomey who has no expertise in this area), says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them." It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy. See here. Dr. Aardweg notes that, "The term neurotic describes such relationships well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).

Recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that 1 in 5 sexually active homosexual and bisexual men in America are HIV-positive but that 44% of them don't know it.  See here.  The health risks associated with the homosexual lifestyle are well documented (see here), but propagandists for the lifestyle - like Ms. Toomey - do not seem to be very concerned about these health risks.  For their goal is to convert others to the homosexal ideology through a planned psychological attack in the form of homosexual propaganda.

In her zeal to promote the sodomite cause, Ms. Toomey engages in one falsehood after another.  She writes, "It's time we accept the fact that as much as 10 percent of the population..is homosexual." But the ten percent myth, which has been based upon research done by the now totally discredited Alfred Kinsey, has been refuted time and again.

For Ms. Toomey, propagandist for the sodomite culture, "Homosexuality..is not wrong."  And she is entitled to her beliefs.  As idiotic as they are.  I'm sure she actually believes the lifestyle is healthy as well.  But those of us who are Christian, Jew and Muslim are entitled to our beliefs as well.  Those of us who are authentically Catholic, as opposed to being Catholic in name only, accept the teaching of the Church's Magisterium, as expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

"Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.'  They are contrary to the natural law.  They close the sexual act to the gift of life.  They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.  Under no circumstances can they be approved." (2357).

And we do not appreciate a second-rate columnist with absolutely no background in theology or the science of DNA telling us that we are backward simply because we do not buy into her radical homosexual agitprop which insists that homosexuality is innate or hardwired.

That the Sentinel & Enterprise would publish such nonsense on Easter Sunday is shameful.  The publication has embarassed itself once again. 

Father Thomas Massaro, Sarav Chidambaram and Gender Neutral Bathrooms

In the comments section of a previous post, Mr. Michael Cole noted how, "Homosexuals, lesbians and transsexuals are often afflicted by evil spirits. Gender confusion is often a sign of demonic possession. Fr. Malachi Martin recounts the story of a possessed transsexual in his bestselling book "Hostage to the Devil." In the chapter titled "The Virgin and the Girl-Fixer," he writes, "At one moment, Father Gerald, the exorcist, was bending over the possessed, Richard/Rita, who had sunk his teeth into his own instep. In the next instant, the glaze in Richard/Rita's eyes broke, melting into a lurid gleam of mockery. Greenish. The teeth loosened their grip on the instep. The mouth opened, baring gums and throat, the tongue protruded, quivering on a stream of gray foam bubbles. The whole face was furrowed in irregular lines, as Richard/Rita broke into peals of laughter. Great buffeting gusts of mocking, jeering, Schadenfreude laughter. Laugter pouring from a belly of amused scorn and contemptuous hate." See here.

Gender confusion has led to the push for so-called gender-neutral bathrooms across the United States. Mr. Sarav Chidambaram, a radical homosexual activist who received an award from the Cambridge Peace Commission, of which Father Thomas Massaro of the Boston Archdiocese is a member, has been one of those agitating for gender neutral bathrooms.  See here.

If the Archdiocese of Boston is not advancing a homosexual agenda, why is it tolerating dissent from the Church's authentic teaching regarding homosexuality?  See here.

Related reading here.

Who is Martha Coakley?

Courtesy of Mass Resistance:

"How horrible is Martha Coakley? Besides the hideous list of Coakley's positions and actions that we already published, we just dug up the keynote speech that Coakley -- as Massachusetts Attorney General -- gave at the fundraising dinner for the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Bar Association on May 11, 2007.

Coakley discussed her unwavering support for homosexual and transgender "rights" and her readiness to fight any challenges to the "legality" of same-sex "marriage".

(This despite the fact that the legislature STILL has not changed the statutes to enable same-sex couples to "marry", as instructed by the Supreme Judicial Court in 2003! See the homosexual lobby's pending bill here. What "law" is Attorney General Coakley upholding?)

Make no mistake about this: If you believe in traditional values, Martha Coakley really despises you.*

Here are some quotes from her speech:

On fighting challenges to same-sex "marriage":

". . . We also know that if the proposed [anti-gay marriage] amendment goes on the ballot, Massachusetts will spend the next year and a half besieged by anti-gay activists and will be the recipient of zealous rhetoric and invective from across the country. If that battle is necessary, you have my support."

On using the controversial Matthew Shepherd murder to push hate crime legislation and homosexual programs in the schools:

"Nine years after Matthew Shepard was left to die on a fence post in Wyoming, members of the GLBT community still remain at risk for discrimination in schools, employment and in places of public accommodation, as well as being targets of violent hate crimes.

"We cannot allow hate to occupy any legal space in Massachusetts. We cannot legislate hate away, but we can hold those accountable who act upon it and that's why it is important to develop and implement effective civil rights programs in our schools."

This is Martha Coakley's vision for America that she would bring to Washington, D.C.

Read the entire 2007 speech HERE."

* As does the Obama administration. See here.

Related reading on the Homosexual Hate Movement here.