-
Now, Pheifferians don't like to talk about it much,
but just consider the spiritual implications in that Paul Hernandez has access to the Holy Eucharist ? :farmer:
(https://media.npr.org/programs/day/features/2007/feb/witchevent200-d1988092bb77b54c0c337b291a84d9ed78eb10d1-s300-c85.jpg)
Lourdes Garcia-Navarro is "cleansed"
by Apolinar Guixpal, a warlock in Catemaco, Veracruz (Source: NPR) (https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7641977)
(For those who missed it, a re-post of an important testimony)
Posted by Catholicus on April 18, 2019, 11:27:19 AM (Link to Topic, Page 4) (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/fr-pfeiffer's-moran-excommunicates-across-the-board/45/)
(Forgive me if it will be a long letter)
Dear Matthew we have to pray for all of us!
And I think after having to deal with this sort of persons in OLMC we all need a realy good exorcist.
Believe me, it's the best for all of us, but it is difficult to find one!
This are the consequences of a modernist church which has abolished exorcists....
All those who had been in contact with Pablo have to seek help even if it is not immediately noticeable, if you had to deal with him YOU NEED HELP! There are consequences of having anything to do with him and His headquarter (Pfeiferville).
So many strange things were happening there....
For example he gave me a food in which I AM SURE he put his blood drops in it, to do me a spell.
So how spells will he have done with Fr. Pfeiffer ans others using food?
I went with him and fr. Pfeiffer once to a takeaway-restaurant. When my dinner was ready he told me that something is missing in the food and he went with my plate to the kitchen of the restaurant, I heard him whisper something very quietly to the chef that came out of the kitchen because he wanted to talk to him.
I did not understand why he was speaking so secretly to chef. But the chef answered aloud and said that "in these soup do not belong tomato!" and: "But if you want it, how many do you want?" Pablo said silently something and the chef answered loudly: "fine in 3 pieces!"
I could have gone to Pablo to get my soup back, but I did not, because I didn´t want to leave Fr. Pfeiffer alone sitting at the table.
I was so naive !!!
The crazy thing was that before Pablo took my soup, Fr.Pfeiffer din´t want him to do it and yelled at him very loud.
I wanted to stop both and so I told Fr. Pfeiffer that it was all right, and accepted that Pablo took it and brought it to the chef.
The strange thing was, when the chef came back from the kitchen and gave him back my soup, Pablo did not come back but he was still standing there with his back to me, he stood there with my soup and I heard a noise of a plastic bag. A child which was traveling with us (friend of Pablo) was all the time like completely hypnotized by Pablo, Pablo called this child and the child went to him with a plastic bag. All this was happening during the timeI was sitting with Fr. Pfeiffer and we were talking about things that are going on in the church.
Looking to Pablo that called the kid with a plastic bag, I thought maybe he wanted to wrap up my soup, to eat it later in the car (because it was also a takeaway restaurant).
Since Pablo was always strange I did not ask any questions, I knew that everything was possible with him and that he was little bit crazy.
But I could not understand what was going on and why he did not bring me the soup. What did he took from the plastic bag and what was he doing with my soup??
After some minute he brought the child to me with my soup and told me to enjoy. Oh, mad me, I shouldn't have eaten ..
His behavior seemed so weird that I started to look in internet, so I started with the first inexplicable situation, the one in the restaurant.
What I had found out was: a witchcraft
In a dark book of witchcraft and of black magic I found out= A witchcraft that can be done with a soup, but you have to make sure that in this vegetable soup are 3 pieces of Tomato in it, and then you have to do some drops of your blood (I can not remember if it should be 2 or 3 drops) in it.
After you do so, the witchcraft works and the person who was against you and take this soup, begins to obey and follow you more and to be more and more obedient to you. You need to know that I was disturbing Pablo very much, because compared to others in Pfeifferville, including Fr. Hewko, I was the only person who did not get advice from him and did not let him give me orders (the other person that did not accept Pablo was Fr. Pfeiffers Daddy). No matter what, if he did something in my soup, the soup maybe did´t work the way it had to, but it certainly has some consequences and it is not good to eat poisonous food.
One day when I was in the priest's house, being asked to help out and clean up a little, Pablos room (yes he was living in the priest house) was open and a person (don´t want to say his name) went out of this room, with fear in his face, and told me that all the resistance priests and bishops are in danger..., because Pablo has something going on with spells, he has on his desk objects like for voodo or santeria witchcraft and some cigars, and has as well as books about HOW TO BRING A PERSON into psychological addiction and about hypnosis.
In the beginning I really thought this person is just playing a psychological game and is harmless. Even when, after my first night spent in Kentuky, when I woke up in the morning I found a big big clock on my bedside table.
That means that one has visited me at night. Someone who also had the keys.
In Kentucky as a visitor I stayed at the seminary, which was allowed because the seminarist were on vacation.
I didn´t say anything to fr. Pfeiffer or to Fr. Hewko about the huge Clock that someone will have brought in overnight but I asked him, who else has a key except me. It was a new lock and I had received one key but who had the second one?
Fr. Pfeiffer told me that Pablo has the second key and he told him to give me also the second key but Pablo never obeyed Father Pfeiffer ...
I stayed normal, said nothing to anyone, and I was friendly to Pablo.
The next morning, instead, I found something else in my room when I got up= a very big butcher knife.
Instead of the clock that had disappeared over night, was a butcher knife.
I thought these are the psychological tricks to scare me. But honestly, it felt a bit strange.
I got a bit scared but then I told myself that's what he wanted, he's crazy and just wants to scare me because I do not let him dominate me and I do not think highly of him, like the others do.
He just wants domination and satan wants me to run away and leave this resistance group.
So I asked God during my prayer time for courage to stay and endure it...
I started to laughed about these things that were going on and thought it was a game of an adult acting crazy.
At next I started at night to hear a noice and went to the corridor and saw Pablo standing inside at the door burning with a cigar the carpet.
He stood with his back to me so he did not see me because he was also in a stooped position.
He spoke formulas in Spanish. I stayed hidden and quiet behind him, and could listen him talking something strange.
Then he left 3 holes full of ash on the carpet and went out.
The next day I cleaned the burned holes of the carpet with the vacuum cleaner but after I went out for a while and came back, I found again the 3 holes full of ashes and a bad odor.
One night before I fell asleep I smelled the smoke of a cigar, I got up and saw Pablo in the dark standing in the corridor on the front door, he was burning the carpet again. Even this time I stayed calm and thought that this person is only acting weird or a little bit unsane.
But I looked again on the Internet and found out that it is witchcraft. To burn the carpet with a cigar and to make 3 holes and leave the ashes in the holes with a few curses that should be spoken, it is for hat this place (or person?) burns up, goes up in flames etc.
No matter what it was, it was a diabolical and I knew that I should not sleep there anymore.
So I found help by some kindly people who took me in, and Pablo went crazy and wild and yelled that I should stay there and not go away.
I kept getting calls on my American cellphone number, it was people in spanish who always cursed me. Sometimes women from south america called me and sometimes men and they all cursed me on the phone. They wished me the worst and hung up.
Who were these people?
Can someone tell me from the Cathinfo if you have already experienced something like that?
I didn't answer the phone anymore. But now they became very smart. Whenever Fr. Pfeiffer was gone, as for example in Dallas and other cities, I got calls from these cities. On my smartphone was written for example: call from Dallas or Denver (do not remember exactly the order of the cities). So I thought it was fr. Pfeiffer or a person that was with him, and answered the call, but again a latino person shouted curses in spanish over me. WHO WAS IT?(https://www.cathinfo.com/Smileys/classic/huh.gif)
Did these people get money to call me and tell me these horrible things?
If they were paid, with what money they were paid? With the money of donation? Do they raise money and accept donations to use it for something good but then they use it to harm you? Pablo always got access to the bank account from Fr. Pfeiffer as well as donate money.
I did not understand why so many different people called me several times a day to curse me in Spanish.
Do you have an idea??
I thought it was one of those tricks, because I knew that he had certain books about how to make a person dependent and obedient, using terror and psychological tricks.
I said to myself: no I'm not afraid, I'm strong with God and I'm not scared because these are only power and control games of a sick person but I'm strong because I'm with God and I stay here (resistance Kentucky) even if satan does not want me to be here.
So I lived not far from the chapel but no longer on Fr. Pfeiffers ground.
But what I found questionable, however, was why Pablo wanted to have me on the property.
So I started doubting if it really was God's will for me to stay or if I should not move away forever....
What made me move?
I moved into this property and stayed overnight with the family of Fr. Pfeiffer... I do not want to go into details, I thought it was safe there but now something incomprehensible happened .... in my room.
I was left alone in this home, I was alone in one room, no matter what I thought I am safe.
At night a few minutes before midnight, my smartphone started ringing again.
I did not answer the phone because I thought it was again a person screaming curse.
With my other smartphone (I had two) I started to listen to the litany of the Saints, in latin as an audio recording.
The more the phone rang the louder I made the litany and said to myself that I do not have to be afraid.
Then I did something it should not be done. I hung up! I did not know that one should not act like that. I did not pick up the phone call, but I pressed the red button to reject the call. Later I read that we should not do that either. We should not answer but also not hang up, because pressing the red button means a reaction and it is like opening the door to the curse or the spirit and this can penetrate.
I did not understand it then and knew nothing about it so I did it.
At this moment, when I pressed the red button, it was one minute before midnight. I was just looking at the clock, when it struck midnight there was a loud noise, it was as if somebody jumped into my room. Until this moment, I really thought it was all a joke, a prank, and the witchcraft is like a game, without any power or result.
I was a more rational person and a believer, believing in the power of God more than in Satans acting spirits...
Pablo always talked about ghosts and demons, freemasons, human sacrifices and fallen angels and exorcism, i did not like to hear about it, and demons and exorcism was not my interest.
But that night I realized that it was all no joke but satanism.
There were these fallen angels or whatever it was, that was in my room, there were moving cupboards, it opened and closed the cupboards it also turned on the gas stoven. This something that was making noice, had feet because it walked and even breathes, but it could not approach me for I was kneeling before the cross and prayed.
On the floor kneeling before the cross I felt safe, and was convinced that this "something" could not get closer to me as long as I stayed kneeling. Then all lights went out and the gas alarm started.......
Should I get up but be in danger? Or should I stay on my knees but possibly stifle on gas poisoning?
I stayed on my knees and prayed aloud with the audio recording the Litany of the saints, and took then my smartphone (the one where I got all the bad calls) and called a family member from a priest... this family member came immediately and,
opened all the windows, and got me out of there ..... I told him nothing about what was going on but this person said immediately: it's Pablo. He always walks in the woods at midnight and who knows what he is doing there on magic. Satan wants you away.
Do not let him win. He want´s to destroy the RESISTANCE.
This I was told.
WHETHER IT WAS SATAN OR GOD THAT WANTED THAT I LEAVE, I HAVE DECIDED IMMEDIATELY TO LEAVE THIS PLACE AND I NEVER WENT BACK.
This evil person that did all these things to me, threatened me, and then called me to ask how my parents are....that their health are in danger... since then they are ill and many years have passed and they are still ill.
I myself have a deep sorrow in my heart and a permanent battle... since then and ask for prayer. I pray for all of you and the poor priests and all the souls in need in this fight between heaven and hell.
May God bless you!! We all need Help and blessings and the intervention from Heaven in this evil time.
Oportet Christum regnare!
-
This should be reposted every week for weeks, translated in to every language where fr. Pfeiffer has a presence, and posted on the car of every Pfeifferite as another effort to wake them.
-
Note: Hernanadez's Rectory bedroom walls, have photos of people just like his brother warlock's wall in the above NPR photo.
The purpose is for an indirect application of a Malefice or curse on the individuals per below. Source: Father Amorth (https://tradcatknight.blogspot.com/2018/02/father-gabriele-amorth-on-spiritual.html)
1. Black Magic – Witchcraft – Satanic Rites that Culminate with Black Masses
.
Fr. Amorth address these practices as a group because they are analogous and they share the “common characteristic” of obtaining “a curse against a specific person through magic formulas or rituals – at times very complex – by invoking the demon, but without the use of particular objects.”
.
Whoever devotes himself to these practices becomes a servant of Satan through his own fault.
.
Scriptural passages prohibiting analogous practices: Dt18:10-12, Lev 19:31, Lev 20:27, Lev 19:26-31, Ex 22:18
.
2. Curses
.
Curses invoke evil, and the origin of all evil is demonic. When curses are spoken with true perfidy, especially if there is a blood relationship between the one who casts them and the accursed, the outcome can be terrible.
.
Fr. Amorth stresses the fact that there are incredibly strong bonds between family members, and that curses that operate within these familial bonds or on a “special occasion,” e.g., a wedding, can have terrible consequences.
.
He gives several examples of cases he worked: a young man cursed by his own father at birth, parents cursing their daughter-in-law at their wedding, and man whose grandmother cursed a photograph of him, resulting in ill legs and multiple surgeries.
.
3. The Evil Eye
.
This consists in a spell cast by looking at someone. It does not come about, as many think, by believing that some individual cause bad luck by just looking at you; this is nonsense. The evil eye is a true spell; in other words, it presupposes the will to harm a predetermined person with the intervention of demons.
.
What is important is that the victim should not suspect everyone he meets, but forgive wholeheartedly whoever caused him evil, no matter who. I want to stress that, while I believe that the evil eye is possible, I cannot be positive that I have encountered it in my experience as an exorcist.
.
4. The Spell (aka Malefice or Hex)
.
A “spell” is the “most commonly used means to achieve evil.” In Latin, it is the male factus – meaning “Evil work.” It is generally accomplished by making some type of “evil” artifact.
.
The object has an almost symbolic value: it is a tangible sign of the will to harm, and it is offered to Satan to be imprinted with his evil powers. It is often said that Satan apes God; in this case we can use the sacraments as an analogy. The sacraments use tangible matter (for instance the water of baptism) as an instrument of grace. In the malefice matter is used as an instrument of harm.
.
Application of the Malefice:
.
Direct Way: “Consists of mixing the object that is used for the spell into the victim’s food or drink. As already mentioned, this is manufactured with the most diverse materials; it can be menstrual blood; bones of dead people; various burned powders, mostly black; animal parts – the heart seems to be the favorite; peculiar herbs, and so on.”
.
Indirect Way: “This consists in hexing objects that belong to the target (photographs, clothes, or other belongings) or figures that represent the accursed: dolls, puppets, animals, even real people of the same age and sex. This is called “transfer” material, and it is struck with the same ills that are intended for the victim.”
.
Other Attributes:
.
Binding Malefice: The transfer object is bound with various ribbons or animal hairs to produce a “binding” effect. Fr. Amorth recounts an event where a doll was bound to an umbilical cord with horse hair in an attempt to strike a pregnant woman’s child.
.
Hex Objects: Often times transfer objects for a hex appear inside pillows or mattresses.
.
I have found just about everything, from colored and tied ribbons to chunks of hair tightly knotted… animals – especially mice – or geometric shapes; and blood clots. I have seen chunks of wood or iron, twisted wire, and dolls full of piercing and marks and have witnessed the sudden appearance of very thick braids of children or women’s hair. Miraculously, sometimes these objects are not even visible until holy water is sprinkled upon the opened pillow.
-
Shortly before we got away from OLMC hernandez asked me for a family photo. Something inside me told me not to give it to him. I am glad I didn't.
-
Can someone please explain to me who Pablo is. Who is Hernandez? And how did they become involved with Fr. Pfeiffer?
-
Can someone please explain to me who Pablo is. Who is Hernandez? And how did they become involved with Fr. Pfeiffer?
There are many threads here with information about him.
In a nutshell, he is a dangerous man.
This gives you a brief introduction:
https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/the-devil-and-mr-hernandez-6418725
He locked hips with fr. Pfeiffer when they were both in Arizona.
-
How does a person get the ability to turn the lights on and off (if he does not use any technical tricks)?
He snapped his fingers and the light went off, he snapped again and the light went on.
Another time he snapped his fingers and the WIFI connection turned off, he snapped again and it turned on. The WIFI router is in the priests house but it works also outside the house and we were standing outside in front of the door and he said I should connect my smartphone to the internet using WIFI as I did before, and then he told me to see what he is able to do. So he snapped his fingers and it stopped to work. The WIFI connection turned off. He did it 4 times, and as he snapped it turned on or off. His words about it: "WITCHCRAFT!" and he smiled.
Was it a joke? I thought it was just power games and nothing else....
But I also asked myself how can a human have such a power by snapping his fingers?
We need to pray for the priests, and seminarians, for all who seek the true Catholic faith and for our resistance bishops.
-
Can someone please explain to me who Pablo is. Who is Hernandez? And how did they become involved with Fr. Pfeiffer?
Pablo had some ominous names since his days in Phoenix with Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer. Back then, according to an SSPX priest, he already had a reputation and two nicknames. Pablo "El Brujo" (the warlock) and Pablo "El Diablo" (need I translate?)
He would scream at parishioners in the parking lot, etc. He was banned from the chapel, and for good reason. We're talking about Traditional Catholics here! It's not like a Trad shorted him on a drug deal, was caught in adultery with one of his relatives, or something. There shouldn't be any reason to scream at a fellow parishioner, unless you have psychological or spiritual issues.
-
Pablo had some ominous names since his days in Phoenix with Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer. Back then, according to an SSPX priest, he already had a reputation and two nicknames. Pablo "El Brujo" (the warlock) and Pablo "El Diablo" (need I translate?)
He would scream at parishioners in the parking lot, etc. He was banned from the chapel, and for good reason. We're talking about Traditional Catholics here! It's not like a Trad shorted him on a drug deal, was caught in adultery with one of his relatives, or something. There shouldn't be any reason to scream at a fellow parishioner, unless you have psychological or spiritual issues.
So he was banned from the chapel in Phoenix and then followed Fr. Pfeiffer to Boston, Kentucky?
-
There are many threads here with information about him.
In a nutshell, he is a dangerous man.
This gives you a brief introduction:
https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/the-devil-and-mr-hernandez-6418725
He locked hips with fr. Pfeiffer when they were both in Arizona.
The article is from 2001 and it says he was 49 at the time, that makes him like 67 years old today. He is obviously a bully preying on the weak, yet no seminarian or young man has beaten the tar out of him all these years? People like that are an occasion of sin to me. I've always solved these problems by first asking God to remove the person from my sight before I have to take care of the matter myself. This has happened to me four times since I came back to the faith like 25 years, and every time God has always removed these people within less than one week to never ever come back.
That God would allow such a person to last this long, indicates to me that this is a punishment from God upon that chapel.
-
The SSPX wanted absolutely to separate Fr. Pfeiffer from him! Especially after a certain incident happened, the SSPX decided to send Fr. Pf. to the Philippines. So he was separated from his mexican friend for the time being in the Philippines, but this person tried by all means to bring father back home... I mean this is obvious that the idea came to leave the SSPX and to go his own way, building up a church... The fact that Bishop Fellay was "ready to compromise doctrine”, was a good reason to use it for this decision.
The evil things happen in the SSPX, is also the work of the devil. We know that the devil hates the holy sacrifice of the mass, the tradition and the priests. Satan wanted to destroy the SSPX as well he wants to destroy the resistance. All this EVIL going on, can also be seen as a punishment, because God punishes not only the modernists but also traditionalists...take care. But we should pray that God helps us.
We are experiencing the great tribulation.
Only Our Blessed Mother can help us during the tribulation.
We have been asked by Our Blessed mother to have compassion on the Heart of Our Most Holy Mother,
covered with thorns because there is no one to make an act of reparation to remove them.
The devotion of reparation of the five first Saturdays of the month is a way to help our church.
Only Our Blessed Mother can help us and can help the Church and also the so called "resistance" in this time of tribulation.
Let us pray and practice the First Saturdays and if possible lat us practice the first Saturdays of twelve consecutive months in honor of the Immaculate Conception.
God bless you all
-
How does a person get the ability to turn the lights on and off (if he does not use any technical tricks)?
He snapped his fingers and the light went off, he snapped again and the light went on.
Another time he snapped his fingers and the WIFI connection turned off, he snapped again and it turned on. The WIFI router is in the priests house but it works also outside the house and we were standing outside in front of the door and he said I should connect my smartphone to the internet using WIFI as I did before, and then he told me to see what he is able to do. So he snapped his fingers and it stopped to work. The WIFI connection turned off. He did it 4 times, and as he snapped it turned on or off. His words about it: "WITCHCRAFT!" and he smiled.
The aptly named "Clapboss" controls all electrical objects plugged into the power source. No magick involved. But PtheMex is a liar.
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/12/12/16763796/astrohaus-clapboss-kickstarter-launch-clapper-ifttt (https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/12/12/16763796/astrohaus-clapboss-kickstarter-launch-clapper-ifttt)
I can confirm he asks everyone for a picture--of the entire family to put up on his wall so he can "pray" for them.
-
Has anyone spoken to Fr. Pfeiffer about his weird friend? Since he has no superiors there is no-one to order him to drop Pablo and go into a long period of silence but has any lay person asked him to his face what the devil (no pun intended) is going on? Never mind all the lurid stories I've read over the years it is just unseemly for a priest to be this attached to a layman.
-
Has anyone spoken to Fr. Pfeiffer about his weird friend? Since he has no superiors there is no-one to order him to drop Pablo and go into a long period of silence but has any lay person asked him to his face what the devil (no pun intended) is going on? Never mind all the lurid stories I've read over the years it is just unseemly for a priest to be this attached to a layman.
Countless *supporters*, friends, and fans of Fr. Pfeiffer have tried over the years, all to no avail.
That's why it's actually very logical, possible, and reasonable to suspect demonic influence in this case. It's the only explanation that fits all the facts we know.
There is a progression of "waking up" when it comes to OLMC.
A) The greatest number are awake to the evils of Pablo. But many continue to support the next two.
B) Some go a step further and won't receive Fr. Pfeiffer for Mass, due to his relationship with Pablo, etc. but they will receive Fr. Hewko.
C) Some go a step further and want nothing to do with OLMC, because even Fr. Hewko is pushing the Pfeiffer cult/propaganda, and he is under Pablo's spell(s) as well.
Of course today Fr. Hewko has left OLMC. But he still contains a lot of Pfeiffer venom/poison in his mind. It will take time to heal after being in that cult (under Pablo) for so many years. I pray that he eventually detoxes completely. He could do great good for the Church, particularly the faithful remnant of Traditional Catholics, if he'd ditch all the residual Pablo nonsense (hatred for the mainstream Resistance, its 4 bishops, and all the childish Pfeiffer propaganda about "the false Resistance".)
-
Thank you "revolve books",
so I did not know that a person che get in contact with my smartphone, my tablet and computer through finger snapping and shut off also my Wifi ... about this I dind´t read anything in the link that you have sent.
Wanting to put fears and dominate others, behaving this way, is a sick and diabolical behaviour. An adult person does not behave like this, especially not a Christian. And a christian would never say of himself to be a WIZARD and a Freemason...
We all know that this person is to be avoid.
-
While this trick can be performed with technology, I am disturbed by Pablo's quick glib answer that he's using "Witchcraft". And the other details shared by Catholicus are downright disturbing, and merely confirm the suspicions some of us have long had about the diabolical influence on/by Pablo.
Father Ripperger cautions very strongly against people attempting to engage evil spirits without the authority of the Church, and says that they are prime takeover targets.
Given the natural powers of the fallen angels, in a battle of wits against Pablo, it's not difficult to predict the outcome.
Perhaps Father Ripperger needs to pay Pablo a visit. Of course, exorcisms don't work on those who are willingly in league with the demons.
-
While this trick can be performed with technology, I am disturbed by Pablo's quick glib answer that he's using "Witchcraft". And the other details shared by Catholicus are downright disturbing, and merely confirm the suspicions some of us have long had about the diabolical influence on/by Pablo.
Father Ripperger cautions very strongly against people attempting to engage evil spirits without the authority of the Church, and says that they are prime takeover targets.
You weren't very clear in that first sentence -- so I made the change above. I thought you were talking about CathInfo members talking about Pablo. It was only after reading the whole post, and re-reading it, that I understood what you meant.
-
You weren't very clear in that first sentence -- I thought you were talking about CathInfo members. It was only after reading the whole post, and re-reading it, that I understood what you meant.
Thanks for calling that out. It's one of those things where I knew the reference in my head and didn't realize it might be ambiguous to the reader.
-
And incidentally, I agree, Ladislaus.
I was thinking the same thing. Just the way he jokes about it -- it's very demonically inspired and demonesque. Even when joking, he has a devil's sense of humor. Don't you suppose the devil, having an intellect, would be capable of a certain sick, dark sense of humor?
And devil's words certainly drip with pride -- as do Pablo's.
Also recall his many quotes which evince a burning hatred for Traditional Catholics -- yeah, that's real understandable, hating the REAL Catholics, those who give up all to follow Christ, those who make Christ and the Catholic Church a priority in their life, those who take the Catholic religion seriously, etc. -- yeah, THAT group is really worthy of hatred. To the devil maybe!
One such quote from Pablo: "I will teach my children to beware Traditional Catholics first, the devil second."
He's actually placed faithful Catholics below the devil!
-
So he was banned from the chapel in Phoenix and then followed Fr. Pfeiffer to Boston, Kentucky?
No.
Fr. Pfeiffer asked him to come to KY.
-
no seminarian or young man has beaten the tar out of him all these years?
Exactly what he needs.
One seminarian tried. He left immediately afterwards
-
Has anyone spoken to Fr. Pfeiffer about his weird friend?
Soooo many have.
Hernandez is the main reason b. Williamson doesn't work with fr. Pfeiffer. The other reason is that b. Williamson told fr. Pfeiffer to stop travelling and pay attention to his "seminary". Fr. Pfeiffer refused.
Fr. Pfeiffer has chosen hernandez over b. Williamson, over fr. Voigt, and now over fr. Hewko.
It is all too diabolical.
-
While this trick can be performed with technology, I am disturbed by Pablo's quick glib answer that he's using "Witchcraft".
Indeed, it shows where his mind is at, and admitting something like this (even as a joke) is something of a "he doth protest too much". It's a variation on that.
I actually knew a leftist, millennial, sodomite Jew who used this technique all the time -- before someone can accuse you of drinking too much, joke that you're constantly hungover. What can you say to that?
I think the technique is something like "accept and extend to a ludicrous degree" -- it forces your opponent to agree with you.
-
Perhaps Father Ripperger needs to pay Pablo a visit.
Just try to get in touch with fr. Ripperger...
We have been trying for months, to no avail.
If anyone can help, please PM.
We have need to dispel OLMC evil from someone in our family.
-
Fr. Pfeiffer has chosen hernandez over b. Williamson, over fr. Voigt, and now over fr. Hewko.
It is all too diabolical.
Indeed. Choosing Pablo over these clerics is LITERALLY a diabolical choice.
-
I am thankful that my family didn't move to Boston early on, before the trainwreck became obvious even to those mostly blinded by hope. We discussed it, wanting to be of more help to the resistance seminary, but decided against moving. We decided it wasn't prudent to put all our eggs in the basket of a mere man. And it seems that it was PtM's basket after all...
-
One such quote from Pablo: "I will teach my children to beware Traditional Catholics first, the devil second."
He's actually placed faithful Catholics below the devil!
Wow, I hadn't heard this one. This man practically emits the scent of sulphur.
-
Just try to get in touch with fr. Ripperger...
We have been trying for months, to no avail.
If anyone can help, please PM.
We have need to dispel OLMC evil from someone in our family.
He's almost impossible to get a hold of ... and he would not operate outside his diocese anyway.
But if it's someone in your family over whom you have authority, you can apply the binding prayers against the demons that inflict him.
Father Ripperger, while I don't agree with him about everything, makes some very solid points about authority, that the demons are subject to God's authority, and that you have the right to invoke the authority that derives from God towards all those people and things and places under your authority. He makes a distinction between deprecatory and imprecatory prayer, the former a request, the latter a command.
Father R spends a lot of time talking about how you have to discern precisely the type of demons that might be afflicting your family members. I think he's overcomplicating it too much. As the father of my family, I have prayed as follows: "By the authority of God invested in me as father, I command my [son's or daughter's] Guardian Angel to identify and ward off whatever demonic spirits are afflicting [him/her]." [Same for a husband's authority over his wife.] I tell them to get reinforcements from Our Lady and St. Michael, and then request the same from the latter. These Guardian Angels know who these demonic spirits are and can respond accordingly on a seek-and-destroy mission. Especially in this day and age when very little is questioned by the forces of Satan than the authority and husbands and fathers, I believe that such commands have more force than ever. After I started praying this way, I noticed a decided increase of peace in the family. Unlike Pablo, I hesitate to take on these demons directly, since I am no match for them, but that's exactly what the Guardian Angels are there for, and they are capable of wiping them out.
Also, I pray to the Guardian Angel of our family (in the same way). I believe that all entities constituted by God (the family in particular) have Guardian Angels assigned by God. Our Lady at Fatima made reference to the Guardian Angel of Portugal.
-
From the Second Apparition at Fatima:
'How must we sacrifice?' I asked the Angel.
'Offer God a sacrifice of anything you can as an act of reparation for the sins with which He is offended and as a supplication for the conversion of sinners. Draw peace upon your country by doing this. I am its guardian angel – the Angel of Portugal. Above all, accept and endure with submission whatever suffering the Lord sends you.' Then he disappeared.
The angel's words were impressed upon our souls like a light that made us understand Who God is, how much He loves us and wishes to be loved, the value of sacrifice and how sacrifice pleases God, and how He converts sinners because of it."
I would imagine that the SSPX has a Guardian Angel as well. Perhaps prayers to this Guardian might be in order. Hard to say about the Resistance, since it's not a formally constituted group.
-
I would be interested in knowing whether Father Pfeiffer knew Pablo before the summer-camp drowning that affected him so deeply.
-
Did Fr. Hewko have problems with Pablo the mexican?
I read that he left because of him, is it true?
It amazes me, because he always said that Pablo needs to stay there!!
I still remember exactly how Fr. Pfeiffer told Father Hewko that it would be better if Pablo take distance from the resistance priests also because he is a layman and being around in the priests home is not so good.
But it was FR. HEWKO that convinced father Pfeiffer how important Pablo was for them in Kentucky. He looked at him as if he were a Saint.
He said that he does not want that Pablo leaves, because he is a big help and it is better to loose some people who are against Pablo than to renounce Pablo.
Pablo also began praying an "exorcism prayer" over a Fr. Hewkos necklace with a cross and a rosary and he did it also with many other holy objects (also with the so called sacramentale).
He also has a room in the hut that is behind the chapel, where he keeps crosses and holds statues because they have to be blessed by him (by Pablo).
Fr. Hewko and me, we were with Pablo down in the kitchen of the priest house and Pablo told me that a exorcist had said that the St. Benedict cross is no longer blessed but is used by the devil and= "that is why we should destroy them! They have lost power against satan!"
Fr. Hewko said it was all right if an exorcist said so.
Pablo started also to say that no one of us should place the St. Benedict cross and medal around the neck, Fr. Hewko obeyed him.
Pablo said that this cross (the St. Benedict cross) is already old and as cross no longer a blessing and protection. He said it had no power to drive out the demons and should therefore no longer be used and not to be worn around the neck.
He told us that no matter which St. Benediktus cross, also a blessed one by a true catholic priest, it rather attracts the devils instead of expelling them.
"Fr. Hewko, how can you sit there and keep silent when this man tells idiocy!??"
Fr. Hewko said that it wasn´t idiocy but that we need to be humble and listen also a Layman's talk... It was disturbing.
Did he confound true HUMILITY with accepting the error as a truth?
He almost reminded me more a modernist priest or a "charismatic" from the New Conciliar "Religion" and less did he remind me of a traditional priest.
I thought I was in the madhouse and asked if he could not distinguish the good from the evil.
And as a catholic priest you have to know that this kind of talk is evil!
"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed".
Galatians 1:8
God knows I'm telling the truth.
Fr. Pfeiffer was convinced during this time by Fr. Hewko to lat Pablo live there permanently and not even to stay away for a few months.
So now I'm wondering what happened that Fr. Hewko should have said that Pablo must go.
Are you sure about it ? ?
God bless
-
so I did not know that a person che get in contact with my smartphone, my tablet and computer through finger snapping and shut off also my Wifi ... about this I dind´t read anything in the link that you have sent.
Just to clarify the technology approach - they're not suggesting a person can get into your smartphone or tablet with a finger snap.
The suggestion is a loud snap could signal another device to turn power on or off to the router or device providing wifi. This is basically how an item called the "Clapper" worked many years ago.
Remote control technologies could also be set up to turn power on and off, and the loud snap could just be a distraction like a professional magician might do while pressing a button with the other hand.
-
... Pablo told me that a exorcist had said that the St. Benedict cross is no longer blessed but is used by the devil and= "that is why we should destroy them! They have lost power against satan!"
Fr. Hewko said it was all right if an exorcist said so.
Pablo started also to say that no one of us should place the St. Benedict cross and medal around the neck, Fr. Hewko obeyed him.
Pablo said that this cross (the St. Benedict cross) is already old and as cross no longer a blessing and protection. He said it had no power to drive out the demons and should therefore no longer be used and not to be worn around the neck
.
He told us that no matter which St. Benediktus cross, also a blessed one by a true catholic priest, it rather attracts the devils instead of expelling them.
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/4a16b44bcbcc59f5f076ce7a72d87310/tenor.gif?itemid=6098038)
-
Pablo trying to get people to stop wearing St. Benedict's medals ... suggests that the St. Benedict's medals actually thwart whatever activity he was up to. We know that they are powerful weapons against demonic influence, especially when blessed by a priest.
If anything this demonstrates that the medal DOES have power against evil, as the Church has promoted ... so I'll take this as an inspiration to order some and have them blessed.
Thanks for the tip, Pablo. Satan will not appreciate you tipping his hand like that.
-
Pablo trying to get people to stop wearing St. Benedict's medals ... suggests that the St. Benedict's medals actually thwart whatever activity he was up to. We know that they are powerful weapons against demonic influence, especially when blessed by a priest.
If anything this demonstrates that the medal DOES have power against evil, as the Church has promoted ... so I'll take this as an inspiration to order some and have them blessed.
Thanks for the tip, Pablo. Satan will not appreciate you tipping his hand like that.
Exactly!
First of all, St. Benedict was a great saint, and his Order one of the greatest religious orders to ever have existed. And the St. Benedict medal is an OLD, venerable devotion. One of the more powerful weapons in a Catholic's arsenal against the powers of hell.
The bit about "it attracts devils rather than repelling them" -- that "mirror" exact opposite of truth -- that is EXACTLY how the devil and his followers operate! You see it again and again. Look at Planned Parenthood talk about "compassionate care for women", "they care about women" -- couldn't be farther from the truth! Just look at the satanists in the Deep State. They are actual traitors, colluding with Russia, cheating in every election, so how do they deal with their arch enemy Trump? Accuse him of colluding with Russia and rigging the 2016 election! Complete inversion of the truth, which is the very definition of satanic. Also, they lie as often as most people tell the truth, and tell the truth as often as most people lie. They are children of the "Father of Lies".
This basically proves we are correct about Pablo, and it also proves the efficacy of the St. Benedict Medal.
Many have said over the years: exorcist(s) would have their work cut out for them in Boston, KY.
-
Here's a great article about it (albeit from a Novus Ordo source) --
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/astagnaro/the-st.-benedict-medal-when-the-church-is-no-longer-messing-around (http://www.ncregister.com/blog/astagnaro/the-st.-benedict-medal-when-the-church-is-no-longer-messing-around)
some highlights --
Pope Benedict XIV solemnly approved and recommended the use of the medal to the faithful in 1742.
...
According to Dom Gueranger, the medal is considered effective in:
... destroying the effects of witchcraft and all other diabolical and haunting influences;
It has prayers from the Rite of Exorcism inscribed on it (in abbreviation).
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Benedict_Medal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Benedict_Medal)
The various initials are spelled out here. I love the prayer it stands for. And just think that prayer was composed 1500+ years ago!
-
It's incredible that we're almost used to the idea of demonic influence in Boston, KY, and that Pablo is a literal warlock.
We can't laugh too hard though, because actual souls are being harmed. Besides AT LEAST two priests falling under satanic control, and these powerhouses of God's grace becoming super limited and much less effective for fighting satan in the world today, many souls are being harmed thanks to satan's influence.
Think of all the souls that are home alone because of Pfeiffer propaganda. Think of all the vocations and young people who have been harmed by their time at the Pfeiffer "seminary". Think of the Trad family(ies) that have actually broken up thanks to Pablo's influence.
Think of all the people that mistakenly trust in Fr. Pfeiffer, who is himself under demonic influence. These souls now are poisoned against the Resistance. They believe Fr. Pfeiffer's cult is the only resistance. Even if they wake up to the reality and escape the cult, they are still damaged beyond repair: few ever return to the SSPX, the real Resistance, or any other Trad group! So the devil gets them either way.
Sad. Tragic and sad. You can see the devil's hand in all of this. Especially when you detect lies. That is the huge red flag! When a priest starts lying to you, GET OUT OF THERE. He's gone. Leave, don't look back, but pray for the priest in question.
-
The crazy thing is that he had around his neck one St. Benedict cross for a long period of time,
but no one else should have one around the neck.
His was a special one, he worked on that cross he said, but he did not want to have it anymore around his neck.
He wanted to tell us the news that an exorcist said, that the St. Benedict crosses and medals are no longer working, they do not protect anymore but attracts the devils so we all should rather refuse this cross.
The medal is one of the oldest and most honored medals used by Christians and we all all should place it around our neck.
More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Benedict_Medal
But now my question: where can I find more information why Fr. Hewko left KY and Fr. Pfeiffer ?
-
The crazy thing is that he had around his neck one St. Benedict cross for a long period of time,
but no one else should have one around the neck.
His was a special one, he worked on that cross he said, but he wanted to tell us the news that this St. Benedict cross and medal is no longer working, it attracts the devils so we all should rather refuse it.
Where can I find more information why Fr. Hewko left KY and Fr. Pfeiffer ?
Fr. Hewko's letter is here on CathInfo, in the Resistance subforum.
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/public-message-from-fr-hewko/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/public-message-from-fr-hewko/)
He is still brainwashed though. Just for starters, he totally passes over the devil and his influence there in Boston! He just complains about Pablo being the "chief in charge".
As for his future, he said he wants to take a couple years off before joining any group.
-
I think that the case for a demonic influence emanating from Pablo is very cut and dry. And some of the behavior and thinking from Fathers Pfeiffer and Hewko has been so bizarre that it must have come from some external influence.
Perhaps an exorcist should go into Boston.
This reinforces for us Catholics also the power of blessings from the Church ... Holy Water, blessed medals, blessed salt, etc. We know that, since the demons don't need to waste their time on 99% of the world, since they willingly have given themselves over to evil, they're undoubtedly concentrated in greater numbers than ever around the remaining faithful Catholics and Traditional Catholics.
-
Exactly!
The bit about "it attracts devils rather than repelling them" -- that "mirror" exact opposite of truth -- that is EXACTLY how the devil and his followers operate. Just look at the satanists in the Deep State! They are actual traitors, colluding with Russia, cheating in every election, so how do they deal with their arch enemy Trump? Accuse him of colluding with Russia and rigging the 2016 election! Complete inversion of the truth, which is the very definition of satanic.
This basically proves we are correct about Pablo, and it also proves the efficacy of the St. Benedict Medal.
Many have said over the years: exorcist(s) would have their work cut out for them in Boston, KY.
Exactly.
Inversion of the truth is also called projection, which is attributing the evil in oneself to others.
So, HRC, through Fusion One, paid for the generation of the fake Steele Dossier, which suggested that Trump was colluding with Russia, when it had been Clinton's Uranium One project which was the ultimate Russian collusion (treason).
Until I read this thread, I was not aware of the diabolic wickedness perpetrated by Pablo. These scenes with Pablo remind me of The Silver Chair written by C.S. Lewis in his book The Chronicles of Narnia, where Prince Caspian was under the spell of the Green Witch, just as Eve was under the spell of the Satanic Snake in the Garden of Eden. In this case, Pablo is the Green Witch or warlock.
Matthew, please consider pinning this thread so that it will not be overlooked.
-
1) Wasn’t there some story a couple years ago about how some resistance priest (Fr. Voigt?) suggested an exorcism be performed in Boston, which elicited a response from Fr. Hewko that it was not necessary because he was already performing regular exorcisms on the grounds?
2) To be efficacious, a St. Benedict medal can only be blessed by a Benedictine priest.
-
1) Wasn’t there some story a couple years ago about how some resistance priest (Fr. Voigt?) suggested an exorcism be performed in Boston, which elicited a response from Fr. Hewko that it was not necessary because he was already performing regular exorcisms on the grounds?
hahaha... blessing the water every morning during the Lavabo doesn't count, Fr. Hewko. You need to do more than that!
I don't think it has to be a Benedictine priest -- maybe it's BETTER to have a Benedictine bless it, but let's face it, the efficacy comes from the power and prayer of the Church, and the fact that the priest, as an alter Christus, has a certain power to bless objects and expel demons. His words of blessing are basically the words of Christ.
When looked at in this manner, the difference between an SSPX priest, a Dominican priest, and a Benedictine priest blessing the St. Benedict medal is small indeed.
-
1) Wasn’t there some story a couple years ago about how some resistance priest (Fr. Voigt?) suggested an exorcism be performed in Boston, which elicited a response from Fr. Hewko that it was not necessary because he was already performing regular exorcisms on the grounds?
2) To be efficacious, a St. Benedict medal can only be blessed by a Benedictine priest.
The point being: If Fr. Hewko found it necessary to perform regular exorcisms on the grounds, it would seem to corroborate some of Catholicus’s account.
-
The point being: If Fr. Hewko found it necessary to perform regular exorcisms on the grounds, it would seem to corroborate some of Catholicus’s account.
Incidentally, Fr. Hewko should know better -- he should be extra knowledgeable and alert for satanic influence, since he spent some time investigating a Benedictine vocation. Didn't he spend a couple years at the Silver City, NM Benedictine monastery?
-
hahaha... blessing the water every morning during the Lavabo doesn't count, Fr. Hewko. You need to do more than that!
I don't think it has to be a Benedictine priest -- maybe it's BETTER to have a Benedictine bless it, but let's face it, the efficacy comes from the power and prayer of the Church, and the fact that the priest, as an alter Christus, has a certain power to bless objects and expel demons. His words of blessing are basically the words of Christ.
When looked at in this manner, the difference between an SSPX priest, a Dominican priest, and a Benedictine priest blessing the St. Benedict medal is small indeed.
Thanks for the correction regarding the blessing of St. Benedict medals: I found a 1964 instruction which indeed says any priest can bless them. I do not know if the pre-conciliar practice was different or not?
-
Thanks for the correction regarding the blessing of St. Benedict medals: I found a 1964 instruction which indeed says any priest can bless them. I do not know if the pre-conciliar practice was different or not?
Apparently, the expansion in 1964 of who can bless and exorcise a Benedictine medal was indeed a conciliar novelty. Prior to that, only a Benedictine priest could do so:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fatherjerabek.com/2015/09/03/can-deacons-bless-a-st-benedict-medal/amp/ (https://www.google.com/amp/s/fatherjerabek.com/2015/09/03/can-deacons-bless-a-st-benedict-medal/amp/)
Based on that, I am going to reaffirm my contention that a Benedictine priest must perform the exorcism and blessing.
-
Pablo may not be a saint, or a good man, but he is not a devil. There have been many reports of diabolic activities, such as with the fire pit and other things, but these stories are not based on reality. They are poor attempts to denigrate those who live at Boston.
They not only distort the truth, they are completely unnecessary in highlighting the many real issues at the Boston compound.
It is better to stick with what can be docuмented and confirmed, than to go off on wild tangents that border on hysteria.
Oh MC, I forgot about you... being under the warlock's spell too :facepalm:
-
X,
Thanks for following up on this. I checked my Trad copy of the Roman Ritual and it puts the matter to rest: in the world of Tradition, the St. Benedict Medal must be blessed by a Benedictine priest.
I stand corrected.
Matthew
-
This is why people see Cathinfo as the Traditional Catholic National Enquirer. We have turned the true stories of Boston into the likes of “Mutant Batboy Terrorizes Neighborhood”.
There's one thing you're missing.
Yes, there are verified reports with accompanying evidence, and then there are anecdotes which you actually can't prove even if they were first-hand accounts!
But that doesn't mean all personal anecdotes are worthless.
What factor you are missing: the likelihood of something being true; How well does it fit the known evidence?
Normally, one shouldn't jump to believe that a given man is a warlock making use of witchcraft and spells. But that is because FOR MOST PEOPLE, throwing in witchcraft would be MOST incongruous with the rest of the known evidence and public knowledge about that person. Just for starters, being a Traditional Catholic in good standing!
But everything else surrounding Pablo tends to corroborate, rather than refute, the hypothesis that he is a warlock. In fact, it's about the ONLY explanation for Fr. Pfeiffer's inexplicable behavior, especially his decades-long "attachment" to said Pablo, and his decision to defend him at all costs, even when forced to choose between Pablo and Catholic morality or Pablo and Catholic truth!
I could break into a bullet point list right here of evidence that supports the "Pablo el Brujo" hypothesis. But this would be easy for anyone to do, and I don't have time right now.
So don't try to gaslight us (make us think we're crazy) or write off CathInfo as a bunch of evil and/or naive lunatics. The fact is, we're having this conversation and entertaining the possibility of witchcraft in Boston, KY for very good reasons, based on a mountain of evidence.
You and I both know that if any other person in the Trad world were the subject of such speculation, it would be dismissed and not even discussed. There would be no interest. Those on CathInfo would be the first to dismiss and ridicule it! So please don't kid yourself.
-
There are many reasons for Father Pfeiffer’s continued connections with Pablo, none of which have to do with being a wizard, a warlock, or other, similar storybook villains.
The answers are more down to earth, and are far less “mystical”. I’ve been there. I’ve lived it, which is why I don’t buy the stories of dungeons and dragons.
It is also why I think we should not be actively selling those stories, or allowing them to go without scrutiny.
The light of truth need not be bolstered by the tales from the crypt.
-
When we go off on these tangents, it reduces the credibility of those things which are verifiable and docuмented. It also turns many away from learning what is truly going on.
How about all the INNOCENTS who are *not* turned away from Boston, and instead have their lives ruined, because they thought Pablo was just a little rough around the edges?
How does such lack of information, such naivete, serve the good of souls? It doesn't.
-
There are many reasons for Father Pfeiffer’s continued connections with Pablo, none of which have to do with being a wizard, a warlock, or other, similar storybook villains.
The answers are more down to earth, and are far less “mystical”. I’ve been there. I’ve lived it, which is why I don’t buy the stories of dungeons and dragons.
It is also why I think we should not be actively selling those stories, or allowing them to go without scrutiny.
The light of truth need not be bolstered by the tales from the crypt.
All your literary prose and eloquent wordsmithing and editorializing doesn't change the facts: the devil exists, he has disciples in the present day, and both devil and disciples desire the destruction of souls and the Church upon earth.
Why is it thought a thing incredible, that the devil should wage war on Traditional Catholics? Isn't it common sense that he "has" most moderns in his clutches already? Who is even fighting him and trying to serve God?
You know, the idea of a man rising from the dead is normally CRAZY TALK as well. Resurrection normally doesn't happen. But in the case of Our Lord, it's what happened. God can raise the dead, and there was tons of evidence for Our Lord's resurrection.
If you had been living back then, I guess you'd be a clever wordsmith jew, mocking the resurrection and joking about "zombies" and Christiani - Zee? You'd call for us to all be good Jews, and there's no need for zombie rabbis and undead messiahs. You'd throw out all kinds of clever turns-of-phrase, like any orator or good author -- just as you did above.
Your mocking rebuttal sounds more like a rejection of *any* witchcraft (or "tales from the crypt") charges, rather than a rejection of such stories *in Pablo's case in particular*.
-
There are many reasons for Father Pfeiffer’s continued connections with Pablo, none of which have to do with being a wizard, a warlock, or other, similar storybook villains.
The answers are more down to earth, and are far less “mystical”. I’ve been there. I’ve lived it, which is why I don’t buy the stories of dungeons and dragons.
It is also why I think we should not be actively selling those stories, or allowing them to go without scrutiny.
So then what are the “down to earth” reasons Fr. P is still connected with Pablo?
Also, are you discrediting Catholicus’ experiences as a fraudulent account?
-
I reject the accusations which I know to be false, such as with the animal sacrifices and the fire pit, and more.
I acknowledge as true the accusations of financial chicanery, of the unreasonable demands on those who supported the seminary, of the issues with Bishop Ambrose, the issues with misrepresentation of the seminary and the non-profit status to the faithful and to the government, of the distortions of facts and events, the mistreatment of many who have visited or worked at the seminary, and more.
I do not accept, nor will I promote, those accusations which have absolutely nothing substantial within them.
I have seen Pablo’s “room” at the seminary. I had to clean the bloody place. It is nothing as it has been described here. It is a mess, as he doesn’t care much about organizing his room.
—
As a side, I have no problem with going to a Mass offered by Father Pfeiffer, as he is a valid priest. His problems exist outside the sacrifice of the Mass.
I would not recommend that anyone attend the seminary, as it now stands.
-
Nobody has said that Pablo IS the devil, but it's clear that he's dabbling in dark things.
He was trying to perform exorcisms without the proper authority, and that opens people up to being taken over by dark forces.
We've heard enough anecdotal testimony of his dealings to clearly back the allegation that he's into the dark arts. That is in fact a very common thing in Mexico, to mix Catholicism with the occult.
-
We've had a second person attest to the fact that Pablo collects pictures of people and their families.
We could easily verify by asking Father Hewko if Pablo in fact tried to get people to stop wearing St. Benedict's medals.
Catholicus' testimony sounds sincere.
In any case, you cannot prove the negative simply by stating that you yourself have seen no evidence of it.
There was likely a reason he was called "El Brujo" and "El Diablo". Where there's smoke, there's usually fire ... as in hellfire.
-
"ManuelChavez!" you have been busy with other things, you can not prove that these things you read here are not true. You can not prove that they're wrong, and Pablo did not do and say things he said to other people..., so you do not need to act as his great defender.
You were motivated to leave for other reasons, each one makes his own experience.
I would advise you to be quiet and to pray instead of judging others to be a liar or having invented things.
God bless
-
Dear "Ladislaus!"
First of all, do not expect that Fr. Hewko gives an answer or can remember, because under a witchcraft he may not remember “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
Secondly, it is certainly not wise to admit it when you was involved.
BUT it is good to remind him that Pablo said that an exorcist told him that the St. Benedict cross no longer protects against the devils and has lost its power.
I already know how he will answer: that he can not remember, and if he is bewitched he will say that it is not true and he knows nothing about it.
Let us pray for him, may God enlighten him and find peace.
May he be led by God and gain knowledge.
God bless
-
Manny Chav said: I would not recommend that anyone attend the seminary, as it now stands.
Including your brother?
https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8 (https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8)
-
"ManuelChavez!" you have been busy with other things, you can not prove that these things you read here are not true. You can not prove that they're wrong, and Pablo did not do and say things he said to other people..., so you do not need to act as his great defender.
You were motivated to leave for other reasons, each one makes his own experience.
I would advise you to be quiet and to pray instead of judging others to be a liar or having invented things.
God bless
This is true.
Manuel has been gone from Boston for years. And even during his Thirty Days in Boston, he wasn't exactly omnipresent or omniscient! Even if he stayed for a couple additional weeks here and there, that's nothing compared to the total time that abominable cult has been in existence (since 2012).
Fr. Pfeiffer's Boston, KY operation has been going for about 360 WEEKS now. How many weeks did you volunteer in Boston, Martin?
-
Including your brother?
https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8 (https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8)
One of those diners looks like he ATE Pablo.
-
That particular Blasak has a lot of medical problems, which have either been ignored or not well treated, for a number of unfortunate reasons. He is more or less a good kid, one who deserves better than to be unjustly mocked by a total stranger.
His lifespan has been significantly reduced by his condition, and he is living in a highly unstable environment. Do we have to drag him further down than he already is?
I was just teasing. I don't buy into the "be offended by everything" snowflake culture. I enjoy and am willing to participate in non-PC jokes in every way. Comedy has been totally destroyed by political correctness. I completely reject the liberal, politically correct dogma that any notice, joking, or comedy about specific races, body types, genders, etc. constitutes malice OR hatred.
I love caricatures that exaggerate the features of the various nationalities and races. I love ethnic jokes. Such jokes are "funny because they're true!"
I don't really believe he consumed Pablo the Mexican. :)
I remember an old John Candy movie, "armed and dangerous" (NOT a good movie for Catholics; I watched it as a kid; my folks unfortunately had a TV) and John Candy gets into an 18 wheeler truck at the end of the movie. The Texas cowboy-esque truck driver immediately dubs him "slim". (Google John Candy if you don't know what he looks like -- especially his overall shape) My dad got a kick out of that, and now that's my sense of humor as well. The cowboy truck driver was obviously ribbing him for his size, but he was completely good natured and did everything to help him -- including half-destroying his 18-wheeler to get John Candy where he needed to go.
Life is serious enough without losing one's sense of humor -- No one gets out of this world alive!
-
I reject the accusations which I know to be false, such as with the animal sacrifices and the fire pit, and more.
I acknowledge as true the accusations of financial chicanery, of the unreasonable demands on those who supported the seminary, of the issues with Bishop Ambrose, the issues with misrepresentation of the seminary and the non-profit status to the faithful and to the government, of the distortions of facts and events, the mistreatment of many who have visited or worked at the seminary, and more.
I do not accept, nor will I promote, those accusations which have absolutely nothing substantial within them.
I have seen Pablo’s “room” at the seminary. I had to clean the bloody place. It is nothing as it has been described here. It is a mess, as he doesn’t care much about organizing his room.
—
As a side, I have no problem with going to a Mass offered by Father Pfeiffer, as he is a valid priest. His problems exist outside the sacrifice of the Mass.
I would not recommend that anyone attend the seminary, as it now stands.
MC,
1. Is it possible things have changed since you were there?
2. Is it possible you wear rose colored glasses since your brother is there?
3. If you would have no problem attending a mass of fr. Pfeiffer, why didn't you attend when he was recently near your town saying mass?
4. You know good and well that pablo has a binder with photos in it. Photos of olmc and ex-olmc people. Perhaps the photos are now on his wall.
-
Including your brother?
https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8 (https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8)
Mrs. Blaszak, her 7 children, fr. Cordaro (his diocese calls him "mr), and MC's brother in the dining room of "the blaszak house".
-
Things do change, and I am aware that things change. However, the text mentions the Dallas mission, which has been inactive since February 2017. This means that this story would have taken place before that time, when the DFW mission was active.
I have been in Boston on numerous occasions between July 2013 and December 2016, during which time these events would have occurred. None of my visits were short, as they often were for weeks at a time, at least every six months or so.
I lost the rose colored glasses a long time ago, nor do I want my brother to remain here.
I did not attend the Mass recently, which was the first Mass in Dallas since February 2017, though I was halfway there when my Honda experienced some issues with the front driver control arm. I went home instead.
That blasted control arm is going to cost dearly. I wanted to go, especially to speak with Father on a few unresolved matters.
During my many stays in Boston, in which no areas were out of limits, I did not see anything remotely like what was described. There were no photos of families on the walls in any of the rooms.
-
During my many stays in Boston, in which no areas were out of limits, I did not see anything remotely like what was described. There were no photos of families on the walls in any of the rooms.
Since you were the official "reporter" or public face of what goes on in the Seminary (certainly one of its ONLY apologists with any kind of platform), don't you think Pablo put away various paraphernalia for the duration of your short visits?
There might be others who spent time there, and others who were technically online. But since all of them didn't post on CathInfo (either because they were banned, or for other reasons) they could only have reached a few dozen people at best. You posted your "Thirty Days in Boston" and other CathInfo posts for the Trad world at large. I'm sure Pablo knew that.
No one is accusing Pablo of being stupid. Perhaps demonically clever, but not stupid.
-
That particular Blasak has a lot of medical problems, which have either been ignored or not well treated, for a number of unfortunate reasons. He is more or less a good kid, one who deserves better than to be unjustly mocked by a total stranger.
His lifespan has been significantly reduced by his condition, and he is living in a highly unstable environment. Do we have to drag him further down than he already is?
The addresses of the businesses of this "good kid" is the seminary address. This is a complete violation of federal 501c3 laws.
And what is the use of this house for the blaszak family, personally? This house, which is directly across the street from the seminary, was purchased for the seminarians, not for a divorcee and her children.
This house is listed by the county as owned by the seminary. Show me any other seminary in the country which allows a single woman and her children to live on seminary property.
And what of her children who are seminarians and postulant? Is it normal for them to be in such close contact with parents when they are supposed to be living on cloistered, sacred grounds?
I wonder who is taking this video. I suspect hernandez. And look where he is sitting: sharing the head of the table with mrs. Blaszak.
-
And what of her children who are seminarians and postulant? Is it normal for them to be in such close contact with parents when they are supposed to be living on cloistered, sacred grounds?
All good questions.
The answer is that Fr. Pfeiffer's "seminary" and his "convent" with one postulant are both a sick joke.
Male and female religious, especially very young novices/seminarians inexperienced in virtue, should not be in that close of contact. Human nature.
The household in the video is mostly one family. But that young lady ("postulant") is not related to most of the "seminarians". It is not prudent to have them only a stone's throw from each other, day and night.
I'm sure the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church and (1917) Code of Canon Law would have something to say about that!
-
All good questions.
The answer is that Fr. Pfeiffer's "seminary" and his "convent" with one postulant are both a sick joke.
Male and female religious, especially very young novices/seminarians inexperienced in virtue, should not be in that close of contact. Human nature.
The household in the video is mostly one family. But that young lady ("postulant") is not related to most of the "seminarians". It is not prudent to have them only a stone's throw from each other, day and night.
I'm sure the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church and (1917) Code of Canon Law would have something to say about that!
There are two postulants in their "convent". A blaszak and another young lady from CO.
The postulants live in a small building which was built behind the priest's house. They live ON THE SAME, EXACT grounds as the seminarians, not even across the street, directly behind hernandez... (scary thought considering constance's experience with hernandez).
Two of the three seminarians in the video are the postulants brothers.
The blaszak house, in this video, is exactly across from the seminary, but the house is owned by the seminary and is registered with the county as being church property. However, it is not being used to house church people, but this single family, hence the name: "the Blaszak house".
-
And a poor Daddy spends his easter alone ? ? Or is he in the Video?
What kind of Catholics are they? It is very bad. Our Lord Jesus Christ would die again to save this marriage and nothing happens here? It is accepted that a mother takes away from her husband his 7 children? Does Fr. Pfeiffer have nothing to say about it? Is this called: being a Traditional Catholic?? NO! It´s so sad.
"MANUEL CHAVEZ"one question, do you think this is a good example to give to others? And your brother is in the video and celebrates with a sad broken family in which the father is not invited?
And during all the time, the two "resistance priests" accepted that this family collapsed? Did they work on it to save this marriage?
What´s about the dogma? The sacrament of marriage? Has it not a deep and serious meaning for these people?
But above all, does the law allow that a daddy can´t see his children?
But if for example the daddy is dangerous and could be putting his children in danger, then of course that's a different story.
Oremus.
We can only pray and hope that everything will turn out well.
God bless these children and their parents
-
There are two postulants in their "convent". A blaszak and another young lady from CO.
The postulants live in a small building which was built behind the priest's house. They live ON THE SAME, EXACT grounds as the seminarians, not even across the street, directly behind hernandez... (scary thought considering constance's experience with hernandez).
Two of the three seminarians in the video are the postulants brothers.
Ok, two "postulants". Where are the professed sisters, Rule of Life, or Mother Superior? Then we'll talk! hahaha
How many seminarians total? And even those two are only related to ONE of the "postulants". In other words, each "postulant" is related to ONE seminarian. That leaves a lot of non-family, non-relative, young, single males and females living imprudently close to one another.
-
And a poor Daddy spends his easter alone ? ? Or is he in the Video?
What kind of Catholics are they? It is very bad. Our Lord Jesus Christ would die again to save this marriage and nothing happens here? It is accepted that a mother takes away from her husband his 7 children? Does Fr. Pfeiffer have nothing to say about it? Is this called: being a Traditional Catholic??
"MANUEL CHAVEZ"one question, how do you like it and do you think this is a good example to give to others?
And Fr. Hewko was quiet and accepted that this family collapsed? What did they do to save this marriage?
What´s about the dogma? The sacrament of marriage? Has it not a deep and serious meaning for these people?
But above all, does the law allow that a daddy can´t see his children?
Or maybe the daddy is dangerous and he could be putting his children in danger, then of course that's different.
He has since passed away.
But that doesn't change the fact that Pablo, Fr. Pfeiffer, and Fr. Hewko were complicit in this Trad family's breakup and divorce.
-
And a poor Daddy spends his easter alone ? ? Or is he in the Video?
What kind of Catholics are they? It is very bad. Our Lord Jesus Christ would die again to save this marriage and nothing happens here? It is accepted that a mother takes away from her husband his 7 children? Does Fr. Pfeiffer have nothing to say about it? Is this called: being a Traditional Catholic??
"MANUEL CHAVEZ"one question, how do you like it and do you think this is a good example to give to others?
And Fr. Hewko was quiet and accepted that this family collapsed? What did they do to save this marriage?
What´s about the dogma? The sacrament of marriage? Has it not a deep and serious meaning for these people?
But above all, does the law allow that a daddy can´t see his children?
Or maybe the daddy is dangerous and he could be putting his children in danger, then of course that's different.
Fr. Pfeiffer and hernandez helped with the divorce.
Not sure of fr. Hewko's involvement.
Their father died shortly after being divorced.
-
The daddy has since passed away? When?
Sorry but this people really seem to be cursed !!
The daddy was at least emotional murdered.
And the priests had no authority to bring the woman back to her husband or to take care or to save this marriage?
Do not tell me now he accidentally died of heart failure or a car accident or drowned in a lake.
Does someone know why and how he died?
This thing is a horror, worse than horror, and we see were evil is and pain, where demons are at work they use also bodies and they are even able to lead people to call themselves catholic traditionalists... It is so bad and sad and bad for all those looking for a good Catholic community and church...
There is nothing else to do, we can only cry, pray, fast and do penance.
-
Just try to get in touch with fr. Ripperger...
We have been trying for months, to no avail.
If anyone can help, please PM.
We have need to dispel OLMC evil from someone in our family.
When was Fr Ripperger ordained as a Priest? Was he ordained in the Old Rite or in the Novus Ordo Rite? Are his exorcisms valid?
-
The daddy has since passed away? When?
Sorry but this people really seem to be cursed !!
The daddy was at least emotional murdered.
And the priests had no authority to bring the woman back to her husband or to take care or to save this marriage?
Do not tell me now he accidentally died of heart failure or a car accident or drowned in a lake.
Does someone know why and how he died?
This thing is a horror, worse than horror, and we see were evil is and pain, where demons are at work they use also bodies and they are even able to lead people to call themselves catholic traditionalists... It is so bad and sad and bad for all those looking for a good Catholic community and church...
There is nothing else to do, we can only cry, pray, fast and do penance.
Mr. Blaszak, God rest his soul, died of liver failure.
Fr. Pfeiffer told me the reason for the separation. I am no canon lawyer or theology expert, but i did look up the "rules" regarding marital separation and the excuse fr. Pfeiffer gave me was not a legitimate reason for marital separation, much less legal separation (i.e. divorce).
Now, if the husband approved of the separation, any reason suffices. However, the husband made it clear he wanted his family back. Therefore, the separation was not mutual.
Hernandez helped Mrs. Blaszak with the attorney and legal paperwork. Fr. Pfeiffer was keenly aware. I don't know if fr. Hewko was.
I never heard Fr. Hewko say one word against this separation. To the contrary, he defended hernandez at every opportunity, even when Hernandez' married son lived with the blaszak's without his wife present. Fr. Hewko saw no problem with such an arrangement.
Horror worse than horror is correct. It is diabolical.
We can pray, we can expose, we can warn.
-
When was Fr Ripperger ordained as a Priest? Was he ordained in the Old Rite or in the Novus Ordo Rite? Are his exorcisms valid?
Ordination was according to the old rite in 1997 by Bishop Slattery:
https://www.tulsaworld.com/archive/priest-ordained-in-traditional-mass/article_022a9043-5594-5860-8cd8-0bc817741781.html (https://www.tulsaworld.com/archive/priest-ordained-in-traditional-mass/article_022a9043-5594-5860-8cd8-0bc817741781.html)
However, Slattery was "consecrated" in the questionable new rite of episcopal consecration in 1994 by JPII:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_James_Slattery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_James_Slattery)
Consequently, the validity of the ordination is open to question.
-
Including your brother?
https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8 (https://youtu.be/eznqpDFSyv8)
That IS Hernandez filming.
Do you see where he is seated? At the head of the table with the mother of this, primarily, family. And he is seated very CLOSELY to her, at that.
While she was recently divorced and more recently widowed, he is divorced but still married in the eyes of God. He told me he considers himself still married. But here he is, again, assuming the position of head of this family.
As a side note, what is fr. Cordaro doing in a white cassock and red tie? He was a diocesan franciscan oblate.
-
As a side note, what is fr. Cordaro doing in a white cassock and red tie? He was a diocesan franciscan oblate.
Has he been conditionally ordained?
-
Has he been conditionally ordained?
Interesting thought.
Maybe by Moran?
I doubt it, but at this point i wouldn't put anything past fr. Pfeiffer.
It is more likely fr. Cordaro has an extensive wardrobe. I have seen photos of him in black clerical suits, black cassock, and brown cassock.
-
Ordination was according to the old rite in 1997 by Bishop Slattery:
https://www.tulsaworld.com/archive/priest-ordained-in-traditional-mass/article_022a9043-5594-5860-8cd8-0bc817741781.html (https://www.tulsaworld.com/archive/priest-ordained-in-traditional-mass/article_022a9043-5594-5860-8cd8-0bc817741781.html)
However, Slattery was "consecrated" in the questionable new rite of episcopal consecration in 1994 by JPII:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_James_Slattery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_James_Slattery)
Consequently, the validity of the ordination is open to question.
Thanks.
Does that mean Fr Ripperger's exorcisms are questionable?
-
After having read the story more, and to relatives, I am convinced that it is absolutely false.
Mentioning Dallas was a mistake.
I knew every person who ever attended the Mass in North Texas. No one from this mission ever placed such a call, as this writer claims of having received in this area.
There is no possibility of any such call having come from the North Texas mission.
There are other details which do not ring as true, but this is one in which I wanted to highlight.
I disagree.
1. Is your brothers phone a dallas number? Perhaps his was used.
2. Fr. Pfeiffer was in the Dallas area in early April. He could have used a phone of anyone in the congregation at that mass. You weren't there.
-
I was halfway there when my Honda experienced some issues with the front driver control arm. I went home instead.
Your guardian angel...
-
.
Father Pfeiffer has not been out here since February of 2017.
.
The April Mass in Denton [dallas area]
Which is it?
-
-@ "Manuel Chavey"
- 1. I'm not a liar dear Martin or whatever you name is, I have forgotten your name. I got calls from the different cities where the priest went so also from places where he went on mass circuits. This was the only reason I answer the phone because I thought it was a trustworthy person calling.
- 2. The calls in which I was cursed in Spanish came at the beginning always from the south, but when I did not answer that calls anymore, the calls came from the different cities where Fr. Pfeiffer was. All this happened a few years ago, during that time I knew that Fr. Pfeiffer was in these cities, I also sometime accompanied him to the airport where he took the flight to get there.
- 3. the cities from where the phone calls came are not important. You missed the point!! It doesn´t matter. I am sure it was certainly not a person from these cities to make the phone call.
Someone has faked to call me from places where Fr. Pfeiffer was, to make sure that I answer the call.
Someone who knew where Fr. Pfeiffer was. Maybe there is a program or App that helps you to change your own voice during a phone call and this was used?
I know that there there is the possibility to fake the city from which the phone call comes.
I think the calls that I received were from a scammer, with or without fake caller ID information.
Or people who were paid for it or only OBEDIENCE did the phone call.
But a person can also use a voice-changing app. I just read it online.
There are voice filters as well.
No matter what, it was never claimed that one of the faithful did it, but that on the phone appeared these different kind of cities where Fr. Pfeiffer was, so that I may pick up the phone.
God bless
Chris does not have a Dallas number, and neither do I.
This story does not seem to have taken place in the current month. Given the details, it seems to be placed earlier in the decade, perhaps 2015 or 2016; with it being no later than early 2017.
Father Pfeiffer has not been out here since February of 2017.
When the Mass was offered in Dallas from 2013 to 2017, there was only one fluent Spanish speaker who attended the Mass; my mother.
The April Mass in Denton was not well attended. I also know who had the Mass at their house, and a few of the circuмstances therein.
This story is a mess from the first line.
-
I was just thinking -- what is going to become of this Blaszak family? Aren't some of the children adults already? Being involved in this cult is going to completely ruin their lives.
1. Every Trad online knows their last name. Would you want your son or daughter courting one of them, or would you discourage it? Talk about damaged goods.
2. These children won't be able to find a spouse, except for maybe online. Even then, see #1.
3. And for those children with an objective vocation from God, they are even more "done for". There is no REAL convent or monastery in the Pfeiffer cult ecosystem. And the seminary is a joke; the "seminarians" either won't be ordained ever, or they'll receive a FAKE ordination from Ambrose Moran. At best, they'll be ordained like Fr. Francis (the black seminarian) by a Thuc-line bishop. That's the most they can hope for: a doubtful, Thuc-line ordination from a bishop (or "bishop"?) who lives in a mansion, lives a luxurious lifestyle, and whose normal attire is bermuda shorts.
I could see multiple children leaving the Faith altogether over something like this.
Think about it for longer than a few minutes! You're talking about am entire large family, growing old into old maids/bachelors together. Some of them are going to say "this is for the birds" but then where will they go? Probably leave the Faith altogether, since Fr. Pfeiffer burned all other bridges for them long ago (SSPX, mainstream Resistance, sedevacantism, etc.)
And people wonder why Pfeifferville is heavily criticized on places like CathInfo. Souls are being harmed, and WILL be harmed in the future. In fact, most of the harm is yet to come!
-
You are right about the blaszak children.
Regarding fr. Francis...
"That's the most they can hope for: a doubtful, Thuc-line ordination from a bishop (or "bishop"?) in a mansion wearing bermuda shorts."
Did you see this?
or are you causing calumny?
-
You are right about the blaszak children.
Regarding fr. Francis...
"That's the most they can hope for: a doubtful, Thuc-line ordination from a bishop (or "bishop"?) in a mansion wearing bermuda shorts."
Did you see this?
or are you causing calumny?
Ah, it's you...the guy who hates Bp. Zendejas, even though you're also completely against the Pfeiffer cult. But you like Bp. Williamson, even though he personally chose and ordained Bp. Zendejas. You're a strange duck, you know that?
But more than that, you're also on probation as it were. I wouldn't push your luck by accusing the forum owner of calumny.
Not that I care what you think, but for the readers out there:
I was just passing on what a young man told me, who actually visited said bishop in person, the same bishop who ordained Fr. Francis. I'd call that credible.
Since I believe it's true, it can't be calumny (which involves falsehoods).
NEXT...
-
"St Paul",
1. I was talking about the bishop's normal attire and where he lives, not where the ordination took place. I clarified this in my post.
2. "You read that I ban people based on emotions" -- First of all, you should stop reading those dead, washed up tiny forums that are full of bitter ex-CathInfo members, Pfeifferites and other blind guides. Looking at your posting history, you mostly criticize Pfeifferism, which is good. I just don't understand what you have against Bp. Zendejas.
3. My knowledge of your opinion of Bp. Z comes from your voting history. Yes, I can and DO look this up when I see anomalous behavior (someone downthumbing every post in a thread, for example -- this mostly depends on the thread topic in question), just like I moderate and check the identity of many posts in the Anonymous subforum. The whole CathInfo forum is subject to moderation, though I do respect members privacy when they talk about personal sins or other private matters in the Anonymous subforum. (After all, that's what it was created for.) I don't want to know who is guilty of having a girlfriend abort their baby, for example.
but most important of all, I have to repeat ONCE AGAIN:
If you can find me one, JUST ONE forum *anywhere on the Internet, on any topic* with more than 150 members that allows members to insult the moderator(s), the forum itself, the entire forum membership, and/or the owner*, then I will button my lip and give you carte blanche to say anything and everything about me on CathInfo for the next 50 years. Deal?
I first gave this ultimatum probably 7 years ago -- I'm still waiting! So good luck finding a forum that won't ban you if you insult the forum authority(ies) or moderator(s).
You like those small Pfeifferite forums? How about you sign up for a new account on one of them, and have your first new topic be, "You're all a bunch of Pfeifferite Cult stooges" or "Want to see Fake Resistance? Look at those who reject the 4 Resistance Bishops" and see how long your account lasts.
I think you'll find that CathInfo's moderator has a long fuse compared to most other fora. You can't accuse me of excessive emotion, tyranny, mood swings, etc. when literally 100% of all forum owners behave the same way.
Come on, enemies! I've banned many people while giving them this offer. Why doesn't JUST ONE of them want to prove me wrong? Am I right after all? I guess I'm right after all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* for example, calling them nαzιs, Hitler, tyrant, mortal sinner, demonic, heretic, fag, liar -- or whatever insults hold weight for the interest group in question.
-
Ok, "St paul", you got your fervent wish. You've been banned for the reason of a stream of insults against the forum owner.
No forum would allow members to throw serious insults at the owner or management. You find me JUST ONE, and I'll publicly apologize to you and unban you. You can e-mail me the URL(s) of the forum(s) you find here:
matthew (at) cathinfo dot com.
You should give me a link to the insulting topic you started as well. You'll forgive me for waiting 3 days before declaring the forum "let the post stand". Sometimes the forum owner has a life and doesn't notice things within a couple hours. You have to give the owner/mod a couple days to notice it.
-
I didn’t miss any point. I am concerned that your story does not add up, and that certain elements do not ring as true.
You were just a tolerated guest that financially helped with his family for the existence of this jungle called "seminary".
So they certainly did not show and revealed you everything...
You did not live there permanently and you did not know what was going on there.
So do not talk about things you do not know. You can not judge other people's experiences. No matter who says something against this particular person that wants to be called "Pablo" & you go crazy. But sometimes you talk bad about Pablo, you do it only because you want to look like you do not like this person to be believable when you discredit others who have had bad experience.
Your comments are naive, you are determined by others
-
You were just a tolerated guest that financially helped with his family for the existence of this jungle called "seminary". So
you certainly have not been shown everything...
You did not live there permanently and you did not know what was going on there.
So do not talk about things you do not know. You can not judge other people's experiences. No matter who says something against this particular person you go crazy. You want to look like you do not like this person to be believable when you discredit others who have had bad experience.
Your comments are naive, you are determined by others
I am not there 24 hours a day.
My brother, on the other hand, is there every day. During that time, he has neither lied about nor misrepresented the situations in Boston.
Your story took place during or between my many visits to Boston. I know, either directly or through my brother, the conditions of the seminary during that time. Things didn’t change much between visits.
I did not judge, but I do doubt many of the events listed therein, as either exaggerations/misrepresentations of true events or as fabrications.
Having been to Boston, it does raise many questions (some of which would seem irrelevant to those who are not familiar with the area around Boston, or my experiences there):
What restaurant did you go to? What city?
What “Dallas” numbers called you? When?
Where in the carpet were the burns? Which building? Which floor?
When did this take place? How long a time period are we talking about?
I’ll give you the benefit of some doubt, if you can answer these questions.
-
I am not there 24 hours a day.
My brother, on the other hand, is there every day. During that time, he has neither lied about nor misrepresented the situations in Boston.
Your story took place during or between my many visits to Boston. I know, either directly or through my brother, the conditions of the seminary during that time. Things didn’t change much between visits.
I did not judge, but I do doubt many of the events listed therein, as either exaggerations/misrepresentations of true events or as fabrications.
Having been to Boston, it does raise many questions (some of which would seem irrelevant to those who are not familiar with the area around Boston, or my experiences there):
What restaurant did you go to? What city?
What “Dallas” numbers called you? When?
Where in the carpet were the burns? Which building? Which floor?
When did this take place? How long a time period are we talking about?
I’ll give you the benefit of some doubt, if you can answer these questions.
It does not make sense to talk to you because you are not neutral!
The money of your family make it possible that this "seminary" exists.
You should maybe go back to this "seminary" and become a priest there, because as you say, it is so wonderful there, they are catholic, there is nothing diabolic.... You are so blind, more blind than many others of this sect.
I´am sure you will find your place and "mission" there and if it´s not to become a priest you can become a reporter ;-)) Hei, you can turn your hobby into a job there :applause:
But do not forget that one day you have to take your accountability to God.
Do you know that the donors are responsible for keeping seminarians in the illusion to become a catholic priest and to fight the good fight?
And can you accept that with your donation (the help of your family) your brother loses his youth and possibly his vocation (if he has one) or even his soul?
Do you know that donors are responsible for the many families who lose faith or are kept away from the sacraments because they were scared off??
Matthew 18:6
Causing to Stumble
“If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."
You and your family make it possible by donating money and giving other kind of support, that this babylon and this inhumane system that you call "seminary" exists...
I know you do it with good intentions to do something good, but you have to wake up and choose to help the resistance bishops and their seminary for example.
I'm done with you, it's not worth talking to you.
We will pray for you and your brother.
God bless you!!
Take care
-
We need to be sensitive to the vulnerability of others and not scare the people by shocking them.
Our Lord Jesus Christ cares deeply about the lost and died to redeem us. He surely doesn't want us contributing to others' losing faith and hope.
-
As an impartial observer, here are my thoughts:
I am not there 24 hours a day.
My brother, on the other hand, is there every day. During that time, he has neither lied about nor misrepresented the situations in Boston.
Your story took place during or between my many visits to Boston. I know, either directly or through my brother, the conditions of the seminary during that time. Things didn’t change much between visits.
I'm sorry, Manuel, but you're not an all-seeing oracle (and neither is your brother). You can't know everything that is going on in all the different buildings, at all times. And neither can your brother. Not even parents know what their children are doing 24/7, in the same house! You're not an expert on all things Pfeifferville. For you to suggest as much, hurts your credibility.
Having been to Boston, it does raise many questions (some of which would seem irrelevant to those who are not familiar with the area around Boston, or my experiences there):
What restaurant did you go to? What city?
What “Dallas” numbers called you? When?
Where in the carpet were the burns? Which building? Which floor?
When did this take place? How long a time period are we talking about?
I’ll give you the benefit of some doubt, if you can answer these questions.
If we were to spend the time to research the accusations, or if such accusations were brought before the court of law, the above questions are legitimate questions. Catholicus, I'm not saying that you need to answer these questions, but before I could take your story seriously, you'd have to provide more details concerning the above. My opinion doesn't matter; I'm just pointing out that your story needs more proof, since your accusations are quite serious.
-
I just want to interject --
(I said this earlier, but it bears repeating)
If accusations of witchcraft were brought against your average Traditional Catholic in good standing, they would rightfully evoke much skepticism. But Pablo already has a reputation, such that most Traditional Catholics who have encountered him have decided it's best to "steer clear".
Whether we're steering clear because he's a nut, a control freak, rumored to be a warlock, or an actual warlock, it really doesn't make much difference. We're staying away regardless!
In other words, we don't need allegations of witchcraft to put Pablo firmly on the "to be avoided" list. That ship has long since sailed!
If he did turn out to be involved in witchcraft, it would only be "the icing on the cake", sad to say!
I know these are some serious and unusual allegations. But Pablo is an unusual man! He was banned from the SSPX Phoenix chapel years ago, during which time he acquired the nicknames "Pablo the Warlock" and "Pablo the Devil". He was known for shouting and screaming at Traditional Catholics in the parking lot. He has a curious relationship with Fr. Pfeiffer. Always wearing black, frequently wearing dark sunglasses (to hide his eyes, the "windows of the soul"), doesn't attend Mass even though he's the administrator of Fr. Pfeiffer's whole operation, obsessed with the devil, has a hatred for Trads, has slandered several individuals, including the good priest Fr. Voigt. Furthermore, Pablo is extremely proud, he publicly embraced that Phoenix newspaper article "The Devil and Mr. Hernandez" just 6 years ago, he has complete control over Fr. Pfeiffer and his whole operation, there are countless anecdotes that are various levels of disturbing, etc.
And then there's the inexplicable behavior of Fr. Pfeiffer and Fr. Hewko. How could they be THAT blind as to the evils going on there? What would explain such control? If Pablo were merely controlling these priests via blackmail, then based on what he's getting these priests to do, he must have "dirt" on them comparable to what the Bushes and Clintons are guilty of -- and let me tell you, that would be pretty bad! Like 33rd degree Freemason, Illuminati, child sacrifice, pedophilia bad.
I think it's easier to imagine that these priests are more innocent victims of witchcraft, and that the superstitious Pablo (who frequently talked/talks about the devil and was getting WAY TOO CLOSE even many years ago when The Devil and Mr. Hernandez article was written) might be involved in some dark arts.
-
As an impartial observer, here are my thoughts:
I'm sorry, Manuel, but you're not an all-seeing oracle (and neither is your brother). You can't know everything that is going on in all the different buildings, at all times. And neither can your brother. Not even parents know what their children are doing 24/7, in the same house! You're not an expert on all things Pfeifferville. For you to suggest as much, hurts your credibility.
If we were to spend the time to research the accusations, or if such accusations were brought before the court of law, the above questions are legitimate questions. Catholicus, I'm not saying that you need to answer these questions, but before I could take your story seriously, you'd have to provide more details concerning the above. My opinion doesn't matter; I'm just pointing out that your story needs more proof, since your accusations are quite serious.
I said to much on this topic.
I will keep silent about it from now on. God's blessings to all of you. I´am finished.
Good Bye
For more infos:
- https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/nightmare-in-boston-lies-swindling-etc-by-pablo/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/nightmare-in-boston-lies-swindling-etc-by-pablo/)
- https://secure.kentucky.gov/formservices/AttorneyGeneral/ConsumerComplaintForm (https://secure.kentucky.gov/formservices/AttorneyGeneral/ConsumerComplaintForm)
- https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pablo-hitting-the-gas-full-throttle-in-slander-against-priests-and-bishops/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pablo-hitting-the-gas-full-throttle-in-slander-against-priests-and-bishops/)
- https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pablo-paul-hernandez-the-crisis-in-kentucky/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pablo-paul-hernandez-the-crisis-in-kentucky/)
-
I said to much on this topic.
I will keep silent about it from now on. God's blessings to all of you. I´am finished.
Good Bye
I don't understand this reaction at all.
-
Well then!
That's interesting to say the least.
"Catholicus" is following the exact same M.O. that Constance did several years ago: giving a damning report about Boston, KY, but as soon as criticism is applied (as in Historical Criticism, or trying to verify the elements of the story) he gets nervous and dramatically declares that he is leaving the site forever.
And then he even links to Constance's story!
Color me suspicious.
Personally, I don't think it looks very good for his testimony being true. In fact, I'd have to say he must have made up the whole thing.
HOWEVER --
Please read my post (a few posts above) regarding how it DOESN'T MATTER if Catholicus' testimony is true or completely made up. There are already a mountain of good reasons to avoid Boston, KY, Fr. Pfeiffer, and Pablo like the plague. Why would we even need yet another reason?
And in my post (above) you will read that even the case for Pablo being a warlock is hardly destroyed if it turned out that Catholicus' testimony was false. There are still plenty of data points to raise legitimate suspicions on this heading.
-
And some of you might remember a certain young man named Michael (who is probably "of age" now) who made up a story about Pablo a couple years ago. That story was scrubbed because I was advised by friends to remove it for legal reasons, since the kid was only 16 or so. He totally took us for a ride.
He was from up north (in the Midwest) and had his own chapel or at least a ton of chapel equipment.
You gotta be careful, even when a story is plausible.
The problem is when you have a character like Pope Francis, for whom NOTHING would shock me. It opens the door to accepting false reports as true, because when a Pope actually says things like, "There is no Catholic God" what could you really dismiss as too crazy?
-
Well then!
That's interesting to say the least.
"Catholicus" is following the exact same M.O. that Constance did several years ago: giving a damning report about Boston, KY, but as soon as criticism is applied (as in Historical Criticism, or trying to verify the elements of the story) he gets nervous and dramatically declares that he is leaving the site forever.
And then he even links to Constance's story!
Color me suspicious.
Personally, I don't think it looks very good for his testimony being true. In fact, I'd have to say he must have made up the whole thing.
HOWEVER --
Please read my post (a few posts above) regarding how it DOESN'T MATTER if Catholicus' testimony is true or completely made up. There are already a mountain of good reasons to avoid Boston, KY, Fr. Pfeiffer, and Pablo like the plague. Why would we even need yet another reason?
And in my post (above) you will read that even the case for Pablo being a warlock is hardly destroyed if it turned out that Catholicus' testimony was false. There are still plenty of data points to raise legitimate suspicions on this heading.
It is not right to judge others who bring out a warning because they see that there are still souls being destroyed there.
What I meant is that I'm done, that I´am finished to justify and repeat things.
I do not know who Constanze is but I discovered her testimony today and I believe her, I´am sure that she told us 100% truth.
That's why I had put the link. Do you have something special against this person? I know nothing about it. I´m sorry.
Her task was only give us a warning, to draw attention to the abuses that prevail there and to help people with it.
So we should not offend people by calling them liars because that's unfair.
The following text was actually the text i wrote but i deleted it because i think it does not change anything. It is just a repetition of what I have already said but here it is. I said all the necessary has to be said, and my intention was to warn and to give the advise to get in touch with an exorcist, because there are things that we cannot solve on our own when we have been in contact with evil people...
Look out for a good exorcist.
God's blessings to all of you all and the Cathinfo owner.
My deleted (or better modified) message was:
I can understand that there are things that do not need to be said because they do not help but can also harm people, so in this case if a person So when a person says, I stop, I´am done, we have to accept it without immediately addressing and offending the person. That´s insane.
I said to much on this topic. I did not write down the numbers of the phone calls at that time, I'm sorry. Do not forget that all this happens many many years ago. I saw the name of the city on my phone and the number was unknown to me. One must not forget that many years have passed by now, and I can not remember the name of the restaurant. It was at a place not far away from the so called "seminary", there were also other shops near by (we were not in Louisville). Look after small burn holes on the carpet at the seminary entrance. I repeat, it happened many years ago. I have already said everything and I do not want to reveal more details in order to protect others, who also saw these things and do not want me to mention them. We are not dealing with children playing here.
I will keep silent about it from now on. God's blessings to
-
Her task was was only to draw attention to the abuses that prevail there and to help people with it.
So we should not offend people by calling them liars because that's hurtful and unfair.
We shouldn't believe you anymore than we believe Pablo. Your story is a classic "he said, she said", except your story hurts the reputation of a known person. No one is calling you a liar because we don't even know who you are - you are completely anonymous.
-
Please read my post (a few posts above) regarding how it DOESN'T MATTER if Catholicus' testimony is true or completely made up.
I agree with you, Matthew, up to a point. It does matter to know which stories are true or false, in the sense that if you accept a bunch of falsehoods about a person, this diminishes the actual true stories which should cause scandal.
-
The fact that Pablo doesn't attend Mass is another huge red light. Does he have some aversion to it? He has made comments where he placed Traditional Catholics below Satan. Now, what is his business being so intimately involved with a Tradtional Catholic group if he has such contempt for them? Nothing adds up here ... but the witchcraft explanation would go a long way to making sense of everything.
-
The fact that Pablo doesn't attend Mass is another huge red light. Does he have some aversion to it? He has made comments where he placed Traditional Catholics below Satan. Now, what is his business being so intimately involved with a Traditional Catholic group if he has such contempt for them? Nothing adds up here ... but the witchcraft explanation would go a long way to making sense of everything.
^^^ This.
Does Pablo have an aversion to Holy Water?
Does he have an aversion to the Holy Cross?
Does he avoid making the Sign of the Cross?
Those would be huge red flags.
-
Let's hope and pray that Pablo has never influenced Fr. Pfeiffer to the extent that he has disclosed things to him that he has heard under the Seal of Confession. That said, I'd nevertheless actually be surprised if Pablo has not tried on more than one occasion to get Fr. Pfeiffer to break the Seal.
-
Let's hope and pray that Pablo has never influenced Fr. Pfeiffer to the extent that he has disclosed things to him that he has heard under the Seal of Confession. That said, I'd nevertheless actually be surprised if Pablo has not tried on more than one occasion to get Fr. Pfeiffer to break the Seal.
^^^ This is exactly the ploy of communists and freemasons.
They want to destroy priests.
-
doesn't attend Mass
Is this true? He never goes to Mass, ever? Or he doesn't go to Mass on weekdays?
-
How does a person get the ability to turn the lights on and off (if he does not use any technical tricks)?
He snapped his fingers and the light went off, he snapped again and the light went on.
Another time he snapped his fingers and the WIFI connection turned off, he snapped again and it turned on. The WIFI router is in the priests house but it works also outside the house and we were standing outside in front of the door and he said I should connect my smartphone to the internet using WIFI as I did before, and then he told me to see what he is able to do. So he snapped his fingers and it stopped to work. The WIFI connection turned off. He did it 4 times, and as he snapped it turned on or off. His words about it: "WITCHCRAFT!" and he smiled.
Was it a joke? I thought it was just power games and nothing else....
But I also asked myself how can a human have such a power by snapping his fingers?
We need to pray for the priests, and seminarians, for all who seek the true Catholic faith and for our resistance bishops.
This no magic power, demonic or otherwise! Heard of Alexa? Way back in the 80s and 90s, there was a device advertised on late-night infomercials called The Clapper. It turned things on and off in response to clapping, snapping fingers, voice commands. Does this Pablo character wear a smart watch, carry a cell phone? If so, he's taking advantage of you. Remember, the magicians of Pharaoh were able to replicate the rod and snake "trick."
-
Manuel,
Since you know a lot about Pfeifferville, from what Hernandez and your brother tell you,
please play this link and tell me about this dog?
Hound dog in OLMC chapel (https://r3---sn-vgqsrn7d.c.drive.google.com/videoplayback?id=1189a9254fbc74fe&itag=59&source=webdrive&requiressl=yes&mm=30&mn=sn-vgqsrn7d&ms=nxu&mv=u&pl=17&sc=yes&ttl=transient&ei=EFTBXIbaDIeSugKJx6KoAg&susc=dr&driveid=0B29EvG7THU9_cDFyRjAxeS12TzA&app=texmex&mime=video/mp4&dur=14.024&lmt=1498083986208816&mt=1556173224&ip=174.231.131.154&ipbits=0&expire=1556188240&cp=QVNKWEJfV1JSQVhOOkZmb19YWEVCX1Qy&sparams=ip,ipbits,expire,id,itag,source,requiressl,mm,mn,ms,mv,pl,sc,ttl,ei,susc,driveid,app,mime,dur,lmt,cp&signature=BA01FF635F8FE9B8E18C4C967917DDBD0F46D2F6D8FE75B1EE5BFC5A15AFABE7.90D58744A8BB176C7179983BEC5D37C51D5D96ACABBB51EC7DC9F9D004E68792&key=us0&cpn=PVQ6RTK_40a9nuK8&c=WEB_EMBEDDED_PLAYER&cver=20190423)
Link (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B29EvG7THU9_cDFyRjAxeS12TzA/view?usp=drive_web)
Who owned this dog?
Who paid for this dog?
Why was it allowed to come into OLMC chapel with the Blessed Sacrament present and scratch his ass on the rugs?
How did this dog die?
Why did this expensive, obviously healthy dog die?
How was this dog's body disposed of?
Why were the seminarians asked to go to nightly bonfires in back of the seminary house?
Who asked the seminarians to go to the bonfires?
Of course, if you can't provide the answers... I know eye witnesses, who can.
-
I remember that dog. It died.
Pablo liked that dog. He did not kill it, nor was it sacrificed to the gods.
I remember the deaths of a few animals, including one dog that was shot by a neighbor, and one that was hit by a car. Another one was killed by an animal trap set up by a seminarian. None of these deaths can be attributed to the demonic.
The bonfires were to allow the seminarians to relax after the day, and before lights out. It was not some ritualistic devil worship. It was a fire pit, and nothing more.
Some people just want to think the absolute worst of others, and so they turn the smallest things into the greatest evils known to man, as long as it fits their own agendas.
There are other, more easily docuмented and verifiable issues with Boston. One needn’t meddle with heresay and second-hand rumors from those with an axe to grind.
-
There are other, more easily docuмented and verifiable issues with Boston. One needn’t meddle with heresay and second-hand rumors from those with an axe to grind.
But you are the exact inverse of the classic "axe to grind". You are always looking for a chance to defend, for any opening that you can exploit to make OLMC look as good as possible.
It doesn't matter if only 5% or 10% of critics "cross the line" or slip up. Whenever they do, you're always there with a "See? OLMC isn't that bad. They really are a good group." You waste no opportunities to improve the public image of OLMC. Some would call you a shill.
We should dismiss those with an axe to grind, but we should also dismiss you as well. Both are extremely biased.
-
You can take the man out of Pfeifferville but you can't take the Pfeifferville out of the man. Simple questions, answers one, goes on a pointless meditation about "agendas" for the rest of his post. I could set a watch to your absurdity Manuel. After all this time, you can scarcely contribute anything on here unless it's yet another defense of the indefensible.
I am apt to believe Catholicus but if we're really expected to get serious about this account, we will need a real name. I can sympathize not wanting to give that information out, but I think that's the only way Manuel's objections could be solidly rebuffed as he is setting himself up as quite the expert in all things Pfeiffer. You must regret that now, huh Manuel?
It's a good idea not to get too carried away with any one account though. What we know already is bad enough.
-
There are other, more easily docuмented and verifiable issues with Boston. One needn’t meddle with heresay and second-hand rumors from those with an axe to grind.
Manuel,
You are dodging Incredulous' very specific questions. And he said that he had eye-witness accounts, so they aren't rumors or heresay. If you can't answer Incredulous' questions because you don't know or weren't there, just say so. There's no reason to dodge, unless you're hiding from the Truth.
You are always looking for a chance to defend, for any opening that you can exploit to make OLMC look as good as possible.
Matthew makes a great point. You asked Catholicus some very clear and fair questions, which she dodged. Incredulous has asked you similar questions. Why can't you attempt to answer? If you truly want the Truth, you will follow the facts where they lead.
-
This no magic power, demonic or otherwise! Heard of Alexa? Way back in the 80s and 90s, there was a device advertised on late-night infomercials called The Clapper. It turned things on and off in response to clapping, snapping fingers, voice commands. Does this Pablo character wear a smart watch, carry a cell phone? If so, he's taking advantage of you. Remember, the magicians of Pharaoh were able to replicate the rod and snake "trick."
Indeed, but as has been pointed out, the more disturbing part was that Pablo attributed this trick to "witchcraft" ... and taken in conjunction with his nickname of "El Brujo" and all the other things we've heard about him, there's a disturbing picture emerging.
-
I remember that dog. It died.
Pablo liked that dog. He did not kill it, nor was it sacrificed to the gods.
I remember the deaths of a few animals, including one dog that was shot by a neighbor, and one that was hit by a car. Another one was killed by an animal trap set up by a seminarian. None of these deaths can be attributed to the demonic.
The bonfires were to allow the seminarians to relax after the day, and before lights out. It was not some ritualistic devil worship. It was a fire pit, and nothing more.
Some people just want to think the absolute worst of others, and so they turn the smallest things into the greatest evils known to man, as long as it fits their own agendas.
There are other, more easily docuмented and verifiable issues with Boston. One needn’t meddle with heresay and second-hand rumors from those with an axe to grind.
Manuel... you're a pathetic liar.
You and your bother are spiritual slaves and dupes of Hernandez the warlock.
And you both don't even know it :facepalm:
-
I don’t have to support lies and exaggerations of he truth.
I support the truth, and the fullness of the truth. Only in the truth, will we be set free from the errors and the evils done in Boston Kentucky.
I have found other eyewitness accounts to be exaggerated, even of the events in which I was physically present and witnessed. This includes the situation of Father Voigt locking the priest’s house, as well as the subsequent break-in.
I was there for some of the fire pit usage. I never witnessed any evil doings there. I also trust my brother’s eye witness accounts of the fire pit as well. My brother has not lied about or exaggerated the events he has witnessed.
As for the hound, I do not remember the exact cause of death. I remember other dogs and their causes of death, none of which were diabolical in nature.
The idea of raising animals was introduced by the parents of a seminarian. These same parents wanted more livestock at the seminary, which was never fully realized.
As for Catholicus’ “story”, it reads like someone who has read the other tales on Cathinfo, and crafted a new one based on the other stories, both real and exaggerated.
Carpet burns are easy to find, and I can produce photos of the carpet area should Catholicus remember where they occurred.
Pablo never had photos hanging up in either of the rooms he used in the priest’s house. He hardly cleaned up, and he left junk all over the place, even in the rooms. He could not simply “hide” the witchcraft stuff under the bed or in the closets (there are no closet doors in the rooms).
Incredulous’ questions are a mixture of specific and general. The questions of the hound are specific, the fire pit is general, and cover a decent amount of time. The fire pit was there for at least a year, during the rebuilding of one of the houses by a lay worker there. He used the fire pit more than anyone else, as he lived in the house right next to it.
Who paid for the dog? Someone. Where did it come from? Somewhere.
It could have been paid for using seminary funds. I do not know. I never asked Pablo who paid for the dog. I never felt the need to micromanage all his expenditures.
“Obviously healthy” is an assumption, not by any means a certainty.
As for the accusation of me defending Boston, or still being a part of Boston, or anything on that line, those accusations are unjust and incorrect. We terminated the mission here in February of 2017, after a series of heated discussions with Father Pfeiffer and Pablo. We have not invited him back. The many reasons for this are a family matter, and I will respect the privacy of my sisters and their respective families and experiences.
We don’t need rumors. We don’t need second hand and heresay. While the clowns and jokers argue about the truthful tidbits, which are swathed in the quasi-real and the entirely fabricated, there is a wealth of real, tangible, docuмented and actionable evidence.
Much like going after Capone for not paying his taxes, these real and docuмented issues can do much for the cause, yet they are being hampered by these tales of mythical misery and woe, which are time and again being uncovered as either stretches of the truth or complete fabrications, such as the one Matthew mentioned in this thread (I was also against that one, and was insulted in the process for that one as well; how little do things change...).
-
Well, Manuel, it's typically rumors that ultimately lead to flushing out the truth. And this forum is serving a purpose there.
It's docuмented fact that Pablo dabbled with dark forces in attempting to perform exorcisms without the requisite authority.
We've had another independent poster verify that Pablo requests pictures of people and their families. What he does with them is unknown.
His unusual behavior, strange habits, and curious relationship with the Blaszak family are all well attested to.
Is it true or false that Pablo does not attend Mass?
Is it true or false that Pablo had the nickname "El Brujo" and "El Diablo"?
Is it true or false that Pablo instructed people (including priests) to stop wearing St. Benedict's medals?
I myself quashed the suggestion that 469 fitter had impure intent, having discovered in research that Pablo belonged to Pipefitter Union 469 in his Phoenix days.
But I think that it's good for rumors to be aired ... either to be confirmed or quashed/refuted.
We've had similar discussions regarding priests suspected of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity. One could either dismiss such rumors out of a false "charity" or follow up on them and investigate, and the latter is required these days in order to protect people from predators. ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ predators thrive by infiltrating the priesthood not only for access to children, but also because their outward manifestations of "piety" tend to inspire people to defend them against any suspicions and to reject them out of devotion to the priesthood and in a spirit of "charity".
While it's good to hear your point of view, you have sometimes overreached by categorically asserting things to be false simply because you had no knowledge of them. Having no knowledge of A does not prove not A; only positive knowledge of not A does. There are some things to which you can personally attest: that during the time you were cleaning his room, Pablo had no pictures on the walls (of that room). But this does not prove that Pablo was not using these pictures for nefarious purposes in some other context ... or at another time.
It's precisely because of your overreach that people accuse you of being biased and being a shill for OLMC.
-
Manuel, everyone knows you spent a lot of time at the old Pfeiffer Pit. The problem is that you've lost a lot of credibility along the way and I don't see why anyone ought to trust your ability to provide proof of anything. That's the price you pay. You were there far too long with far too little reason to account for it.
-
It's docuмented fact that Pablo dabbled with dark forces in attempting to perform exorcisms without the requisite authority.
We've had another independent poster verify that Pablo requests pictures of people and their families. What he does with them is unknown.
His unusual behavior, strange habits, and curious relationship with the Blaszak family are all well attested to.
And let's not forget Pablo's own words and behavior here on CathInfo back in 2012-2013, before "The Devil and Mr. Hernandez" article became known and Pablo was banned.
He was proud, spoke often about the devil, sowed confusion among the faithful Catholics in the Resistance, and already had a clear disdain for large swaths of Traditional Catholics.
Can we not believe evidence from the horse's mouth?
He spoke of doing "hand to hand combat" with the devil, and also completely embraced the article (The Devil and Mr. Hernandez) which told me everything I needed to know. Just go read that article. That was eighteen years ago! Where did that lead him? Let's just say "I don't want to know." I'll give you a hint: the Catholic Church doesn't forbid dabbling in the demonic for GOOD, CONCRETE reasons -- like avoiding demonic obsession or even possession.
https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/content/printView/6418725 (https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/content/printView/6418725)
And since his banning in 2013, we've seen plenty of other DOcuмENTED proofs of Pablo's spiritual state, and mindset/orientation. His words have come to us from his own videos on Youtube, his own words published on official media organs of OLMC, etc. For example, his demonic lies about Fr. Voigt. So we can see that he never turned away from the dark path we know (with proof) that he was travelling in 2001. From all the evidence, he is travelling down the same dark path. How far down that path did he, and will he, go? Only God knows.
But we do know this with the certainty of Faith: In a battle of wits with the devil, none of us can come out on top. The Church knows this. One must only do battle with the devil A) under obedience, B) with the power and authority of the Church behind you as an ordained priest of God and C) with humility. Pablo was boastfully bragging about fighting the devil on his own as a layman. Complete opposite of points A, B and C.
Scripture warns us about this explicitly. I leave you with Acts of the Apostles, chapter 19:
[11] (http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=11-#x) And God wrought by the hand of Paul more than common miracles. [12] (http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=12-#x)So that even there were brought from his body to the sick, handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the wicked spirits went out of them. [13] (http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=13-#x) Now some also of the Jєωιѕн exorcists who went about, attempted to invoke over them that had evil spirits, the name of the Lord Jesus, saying: I conjure you by Jesus, whom Paul preacheth. [14] (http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=14-#x) And there were certain men, seven sons of Sceva, a Jew, a chief priest, that did this. [15] (http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=15-#x)But the wicked spirit, answering, said to them: Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?
[16] (http://drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=16-#x) And the man in whom the wicked spirit was, leaping upon them, and mastering them both, prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. (http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=16-16&q=1#x) [17] (http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=51&ch=19&l=17-#x) And this became known to all the Jews and the Gentiles that dwelt at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.
The possessed man *sodomized* that would-be amateur/independent exorcist, leaving him with a bleeding rectum. You don't play "Ghostbusters" with the devil.
-
My mother gave so much, not only to the seminary, but to each of my brothers and sisters, to others as well.
I wanted to carry that on in my own actions and choices. I thought I was pleasing my mom and my brother, and doing some good for others in the process.
I no longer support Boston, and haven’t for a while. I don’t feel the need at this time to explain all the reasons why, though there may come a time to explain everything, in all its docuмented and verifiable (and down to earth) detail.
The scars from my mother’s death have not healed, and the events of Boston have in many ways prevented these wounds from healing.
Their time will come...
I think you need to deal with this, you need to face all of this head-on, as part of your healing.
You need to admit it was a mistake -- those days and dollars spent in Boston were all wasted, and it would have been better if you had not spent them.
You need to admit that you -- and your mother and brother -- have been "had" -- that you've all been taken for a ride.
That's the only way to truly heal from a cult experience. You need to come face-to-face with the truth, be a bit angry about the injustice, do what you can today to help others get out of the cult by going public, and then move on with rebuilding your life.
If you save EVEN JUST ONE individual from having his life ruined, his vocation ruined, his marriage and/or finances ruined, by avoiding the mess that is Boston, KY, THEN PERHAPS all the time you spent in Boston will have been for something -- even if it cost you dearly. Then all your sacrifices, past and present, will mean something.
Seriously, man, what are you waiting for?
-
You miserable SOB. You had to question my personal reasons for going to Boston.
I went there to help my brother, and to act as a substitute for my mother, who was slowly dying of cancer, and wanted very much to support her youngest son’s vocation.
For these reasons, I made my many trips to Boston. These trips cost me, and I am still paying these bills even now. I have to fight the urge to act out in anger at what has been done, and what continues to this day, because of Boston.
My mother gave so much, not only to the seminary, but to each of my brothers and sisters, to others as well.
I wanted to carry that on in my own actions and choices. I thought I was pleasing my mom and my brother, and doing some good for others in the process.
I no longer support Boston, and haven’t for a while. I don’t feel the need at this time to explain all the reasons why, though there may come a time to explain everything, in all its docuмented and verifiable (and down to earth) detail.
The scars from my mother’s death have not healed, and the events of Boston have in many ways prevented these wounds from healing.
Their time will come...
Why wouldn't I? You spent most of your time here slavishly defending the situation. You put yourself out there, you set yourself up as the inside guy, and you time and time again deflected valid criticism against the Pfeiffer crew. But now that I see you have so completely internalized your experience there as being your dying mother's wish for you and taking into consideration all of your remaining financial debts, I absolutely stand by what I said to you about your unreliability on this topic. You're not the only one with family divisions and tragedies and you're not the only one to have invested heavily in something only to come up empty-handed. Your anger is completely misplaced as is your lingering loyalty to Boston.
Oh, and watch your language.
-
I was there for some of the fire pit usage.
Ok, so you weren't there all the time. So you're not an expert and are making generalizations.
I never witnessed any evil doings there.
When you were there, which wasn't every time. More generalizations.
I also trust my brother’s eye witness accounts of the fire pit as well. My brother has not lied about or exaggerated the events he has witnessed.
Was your brother there, every time the fire pit was used? Or, at least, was he present EVERY time you weren't there? If not, then he's not an expert either.
As for the hound, I do not remember the exact cause of death.
Ok, so you can't say that it wasn't possibly sacrificed, can you?
I remember other dogs and their causes of death, none of which were diabolical in nature.
Did you witness every death of every dog (excluding the above hound)? Or is this just another generalization?
The point is not to chastise you, Manuel, but to point out your lack of status as an "expert" witness. You are an eye witness to *some* things but not a witness in MANY other things. Pablo had many opportunities, outside of your and your brother's watch, to do weird things. This doesn't prove he did any of them, but it disproves your testimony that Pablo *couldn't* have done them.
You are basically arguing that you and your brother are Pablo's "alibi", which isn't the case.
-
And no offense to Martin, but let's be real here.
His brother can't have a very strong will. That means easily influenced/controlled/brainwashed/mentally influenced -- and maybe bewitched? He's been at Boston for how many years now, seen how much nonsense, and yet he still persists in staying there. In terms of priestly knowledge OR priestly Orders, he's still no closer to the priesthood than I am. He hasn't spoken up against any of the evils that he must have seen first-hand. He is weak of mind/will and cowardly at best, under the influence of actual witchcraft, or a malicious conspirator at worst. To be charitable, I'm going to assume "A".
No, I'd say that we can't trust his brother's testimony at all. He's either dim-witted, bewitched, malicious, or some combination of these! At any rate, what we CAN be certain of is that his testimony is quite useless. It wouldn't even take demonic power to control his mind. A mentalist like Darren Brown (who is sodomite and maybe gets some of his power from the devil, who knows) would be able to manipulate a young man like this very easily. Especially when you're in that "top 10% most-susceptible to the power of suggestion" like his brother probably is.
Anyone who hasn't left or spoken up yet after so many years is completely compromised, whether due to witchcraft, mental dullness, or maliciously jumping on board -- the precise causes are open for debate.
-
So... Pablo only committed animal sacrifices while my brother and I were not there, and while these other, nameless, faceless “eye witnesses” were there?
Not what I'm saying. The facts so far do not prove that Pablo committed any particular act, but they do discount your alibi testimony. This means that Pablo still had the "opportunity" to act. Whether he did or not, must still be proven. There have been many accusations and we must not let a multitude of lies equate to 1 fact (for Christ was accussed by many liars). There's a lot of circuмstantial evidence against Pablo but that doesn't mean he's guilty. Posters like Catholicus need to come back and provide more details.
.
I'm still confused why you are defending the indefensible. History shows that many people are master manipulators and some are genius planners. You weren't around Pablo 100% of the time. It's possible that Pablo tricked you; no harm in admitting this. Smarter men than anyone on this site have been duped by evil geniuses. St John Marie Vianney was duped by the devil and he was one of the holiest priests who ever lived. If you can't admit it's possible that Pablo did x, y, or z...simply due to the fact that you weren't around him 24/7, then you're unable to view the situation impartially.
-
I am not defending Pablo from what is true, docuмented and verifiable. He has abused people, misused funds, misrepresented the truth and is more or less a jerk, even to those who have done much to help both the seminary and himself.
Ok, so you admit that Pablo is an abuser/manipulator, a thief, a liar, and a jerk. And he acts this way to both friends and enemies of OLMC.
I am questioning what is contrary to what I have seen, and what is contrary to what I have experienced and that which does not fit with what I know and what my brother has explained from his own experiences, and what was told to me by the person who used the fire pit regularly.
Ok, so you've admitted that your experiences and your brother's are limited, since you've not lived there 100% of the time and your brother was often busy with many tasks. Will you also admit that the stories you've heard from your "fire pit friend" are second-hand accounts, since you weren't there?
Animal sacrifices do not fit the picture. They seem to be misrepresentations of the events, which appear dubious due to the biases of those who present these second hand accounts.
What picture do they not fit? Is it not possible for Pablo (who you admitted is an abuser, liar, thief and a jerk) to commit some quasi-ritualistic act? How can you trust ANYTHING Pablo has said to you, or represented to you non-verbally, if you admit he's a liar and a thief?
I don’t care if you believe either my brother or myself. I am not here to defend the seminary or convince anyone that the seminary is good or that Pablo is a nice guy.
We believe what you and your brother PERCEIVE to be the truth. However, you're not omni-present on the property and Pablo is a manipulator. Do you not see it's possible he manipulated both of you too?
I want the truth to be allowed to thrive and to speak clearly, through the shady accusations of events which lack credibility, or even names and faces who are willing or able to back them up.
Don’t support Boston. Don’t trust Pablo.
Don’t believe everything you read, either positive or negative. Question events. Ask for proof. Listen to the answers given and try to be reasonable.
How can you simultaneously say to not trust Pablo, yet those who accuse Pablo of evil, (one of which is yourself), you say lack credibility? This makes absolutely no sense.
-
I am insulted constantly, and told I am under a spell ...
Are you? :confused:
-
Pablo is a jerk. That doesn’t make all the accusations credible.
They are absolutely "credible" ... given Pablo's docuмented history and known personality. Now, whether or not any given accusation happens to be true, or a misreading of something, or a downright lie ... the jury is out. Catholicus' testimony sounded sincere. Now, whether or not he misinterpreted something he saw, that's certainly possible.
-
The jury isn’t out. Practically everyone here accepted it initially, without question, and when I raised doubts about it, my own sanity was questioned.
“... under Pablo’s spell...”
Most of us accepted it as credible. I still do.
You did more than just "raise doubts". You overreached by categorically declaring it all to be false.
-
Catholicus admitted that he was reading into the soup incident a possible interpretation.
Another person independently verified that Pablo asks everyone for pictures of themselves and their family (obviously this COULD be innocuous, and he COULD be meaning to pray for them). But it's also possible that something nefarious is afoot, something which you cannot prove to be false simply by stating that you haven't witnessed it.
As for Pablo discouraging the use of St. Benedict's medals, that if true is a big red light. This could presumably be easily verified by, say, Father Hewko. Just because Manuel never witnessed Pablo saying something about it, that doesn't prove that he didn't.
Could you confirm or deny that Pablo does not attend Mass? In this case, having seen him at Mass would suffice ... even if it doesn't prove that he regularly attended Mass.
-
Of all the allegations in Catholicus' initial post, the only one that Manuel is in a position to deny is about the contents of his room. Catholicus stated that he had some nefarious book and some "voodoo" items on his desk. Manuel denies that the book was on his desk ... but books move. As for "voodoo" objects, they could simply be personal artifacts, and the purpose for having them and the use he was making of them might not be evident just from seeing them.
It was afterwards that Incredulus and RevolveBooks both posted that Pablo asks people for pictures of themselves and their families and puts them on the wall purportedly to pray for them. So two people other than Catholicus testified to that.
As for everything else in Catholicus' posts, you were in no position to deny them, Manuel.
You categorically denied it all, but you were not present when these things allegedly took place. So you actually are not in a position to deny them, and thus your overreach.
Now could the soup incident have been misconstrued and the origin/nature of the phone calls misunderstood? Certainly. Could Pablo actually be using the pictures to help him pray for the individuals in them? Of course. My mother does the same thing with the pictures of her children and grandchildren.
But you cannot prove that these things did not happen, only that at the time you cleaned Pablo's room you did not find anything overtly related to witchcraft in there. That's it. Based on that, however, you proceed to deny everything.
So right now we have Cathoicus' word -- and Incredulus' and RevolveBooks' word about the photos -- vs. your word. Your unfounded denials have no probative value. At best you can only say that, well, you found no materials/objects overtly related to witchcraft in his room at the time you cleaned it. That's it.
Now, here to me is the best indication that Catholicus was at least sincere in reporting what he thought he had witnessed and/or experienced. If he were entirely fabricating the stories, he could make up far bigger doozies than a few incidents that are open to interpretation. He could have said that he found an upside down crucifix on a Rosary Pablo was carrying around, along with a pentagram in his desk drawer. He could have made up all kinds of things. So, because he didn't come up with more, this suggests that it's sincere.
-
To me, the biggest thing that needs to be checked out and can presumably be verified if true is Pablo's insistence that people not wear/use St. Benedict's medals. And whether or not Pablo attends Mass. Manuel, have you ever seen him attending Mass? If so, did he appear devout and prayerful?
-
Manuel, let's go after the easy pickings first. Answer the questions about mass and the medals, please.
-
Manuel, let's go after the easy pickings first. Answer the questions about mass and the medals, please.
Pablo very rarely attended Mass, and was not an active participant. He did attend on occasion, but not as often as he should.
I am not aware of him having any issues with the Saint Benedict medal. To the contrary, I have seen him use and give out the medal on a few occasions, though I do not know if he wears one now.
-
How about the mystery phone calls from Dallas and other places? The Spanish speakers cursing and whatnot? The burn marks in the seminary carpet?
Those are some of the things mentioned that could be open to interpretation. Could someone have dialed a wrong number? Lots of things could cause burns in the seminary carpet.
As Pax said, get back to the two core questions I asked.
-
Those are some of the things mentioned that could be open to interpretation. Could someone have dialed a wrong number? Lots of things could cause burns in the seminary carpet.
As Pax said, get back to the two core questions I asked.
I have seen him at Mass in Boston, which is a rare event indeed. He has given medals out to others, along with the business card for the Seminary, with the numbers on it.
-
So why does Fr P associate with Pablo, an openly non-practicing catholic, and worse, why does he let Pablo be involved with seminarians? A man who avoids mass is obviously in a bad spiritual state; don’t people think the lack of grace affects a man’s decisions and actions? Isn’t a man in the state of sin controlled by the devil, in some sense? Isn’t such a man cut off from holy inspirations and Divine help? OF COURSE THEY ARE. And Fr P wants this type of man working closely with a church and with future priests? It’s insanity!!
-
So why does Fr P associate with Pablo, an openly non-practicing catholic, and worse, why does he let Pablo be involved with seminarians? A man who avoids mass is obviously in a bad spiritual state; don’t people think the lack of grace affects a man’s decisions and actions? Isn’t a man in the state of sin controlled by the devil, in some sense? Isn’t such a man cut off from holy inspirations and Divine help? OF COURSE THEY ARE. And Fr P wants this type of man working closely with a church and with future priests? It’s insanity!!
Insanity is right! I met this man (Diablo) nearly 20 yrs ago. Much of what you have expressed here seemed obvious to me way back. I warned Fr Pfeiffer about the dangers of his close association with such a man, and he just shrugged it off... no great surprise to me to see how things have turned out the way they are today.
I can't understand how nearly 20 years later, now that things have gotten infinitely worse, that someone can spend a fair amount of time around this scoundrel and NOT see something very sinister about this man, when all I needed was 30 minutes 2 decades ago!
-
Request to shift gears on this topic, to get away from the banter.
For those with Catholic eyes, who can discern, it has already been proven that Paul Hernandez is a warlock.
No layman runs around Phoenix doing exorcisms without being overwhelmed by demons himself.
Hernandez is obviously part of a coven and he has a mission to disrupt what's left of the traditional Catholic movement.
He has demonstrated competence at recruiting priestly slaves and other dupes.
Catholicus reiterated two important points: Fr. Pfieffer is bewitched and anyone who goes to Pfiefferville is affected by the warlock's curses. We've been getting these same "SOS" messages from Pfiefferville since 2012.
To break the Pfeifferville warlock captivity, it will require help from all sectors of the Resistance militant.
This includes Cathinfo members, Broadstairs, Bp. Zendejas, Fr, Chazal, the Dominicans, Independent trad chapels and others.
Until now, we've complacently stood by as Hernandez occupied one of our Catholic strongholds and wreaked havoc on us.
This paralysis has to change and there are proven ways to do it.
To be continued...
-
This paralysis has to change and there are proven ways to do it.
To be continued...
The first thing is to cut the carp about Pablo being a warlock in a coven. Drop the Hogwarts and horcruxes, witches and wizards, and whatever mystical mumbo jumbo you’ve attributed to him.
No court of law or legal system is going to care for accusations of witchcraft. They won’t waste their time with “blood soup,” “animal sacrifices” and “walls of photos designed to hex enemies”. You might as well tell the judge or the police that Pablo is a lizard alien, bent on world domination.
Focus on the money trail, the non-profit and the required docuмents and board needed for said purposes. Take a look at the books, and what others have given to the seminary.
That is the best bet, not these second or third hand tales of dark arts.
-
To me, the biggest thing that needs to be checked out and can presumably be verified if true is Pablo's insistence that people not wear/use St. Benedict's medals.
I don’t know if this is related but a couple of years ago I was present for a conversation where Fr Pfeiffer was telling a group of people not to use the St Benedict Medal Crucifix. He said that the medal placed on those crosses was above the Body of Jesus and implied St. Benedict had more importance over Christ. I’ve always wondered about this and where Fr P got the idea from. I’ve never heard any other priest say this.
-
The first thing is to cut the carp about Pablo being a warlock in a coven. Drop the Hogwarts and horcruxes, witches and wizards, and whatever mystical mumbo jumbo you’ve attributed to him.
No court of law or legal system is going to care for accusations of witchcraft. They won’t waste their time with “blood soup,” “animal sacrifices” and “walls of photos designed to hex enemies”. You might as well tell the judge or the police that Pablo is a lizard alien, bent on world domination.
Focus on the money trail, the non-profit and the required docuмents and board needed for said purposes. Take a look at the books, and what others have given to the seminary.
That is the best bet, not these second or third hand tales of dark arts.
If there is evidence for it, if there are people willing to speak about it with first hand accounts, you better believe it's an open question. Advice from an emotional basket case with all the maturity of a wounded teenager has little value. My advice to you is find another topic.
-
Focus on the money trail, the non-profit and the required docuмents and board needed for said purposes. Take a look at the books, and what others have given to the seminary.
That is the best bet, not these second or third hand tales of dark arts.
This is a good point, however the only person with access to any of this stuff, or the ability to bring about a lawsuit is either you or your brother (or someone connected to Boston).
.
The spiritual side of fighting this evil can be accomplished by all of us here, since we can pray and other things without being in Boston.
-
The first thing is to cut the carp about Pablo being a warlock in a coven. Drop the Hogwarts and horcruxes, witches and wizards, and whatever mystical mumbo jumbo you’ve attributed to him.
No problem! No more talk about Hogwarts, horcruxes, or mystical mumbo jumbo. Done!
I'll happily destroy that STRAW MAN as well. But it's just that -- a straw man you've set up.
Incred is talking about spiritual warfare, which is a great idea. To be most effective though, people need to almost assume that something is amiss in the "dark arts" department. We need to go ahead and assume the MOST LIKELY REALITY based on the available evidence.
With or without a verified photograph of Pablo mid-spell.
There is already enough evidence for many (most?) of us.
What's wrong with saying prayers like, "May God protect the priests and Faithful in Boston KY from all artifices of the devil. St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle..."
We should all start on such a campaign right away -- even absent smoking-gun evidence of witchcraft. There is already a mountain of evidence to arouse suspicion. If exorcists WERE lay-businesses like Ghostbusters in the phonebook, many Catholics would have *rightfully* called them many times by now, many years ago.
-
Manuel,
I don't want to hear the brainwashing from Pablo bouncing around in your brother's brain here on CathInfo. He has never even been here, so his opinion is SO MUCH LESS than worthless.
Your brother wouldn't know CathInfo if it got up and slapped him across the face. If anything, such a ridiculous opinion that is SO wrong must have come from some serious brainwashing. Fr. Pfeiffer is pretty convincing, and Pablo seems to have some powers of persuasion as well (from whence this powers come is matter for debate).
Yeah, we can't have Traditional Catholics getting together to talk together and share information without the censorship and control of Fr. Pfeiffer and/or Pablo. That would be disastrous for them -- it would wake people up to the truth. Don't you see how self-serving their attacks on CathInfo are?
Wake up, man! Do you hear anyone else accused of witchcraft on CathInfo? Or anything else serious for that matter? I certainly don't. It's not like it's a free-for-all here. Despite some LIES that frankly originate in Hell, CathInfo operates on Catholic principles of morality.
The FACTS are: there are a lot of reports about one individual only (Pablo). Doesn't that strike you as noteworthy? Each of the anecdotes and accusations must be taken on its own merit.
And enough exaggerating and making up straw men. Stick to the facts, as you claim to desire and push for. Did Croixalist actually claim the three "quotes" you listed in the post I deleted? I somehow doubt it. I think you're making those up as strawmen.
-
Matthew, this is it...
Those were all very good questions. What the hell (pun intended) was a dog doing in the sanctuary, especially considering Fr. P keeps the Blessed Sacrament in that chapel.
There was a video of it. No rumors there.
I guess it makes sense for someone to allow that, when he doesn't attend Mass himself. He can't have too much love or respect for the Blessed Sacrament, or he'd be at Mass more often than "rarely, not as an active participant".
-
Insanity is right! I met this man (Diablo) nearly 20 yrs ago. Much of what you have expressed here seemed obvious to me way back. I warned Fr Pfeiffer about the dangers of his close association with such a man, and he just shrugged it off... no great surprise to me to see how things have turned out the way they are today.
I can't understand how nearly 20 years later, now that things have gotten infinitely worse, that someone can spend a fair amount of time around this scoundrel and NOT see something very sinister about this man, when all I needed was 30 minutes 2 decades ago!
So, was Father Pfeiffer involved with Pablo already at the time of the summer-camp drownings.
-
So, we have confirmation from Manuel that Pablo rarely attended Mass, and then never actively.
Someone asked why Father Pfeiffer would associate with such a man. Equally important: why would a man who basically doesn't practice the faith become so deeply involved with a Traditional Catholic group? This is a HUGE RED LIGHT. What are his motives from being there? This makes it more plausible to me that he's there to deliberately perpetrate mischief, and perhaps even of the occult variety.
-
Request to shift gears on this topic, to get away from the banter.
For those with Catholic eyes, who can discern, it has already been proven that Paul Hernandez is a warlock.
No layman runs around Phoenix doing exorcisms without being overwhelmed by demons himself.
Hernandez is obviously part of a coven and he has a mission to disrupt what's left of the traditional Catholic movement.
He has demonstrated competence at recruiting priestly slaves and other dupes.
Catholicus reiterated two important points: Fr. Pfieffer is bewitched and anyone who goes to Pfiefferville is affected by the warlock's curses. We've been getting these same "SOS" messages from Pfiefferville since 2012.
To break the Pfeifferville warlock captivity, it will require help from all sectors of the Resistance militant.
This includes Cathinfo members, Broadstairs, Bp. Zendejas, Fr, Chazal, the Dominicans, Independent trad chapels and others.
Until now, we've complacently stood by as Hernandez occupied one of our Catholic strongholds and wreaked havoc on us.
This paralysis has to change and there are proven ways to do it.
To be continued...
THIS is why this is so important, Manuel. If we identify the threat, we can all mobilize to help eliminate it. If Pablo is in fact working dark arts against Fathers Pfeiffer, Hewko, and others, we need to help work to liberate them from this evil. We can send our prayers, alert the public, and ... as Incredulous suggested, enlist the help of ordained exorcists to liberate the priests and faithful. This is not simply gratuitous bashing of Pablo for our own personal entertainment.
-
The first thing is to cut the carp about Pablo being a warlock in a coven. Drop the Hogwarts and horcruxes, witches and wizards, and whatever mystical mumbo jumbo you’ve attributed to him.
No court of law or legal system is going to care for accusations of witchcraft.
Who cares about the legal system? We're Catholics here. I think you reveal your hand with this post. You simply don't believe in witchcraft and diabolical activity. Well, Catholics have always recognized the existence of such things, and that's why the Church counters them with blessings, sacramentals, and even dedicates a specific Order to authorizing and empowering exorcists. One of the very first activities we see Our Lord's disciples performing in the Gospels is going around performing exorcisms to expel evil. There was no doubt a significant increase or spike in diabolical activity surrounding Our Lord on earth ... and there can be little doubt that there's a concentration of such activity around the remnant faithful Catholics.
You reveal your lack of faith with this post, deriding such things as "mumbo jumbo". Myriad Catholics exorcists and missionaries have testified to the diabolical activity they have witnessed.
-
I have seen him at Mass in Boston, which is a rare event indeed. He has given medals out to others, along with the business card for the Seminary, with the numbers on it.
So he's using his association with them not to serve God and practice the faith, but to go around making connections with Resistance Catholics. Very telling. Is this just a business venture for him? Or is there something darker? Well, combining this activity with what we know of him and his past as "El Brujo" ... a picture begins to emerge.
-
I don’t know if this is related but a couple of years ago I was present for a conversation where Fr Pfeiffer was telling a group of people not to use the St Benedict Medal Crucifix. He said that the medal placed on those crosses was above the Body of Jesus and implied St. Benedict had more importance over Christ. I’ve always wondered about this and where Fr P got the idea from. I’ve never heard any other priest say this.
Thank you. So now we have an independent confirmation of this crucial part of Catholicus' story. Strange that the Church has strongly endorsed this medal and does not see any problems with the symbolism on the medal. So this is Father Pfeiffer second-guessing the Church.
-
Is it a sign of the times that, a few minutes ago, this sensational thread (which impacts perhaps 350 souls worldwide) had 30 viewers, while the thread regarding the SSPX’s response to Sr. Mary Elizabeth (which indicates the direction the fates of 500,000 souls are heading) had only 5?
-
Is it a sign of the times that, a few minutes ago, this sensational thread (which impacts perhaps 350 souls worldwide) had 30 viewers, while the thread regarding the SSPX’s response to Sr. Mary Elizabeth (which indicates the direction the fates of 500,000 souls are heading) had only 5?
Lol...and in the one minute it took me to type that message, I received notice that 3 (!!!) more replies had been posted?
:facepalm:
-
Who cares about the legal system? We're Catholics here. I think you reveal your hand with this post. You simply don't believe in witchcraft and diabolical activity. Well, Catholics have always recognized the existence of such things, and that's why the Church counters them with blessings, sacramentals, and even dedicates a specific Order to authorizing and empowering exorcists. One of the very first activities we see Our Lord's disciples performing in the Gospels is going around performing exorcisms to expel evil. There was no doubt a significant increase or spike in diabolical activity surrounding Our Lord on earth ... and there can be little doubt that there's a concentration of such activity around the remnant faithful Catholics.
You reveal your lack of faith with this post, deriding such things as "mumbo jumbo". Myriad Catholics exorcists and missionaries have testified to the diabolical activity they have witnessed.
Well said, Ladislaus!
He claims he's just moving slowly and carefully towards such accusations against Pablo -- but the way he talks about witchcraft, making fun of it, exaggerating, talking about Hogwarts and whatnot, he sounds like an unbeliever!
-
Quite a few of those “reports”, including this most recent one, couldn’t stand up to scrutiny, yet it was those who were scrutinizing the stories that caught the flak.
The nameless, faceless accusers get the benefit of doubt, while those who do not hide in shadows are denigrated, their messages deleted.
There is no mercy, no true justice.
Nonsense. We have a real, legitimate "witch hunt" taking place here. People are trying to flush this guy out into the light.
YOU YOURSELF confirmed a key piece of the puzzle, that Pablo rarely attends Mass and never actively. When he shows up he's merely trying to make connections, passing out business cards.
We now have confirmation from an independent witness that Father Pfeiffer has discouraged the use of the St. Benedict medal.
Those are two key points, regardless of any construction one might want to put on the phone calls and the soup incident, etc.
So, now, the very point of bringing this out in public, and Catholicus did a great service here, is to see if there are others out here who can corroborate some of the information. We have received on this thread precisely that corroboration (and from none other than yourself regarding Mass attendance).
There's a very strong, albeit circuмstantial case, building in support of the fact that Pablo, whether deliberately or not, is an agent for diabolical activity against the Resistance Catholics tied to Father Pfeiffer's group.
-
Quick poll --
How many of you KNOW SOMEONE (besides Pablo) who has received public, widely known/used, and ominous nicknames like "the devil" or "the warlock" at your Traditional Catholic chapels?
I can only think of one minor nickname like this, and it was only used in our family privately. I've been a Trad my whole life. Such names and reputations just DON'T GET ATTACHED to regular, average, or Catholics who are innocent of the charges that the nicknames imply.
My dad would privately and good-naturedly call one parishioner "the nαzι" because he was southern, he kind of stood out, he might have actually been a White Nationalist of some sort, and one time a relative came to Mass with him, and had a swastika tattoo on her forehead. I didn't hang around my dad for all discussions he had with parishioners; maybe he heard something from this man that earned him the nickname. I recall the man being very nice and friendly. Probably because we were a white family...hahaha
It's like stereotypes. The only ones that get any real traction or popularity are those which are based on the truth.
"Where there's smoke, there's fire."
It's also like sodomy. Usually a person gets a "reputation" -- seldom are there videos or other "proof" capturing the person in the act. Ditto for witchcraft. Do people really expect videos to be brought forth showing someone engaging in diabolical and dark arts? The good guys don't usually bug peoples' rooms.
Some things are so evil and so shameful, that the perpetrator makes sure there is no video or hard evidence in existence, much less available for dissemination to the public. They can't hide everything, but it's only secondary or tertiary proofs that are available to see; things that could be explained away by various excuses.
-
It's fortunate for Pablo that he hasn't crossed paths with a Mafioso type. He's be rubbed out in a heartbeat. End of story.
-
“Where there’s smoke, there’s fire...”
This site sees the smoke, and lights more fires.
Newsflash - you're part of the "this site" which you criticize. Go to confession.
Incredulous, for example, is 0.0268456% -- that's 2.6 hundredths of a percent, not 2.6%, of CathInfo. So are you! CathInfo is as much "ManuelChavez" as it is "Incredulous".
CathInfo doesn't have a soul, nor will it end up in heaven OR hell. It is nothing more than a grouping of Traditional Catholics who are as different as individuals can be. We are all at various stages of the spiritual life, different degrees of sin or holiness, different levels of education, etc.
It's ridiculous to treat CathInfo like it's some monolithic entity, with a soul and spiritual state for good measure. How stupid can you get!
Hypocrite! You want us to be charitable towards Pablo el Brujo, giving him every benefit of the doubt and then some, and refraining from painting him with a broad brush. But then look at how you speak about the hundreds of Traditional Catholics, the faithful remnant making countless sacrifices to serve God and keep the Faith, that make up what you call "CathInfo"! One or two individuals violate your personal code of morality, and immediately the whole site is a den of evil.
I hate to be harsh on you, but it's not fair to all those good Catholics who you malign, which is why I'm righteously indignant about this particular injustice.
-
Newsflash - you're part of the "this site" which you criticize. Go to confession.
CathInfo doesn't have a soul, nor will it end up in heaven OR hell. It is nothing more than a grouping of Traditional Catholics who are as different as individuals can be. We are all at various stages of the spiritual life, different degrees of sin or holiness, different levels of education, etc.
It's ridiculous to treat CathInfo like it's some monolithic entity, with a soul and spiritual state for good measure. How stupid can you get!
Hypocrite! You want us to be charitable towards Pablo el Brujo, giving him every benefit of the doubt and then some, and refraining from painting him with a broad brush. But then look at how you speak about the hundreds of Catholics that make up what you call "CathInfo"! One or two individuals violate your personal code of morality, and immediately the whole site is a den of evil.
I refer specifically to those on this thread, whose actions and opinions are one-sided. This “group” has expressed a unanimous belief in this story, and disdain for my comments.
I never claimed that CathInfo is a person or has a soul, but I have noticed the group expressing subtle variations of the same belief; that Pablo is absolutely guilty of these unproven accusations, and that I am absolutely wrong in questioning them.
Even my own faith and the foundation of my soul has been called into question; something that is known only to God, to myself and my confessor.
How is that in any way a Catholic action?
You can’t fight fire with fire.
-
This “group” has expressed a unanimous belief in this story, and disdain for my comments.
I never claimed that CathInfo is a person or has a soul, but I have noticed the group expressing subtle variations of the same belief; that Pablo is absolutely guilty of these unproven accusations, and that I am absolutely wrong in questioning them.
How exactly did CathInfo "this group" express a "unanimous belief" in this story? Was there a poll taken that I'm not aware of?
Manuel, you can't blame us for your own emotions and feelings. They really don't count for much. Only the facts matter. And the facts are that no one has expressed unanimous anything. Most of the membership hasn't even read or chimed in on this thread, for crying out loud! That's the REALITY and FACTS if you care about such things.
Hey, at least we're getting somewhere...where you're coming from, I mean. So your FEELZ tell you that all of CathInfo has a unanimous belief in Catholicus' story.
Great. Good for your feelz. The subtotal of your strongest feelings for a whole day, plus a dollar, will get you a candy bar.
-
And yes, perhaps the 10 people who have chimed in are all "against" you, siding more with Incredulous or Ladislaus. But did you ever stop to consider that these 10 devout Catholics might be correct, and that you (a single devout Catholic) might be wrong?
Don't puff yourself up and allow yourself to believe you're a saint, while everyone else is wicked. The members here are just as serious about serving God, saving their souls, and have made just as many sacrifices for God as you have, on average. Some a bit more, some a bit less. But let's be realistic. This is a "hive" of Traditional Catholics. Right off the bat, Trad Catholics are the cream of the crop when it comes to serving God, being of good will, avoiding sin, living the Catholic Faith 24/7, etc. They aren't saints or perfect, but they are the best Catholics you're going to find in 2019. The rest of the world is even worse!
At the very least the CathInfo membership is going to be above-average knowledgeable about sin!
And any one of them has as much chance of being upright (in God's eyes) as you do.
-
This “group” has expressed a unanimous belief in this story, and disdain for my comments.
Yes, and you should ask yourself why. It's because your comments are founded in nothing other than an emotional refusal to believe that Pablo is practicing witchcraft. You have nothing to substantiate your opinion besides your own FEELZ (as Matthew put it). You have zero factual evidence to back up your comments. I've already laid this out several times. THAT is why nobody's buying what you're selling.
On the other side we have several key/crucial facts corroborated independently by more than one poster.
-
but I do hold you accountable for calling into question my status as a Catholic.
When did I ever call into question your status as a Catholic? You're going to have to prove it I'm afraid.
Again, feelings don't count. Only actual words posted by me count.
-
Manuel's argument
The 10 participants in this thread disagree with me
But I am a saint, as well as infallible, incapable of being deceived.
Therefore, the 10 participants in this thread are evil.
Then:
The 10 participants in this thread are evil.
The other 3,714 CathInfo members (everyone except me) must agree with them. Because that's the feeling I get.
Therefore the whole forum is evil.
-
There you have it; these words, in conjunction with the words of another, the notion of me as an unbeliever is made clear.
You approve of the accusation made, and imply that it is true.
And I stand by what I said because it's true, Martin!
You DO sound like an unbeliever when you mock witchcraft in this manner. That is EXACTLY how unbelievers talk about the subject. Unbelievers don't believe in the devil OR any kind of sorcery getting powers from said devils. If you made charges of witchcraft, they would mock, bring up Harry Potter, joke about it -- exactly like you did. That was my point. And it's true!
I never said you WERE an unbeliever. Can you make any distinctions, or do you operate completely on feelings?
You'll note in a later post I referred to you as a devout Catholic. So I clearly didn't consider you an unbeliever. I'm just surprised to hear you talk like one re: the topic of witchcraft.
Matthew
-
I don’t know if this is related but a couple of years ago I was present for a conversation where Fr Pfeiffer was telling a group of people not to use the St Benedict Medal Crucifix. He said that the medal placed on those crosses was above the Body of Jesus and implied St. Benedict had more importance over Christ. I’ve always wondered about this and where Fr P got the idea from. I’ve never heard any other priest say this.
I'm confused by the above. Shouldn't you have said "the crosses placed on those medals"?
-
I don’t know if this is related but a couple of years ago I was present for a conversation where Fr Pfeiffer was telling a group of people not to use the St Benedict Medal Crucifix. He said that the medal placed on those crosses was above the Body of Jesus and implied St. Benedict had more importance over Christ. I’ve always wondered about this and where Fr P got the idea from. I’ve never heard any other priest say this.
Quote:
Fr Pfeiffer was telling a group of people not to use the St Benedict Medal Crucifix.
-
Martin,
Forget all the pointless details and Me-tales, and abandon the sophomorically-stilted, tortuous language construction.
Rather, our comprehensive, phenomenological, theological and philosophic totality is either for or against Christ. Which is it? You need to let the scales fall from your eyes.
Your flip, arrogant and sarcastic comments (“stories of dungeons and dragons….tales from the crypt…skullduggery….witches and wizards”) are made in a state of altered perception. You are embarrassing yourself in front of some very intelligent and holy people. Stop posturing as if you know what you are talking about.
You must evolve from your present level of immature, instinctual feelings, all the way to cognition, and finally to metacognition.
-
How exactly did CathInfo "this group" express a "unanimous belief" in this story? Was there a poll taken that I'm not aware of?
Manuel, you can't blame us for your own emotions and feelings. They really don't count for much. Only the facts matter. And the facts are that no one has expressed unanimous anything. Most of the membership hasn't even read or chimed in on this thread, for crying out loud! That's the REALITY and FACTS if you care about such things.
Hey, at least we're getting somewhere...where you're coming from, I mean. So your FEELZ tell you that all of CathInfo has a unanimous belief in Catholicus' story.
Great. Good for your feelz. The subtotal of your strongest feelings for a whole day, plus a dollar, will get you a candy bar.
Even if people were to concede that most of Catholicus' claims were fabricated (which I don't necessarily think they were), I think that diabolical activity remains the most likely explanation for what has gone on at Boston.
It's been said before, but Father Pfeiffer clearly isn't dumb. We have to assume that he received a solid seminary formation, being ordained when he was, before things really started to go South, so he's clearly been taught the fundamentals of moral and sacramental theology. He's also not a coward, personality wise. Having met him and spent time with him, I find it hard to believe that he'd let himself be duped or intimidated through any normal means. He's a strong personality and won't cowtow to anyone.
He also doesn't seem to be mentally ill, or out of his mind in a medical sense. I mean, he seems fairly lucid.
What then, would cause a person like Fr Pfeiffer to progressively cut himself off from essentially every other Resistance personality out there, to savage +Williamson repeatedly, and, above all, to continue against best advice to cavort with Mr. Moran, to destroy so many relationships etc.?
Like I said, we can rule out improper seminary formation or training. We can likely rule out lack of intellect, as he is a reasonably smart man. We can (probably) rule out mental illness....what are the remaining explanations? The fact is that his behaviour is far beyond the spectrum of normal.
If not straight up possession, then some sort of oppression or diabolical influence honestly seems to be the most compelling explanation at this point.
True as they may be (and I'm inclined to think that they are), we don't even need stories of moonlight woods or plastic bags of blood to reasonably suspect that something diabolical is going on at Boston...
-
What then, would cause a person like Fr Pfeiffer to progressively cut himself off from essentially every other Resistance personality out there, to savage +Williamson repeatedly, and, above all, to continue against best advice to cavort with Mr. Moran, to destroy so many relationships etc.?
Like I said, we can rule out improper seminary formation or training. We can likely rule out lack of intellect, as he is a reasonably smart man. We can (probably) rule out mental illness....what are the remaining explanations? The fact is that his behaviour is far beyond the spectrum of normal.
If not straight up possession, then some sort of oppression or diabolical influence honestly seems to be the most compelling explanation at this point.
True as they may be (and I'm inclined to think that they are), we don't even need stories of moonlight woods or plastic bags of blood to reasonably suspect that something diabolical is going on at Boston...
Excellent post!
-
The first thing is to cut the carp about Pablo being a warlock in a coven. Drop the Hogwarts and horcruxes, witches and wizards, and whatever mystical mumbo jumbo you’ve attributed to him.
No court of law or legal system is going to care for accusations of witchcraft. They won’t waste their time with “blood soup,” “animal sacrifices” and “walls of photos designed to hex enemies”. You might as well tell the judge or the police that Pablo is a lizard alien, bent on world domination.
Focus on the money trail, the non-profit and the required docuмents and board needed for said purposes. Take a look at the books, and what others have given to the seminary.
That is the best bet, not these second or third hand tales of dark arts.
In the name of the Holy Trinity,
Father, Son and Holy Ghost, SILENCIO!
-
Focus on the money trail, the non-profit and the required docuмents and board needed for said purposes. Take a look at the books, and what others have given to the seminary.
Ok, Manuel, go ahead. We're waiting. If you have evidence of this sort, we're all ears. Let's have it. Otherwise, if you refuse to light a candle, please refrain from cursing the darkness.
-
Excellent post!
Let's not forget the most plausible explanation: blackmail.
-
Let's not forget the most plausible explanation: blackmail.
Yes, but as I've said many times, blackmail only works when the thing you're forced into (payoffs, forced behavior) is LESS THAN the damage that would be done if the blackmail victim's "deeds" were given a full public airing.
Say Joe Public had dirt on me, that could result in my going to jail for UP TO 30 days. He would never be able to force me into working full-time on his farm for free for a whole 3 months. Get it? I (hypothetically) would rather do the shorter jail time, which might even be less than 30 days.
But what if he had greater dirt on me, that could result in 10 years in a maximum security prison? Now that 3 months' free labor is looking like a bargain. Capiche?
Now when you factor in how great the evils are that Fr. Pfeiffer is being forced into... Attacking all other Resistance priests and bishops, embracing a con-artist like Ambrose Moran, associating with and promoting countless priests with "lavender" reputations, the destruction of souls in and around Boston, KY, the loss and damage to many vocations, destroying at least one Traditional Catholic marriage, countless spiritual harm -- the dirt Pablo would have to have on Fr. Pfeiffer would be mind-boggling. Because in this scenario, Fr. Pfeiffer would know just how wrong all this is! He knows the value of one soul, of one vocation. He knows the dignity of a priest and a bishop. The crimes being held over Fr. P's head would have to be heinous indeed -- along the lines of what the Clintons or Bushes are guilty of! (And by the way, I believe the Clintons are guilty of conspiracy, murder, treason, cнιℓd тrαffιcking, pedophilia, and sacrificing children to the devil.)
Blackmail sounds plausible, until you think about just how much Pablo has "forced" Fr. Pfeiffer into. No, I can't believe Fr. Pfeiffer had committed any crimes THAT serious pre-2012!
-
There you have it; these words, in conjunction with the words of another, the notion of me as an unbeliever is made clear.
You approve of the accusation made, and imply that it is true.
Matthew was obviously speaking secundum quid rather than simpliciter. He's not saying that are categorically not Catholic, just that with regard to this topic you sound no different than any unbeliever might. You dismissed the possibility of witchcraft being in play here as so much "mumbo jumbo" ... as if you didn't believe that such things exist.
-
Yes, but as I've said many times, blackmail only works when the thing you're forced into (payoffs, forced behavior) is LESS THAN the damage that would be done if the blackmail victim's "deeds" were given a full public airing.
Say Joe Public had dirt on me, that could result in my going to jail for UP TO 30 days. He would never be able to force me into working full-time on his farm for free for a whole 3 months. Get it? I (hypothetically) would rather do the shorter jail time, which might even be less than 30 days.
But what if he had greater dirt on me, that could result in 10 years in a maximum security prison? Now that 3 months' free labor is looking like a bargain. Capiche?
Now when you factor in how great the evils are that Fr. Pfeiffer is being forced into... Attacking all other Resistance priests and bishops, embracing a con-artist like Ambrose Moran, associating with and promoting countless priests with "lavender" reputations, the destruction of souls in and around Boston, KY, the loss and damage to many vocations, destroying at least one Traditional Catholic marriage, countless spiritual harm -- the dirt Pablo would have to have on Fr. Pfeiffer would be mind-boggling. Because in this scenario, Fr. Pfeiffer would know just how wrong all this is! He knows the value of one soul, of one vocation. He knows the dignity of a priest and a bishop. The crimes being held over Fr. P's head would have to be heinous indeed -- along the lines of what the Clintons or Bushes are guilty of! (And by the way, I believe the Clintons are guilty of conspiracy, murder, treason, cнιℓd тrαffιcking, pedophilia, and sacrificing children to the devil.)
Blackmail sounds plausible, until you think about just how much Pablo has "forced" Fr. Pfeiffer into. No, I can't believe Fr. Pfeiffer had committed any crimes THAT serious pre-2012!
I've considered the blackmail angle before. Here's why it doesn't make sense to me, or rather, here's why blackmail ALONE doesn't seem to be a plausible explanation:
Prior to 2012, Father Pfeiffer had a pretty good reputation within traditional circles. He came across as principled, upright, and generally a well balanced individual. I have to believe (maybe foolishly) that were Pablo to have some kind of dirt on him, Father Pfeiffer would realize that dragging so many souls down with him is simply not worth the price of silence. Easier said than done, perhaps, but generally speaking, I'd hope that a well formed traditional priest, especially one with a personality like Father Pfeiffer, would just tell Pablo "bite me" rather than risk the destruction of so many souls under his care.
For example, even if I had committed a heinous crime, I simply couldn't be blackmailed into renouncing the faith, or committing sacrilege, or deliberately missing Mass, or committing iconoclasm, etc.
Can you imagine trying to blackmail Fr Pfeiffer into somehow saying a Novus Ordo Mass? No way! In the same way, I just can't see him being blackmailed into cavorting with Ambrose Moran, IF he was in his right mind. It would take some serious manipulation, particularly of the demonic sort, to get him to stoop to this level...
-
Blackmail sounds plausible, until you think about just how much Pablo has "forced" Fr. Pfeiffer into. No, I can't believe Fr. Pfeiffer had committed any crimes THAT serious pre-2012!
I would say that blackmail is plausible ... EXCEPT that it doesn't explain his completely IRRATIONAL behavior. Blackmail can explain actions, but when Father Pfeiffer speaks he often sounds like he's completely lost his mind. So IMO it's either mental instability or diabolical influence. Now, one of the big things they look for throughout seminary is signs of mental instability. Over 6 years, that certainly would have come to light and Father Pfeiffer would have been dismissed from the seminary. Except perhaps if the 1998 drownings affected him on some deep psychological level. That's possible. But then you start factoring in what we know about Pablo ... the signs seem to all point to diabolical attack.
Was Father blackmailed into giving that sermon about how masturbation is the cause of road rage?
Like you said, though, the only types of blackmail material that could work would be if Father Pfeiffer had been living along the lines of a Father VanDerPutten.
-
My questioning of dubious stories with no evidence and situations that conflict with personal experiences
Manuel, you continue to elevate your personal experiences above anyone else's. If Catholicus were to provide pictures of burn marks in the rug, your likely reply would be: "Well, I need to visit Boston personally to see the burn marks before I believe them." You've admitted that Pablo is a liar, abuser, thief, jerk and one who almost never attends mass...this type of person deserves no "benefit of the doubt" yet you continue to defend him as if his reputation is being tarnished. Newsflash- Pablo's reputation is ANYTHING but trustworthy.
-
So, we have confirmation from Manuel that Pablo rarely attended Mass, and then never actively.
Someone asked why Father Pfeiffer would associate with such a man. Equally important: why would a man who basically doesn't practice the faith become so deeply involved with a Traditional Catholic group? This is a HUGE RED LIGHT. What are his motives from being there? This makes it more plausible to me that he's there to deliberately perpetrate mischief, and perhaps even of the occult variety.
This is probably the most damning piece of evidence to me.
Pablo is on record, as early as 2015, as saying that he was making plans to leave Boston and have someone else take over his responsibilities. Obviously this didn't happen. Put the pieces together: it is impossible to overstate how DANGEROUS it is for a layperson to attempt to perform the duties of an exorcist (or, in Pablo's words, do 'hand to hand combat' with the devil, or however he worded it). Pretty much just as dangerous as using a ouija board, if not more dangerous.
Add the following factors together:
-Pablo not attending Mass
-Fr Pfeiffer progressively cutting off everyone who was formerly supportive
-Pablo being on record - admitting engaging in illicit exorcism type activity...
Manuel, the thing is that if someone accused, for example, Bishop Williamson, of witchcraft on the basis that they saw him fiddling with a plastic bag at a restaurant, I'd laugh, and them probably accuse them of detraction...the reason being that there is not a single other shred of evidence suggesting that His Excellency might be involved with the demonic. It's the larger details of what goes on at Boston, combined with the insanity of Fr Pfeiffer's behaviour, that make me much more inclined to believe stories like that, especially when they come from traditional Catholics. If anything, trads would be LESS likely to accuse someone of witchcraft unjustly, because trads should understand how diabolical and serious witchcraft actually is. It isn't these stories alone, it's these stories IN COMBO with other info we actually know, that makes witchcraft a real possibility.
-
For example, even if I had committed a heinous crime, I simply couldn't be blackmailed into renouncing the faith, or committing sacrilege, or deliberately missing Mass, or committing iconoclasm, etc.
Can you imagine trying to blackmail Fr Pfeiffer into somehow saying a Novus Ordo Mass? No way! In the same way, I just can't see him being blackmailed into cavorting with Ambrose Moran, IF he was in his right mind. It would take some serious manipulation, particularly of the demonic sort, to get him to stoop to this level...
But Fr. Pfeiffer has done things similar to the things you list. Attacking Bp. Williamson? I spoke with Fr. P in 2013 when he came here to say Mass. He was very nostalgic about the good old days at +W's seminary. The notion of +W being a bad guy hadn't even crossed his imagination yet.
And betraying +W is one of those things I couldn't imagine doing. Just for starters, he's a Traditional bishop and deserves a good deal of respect because of his office alone. Then there's the additional respect he deserves personally for fighting for the Faith for so long and giving up so much.
And placing young, impressionable seminarians under the authority and tutelage of Pablo, who is superstitious, obsessed with the devil (in both senses of the term "obsessed"), and doesn't attend Mass? Fr. P must know Pablo's bad side. And yet he's OK sending his seminarians like sheep to the slaughter to be taught and trained (and abused) by Pablo.
-
But Fr. Pfeiffer has done things similar to the things you list. Attacking Bp. Williamson? I spoke with Fr. P in 2013 when he came here to say Mass. He was very nostalgic about the good old days at +W's seminary. The notion of +W being a bad guy hadn't even crossed his imagination yet.
And betraying +W is one of those things I couldn't imagine doing. Just for starters, he's a Traditional bishop and deserves a good deal of respect because of his office alone. Then there's the additional respect he deserves personally for fighting for the Faith for so long and giving up so much.
And placing young, impressionable seminarians under the authority and tutelage of Pablo, who is superstitious, obsessed with the devil (in both senses of the term "obsessed"), and doesn't attend Mass? Fr. P must know Pablo's bad side. And yet he's OK sending his seminarians like sheep to the slaughter to be taught and trained (and abused) by Pablo.
100% agree, which is why in my mind, the only two possibilities to explain such a drastic change in behaviour are EITHER mental illness, or the diabolical.
I think we may be able to rule out mental illness. I haven't seen anything that indicates Fr. Pfeiffer's mental state should be called into question, ESPECIALLY because he functioned for so long as a priest without any issues like this.
-
Manuel, the thing is that if someone accused, for example, Bishop Williamson, of witchcraft on the basis that they saw him fiddling with a plastic bag at a restaurant, I'd laugh, and them probably accuse them of detraction...the reason being that there is not a single other shred of evidence suggesting that His Excellency might be involved with the demonic. It's the larger details of what goes on at Boston, combined with the insanity of Fr Pfeiffer's behaviour, that make me much more inclined to believe stories like that, especially when they come from traditional Catholics. If anything, trads would be LESS likely to accuse someone of witchcraft unjustly, because trads should understand how diabolical and serious witchcraft actually is. It isn't these stories alone, it's these stories IN COMBO with other info we actually know, that makes witchcraft a real possibility.
And it gets worse --
What kind of diabolically inverted (up is down, good is evil, etc.) mind does it takes to accuse someone like Fr. Voigt of putting a curse on Pablo's son which caused his death? Pablo actually made this accusation! Not only is that a ludicrous charge against a holy priest like Fr. Voigt, but it says a lot about the accuser. How could Pablo have so much demonic hatred for a priest, to be able to slander him in such a severe manner? I realize that some Trads don't like Fr. Voigt's style, because he wasn't formed at a traditional seminary, but he is a devout priest who has given his life for God. If you've spent any time speaking with him, you know he takes his priesthood seriously. He is truly interested in saving souls, serving God, making us holier and helping us get to heaven. He is full of charity, not hate.
Pablo on the other hand...
And remember in an early post that Pablo used a "clapper" type technology and with a straight face (or deadpan humor) said it was witchcraft? Even if he was joking, it shows where his mind is at.
Likewise, why was Pablo even THINKING about curses unto death when he was looking for slander against Fr. Voigt (who had recently left Boston, KY *and* had gone public with many criticisms, which you can still find here on CathInfo) For most decent Catholics, curses are the farthest things from our minds.
You know the classic psychological phenomenon of "projection"? A thief suspects everyone of trying to rob him, a liar doesn't trust anyone's word? An adulterer suspects and even accuses his spouse of cheating on him -- even when it's not the case. Well Pablo seems to think lots of people use diabolical curses. Hmmm...
Hillary (guilty of treason, Uranium One, collusion with Russia) accuses Trump of Russian collusion. And so on.
-
Great point about the accusation of Pablo's son being cursed. I had forgotten about that.
So, given Pablo's hostility to many Resistance Catholics, and his being so conversant in things like curses and witchcraft, how much of a stretch is it to imagine that he pronounced various curses on his adversaries?
-
Never assume.
The writer could not narrow down the timeline, could not identify the restaurant or the city, or other details. Any substantial evidence would be most welcome.
You attacked her from the get-go, so she stopped talking to you. Instead, your attitude should've been, "Well, Pablo is an untrustworthy guy, so i'll listen to the evidence." No one is saying she's right and we're not saying Pablo's guilty. But your attitude is not "i'll listen and follow the truth."; on the contrary, you defend Pablo as if he's never done anything wrong. Pablo's reputation is wounded through his own actions; he does not deserve a witch hunt, but he does deserve to be doubted.
-
Wait -- that story about Bishop Williamson with the plastic bag is actually a "serious" accusation and not a satirical joke?
:laugh2:
-
Facts: Pablo presumed to "bless" my new Rosary, and lied to me that Fr. Pf. had done so. Fr. could not have blessed my Rosary because he had already gone to say Mass elsewhere. I saw him drive away, although Pablo didn't know that. My Rosary was wet, ostensibly with Holy Water, when he returned it to me. I didn't confront Pablo but later in the week, I told Fr. of my concerns. It wasn't just one incident, Pablo had been giving "blessed" items to many women, all the while making insulting and demeaning comments about them to certain other women, foistering gossip and ill-will. Fr. made no comment, but took the Rosary and blessed it properly. As to the comments, he passed them off as the women's fault because women, like Eve, didn't know to keep their mouths shut.
Fact: Two men whose wives Pablo insulted, confronted Pablo in the chapel parking lot, promising to teach him a lesson if he didn't lay off and stay away, "50 feet from my wife, my mother, and my children." The latter was a police detective. Pablo continued, only with widows and single women without the protection of a male. One very shy lady in her twenties stopped going to Mass because Pablo pursued her, calling her, driving past her apartment, continually insisting he needed her help on various projects around the church. She was afraid to say no, and Pablo had her doing things like taking his clothes home to launder and iron! When M. stopped coming to Mass, he tried to get me to take over, offering monetary pay and free meals after Mass. I turned him down, telling him it was inappropriate for a single woman to handle the clothing of a man with a wife and kids. Afterwards, Pablo acted like a spoiled brat, pouting, turning his back to me, and mumbling under his breath whenever in proximity to him at church. I decided to let this one die out of its own accord rather than acting the same way by tattling to Fr.
Fact: I entered the kitchen at church, was handed a sponge by Pablo, and summarily ordered to, "Get busy washing those dishes." I said, "I'm not your maid. Do them yourself." There was a towering pile of them, dried on, filthy from a week of Fr. giving meals to day laborers he'd hired to do some renovations. In retaliation for my refusal, a rumor suddenly spread around the chapel that I was a feminist plant, so parents had better keep their children away from me and women should not befriend me because I was out to lure away their husbands. Word of this reached the priory and I was summoned to speak with the new prior. Of course I denied the charges. Unconvinced, the prior asked me if I had knowledge of why there were complaints to him about me. So I had no choice but to mention Pablo as the likely source. The prior's demeanor changed instantly. He asked a few questions, apologized for having me make a four hour drive, and let me go. Next Sunday, the sermon topic was about the sin of gossip. Hmmmm.
Fact: In 2015 I went on a women's retreat at OLMC. I caught Pablo in my "room" twice. The second time he was looking into my backpack. He made an excuse about people walking away with utensils and mugs---as if I'd stolen some and stuffed them in my backpack for a souvenir. The first time he accused me of unjustly judging him and denying he was actually in my room, just passing by.
During this retreat, Pablo acted as if I were there not for a retreat but as a worker; slave would be a better word. Along with a few other retreatants with prior connections to OLMC or various relatives of the Pfeiffer family, Pablo ordered us to assist the volunteers and "seminarians" with chores like food preparation, cleaning up after meals, and laundering bedding and shower linens. Sometimes, if Fr. Pfeiffer was not present, only Fr. Hewko, he'd order us to leave in the middle of conferences and miss meditations in order to work. If anyone protested, he said it was penance! At one point, I was ushered from the room in mid-conference because I might be an answer to prayers. Did I know how to drive a stick? Caught off guard, I found myself behind the wheel with a "seminarian" beside me, making a grocery run to E-town! I missed one and a half conferences, two meditations, and Confession. Upon return, Pablo chastised the seminarians for being sissies, girly men, and wimps because a woman was the only one who could drive a manual transmission. Once again, instead of being thanked, I was branded a feminist to the seminarians because "real woman
don't know how to drive a man's vehicle." The obscene connotations of that statement made all but one seminarian blush in shame. Even the black guy turned red. One seminarian "didn't get it." He stood there looking confused. I don't think he was the sharpest knife in the block, or maybe there was a language barrier. It later occurred to me that he was the only one who might emerge unscathed and go on to a real seminary and become a holy priest. I complained to Fr. Hewko, and he told me to ignore Pablo. He's all bark and no bite.
The proverbial straw that broke this camel's back happened on the fourth day of the retreat. I wasn't feeling well, and excused myself to lie down. Pablo was in the room. He suddenly turned all solicitous, insisting I go over to the house where I could rest in a real bedroom with peace and quiet, instead of in the dormitory where a lot of noise and commotion was going on. I tried to refuse, but a certain lady, an employee at the time, agreed with Pablo. She had some linens that had to be brought to the house, so Pablo would bring me over on a golf cart. I went with him reluctantly. Pablo got angry upon finding the front door ajar and cats wandering in and out. He cursed at the cats and roughly kicked one aside hard enough to hurt it. Once inside, Pablo closed the door and locked it. He gave me a stack of linens, told me to bring them upstairs, make up two beds, put away the towels except for a particular set, in a linen closet. I was to take a shower, use the set of linens, to dry off, and wear a robe I'd find in a certain bedroom closet. When I was done with that, I was to take a long nap in that particular bedroom, none other. I could feel secure because he'd have all the doors to the house locked. Horrified, I asked exactly why this was necessary. He said it was his duty to protect me from any males who might try to break in, that the house was isolated from the rest of the buildings and it was dangerous for a woman to stay there alone. We were in the kitchen, Pablo standing in the doorway. I feigned going for a glass of water, and when Pablo went to "assist" me, I dashed through a utility room and out a back door. I got in my car that was parked in the driveway and drove, locked in, to the side door of the dormitory. I hastily retrieved the few items I had inside and drove an hour east to a friend's house.
Fact: Starting a week or so after this incident, and lasting about four months, I received nasty, even threatening emails, texts, and voice messages, some in Spanish, others in poorly written English. Several of these I reported to the police. I attempted to trace them and came up with locations in New Hampshire, Kansas, Florida, and Quebec. Eventually, I changed my phone and email numbers. They stopped. I made one last attempt to talk with Fr. Pf. and Fr. Hewko about what happened. Fr. Hewko brushed it off as Spanish machismo, and Fr. Pf. told me I was making rash judgments, that Pablo meant no harm. When I mentioned the cat getting kicked, Fr. made a joke of it. (Anyone who is unnecessarily cruel to harmless animals is a sign of a black heart in my book) That is last time I had any contact with Fr. Pf, Fr. H.or from OLMC.
In retrospect, maybe I should have gone to the police, but really, there was nothing illegal that transpired. Pablo never physically touched me. His words, while creepy, were not worthy of legal charges. There are no laws against being a creep. I was at OLMC of my own volition. I could probably have had Fr. Pf. or Mr. Pf. forced to evacuate and disassemble the makeshift rooms. They were a serious fire hazard. Pablo, the seminarians, and various volunteers could have received a legal slap on the paddies for helping make them. What good would it do? I'm of the opinion only Our Lady of Mt. Carmel in Heaven can straighten out OLMC in Boston, KY. The perpetrators need to come to themselves like the Prodigal Son who was so self-deluded under control of Satan, that he lived a year as a pig before receiving the grace to wake up and smell the manure.
Is overt witchcraft taking place? Maybe. I never saw any direct evidence such as sacrifices at the firepit, burn holes in weird places, bags of blood or tomato sauce, take your pick. I have reason to believe Pablo killed a kitten out of desire to wound the soul of a an emotionally fragile person. In addition to a beagle dying, I heard it was hit by a car after being given to the care of a relative. The donkey that stood tied up and neglected may have died as a result of mistreatment. Thankfully, chickens take care of themselves despite having chicken brains. One thing I'm sure of is that the premises are occupied by oppressive spirits, and that Fr. Pf., Fr. Hewko, and Pablo are suffering under demonic influence. An exorcist is definitely needed. The devil uses sin to blind people to reality so that they think, say, and do things that defy common sense and rational thought. That's why there are volumes of YouTubes dedicated to "The World's Stupidest Criminals!" (The chickens are probably the holiest of sentient creatures on the grounds of OLMC.) Fr. Hewko has received the grace to physically escape. Mental, emotional, and spiritual wounds will take longer to heal. Let's pray for complete restoration for him. As for Fr. Pf., let's pray for him to wake up in the mud and smell the "crap." Pablo needs a thorough conversion to the Catholic Faith. Right now, he's like a man in the middle of the desert who claims to be a skilled seafaring captain. He knows all the right words, the right actions, the right equipment. Sadly, he's never put a foot in the ocean or even seen a ship in real life, and wouldn't know a real sailor if he literally ran into one. He's a fraudster who sells cruise tickets to the misguided, ignorant, and gullible. He believes his own lies. A secular psychiatrist would probably diagnose him with a personality disorder.
It's so sad what has become of once holy priests, full of zeal for saving souls, dedicated to the Catholic religion as handed down. For now, OLMC is descended to the likes of Pope Michael, the Dimond brothers, and the Palmarians---for po' folk. But they're all still physically alive, so there's hope until their souls have been judged.
As +Bp. Williamson says, "Kyrie Eleison."
-
Facts: Pablo presumed to "bless" my new Rosary, and lied to me that Fr. Pf. had done so. Fr. could not have blessed my Rosary because he had already gone to say Mass elsewhere. I saw him drive away, although Pablo didn't know that. My Rosary was wet, ostensibly with Holy Water, when he returned it to me. I didn't confront Pablo but later in the week, I told Fr. of my concerns. It wasn't just one incident, Pablo had been giving "blessed" items to many women, all the while making insulting and demeaning comments about them to certain other women, foistering gossip and ill-will. Fr. made no comment, but took the Rosary and blessed it properly. As to the comments, he passed them off as the women's fault because women, like Eve, didn't know to keep their mouths shut.
Fact: Two men whose wives Pablo insulted, confronted Pablo in the chapel parking lot, promising to teach him a lesson if he didn't lay off and stay away, "50 feet from my wife, my mother, and my children." The latter was a police detective. Pablo continued, only with widows and single women without the protection of a male. One very shy lady in her twenties stopped going to Mass because Pablo pursued her, calling her, driving past her apartment, continually insitting he needed her help on various projects around the church. She was afraid to say no, and Pablo had her doing things like taking his clothes home to launder and iron! When M. stopped coming to Mass, he tried to get me to take over, offering monetary pay and free meals after Mass. I turned him down, telling him it was inappropriate for a single woman to handle the clothing of a man with a wife and kids. Afterwards, Pablo acted like a spoiled brat, pouting, turning his back to me, and mumbling under his breath whenever in proximity to him at church. I decided to let this one die out of its own accord rather than acting the same way by tattling to Fr.
Fact: I entered the kitchen at church, was handed a sponge by Pablo, and summarily ordered to, "Get busy washing those dishes." I said, "I'm not your maid. Do them yourself." There was a towering pile of them, dried on, filthy from a week of Fr. giving meals to day laborers he'd hired to do some rennovations. In retaliation for my refusal, a rumor suddenly spread around the chapel that I was a feminist plant, so parents had better keep their children away from me and women should not befriend me because I was out to lure away their husbands. Word of this reached the priory and I was summoned to speak with the new prior. Of course I denied the charges. Unconvinced, the prior asked me if I had knowledge of why there were complaints to him about me. So I had no choice but to mention Pablo as the likely source. The prior's demeanor changed instantly. He asked a few questions, apologized for having me make a four hour drive, and let me go. Next Sunday, the sermon topic was about the sin of gossip. Hmmmm.
Fact: In 2015 I went on a women's retreat at OLMC. I caught Pablo in my "room" twice. The second time he was looking into my backpack. He made an excuse about people walking away with utensils and mugs---as if I'd stolen some and stuffed them in my backpack for a souvenir. The first time he accused me of unjustly judging him and denying he was actually in my room, just passing by.
During this retreat, Pablo acted as if I were there not for a retreat but as a worker; slave would be a better word. Along with a few other retreatants with prior connections to OLMC or various relatives of the Pfeiffer family, Pablo ordered us to assist the volunteers and "seminarians" with chores like food preparation, cleaning up after meals, and laundering bedding and shower linens. Sometimes, if Fr. Pfeiffer was not present, only Fr. Hewko, he'd order us to leave in the middle of conferences and miss meditations in order to work. If anyone protested, he said it was penance! At one point, I was ushered from the room in mid-conference because I might be an answer to prayers. Did I know how to drive a stick? Caught off guard, I found myself behind the wheel with a "seminarian" beside me, making a grocery run to E-town! I missed one and a half conferences, two meditations, and Confession. Upon return, Pablo chastised the seminarians for being sissies, girly men, and wimps because a woman was the only one who could drive a manual transmission. Once again, instead of being thanked, I was branded a feminist to the seminarians because "real woman
don't know how to drive a man's vehicle." The obscene connotations of that statement made all but one seminarian blush in shame. Even the black guy turned red. One seminarian "didn't get it." He stood there looking confused. I don't think he was the sharpest knife in the block, or maybe there was a language barrier. It later occurred to me that he was the only one who might emerge unscathed and go on to a real seminary and become a holy priest. I complained to Fr. Hewko, and he told me to ignore Pablo. He's all bark and no bite.
The proverbial straw that broke this camel's back happened on the fourth day of the retreat. I wasn't feeling well, and excused myself to lie down. Pablo was in the room. He suddenly turned all solicitous, insisting I go over to the house where I could rest in a real bedroom with peace and quiet, instead of in the dormitory where a lot of noise and commotion was going on. I tried to refuse, but a certain lady, an employee at the time, agreed with Pablo. She had some linens that had to be brought to the house, so Pablo would bring me over on a golf cart. I went with him reluctantly. Pablo got angry upon finding the front door ajar and cats wandering in and out. He cursed at the cats and roughly kicked one aside hard enough to hurt it. Once inside, Pablo closed the door and locked it. He gave me a stack of linens, told me to bring them upstairs, make up two beds, put away the towels except for a particular set, in a linen closet. I was to take a shower, use the set of linens, to dry off, and wear a robe I'd find in a certain bedroom closet. When I was done with that, I was to take a long nap in that particular bedroom, none other. I could feel secure because he'd have all the doors to the house locked. Horrified, I asked exactly why this was necessary. He said it was his duty to protect me from any males who might try to break in, that the house was isolated from the rest of the buildings and it was dangdrous for a woman to stay there alone. We were in the kitchen, Pablo standing in the doorway. I feigned going for a glass of water, and when Pablo went to "assist" me, I dashed through a utility room and out a back door. I got in my car that was parked in the driveway and drove, locked in, to the side door of the dormitory. I hastily retrieved the few items I had inside and drove an hour east to a friend's house.
Fact: Starting a week or so after this incident, and lasting about four months, I received nasty, even threatening emails, texts, and voice messages, some in Spanish, others in poorly written English. Several of these I reported to the police. I attempted to trace them and came up with locations in New Hampshire, Kansas, Florida, and Quebec. Eventually, I changed my phone and email numbers. They stopped. I made one last attempt to talk with Fr. Pf. and Fr. Hewko about what happened. Fr. Hewko brushed it off as Spanish machismo, and Fr. Pf. told me I was making rash judgments, that Pablo meant no harm. When I mentioned the cat getting kicked, Fr. made a joke of it. (Anyone who is unnecessarily cruel to harmless animals is a sign of a black heart in my book) That is last time I had any contact with Fr. Pf, Fr. H.or from OLMC.
In retrospect, maybe I should have gone to the police, but really, there was nothing illegal that transpired. Pablo never physically touched me. His words, while creepy, were not worthy of legal charges. There are no laws against being a creep. I was at OLMC of my own volition. I could probably have had Fr. Pf. or Mr. Pf. forced to evacuate and disassemble the makeshift rooms. They were a serious fire hazard. Pablo, the seminarians, and various volunteers could have received a legal slap on the paddies for helping make them. What good would it do? I'm of the opinion only Our Lady of Mt. Carmel in Heaven can straighten out OLMC in Boston, KY. The perpetrators need to come to themselves like the Prodigal Son who was so self-deluded under control of Satan, that he lived a year as a pig before receiving the grace to wake up and smell the manure.
Is overt witchcraft taking place? Maybe. I never saw any direct evidence such as sacrifices at the firepit, burn holes in weird places, bags of blood or tomato sauce, take your pick. I have reason to believe Pablo killed a kitten out of desire to wound the soul of a an emotionally fragile person. In addition to a beagle dying, I heard it was hit by a car after being given to the care of a relative. The donkey that stood tied up and neglected may have died as a result of mistreatment. Thankfully, chickens take care of themselves despite having chicken brains. One thing I'm sure of is that the premises are occupied by oppressive spirits, and that Fr. Pf., Fr. Hewko, and Pablo are suffering under demonic influence. An exorcist is definitely needed. The devil uses sin to blind people to reality so that they think, say, and do things that defy common sense and rational thought. That's why there are volumes of YouTubes dedicated to "The World's Stupidest Criminals!" (The chickens are probably the holiest of sentient creatures on the grounds of OLMC.) Fr. Hewko has received the grace to physically escape. Mental, emotional, and spiritual wounds will take longer to heal. Let's pray for complete restoration for him. As for Fr. Pf., let's pray for him to wake up in the mud and smell the "crap." Pablo needs a thorough conversion to the Catholic Faith. Right now, he's like a man in the middle of the desert who claims to be a skilled seafaring captain. He knows all the right words, the right actions, the right equipment. Sadly, he's never put a foot in the ocean or even seen a ship in real life, and wouldn't know a real sailor if he literally ran into one. He's a fraudster who sells cruise tickets to the misguided, ignorant, and gullible. He believes his own lies. A secular psychiatrist would probably diagnose him with a personality disorder.
It's so sad what has become of once holy priests, full of zeal for saving souls, dedicated to the Catholic religion as handed down. For now, OLMC is descended to the likes of Pope Michael, the Dimond brothers, and the Palmarians---for po' folk. But they're all still physically alive, so there's hope until theit souls have been judged.
As +Bp. Williamson says, "Kylie Eleison."
I have read this testimony a few times. I have dissected quite a bit of it, and compared it to my own experiences.
If this story isn’t true, it is one of the best forgeries I have ever seen.
Nearly every aspect rings as believable. The circuмstances and descriptions match my experiences quite well, as well as the descriptions of the seminary grounds. The timeline fits, and the actions mentioned match what happened at the retreats of 2015.
I could go into greater detail on how this story is far more plausible than the other, most recent effort.
Although I will not say with absolute certainty that this story is true, I believe that it reflects the truth, and that these events occurred more or less as they are written.
-
I have read this testimony a few times. I have dissected quite a bit of it, and compared it to my own experiences.
If this story isn’t true, it is one of the best forgeries I have ever seen.
Nearly every aspect rings as believable. The circuмstances and descriptions match my experiences quite well, as well as the descriptions of the seminary grounds. The timeline fits, and the actions mentioned match what happened at the retreats of 2015.
I could go into greater detail on how this story is far more plausible than the other, most recent effort.
Although I will not say with absolute certainty that this story is true, I believe that it reflects the truth, and that these events occurred more or less as they are written.
How gracious of you, pope ManuelChavez, arbiter of truth, to consider Seraphina a non-liar.
She's as good of a Catholic as you are, probably better! Who are you to stand in judgment of her or her testimony? She has no more reason to lie (about Pablo or anything else) than you do.
I know sincerity when I read it.
-
Manuel, the "story"is neither a story, nor a good forgery. It's a true account of my personal experiences with Fr. Pf.and Pablo beginning in 2005, ending in 2015. Yes, I'm quite familiar with the grounds. Need further proof? The first time I visited was before the house burned down. On the ground floor was a big dining room table with a lazy Susan in the middle. There was a rather hideous orange snd rust shag rug from the 1970s in the living room and dining room. One walked through them to reach the kitchen. The sink was to your right, the table to the left. There were whitish tiles on the floor. From the kitchen there was an alcove of sorts with a restroom on the left. Walking forward, there was a door that opened onto a narrow driveway very close to the priests' residence. There was a small bedroom and office/utility room off the Iiving room. The walls were of dark brown paneling. A sofa was against the wall to the left, Mr. Pfeiffer's chair across from it with a wall mounted tv where he watched Fox news. Beside the dpor on the right was a pencil drawing of the Pfeiffer boys. I was never upstairs, so cannot describe it.
The schoolhouse is behind the chapel, built into a steep hill. To get to the fire pit without entering the schoolhouse, one descended a rather precariously steep hI'll with assorted rocks serving as stairs.
On the grounds were the actual seminary to the left of the chapel which has a circular driveway around it.
On the grounds are also an old barn, a deck with picnic tables, a garage or carport with a corrugated metal roof, and a workshop by the priests' residence. Thr worldjop had black widow spiders in it. The senior Pfeiffers now live in a mustard colored double wide trailer house on the left of the driveway, just past a small private cemetery when entering. In place of house that burned is a paved area to park or play basketball. Up between the chapel at the top of the a hill, and seminary is the Pfeiffer cemetery. There's a statue of Our Lady. Buried there are various Pfeiffer grandparents, Fr. Hannefin, and Pablo's son.
Need any more proof?
Readers may rest assured that the adventures with Pablo and Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko in my original post are also true.
-
Wait -- that story about Bishop Williamson with the plastic bag is actually a "serious" accusation and not a satirical joke?
:laugh2:
Wait! I witnessed His Excellency help himself to a brownie, bite into it and say, "Mmm, I love gluten!" Maybe he cursed the entire tray of brownies! Oh dear! He must be dabbling in the dark arts!
-
Manuel, the "story"is neither a story, nor a good forgery. It's a true account of my personal experiences with Fr. Pf.and Pablo beginning in 2005, ending in 2015. Yes, I'm quite familiar with the grounds. Need further proof? The first time I visited was before the house burned down. On the ground floor was a big dining room table with a lazy Susan in the middle. There was a rather hideous orange snd rust shag rug from the 1970s in the living room and dining room. One walked through them to reach the kitchen. The sink was to your right, the table to the left. There were whitish tiles on the floor. From the kitchen there was an alcove of sorts with a restroom on the left. Walking forward, there was a door that opened onto a narrow driveway very close to the priests' residence. There was a small bedroom and office/utility room off the Iiving room. The walls were of dark brown paneling. A sofa was against the wall to the left, Mr. Pfeiffer's chair across from it with a wall mounted tv where he watched Fox news. Beside the dpor on the right was a pencil drawing of the Pfeiffer boys. I was never upstairs, so cannot describe it.
The schoolhouse is behind the chapel, built into a steep hill. To get to the fire pit without entering the schoolhouse, one descended a rather precariously steep hI'll with assorted rocks serving as stairs.
On the grounds were the actual seminary to the left of the chapel which has a circular driveway around it.
On the grounds are also an old barn, a deck with picnic tables, a garage or carport with a corrugated metal roof, and a workshop by the priests' residence. Thr worldjop had black widow spiders in it. The senior Pfeiffers now live in a mustard colored double wide trailer house on the left of the driveway, just past a small private cemetery when entering. In place of house that burned is a paved area to park or play basketball. Up between the chapel at the top of the a hill, and seminary is the Pfeiffer cemetery. There's a statue of Our Lady. Buried there are various Pfeiffer grandparents, Fr. Hannefin, and Pablo's son.
Need any more proof?
Readers may rest assured that the adventures with Pablo and Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko in my original post are also true.
I was not questioning your experiences or your veracity.
I believe you.
-
How gracious of you, pope ManuelChavez, arbiter of truth, to consider Seraphina a non-liar.
She's as good of a Catholic as you are, probably better! Who are you to stand in judgment of her or her testimony? She has no more reason to lie (about Pablo or anything else) than you do.
I know sincerity when I read it.
I am not a saint. I never claimed or even implied that I am a better Catholic than anyone else. I never claimed to be infallible. I am not the arbiter of truth.
We are called to love sinners and hate sin, to judge actions but not judge souls.
My criticisms and critiques are of actions and words. I did not criticize nor did I judge the writer.
You have judged the state of my soul.
“She is as good a Catholic as you are, probably better...”.
You are in absolutely no position to make that kind of observation, regardless of whether it is true or not.
I used the word “story” because, as a writer, I see everything as such. There are fiction stories, non-fiction stories, and combinations of the two.
Matthew, you’ve let this slide into a personal matter when it shouldn’t be one. We don’t go after the person, we go after the actions. The actor is not the act, the sinner is not the sin.
I hope to know sincerity when I read it. I want to believe the best of every soul. I want to embrace the possibility of change; that the worst sinner could become the greatest saint, with the help of many prayers and sacrifices from the saints and other souls.
I never want to harbor hatred towards anybody, especially those who have hurt either myself or my family, such as Pablo and Father Pfeiffer.
I hold onto this hope for all souls, because if the worst sinner can change, I may have a shot as well.
I am not the Pope.
I am not a saint.
I am not infallible.
I am only a man.
My name is Martin Dougherty.
-
Your name might as well be Mud, Martin.
Now I haven't been following your posts over the long term. Perhaps you or someone else could direct me to the series of posts in which you changed your mind about Boston and actually did something to dissuade folks from going there: a grand exposé of some sort. Because to me, that's what people who have been a big part of a bad situation do to help clear their conscience and turn over a new leaf in their lives. All I remember is you being given special protection status, disappearing for a time and reappearing to post on unrelated issues from time to time only to return to the subject of Boston in order to defend Pablo over something a seminary cook wouldn't necessarily be privy to.
You see, the more you claim to have been involved in that cult operation, the greater your culpability becomes. The less effort you make to expose the well known issues over there, the more suspicion you accrue to yourself. The more you respond to valid criticism - your deflections, your credibility, your motivations, with little more than vulgar recriminations and hollow self affirmations, the more you prove that you are still part of the problem. Let's just say you've pushed all of these categories well past the point of my gastronomic capacity.
So I don't buy your act. You're not a little kid, though you argue like one. You're not directly responsible for the sacrileges at Boston like Frs Pfeiffer and Hewko are, nor are you responsible for the variously sinful behavior of Pablo (as far as we know), but you were present for much of it and you spent an awful lot of time on these forums trying to convince people how great it all was. You certainly functioned as an accessory. I distinctly remember how arrogantly you kept chugging along while throwing every single critique out the window, whether it was light-hearted or serious. Believe it or not there was a time I wasn't as harsh on you as I am now! But I am far from the only one who ran out of patience with you.
You played the part of well-intentioned Pollyanna traddy ad nauseum. One thing was for sure and that was there was hardly a single person who agreed with you around here. For the life of me, I still can't figure out why you would spend so much time in a hostile environment unless you were operating under someone else's request. It's entirely possible you truly were that self-convinced, that self-deluded. I suppose the same could be said now. For example, why do I have to explain to a Trad Catholic why "SOB" is not acceptable language? You might prefer I start throwing obscenities your way before you figure it out.
One way or another, Manuel-Martin, forget about Pablo... you have enough to answer for yourself!
-
I have read this testimony a few times. I have dissected quite a bit of it, and compared it to my own experiences.
If this story isn’t true, it is one of the best forgeries I have ever seen.
Nearly every aspect rings as believable. The circuмstances and descriptions match my experiences quite well, as well as the descriptions of the seminary grounds. The timeline fits, and the actions mentioned match what happened at the retreats of 2015.
I could go into greater detail on how this story is far more plausible than the other, most recent effort.
Although I will not say with absolute certainty that this story is true, I believe that it reflects the truth, and that these events occurred more or less as they are written.
In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, Martin, PR agent of Hernandez the warlock, SILENCIO!
-
Your name might as well be Mud, Martin.
Now I haven't been following your posts over the long term. Perhaps you or someone else could direct me to the series of posts in which you changed your mind about Boston and actually did something to dissuade folks from going there: a grand exposé of some sort. Because to me, that's what people who have been a big part of a bad situation do to help clear their conscience and turn over a new leaf in their lives. All I remember is you being given special protection status, disappearing for a time and reappearing to post on unrelated issues from time to time only to return to the subject of Boston in order to defend Pablo over something a seminary cook wouldn't necessarily be privy to.
You see, the more you claim to have been involved in that cult operation, the greater your culpability becomes. The less effort you make to expose the well known issues over there, the more suspicion you accrue to yourself. The more you respond to valid criticism - your deflections, your credibility, your motivations, with little more than vulgar recriminations and hollow self affirmations, the more you prove that you are still part of the problem. Let's just say you've pushed all of these categories well past the point of my gastronomic capacity.
So I don't buy your act. You're not a little kid, though you argue like one. You're not directly responsible for the sacrileges at Boston like Frs Pfeiffer and Hewko are, nor are you responsible for the variously sinful behavior of Pablo (as far as we know), but you were present for much of it and you spent an awful lot of time on these forums trying to convince people how great it all was. You certainly functioned as an accessory. I distinctly remember how arrogantly you kept chugging along while throwing every single critique out the window, whether it was light-hearted or serious. Believe it or not there was a time I wasn't as harsh on you as I am now! But I am far from the only one who ran out of patience with you.
You played the part of well-intentioned Pollyanna traddy ad nauseum. One thing was for sure and that was there was hardly a single person who agreed with you around here. For the life of me, I still can't figure out why you would spend so much time in a hostile environment unless you were operating under someone else's request. It's entirely possible you truly were that self-convinced, that self-deluded. I suppose the same could be said now. For example, why do I have to explain to a Trad Catholic why "SOB" is not acceptable language? You might prefer I start throwing obscenities your way before you figure it out.
One way or another, Manuel-Martin, forget about Pablo... you have enough to answer for yourself!
You’ve been a number of things since I began posting so many years ago. Patient and understanding are not two of those things.
I have been naive. I have been duped. I have been lied to, and used in many ways.
I am not a liar, nor am I selling an act. I already answered and explained my reasons for going there. My answers, actions and intentions are true.
I already exlained why I am against unverified rumors. No one, no matter how evil their actions may be, deserves to have lies and deception spread about them.
I was asked by someone about this initial story, and I told them I would reply.
How exactly do I need to answer for myself? What sins? What evil?
-
Your name might as well be Mud, Martin.
Now I haven't been following your posts over the long term. Perhaps you or someone else could direct me to the series of posts in which you changed your mind about Boston and actually did something to dissuade folks from going there: a grand exposé of some sort. Because to me, that's what people who have been a big part of a bad situation do to help clear their conscience and turn over a new leaf in their lives. All I remember is you being given special protection status, disappearing for a time and reappearing to post on unrelated issues from time to time only to return to the subject of Boston in order to defend Pablo over something a seminary cook wouldn't necessarily be privy to.
You see, the more you claim to have been involved in that cult operation, the greater your culpability becomes. The less effort you make to expose the well known issues over there, the more suspicion you accrue to yourself. The more you respond to valid criticism - your deflections, your credibility, your motivations, with little more than vulgar recriminations and hollow self affirmations, the more you prove that you are still part of the problem. Let's just say you've pushed all of these categories well past the point of my gastronomic capacity.
So I don't buy your act. You're not a little kid, though you argue like one. You're not directly responsible for the sacrileges at Boston like Frs Pfeiffer and Hewko are, nor are you responsible for the variously sinful behavior of Pablo (as far as we know), but you were present for much of it and you spent an awful lot of time on these forums trying to convince people how great it all was. You certainly functioned as an accessory. I distinctly remember how arrogantly you kept chugging along while throwing every single critique out the window, whether it was light-hearted or serious. Believe it or not there was a time I wasn't as harsh on you as I am now! But I am far from the only one who ran out of patience with you.
You played the part of well-intentioned Pollyanna traddy ad nauseum. One thing was for sure and that was there was hardly a single person who agreed with you around here. For the life of me, I still can't figure out why you would spend so much time in a hostile environment unless you were operating under someone else's request. It's entirely possible you truly were that self-convinced, that self-deluded. I suppose the same could be said now. For example, why do I have to explain to a Trad Catholic why "SOB" is not acceptable language? You might prefer I start throwing obscenities your way before you figure it out.
One way or another, Manuel-Martin, forget about Pablo... you have enough to answer for yourself!
You pretty much nailed it Croixalist.
Martin Dougherty is the social media agent for Paul Hernandez, the warlock.
It makes sense because Hernandez can barely write a correct English sentence and has been banned on most forums :jester:
I'm aware of a close friend of Martin's who literally warned him for years to get his brother Chris out of the Pfeiffer hell-hole.
He's never acted on it. It's as if both brothers are bewitched and paralyzed, like so many others.
Martin has a silver tongue. His diversionary posts on this topic remind me of dialogue with a demon.
The best advice is not too communicate with him. He adds no value to a deadly serious topic.
-
So now Seraphina has corroborated Catholicus' story about strange/angry phone calls ("some in Spanish") being received from various different places after a run-in with Pablo.
-
The proverbial straw that broke this camel's back happened on the fourth day of the retreat. I wasn't feeling well, and excused myself to lie down. Pablo was in the room. He suddenly turned all solicitous, insisting I go over to the house where I could rest in a real bedroom with peace and quiet, instead of in the dormitory where a lot of noise and commotion was going on. I tried to refuse, but a certain lady, an employee at the time, agreed with Pablo. She had some linens that had to be brought to the house, so Pablo would bring me over on a golf cart. I went with him reluctantly. Pablo got angry upon finding the front door ajar and cats wandering in and out. He cursed at the cats and roughly kicked one aside hard enough to hurt it. Once inside, Pablo closed the door and locked it. He gave me a stack of linens, told me to bring them upstairs, make up two beds, put away the towels except for a particular set, in a linen closet. I was to take a shower, use the set of linens, to dry off, and wear a robe I'd find in a certain bedroom closet. When I was done with that, I was to take a long nap in that particular bedroom, none other. I could feel secure because he'd have all the doors to the house locked. Horrified, I asked exactly why this was necessary. He said it was his duty to protect me from any males who might try to break in, that the house was isolated from the rest of the buildings and it was dangerous for a woman to stay there alone. We were in the kitchen, Pablo standing in the doorway. I feigned going for a glass of water, and when Pablo went to "assist" me, I dashed through a utility room and out a back door. I got in my car that was parked in the driveway and drove, locked in, to the side door of the dormitory. I hastily retrieved the few items I had inside and drove an hour east to a friend's house.
Wow. So who was it present on the grounds that he considered "dangerous" for a woman to be in the house alone? Forcing you to shower and put on a specific robe is definitely a cause for alarm. You did well to plan your escape at that point. I could see where if you were not feeling well, resting in a real bed in a real room might be good for you. But when he told you that you had to shower and put on the robe, yikes!
If he had been concerned about your state, he would have made the beds for you ... or if he felt that this was incompatible with his standards for machismo, have the other lady do it. But, more than that, why did he have you make TWO beds?
So, could I ask, how was Pablo insulting the wives of those men who went to confront him about it? What was he saying about them?
-
"I was to take a long nap in that particular bedroom, none other". Scary. Hernandez does like making movies. Anyone else thinking the same thing? Hidden camera?
-
You pretty much nailed it Croixalist.
Martin Dougherty is the social media agent for Paul Hernandez, the warlock.
It makes sense because Hernandez can barely write a correct English sentence and has been banned on most forums :jester:
I'm aware of a close friend of Martin's who literally warned him for years to get his brother Chris out of the Pfeiffer hell-hole.
He's never acted on it. It's as if both brothers are bewitched and paralyzed, like so many others.
Martin has a silver tongue. His diversionary posts on this topic remind me of dialogue with a demon.
The best advice is not too communicate with him. He adds no value to a deadly serious topic.
I am not the social media agent for Pablo. I haven’t spoken to Pablo in more than a year, if not longer.
I have had no affiliation with Boston since February 2017. The North Texas mission was shut down at that time. I am no longer the coordinator.
My visits to Boston are over, and I have advised a few seminarians to go elsewhere.
I am not aware of any close friend of mine, so how can you be aware of any such friend?
It is a deadly serious topic, which is why I will continue to shut down the lies and demand accountability for such diabolical accusations, especially when the former Dallas mission was implied to have participated in these diabolic actions.
As for “dialogue with a demon”, I have received better treatment from radical, lesbian feminists with axes to grind than what I have gotten from some people here.
I have posted on the National Catholic Reporter for some time, through their social media outlets, and during that time, I have been maligned for my traditional Catholic positions by practicing ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, by women “priests”, and by other such people.
It is quite sad that they are more reasonable and more charitable than the likes of Incredulous and Croixalist.
-
"I was to take a long nap in that particular bedroom, none other". Scary. Hernandez does like making movies. Anyone else thinking the same thing? Hidden camera?
That thought absolutely crossed my mind.
-
A woman in a robe locked in a strange house with a strange man, who invited her to take a nap. I was thinking much worse...
-
Manuel,
Very intelligent and good people continue to list only facts and personal experiences. Your eternal, unwavering response to these good people is to accuse them of “lies, deceptions, rumors”. These people become agitated only because of your constant denials, lies and subterfuges. Psychologists call your reactions "projection".
All the while you know that these are facts, but your programming does not permit you to admit it. To compare honest Catholic people to radical lesbian feminists is desperate, wouldn’t you agree, at least in your heart of hearts? But don’t admit it to us. It might break the spell, and fragment your fragile armor.
As Will Rogers, used to say: “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging”.
He also said: “After eating an entire bull, a mountain lion felt so good he started roaring. He kept it up until a hunter came along and shot him. The moral: When you're full of bull, keep your mouth shut.”.
-
Manuel,
Very intelligent and good people continue to list only facts and personal experiences. Your eternal, unwavering response to these good people is to accuse them of “lies, deceptions, rumors”. These people become agitated only because of your constant denials, lies and subterfuges. Psychologists call your reactions "projection".
All the while you know that these are facts, but your programming does not permit you to admit it. To compare honest Catholic people to radical lesbian feminists is desperate, wouldn’t you agree, at least in your heart of hearts? But don’t admit it to us. It might break the spell, and fragment your fragile armor.
As Will Rogers, used to say: “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging”.
He also said: “After eating an entire bull, a mountain lion felt so good he started roaring. He kept it up until a hunter came along and shot him. The moral: When you're full of bull, keep your mouth shut.”.
Amen
-
Wow. So who was it present on the grounds that he considered "dangerous" for a woman to be in the house alone? Forcing you to shower and put on a specific robe is definitely a cause for alarm. You did well to plan your escape at that point. I could see where if you were not feeling well, resting in a real bed in a real room might be good for you. But when he told you that you had to shower and put on the robe, yikes!
If he had been concerned about your state, he would have made the beds for you ... or if he felt that this was incompatible with his standards for machismo, have the other lady do it. But, more than that, why did he have you make TWO beds?
So, could I ask, how was Pablo insulting the wives of those men who went to confront him about it? What was he saying about them?
Yes, I think he had a camera somewhere, but no proof, only that to instruct me to engage in person a hygiene and then sleep in a specific bed is highly inappropriate. Are you married or do you have a sister? What about your mother? How would you react if Pablo instructed them to take a shower, to dry off with a specific set of towels and put on a robe that was ready and waiting in a closet, then go and sleep in a specific bed? Why did he have me do chores first before resting? Because he enjoys ordering people around and may not know how to make a proper bed. The fact that I felt sick was of no concern to him. He cares about himself.
What did Pablo say to and about the women? That they were secret feminists, that they weren't attractive, that their husbands married them out of desperation because truly feminine women are impossible to find. Any self-respecting man will not tolerate another man insulting his wife.
-
Martin,
I neither assume nor presume. With few exceptions, you have followed a pattern of dissimulation for years, desperately insulting the intelligence of many good people. I haven’t time to list all the specifics; they are innumerable on CathInfo. You should be ashamed.
-
Just because Catholicus’ accusations weren’t specific, doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. I’m not going to blindly believe in sordid tales, I agree with you there. But you continue to make yourself the “expert” on all things OLMC, which is ridiculous.
I highly advise everyone to ignore Manuel and continue the posting of stories so we can get to the facts.
-
You pretty much nailed it Croixalist.
Martin Dougherty is the social media agent for Paul Hernandez, the warlock.
It makes sense because Hernandez can barely write a correct English sentence and has been banned on most forums :jester:
I'm aware of a close friend of Martin's who literally warned him for years to get his brother Chris out of the Pfeiffer hell-hole.
He's never acted on it. It's as if both brothers are bewitched and paralyzed, like so many others.
Martin has a silver tongue. His diversionary posts on this topic remind me of dialogue with a demon.
The best advice is not too communicate with him. He adds no value to a deadly serious topic.
Deadly serious with obvious legal ramifications too if it ever comes to light. Found this old thread where he at least admits doing "intel" for the group:
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/first-hand-report-from-boston-ky-oct-27-2015/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/first-hand-report-from-boston-ky-oct-27-2015/)
No communication is good advice, but one more for the road...
I am not the social media agent for Pablo. I haven’t spoken to Pablo in more than a year, if not longer.
I have had no affiliation with Boston since February 2017. The North Texas mission was shut down at that time. I am no longer the coordinator.
My visits to Boston are over, and I have advised a few seminarians to go elsewhere.
I am not aware of any close friend of mine, so how can you be aware of any such friend?
It is a deadly serious topic, which is why I will continue to shut down the lies and demand accountability for such diabolical accusations, especially when the former Dallas mission was implied to have participated in these diabolic actions.
As for “dialogue with a demon”, I have received better treatment from radical, lesbian feminists with axes to grind than what I have gotten from some people here.
I have posted on the National Catholic Reporter for some time, through their social media outlets, and during that time, I have been maligned for my traditional Catholic positions by practicing ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, by women “priests”, and by other such people.
It is quite sad that they are more reasonable and more charitable than the likes of Incredulous and Croixalist.
You deserve zero sympathy. Let me tell you why.
You were an active coordinator. Listen up Martin, the only reason you should be talking right now is to apologize to every single person who warned you over and over again through the years of your continuous involvement. You didn't get "duped" for years, you got seduced. You fell in love with your elevated role and you reveled in your function as "intel" gatherer. What went on over there was indisputably evil and you were a part of it. Congratulations! You can't possibly dump it all at their feet. Now it may be too late to earn anyone's respect around here, but you must take responsibility for yourself if for no other reason than your own soul. God help you if any criminality is ever proven to have occurred over there. What a disgrace!
Pablo is a jerk while I'm the SOB, huh? Martinuel, your wormtongue is being flushed out by the rain as we speak.
-
Deadly serious with obvious legal ramifications too if it ever comes to light. Found this old thread where he at least admits doing "intel" for the group:
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/first-hand-report-from-boston-ky-oct-27-2015/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/first-hand-report-from-boston-ky-oct-27-2015/)
No communication is good advice, but one more for the road...
You deserve zero sympathy. Let me tell you why.
You were an active coordinator. Listen up Martin, the only reason you should be talking right now is to apologize to every single person who warned you over and over again through the years of your continuous involvement. You didn't get "duped" for years, you got seduced. You fell in love with your elevated role and you reveled in your function as "intel" gatherer. What went on over there was indisputably evil and you were a part of it. Congratulations! You can't possibly dump it all at their feet. Now it may be too late to earn anyone's respect around here, but you must take responsibility for yourself if for no other reason than your own soul. God help you if any criminality is ever proven to have occurred over there. What a disgrace!
Pablo is a jerk while I'm the SOB, huh? Martinuel, your wormtongue is being flushed out by the rain as we speak.
You’re really working overtime to earn that three-letter title. It suits you.
You can tell me what I have done or failed to do. You can comment on what I have said and what I have written.
You CANNOT tell me what I think or feel. Those are internal, and known only to God and myself. You don’t know me, and you certainly don’t know what I think or feel. No one can know what others think, unless one has telekinetic powers, so as to read the minds of others.
“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The SHADOW knows...”
“Coordinator” was a function. I did the job. I wasn’t the best coordinator (as I was more focused on my position in RadioShack) but I had the greatest support and help any coordinator could ever have.
Mom was there for me, as she was there for my brother, and all my siblings. She did more for the mission than I did. She had the altar built, she paid for the materials, supplies, and she made the cloth items for the chapel.
She made meals for Father and for those who came to Mass. She helped set up and knock down the temporary chapel. She did all this and more, while slowly dying of cancer.
She set the standard for selfless sacrifice and hard work. She was humble and modest, charitable and understanding while she took on such great tasks. Even when I dropped the ball on a few occasions, she was there for me, and made the mission work well.
If I owe anyone any apologies, I owe them all to my mother.
I owe you nothing.
As for respect, I don’t care to have yours, or have it from anyone else who would treat others in the manner as you have done.
You have accused that I have much for which to answer (accusations without specificity or merit).
I will answer to God for all the mistakes in my life, as we all must do.
I will not answer to you, especially for that which is between God and myself (and my mother).
You don’t know what I thought, or how I felt, as the “coordinator” of the mission. You don’t know me.
Keep your assumptions and worthless accusations to yourself.
-
You’re really working overtime to earn that three-letter title. It suits you.
You can tell me what I have done or failed to do. You can comment on what I have said and what I have written.
You CANNOT tell me what I think or feel. Those are internal, and known only to God and myself. You don’t know me, and you certainly don’t know what I think or feel. No one can know what others think, unless one has telekinetic powers, so as to read the minds of others.
“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The SHADOW knows...”
“Coordinator” was a function. I did the job. I wasn’t the best coordinator (as I was more focused on my position in RadioShack) but I had the greatest support and help any coordinator could ever have.
Mom was there for me, as she was there for my brother, and all my siblings. She did more for the mission than I did. She had the altar built, she paid for the materials, supplies, and she made the cloth items for the chapel.
She made meals for Father and for those who came to Mass. She helped set up and knock down the temporary chapel. She did all this and more, while slowly dying of cancer.
She set the standard for selfless sacrifice and hard work. She was humble and modest, charitable and understanding while she took on such great tasks. Even when I dropped the ball on a few occasions, she was there for me, and made the mission work well.
If I owe anyone any apologies, I owe them all to my mother.
I owe you nothing.
As for respect, I don’t care to have yours, or have it from anyone else who would treat others in the manner as you have done.
You have accused that I have much for which to answer (accusations without specificity or merit).
I will answer to God for all the mistakes in my life, as we all must do.
I will not answer to you, especially for that which is between God and myself (and my mother).
You don’t know what I thought, or how I felt, as the “coordinator” of the mission. You don’t know me.
Keep your assumptions and worthless accusations to yourself.
Which sounds more like what happened to you:
A. to be deceived or tricked, to be a victim of deception
B. lead astray usually by persuasion or false promises. Attracted to a belief or into a course of action that is inadvisable or foolhardy
"Seduced" is precisely what happened to you. Next, you'll try and tell me you didn't love what you did or take pride in it! You can't answer me without digging deeper holes for yourself. You were told over and over and over again. You ignored us and now you're paying for it. I'm pointing that out to you because you seem to have forgotten. I'm truly amazed you can march right back up to this forum and do your selective answer dodge/Pfeiffer pundit routine.
Hopefully, you didn't stand by and let anyone receive fake sacraments from a fake priest/bishop after you were warned. I can't blame a paraplegic if he was born that way, but I can blame him if he insisted on playing in traffic when it happened.
I'm not trying to make you do anything but reveal your true character and call you out on it. Maybe you can convince other people here that it was just a simple twist of fate that such a well-intentioned, well-informed man couldn't see himself out of one of the most blatant religious shams of recent decades. Or maybe we are truly are dealing with a man who can't admit a single shred of responsibility. Are we supposed to think you couldn't say no to your mother or your brother or Pablo (or the priests who protected him) when you knew better? You can't hide behind them.
-
Which sounds more like what happened to you:
A. to be deceived or tricked, to be a victim of deception
B. lead astray usually by persuasion or false promises. Attracted to a belief or into a course of action that is inadvisable or foolhardy
"Seduced" is precisely what happened to you. Next, you'll try and tell me you didn't love what you did or take pride in it! You can't answer me without digging deeper holes for yourself. You were told over and over and over again. You ignored us and now you're paying for it. I'm pointing that out to you because you seem to have forgotten. I'm truly amazed you can march right back up to this forum and do your selective answer dodge/Pfeiffer pundit routine.
Hopefully, you didn't stand by and let anyone receive fake sacraments from a fake priest/bishop after you were warned. I can't blame a paraplegic if he was born without legs, but I can blame him if he insisted on playing in traffic.
I'm not trying to make you do anything but reveal your true character and call you out on it. Maybe you can convince other people here that it was just a simple twist of fate that such a well-intentioned, well-informed man couldn't see himself out of one of the most blatant religious shams of recent decades. Or maybe we are truly are dealing with a man who can't admit a single shred of responsibility. Are we supposed to think you couldn't say no to your mother or your brother or Pablo (or the priests who protected him) when you knew better? You can't hide behind them.
Do not presume to know my internal motivations, thoughts or desires.
I have never hidden my true character. I am flawed. I have been used and I bought into a series of lies and deceptions. I have supported lies under the false notions that they were true or reflected truth.
I have also learned my lessons, not because of CathInfo, but despite of it. The truth has been buried under lies, and a few at CathInfo are responsible for supporting those lies and errors.
CathInfo has been quite a recruiting tool for Boston, and was used many times to convince others of the illegitimacy of the accusations against Pablo and Boston.
Father And Pablo point to the obvious lies and exaggerations featured here and used those to cast doubt on the mostly or wholly true testimonies also featured here.
The likes of Croixalist and Incredulous actually hampered my search for truth, and have kept others from understanding the true problems with Boston.
Those are your actions. I do not dare to presume your inner motivations for your actions, however, as I am not God, nor do I know either of you well enough to assume any motivations of any sort.
I have never sought to lie to anyone, nor have I sought to deceive. I wanted to do God’s will for myself, and to do and be a good Catholic and a good son to my mother and a good brother for Chris. My intentions were sincere, as is my quest for the truth in all things.
I have failed in many ways, and to my mother and to my brother I owe much.
I owe to God above all others.
I am flawed. I am weak. I need His strength to continue, despite the failures and sins of the past.
I am not a liar.
I am not evil.
I am a work in progress.
-
Martin. Snap out of it. Be a man. Be Catholic.
-
Do not presume to know my internal motivations, thoughts or desires.
I have never hidden my true character. I am flawed. I have been used and I bought into a series of lies and deceptions. I have supported lies under the false notions that they were true or reflected truth.
I have also learned my lessons, not because of CathInfo, but despite of it. The truth has been buried under lies, and a few at CathInfo are responsible for supporting those lies and errors.
CathInfo has been quite a recruiting tool for Boston, and was used many times to convince others of the illegitimacy of the accusations against Pablo and Boston.
Father And Pablo point to the obvious lies and exaggerations featured here and used those to cast doubt on the mostly or wholly true testimonies also featured here.
The likes of Croixalist and Incredulous actually hampered my search for truth, and have kept others from understanding the true problems with Boston.
Those are your actions. I do not dare to presume your inner motivations for your actions, however, as I am not God, nor do I know either of you well enough to assume any motivations of any sort.
I have never sought to lie to anyone, nor have I sought to deceive. I wanted to do God’s will for myself, and to do and be a good Catholic and a good son to my mother and a good brother for Chris. My intentions were sincere, as is my quest for the truth in all things.
I have failed in many ways, and to my mother and to my brother I owe much.
I owe to God above all others.
I am flawed. I am weak. I need His strength to continue, despite the failures and sins of the past.
I am not a liar.
I am not evil.
I am a work in progress.
What is this? A Stuart Smalley daily affirmation? I-I-I-I-I-I-I-
Right, blame me, blame Fr Pfeiffer, blame Pablo, blame CathInfo, blame everybody else except... can you guess?
This forum absolutely had the truth on Boston, but you couldn't take it because it wasn't complimentary towards you. I know Matthew for one took great pains to give you plenty of space at CathInfo. It's called pride. Funny how all these narcissistic personalities all kind of came together at once. Nibbling on the edges of other narratives like an old shoe isn't helping. Work on your own narrative and come back with something of use.
-
Yes, I think he had a camera somewhere, but no proof, only that to instruct me to engage in person a hygiene and then sleep in a specific bed is highly inappropriate. Are you married or do you have a sister? What about your mother? How would you react if Pablo instructed them to take a shower, to dry off with a specific set of towels and put on a robe that was ready and waiting in a closet, then go and sleep in a specific bed? Why did he have me do chores first before resting? Because he enjoys ordering people around and may not know how to make a proper bed. The fact that I felt sick was of no concern to him. He cares about himself.
What did Pablo say to and about the women? That they were secret feminists, that they weren't attractive, that their husbands married them out of desperation because truly feminine women are impossible to find. Any self-respecting man will not tolerate another man insulting his wife.
Ah yes... another charming Hernandez spiritual molestation story.
It reminds me of an old Southern country saying that would apply to the slimey warlock:
"He should have the ever-lovin crap beat out of him!" :really-mad2:
-
Martin: you remind me of what Putin said about Obama:
”Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon knocks over all the pieces on the board, and then struts around like it won the game." —-Vladimir Putin
-
Ok. Is Martin and Seraphina now safe?
-
Ok. Is Martin and Seraphina now safe?
They're fine, it's the pigeon I'm worried about now.
-
Are you married or do you have a sister? What about your mother? How would you react if Pablo instructed them to take a shower, to dry off with a specific set of towels and put on a robe that was ready and waiting in a closet, then go and sleep in a specific bed?
Yes, I am married, and I probably would have administered a severe beat-down, and perhaps engaged in some "pipe fitting" myself.
-
What did Pablo say to and about the women? That they were secret feminists, that they weren't attractive, that their husbands married them out of desperation because truly feminine women are impossible to find. Any self-respecting man will not tolerate another man insulting his wife.
Indeed, I would have beaten him within an inch of his life if he had spoken of my wife that way.
What's more, if I were a priest and heard that he was speaking of women that way, I would immediately expel him from "the compound". If I had found that he had done any ONE of the things you cited, I would have expelled him ... for giving fake blessings, for insulting people, and ESPECIALLY for locking you into a house with nothing but a robe on.
It's absolutely inconceivable that Fathers Pfeiffer and Hewko permitted this man to stick around.
-
As Catholicus stated, everyone on the farm is affected by the warlock' spell.
They are in need of exorcisms and other rehabilitation.
If there is such a thing as a line of authority within the remnant Resistance, helping these people would fall under Bp. Zendejas's jurisdiction.
But first, Hernandez the warlock needs to be expelled from the property And Our Lady will intercede for us on that issue.
To be continued...
-
As an outsider to this whole situation (having never been involved at all with Boston Kentucky or any of its chapels), I don't know the history very well. And I am not really entitled to an opinion, but I'll give it anyway.
It would seem, from this thread, that Mr. Chavez has seen what Boston, Kentucky is really all about, and has distanced himself from it, thankfully.
Can't he be forgiven for his mistakes? He probably needs to ask for that forgiveness, but still. Aren't we supposed to forgive our brother 70 X 7? That sounds too simplistic, I know. It appears that he stayed involved for too long due to familial concerns (and other reasons, too), which he has explained. That seems reasonable to me. Family ties can be a powerful motivator, and not always to the good.
-
Let’s continue to support a testimony that:
1. Cannot specify what month or even what year the story took place...
2. Could not verify the restaurant or even the city of the restaurant.
3. Could not remember what carpet, in what building, was “burned” by a cigar.
But ...
The writer CAN remember the precise “witchcraft” formulas in exact detail after having glanced at the book for a few moments, and can recall the dialogue between Pablo and the chef at the restaurant, which supposedly took place in the kitchen of the restaurant they could not recall or locate on a map, while the writer was at the table with father.
Wow.
Selective memory: sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. Some people would focus almost entirely on food instead of a train wreck just outside their backyard. Incredible stuff really!
As an outsider to this whole situation (having never been involved at all with Boston Kentucky or any of its chapels), I don't know the history very well. And I am not really entitled to an opinion, but I'll give it anyway.
It would seem, from this thread, that Mr. Chavez has seen what Boston, Kentucky is really all about, and has distanced himself from it, thankfully.
Can't he be forgiven for his mistakes? He probably needs to ask for that forgiveness, but still. Aren't we supposed to forgive our brother 70 X 7? That sounds too simplistic, I know. It appears that he stayed involved for too long due to familial concerns, which he has explained. That seems reasonable to me. Family ties can be a powerful motivator, and not always to the good.
Bingo. Still waiting. He would rather throw insults around than admit to anything other than being weak, gullible and too trusting. Fact is he arrogantly ignored the entire forum, not just the meanies like me, and went on to be as active as any layman could possibly be aside from Pablo.
-
Bingo. Still waiting. He would rather throw insults around than admit to anything other than being weak, gullible and too trusting. Fact is he arrogantly ignored the entire forum, not just the meanies like me, and went on to be as active as any layman could possibly be aside from Pablo.
Sounds reasonable to me. But it can be difficult to admit that one has been very wrong, and to apologize for it.
-
Let’s continue to support a testimony that:
1. Cannot specify what month or even what year the story took place...
2. Could not verify the restaurant or even the city of the restaurant.
3. Could not remember what carpet, in what building, was “burned” by a cigar.
But ...
The writer CAN remember the precise “witchcraft” formulas in exact detail after having glanced at the book for a few moments, and can recall the dialogue between Pablo and the chef at the restaurant, which supposedly took place in the kitchen of the restaurant they could not recall or locate on a map, while the writer was at the table with father.
Wow.
Do I need to list out the points again from Catholicus' story that have been independently verified by other posters? I've done this several times already, but you keep ignoring it.
Depending on how long ago this took place, many of these details could be forgotten. Are you going to dispute Seraphina's story if she can't remember the color of the infamous bathrobe?
You're a complete shill and have discredited yourself.
FACT: [corroborated by none other than yourself] Pablo rarely attends Mass, and on the rare occasion he does it's not to actively participate but to make connections.
FACT: [corroborated] OLMC personnel were telling people to stop wearing St. Benedict's medals.
FACT: [corroborated] Pablo asks for pictures of people and their families to "pray for them".
FACT: [corroborated] People who run afoul of Pablo receive menacing phone calls (often in Spanish) from various different localities.
Those are all elements of Catholicus' story that have since been corroborated on this thread, giving her(?) a significant amount of credibility.
Only the soup incident, cigar incident, and appearance of the knife remain unconfirmed. While these incidents are certainly subject to interpretation, I do not believe Catholicus made them up. She could have come up with much more juicy stories if she were intent on fabricating something.
Add to these corroborated facts:
FACT: Pablo dabbled with doing exorcisms without requisite authority, and exorcists say that it's very dangerous and opens people up to being taken over by those forces.
FACT: Pablo had the nickname "El Brujo" and "El Diablo".
FACT: Pablo stated that Father Voigt had placed a "curse" on his son to cause his death, showing that Pablo is very conversant with things like curses.
FACT: Fathers Pfeiffer and Father Hewko have been acting in extraordinarily irrational ways ... without any obvious natural explanation.
So all the pieces, even without the soup incident and the burning cigar -- all are STRONG WARNING SIGNS that Pablo is mobilizing occult forces against the people at OLMC.
-
Selective memory: sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. Some people would focus almost entirely on food instead of a train wreck just outside their backyard. Incredible stuff really!
Bingo. Still waiting. He would rather throw insults around than admit to anything other than being weak, gullible and too trusting. Fact is he arrogantly ignored the entire forum, not just the meanies like me, and went on to be as active as any layman could possibly be aside from Pablo.
Catholicus’ testimony, and the rabid defense of it, reminds me a lot of the case of “Bishop” Ambrose, with some posters of CathInfo filling in for the supporters of Ambrose (with myself in the initial stages, I am sorry to say).
But of course, this story is against Pablo, so it gets a pass. Pablo is a bad guy, so even if this story is absolutely falsified, we can still use it to highlight the evils of Pablo and Boston.
I am not defending Pablo or the seminary.
CathInfo, for better or worse, is the largest site for the resistance. It has some pull in the field. As such, there ought to be a certain accountability when it comes to making accusations, and there should be room for questioning those accusations, as well as asking for proof of those accusations.
Otherwise, you are only discrediting CathInfo while giving Boston more ammunition for their worldwide machinations.
-
And then add Seraphina's extremely convincing narrative ... especially the part about how Pablo fakes blessings.
-
Catholicus’ testimony, and the rabid defense of it, ...
With each and every absurd post (see my previous lengthy post explaining how Catholicus' story has largely been corroborated, while your gratuitous denials are not credible and lose more and more credibility with each post) ... you become more and more complicit in Pablo's crimes.
-
Sounds reasonable to me. But it can be difficult to admit that one has been very wrong, and to apologize for it.
That's very true. Until his rhetoric changes from "you don't know me" and "you can't make me" to "I should have listened to the alarm and acted sooner" and replaces his habit of deflection into complete transparency, then he might have turned the corner. Right now all we have are anonymous accounts where we could really benefit from a name attached to them. Martin could still be that guy, but he's already used the excuse that he wouldn't want anything tainted on these horrible horrible forums that he is compelled to post on. He will put out personal details for what remains of Pablo's reputation, which speaks volumes as to how far he hasn't come. Admitting to mere flaws or unspecific mistakes won't do it in the confessional and surprise surprise, doesn't go very far here.
With each and every absurd post (see my previous lengthy post explaining how Catholicus' story has largely been corroborated, while your gratuitous denials are not credible and lose more and more credibility with each post) ... you become more and more complicit in Pablo's crimes.
It's completely absurd this has to be explained, but here we are yet again!
-
As Catholicus stated, everyone on the farm is affected by the warlock' spell.
It sounds like that everyone includes Martin ... who still hasn't shake free.
-
Each testimony is separate and unique. A valid and detailed testimony should not be used to validate a lie. It diminishes the value of the true testimony.
Seraphina’s testimony is clear in all its details. It is level-headed and fair. It has time, setting, and people. It can be easily verified.
Catholicus can’t do any of that, and when asked, the writer refused.
Indeed, but read again how much of Catholicus' story has in fact been verified. You keep ignoring that. Ignore if you will the parts that have not been verified, the soup incident, etc. But EVEN IF YOU TAKE THAT OUT, the case against Pablo is damning. Then combined the corroborated parts of Catholicus' story with Seraphina's account, and a picture emerges.
You believe Seraphina, and didn't ask her details to verify her story. Why? You tipped your hand when you dismissed occult practices as "mumbo jumbo". Seraphina's you find credible, whereas Catholicus' do not ... both for no reasons other than your emotions. Why didn't you grill Seraphina about the color of the bath robe, details about exactly when the fake blessing incident took place, etc.?
-
That's very true. Until his rhetoric changes from "you don't know me" and "you can't make me" to "I should have listened to the alarm and acted sooner" and replaces his habit of deflection into complete transparency, then he might have turned the corner. Right now all we have are anonymous accounts where we could really benefit from a name attached to them. Martin could still be that guy, but he's already used the excuse that he wouldn't want anything tainted on these horrible horrible forums that he is compelled to post on. He will put out personal details for what remains of Pablo's reputation, which speaks volumes as to how far he hasn't come. Admitting to mere flaws or unspecific mistakes won't do it in the confessional and surprise surprise, doesn't go very far here.
It's completely absurd this has to be explained, but here we are yet again!
Agreed; a persons' credibility can be called into question if he or she does not admit to very serious mistakes of the past, and present.
It seems that that place can have a strong affect on those who have been involved in it. People don't always easily shake off the effects of being involved in a cult - especially with the likes of Pablo. Maybe prayer and fasting for the intention of separating Pablo from Boston Kentucky and Fr. Pfeiffer would be a good thing - though maybe that's already been tried.
-
Catholicus’ testimony, and the rabid defense of it, reminds me a lot of the case of “Bishop” Ambrose, with some posters of CathInfo filling in for the supporters of Ambrose (with myself in the initial stages, I am sorry to say).
But of course, this story is against Pablo, so it gets a pass. Pablo is a bad guy, so even if this story is absolutely falsified, we can still use it to highlight the evils of Pablo and Boston.
I am not defending Pablo or the seminary.
CathInfo, for better or worse, is the largest site for the resistance. It has some pull in the field. As such, there ought to be a certain accountability when it comes to making accusations, and there should be room for questioning those accusations, as well as asking for proof of those accusations.
Otherwise, you are only discrediting CathInfo while giving Boston more ammunition for their worldwide machinations.
Imagine the hypocrisy of demanding accountability while assuming none of it yourself. You refuse to realize your weak admissions of weakness don't begin to cover your involvement in all this. The best thing anyone can do here to elevate their claims is to release their full names and move forward with all allegations. You could be the first since Fr. Voigt to do that, you could have been an example. You reluctance to share your full testimony could mean any number of things but it certainly doesn't inspire anyone else who might have something important to say from officially standing by their account. I'll tell you what I think it looks like, it looks like everyone is in fear of reprisals from you-know-who.
-
People don't always easily shake off the effects of being involved in a cult - ...
THIS ^^^
You hit the nail on the head. That's why cults often require formal "deprogramming". I think that Father Hewko too is in the cult-withdrawal phase. For both him and Martin, it may take years and years to undo all that.
-
Indeed, but read again how much of Catholicus' story has in fact been verified. You keep ignoring that. Ignore if you will the parts that have not been verified, the soup incident, etc. But EVEN IF YOU TAKE THAT OUT, the case against Pablo is damning. Then combined the corroborated parts of Catholicus' story with Seraphina's account, and a picture emerges.
You believe Seraphina, and didn't ask her details to verify her story. Why? You tipped your hand when you dismissed occult practices as "mumbo jumbo". Seraphina's you find credible, whereas Catholicus' do not ... both for no reasons other than your emotions. Why didn't you grill Seraphina about the color of the bath robe, details about exactly when the fake blessing incident took place, etc.?
Seraphina’s testimony answered all the questions before I had to ask them.
-
Seraphina’s testimony answered all the questions before I had to ask them.
You did not ask the same degree of questions, and she did not provide them. You were asking Catholicus for the name of the restaurant and specific dates. You didn't grill Seraphina about the exact dates of these incidents nor did she provide them. You didn't ask her questions akin to where the cigar holes were, i.e. what color the alleged bathrobe was, etc. So this is nonsense.
If I were staying in a strange place, I would not necessarily recall the layout of the place. If I was eating at a restaurant I did not frequent regularly, I would probably not be able to recall its name even days later, much less months. Catholicus bowed out because of your hostile grilling. You did your job by eliminating a potential source of information against Pablo.
-
Let's also not forget how impossible it would be for Pablo to put anything up on his wall when Manuel wasn't around. As we all know Pablo tightly controlled access for everyone except Mudskipper Chavez.
-
You did not ask the same degree of questions, and she did not provide them. You were asking Catholicus for the name of the restaurant and specific dates. You didn't grill Seraphina about the exact dates of these incidents nor did she provide them. You didn't ask her questions akin to where the cigar holes were, i.e. what color the alleged bathrobe was, etc. So this is nonsense.
If I were staying in a strange place, I would not necessarily recall the layout of the place. If I was eating at a restaurant I did not frequent regularly, I would probably not be able to recall its name even days later, much less months. Catholicus bowed out because of your hostile grilling. You did your job by eliminating a potential source of information against Pablo.
Seraphina’s testimony answered all of that. It was during the time of the retreats of 2015.
I was right about your reading comprehension skills needing work, apparently.
-
What you have posted is not a corroboration of the accusation of books and spells, of the photographs hanging on the walls, of the diabolic objects lying around, of the blood in the soup, and more.
I am not defending Pablo from what is true. I am fighting against lies which have buried the truth for far too long, and has kept people from seeing the truth about Boston.
—
I am not attacking you, or Catholicus, or anyone else here. Once more, the goal is to seek truthful actions and words (written and oral).
This shouldn’t be an exercise in character assassination. That is exactly what the likes of Laudislas and Croixalist have done. They have made it personal, and gone after not only my character, but my status as a Catholic.
I have apologized for my connections with Boston. I have admitted my mistakes of the past. I am not going to continuously run up and down the streets in sackcloth, moaning about my many sins, because you deem it necessary in order to win human respect from those who have no apparent sense of decency or charity.
Your actions are deplorable. Your constant denigration of my character is unjust.
You are out of order.
You most certainly are on the attack. It's only natural given how much you identify criticism with character assassination. I said your behavior was absurd and that you have no credibility, and I provided reasons why. Instead of addressing those reasons, you decided to throw profanity around and brought your family into this. You still don't seem to grasp how offensive it is to see you repeating the same patterns after that entire operation was debunked on multiple levels. None of us are in a position to throw out any of these anonymous accounts, including you. The sooner you accept that, the better it will be for the entire forum.
Many of us here have valid concerns regarding your behavior, your motivations, and your character according to the quality and content of your posts here. If you don't like it and want the criticism to stop, you're going to have to prove it to your critics or figure out a way to silence them. Option B isn't available right now. We could go back and forth like this as long as you want, but I have a feeling you'd like to see an end to this.
Here's what might help: place a link in your signature line to this great admission of yours. That way you won't have the great burden of restating all the specifics. If there is anything like recriminations of CathInfo, the only site that consistently spoke out against that situation, throw it out and start a new one. Leave out what your mother or brother thought or did, focus on your actions and how it affected the TLM community. I hope it provides as many details as you seem to indicate: all the lies, the manipulations, and your specific contributions... otherwise, keep working on it. I feel like your stalling for time over here.
Oh yeah, and no food details.
-
Martin, he's talking about your public activities, not your sins in the internal forum.
-
Who do you think you are? Are you God? Are you my confessor?
Who are you to demand that I specify my “sins” to this or any other crowd? Who are you to demand an oath or loyalty or penance, or that my every post should have a list of my failures, in what I have done and failed to do?
This is crazy.
Does no one else see what is going on here?
It's not crazy. You keep referring to your admissions, but I don't see anything other than original sin and naivete being actively admitted. We all have "flaws", we are all "weak", but what did you do here? Lets see some details. You don't have to do anything, I'm just telling you what would be an act of good faith on your part in my estimation. You were involved in a public scandal, so some kind of public account would be appropriate. You could start with your public behavior on this forum. I don't expect you to take any advice from me or anyone else though because you never have as long as I've seen you post here. Call it a character defect.
Let’s summarize what we have here, for those who came in late.
Catholicus released a testimony against Boston and Pablo.
I doubted the veracity of the story, for many reasons.
Others defended the story as true.
I asked questions regarding time, palace and actions.
I received no answers, only more excuses.
My reputation and character are both attacked, in addition to having my doubts questioned. I was accused of being Pablo’s social media guy, as being under a spell, as being a liar, and more. I have been commanded to apologize for my sins, and have been told to shut up.
This is a bit like the situation a few years ago, when the 16 year old made up the story about Pablo (that one was taken down).
No one ever apologized to me, or recognized that they were duped by a teenager. No one admitted to supporting a series of lies.
No one had their character αssαssιnαtҽd for that situation.
History repeats itself.
As far as that old incident goes, Matthew manned up big time for that as I recall. I seem to remember waiting to post on that story before it got corrected. But to paraphrase you, "that isn't what this is about." This isn't about what everybody else did, it's about what you did. This is about your actions right now.
My triggering came when you were given a list of decent questions which you decided to ignore for the most part and make the same tired claims of unjust persecution. You still haven't answered whether Pablo let his hellhound into the chapel. Then again, it's not like your account holds much weight either. You weren't exactly Pablo's keeper. In fact, it was quite the opposite by your own admission. You were absolutely captivated! Therein lies the main criticism: you never had a handle on events.
-
None of that should be necessary to highlight defects and cast doubt on the dubious tales of an anonymous source.
It wasn't, but you do have unfinished business on your end and you have vastly overestimated your ability to rule anything out over at Boston... especially when you hold your own experiences so close to the vest. As far as you're concerned, you don't believe his story but if you want your opinion to have weight, you have a lot more work to do on yourself first. Learn to deal with criticism better.
-
Others defended the story as true.
Not everyone did. Some are still waiting for more detais.
I asked questions regarding time, palace and actions. I received no answers, only more excuses.
You did receive some answers, but you cast them aside as not "jiving" with "your experiences". Admittedly, Catholicus retreating hurts the story (for now). But some of her story has been corroborated by other sources. You've yet to admit that the story is partially correct.
-
I answered the questions that I could answer, even though they were loaded questions, and their aims were entirely clear, as well as being misguided.
They were to insinuate that the dog was killed in an animal sacrifice and burned upon the “altar” that was the fire pit. That accusation can still be found in the archives of CathInfo.
It was not a hellhound. It was a hound, a creature of God, an innocent and dumb animal, one that did nothing wrong, except for living in Boston. You can’t even muster some decency for a dead dog, let alone another soul whom you encounter on the internet.
Surely you can do better. Have some consideration that you are dealing with other souls on the internet, not mindless, soulless bots. We are all flawed and sinful, each in our own ways. You are no better than I, and I am no better than anyone here.
I question the validity of the story. I must admit that I cannot determine with 100% certainty that the story is false, nor should I do so.
I must hold myself to the same level of accountability as I do for others.
I should be able to question the validity of the story, while making sure I do not question or denigrate the character of the writer.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask others to do the same.
More deflections.
What better way to address all concerns than to consolidate all your admissions in one place for all to see and to easily access? I'm not about to slavishly search your profile or the archives.
I'm not concerned about the pit at this moment, but it is a testament to how evil things are over there that it isn't some great stretch of imagination to consider witchcraft. There's no sense in trying to howl at the moon over it, Pablo has earned the reputation! Speaking of howling, now you're offended by "hellhound?" Challenge accepted for the selectively oversensitive. I'm only going to wear these kiddie gloves once:
To your limited knowledge, was the most honorable and well-intentioned canine of El Pablo Diablo allowed into the Chapel at Boston Kentucky and or into any other Church?
That supposed “unfinished business” is my business, not yours. I don’t have to air it all out or settle scores or beat myself to death with guilt to have valid questions about the testimony.
You don't have to do anything. I just gave you a clue about how to end unwanted criticism. Address the concerns as transparently as you can and you could make things easier for yourself and everyone involved. Or just keep doing the same tired routine and get more and more miserable. It's all up to you.
-
While others have experienced one or two of the elements of Catholicus’ story, this does not validate the testimony as a whole.
Thank you, Captain Obvious. No one ever said that Catholicus' story was entirely true, except you, in order to setup a straw man to validate your persecution narrative.
-
I will honor your attempt to be less confrontational.
I remember the dog in the church.
The doors were left open at times, such as during manualia, and on especially hot days. Wasps would fly in unannounced, as would other critters. The dog was no different.
When I saw the dog in the church, it occurred to me that God gives a sixth sense to some creatures. This dog could have gone anywhere on the grounds to seek solace. It went to the chapel, the best place at the seminary.
The dog knew where to go for peace; the house of God, in the presence of His Son, Our Lord, in the tabernacle. The dog reminded me of Mary Magdalene at the feet of Our Lord, or of the publican in the temple, as it lay peacefully near the doors of the chapel.
“Lord have mercy on me, a sinner.”
:applause: Bravo! :applause:
I knew there was a reason you were holding back.
-
Martin: None of us are God, or your confessor, but many of us wish that you would drop your total self-absorption, and show some pity for your brother, who is forced to identify with the many errors of Boston, and tragically will become Boston. Save him, and you will begin to heal yourself, and embark on the tortuous journey to adulthood and selflessness.
-
I will honor your attempt to be less confrontational.
I remember the dog in the church.
The doors were left open at times, such as during manualia, and on especially hot days. Wasps would fly in unannounced, as would other critters. The dog was no different.
When I saw the dog in the church, it occurred to me that God gives a sixth sense to some creatures. This dog could have gone anywhere on the grounds to seek solace. It went to the chapel, the best place at the seminary.
The dog knew where to go for peace; the house of God, in the presence of His Son, Our Lord, in the tabernacle. The dog reminded me of Mary Magdalene at the feet of Our Lord, or of the publican in the temple, as it lay peacefully near the doors of the chapel.
“Lord have mercy on me, a sinner.”
Okay, now that I've had some time to really take this in, here are a few serious observations.
- This dog was not a service dog and it had no place inside the chapel. Insects on a hot day I could understand, but a dog must be leashed or confined to another area if there was ever a chance of having it walk in on its own. Its presence was a desecration. That it belonged to Pablo the Desecrator is no surprise.
- That the dog might have preferred hanging out in or near the chapel instead of say, his owner, could be interpreted as an unsettling sign.
- That you carefully avoided answering this question in the affirmative until you framed it with "saint" Guinefort levels of animal sanctity implies that you are aware of how bad it looks to have a dog run around the same place as Holy Mass.
- That this dog would remind you of a saint at all is somewhat disturbing to be if not outright absurd. For the first time I'm actually concerned for your mental state, Martin.
I will continue to pray for you, but please do yourself a big favor and let the whole Boston topic go unless you are truly prepared to do what must be done to speak out against it. We need to expose every single scrap of darkness in that place. I have reason to believe you have been holding back and I'm asking you to drop the defenses and to find the strength to put it all out there. Until then, God Bless. I really mean it, man!
-
I will honor your attempt to be less confrontational.
I remember the dog in the church.
The doors were left open at times, such as during manualia, and on especially hot days. Wasps would fly in unannounced, as would other critters. The dog was no different.
When I saw the dog in the church, it occurred to me that God gives a sixth sense to some creatures. This dog could have gone anywhere on the grounds to seek solace. It went to the chapel, the best place at the seminary.
The dog knew where to go for peace; the house of God, in the presence of His Son, Our Lord, in the tabernacle. The dog reminded me of Mary Magdalene at the feet of Our Lord, or of the publican in the temple, as it lay peacefully near the doors of the chapel.
“Lord have mercy on me, a sinner.”
I don't know why the dog is significant to the story here, but I can understand a dog going into a chapel if the doors are open on a hot day.
It probably isn't a good idea for dogs to be in chapels, but it probably isn't sacrilegious either.
I recall when I once attended a Novus Ordo Mass, a man sat down nearby in the same pew as me, with a small dog on his lap. I almost got up and went to another pew, but decided not to. I was surprised that that little dog was very quiet and well-behaved, and sat either on the man's lap, or on the pew and hardly moved at all. I actually forgot about the dog being there, for most of the mass.
-
Folks,
Martin has acted as the social media PR man for Paul Hernandez for years.
He's a soft-shoe spin man.
His brother Chris, is totally under the warlock' spell and this is where Martin gets his G-2.
Very simply, we have 7 years of accuмulated testimony that Hernandez is engaged in the occult arts.
Pfeiiferville is a warlock' lair and we need to rally to get him out of there. The collateral damage to trads souls is enormous, with ripple effects.
We ARE the Church Militant and we have a duty to take spiritual action against warlocks who embed themselves in our TLM Chapels.
-
Pfeiiferville is a warlock' lair and we need to rally to get him out of there. The collateral damage to trads souls is enormous, with ripple effects.
We ARE the Church Militant and we have a duty to take spiritual action against warlocks who embed themselves in our TLM Chapels.
:applause:
Whether wittingly or unwittingly, Pablo the Mexican has been an agent (or tool) of Satan ... with the aim of corrupting the souls tied to Boston.
I'm beginning to believe that Martin is himself somehow under his diabolical influence.
-
Again, here's what we KNOW ...
1 ) Pablo's publicly-known destructive activities (sewing division and chaos, whether publicly or by spreading gossip)
2 ) Pablo's expressed scorn for Traditional Catholics, placing them beneath Satan.
3 ) Pablo rarely attends Mass, and when he does it's to make contacts. What's his motivation for being at front and center of a Traditonal Catholic group at all?
4 ) Pablo's machinations against the St. Benedict medal.
5 ) Pablo's attempting to conduct exorcisms without requisite authority or even Orders. Exorcists state that this is opening oneself up to evil influence/takeover.
6 ) Pablo's nicknames of "El Brujo" and "El Diablo". Why was he called these?
7 ) Pablo collecting pictures of people.
8 ) Pablo performing fake blessings (just one witness to this ... but Martin did not dispute it and felt she was credible)
9 ) Pablo claiming that Fr. Voight put a curse on his son. Why did that pop into his head?
10) Strange menacing phone calls (sometimes in Spanish) received from varying locations after running afoul of Pablo.
What else do we need, Martin?
Catholicus then mentioned Pablo possibly tampering food and speculated (admittedly) that it might be some kind of witchcraft. Catholicus also claimed to have seen a book on his desk about controlling people. Catholicus also described some other strange/unusual behavior. In these cases, it was admittedly speculation. If Catholicus were trying to fabricate things, she could have done much better than this. Was part of it interpretation imposed on some other strange behavior by her own mind? Perhaps. But I don't think she was making it up out of thin air. And 1-10 above make the sinister potential for these other strange activities MORE PLAUSIBLE.
Nobody here was hanging their hat on the certainty that Pablo was casting a spell on Catholicus' food. As someone astutely said, if the report was of Bishop Williamson sprinkling stuff in someone's soup, and that's ALL we had, it would have been completely dismissed or ignored. But look at 1-10 above for a while and let those things sink in.
-
I know people personally who are involved with OLMC. The story is always the same. Pablo is a meanie—rough around the edges—takes it too far sometimes—but he’s harmless.
NO. I’m done with those pathetic excuses. There is something diabolic going on. I could care less if Pablo means well or not. We have no business judging intentions anyway. We don’t need them.
We have years of personal testimonies from MANY people dealing with this man. And conveniently, we also have quite a few people covering for him. And supposedly, they aren’t his biggest fans either?? Yeah, uh huh.. nice cover.
SO MANY TIMES I WAITED FOR FR. PFEIFFER OR FR. HEWKO TO STEP IN AND DO SOMETHING. FIX THIS.
ANYTHING.
THEY WOULDN’T. THEY HAVEN'T. THEY DIDN’T.
MANY REACHED OUT. EMAILS, PHONECALLS, FACE TO FACE.
AND WHAT DO WE HAVE? ‘INACTIVITY’ IN REGARDS TO HANDLING LEGITIMATE CONCERNS PERTAINING TO RELIGIOUS, LAITY AND CHILDREN ASSOCIATED WITH A MISSION/PARISH/SEMINARY.
That’s right, let’s just sit around and do nothing, yeah that’s productive.
Frankly, sounds exactly like what Satan would want.
And to heck with intentions,
the devil doesn’t need em’.
-
A blast from the past -- some words from Pablo himself!
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pablo-explodes-matthew-publicly-admonishes-him (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pablo-explodes-matthew-publicly-admonishes-him)
Words from Pablo himself:
You have offended me and all those I love...
The hatred I have in my heart and my soul for Trad Catholics of Immaculate Virtue, those Whited Sepulcher Pharisees (as I am no longer able to call them), runs shoulder to shoulder with my hatred of the Apostate Angels.
The damage you do to poor souls will be made manifest to you when side by side with the Father of Lies are made to proclaim that which he denies.
You all are no more Catholic than I am a woman with twelve children.
Never in my life have I seen such a wicked group, and I know some real pukes.
Save your evil prayers. And the Rosary Prayers you are calling for are of evil intent. Start your Novena to run me out of here again. This time try harder.
I hate being among you all.
May the Lord punish you, Satan.
-
Words from Pablo himself:
You have offended me and all those I love...
The hatred I have in my heart and my soul for Trad Catholics of Immaculate Virtue, those Whited Sepulcher Pharisees (as I am no longer able to call them), runs shoulder to shoulder with my hatred of the Apostate Angels.
The damage you do to poor souls will be made manifest to you when side by side with the Father of Lies are made to proclaim that which he denies.
You all are no more Catholic than I am a woman with twelve children.
Never in my life have I seen such a wicked group, and I know some real pukes.
Save your evil prayers. And the Rosary Prayers you are calling for are of evil intent. Start your Novena to run me out of here again. This time try harder.
I hate being among you all.
May the Lord punish you, Satan.
If I'm reading his disjointed text right... he even signed off as "satan"
-
It probably isn't a good idea for dogs to be in chapels, but it probably isn't sacrilegious either.
I recall when I once attended a Novus Ordo Mass, a man sat down nearby in the same pew as me, with a small dog on his lap. I almost got up and went to another pew, but decided not to. I was surprised that that little dog was very quiet and well-behaved, and sat either on the man's lap, or on the pew and hardly moved at all. I actually forgot about the dog being there, for most of the mass.
The church is not the placefor dogs. In my mind it is certainly sacriligeous.
AS for a dog sitting on a man's lap during Mass, I find the idea repulsive, in spite of being a dog lover. THis one also sat on the pew. WHy not the floor?
.
NEWSFLASH! Dogs are dirty creatures which do not care too much for hygiene.Allowing a dog to sit where children are likely to put their fingers and even their mouths on occasion is irresponsible and stupid.
I Can't believe that you think this is OK. It is not. VAlues are completely up side down.
-
Fake blessing of Rosary occurred in the spring of 2005, maybe May. Sorry, I don't have the exact date. I never saw the bathrobe because I didn't go upstairs. (Seriously, does anyone think I'd trap myself on the second floor with Pablo? ) The set of towels were medium blue, less worn looking than the others. When you came in the front door, the stairs were in front of you, the kitchen to your right. In the backyard where I exitted, there was an above ground swimming pool with kid's toys floating in it. The driveway was not paved, of gravel and large pieces of bluestone chip. The cat that got kicked was an older orange tiger cat. Any other details, please ask.
-
Fake blessing of Rosary occurred in the spring of 2005, maybe May. Sorry, I don't have the exact date. I never saw the bathrobe because I didn't go upstairs. (Seriously, does anyone think I'd trap myself on the second floor with Pablo? ) The set of towels were medium blue, less worn looking than the others. When you came in the front door, the stairs were in front of you, the kitchen to your right. In the backyard where I exitted, there was an above ground swimming pool with kid's toys floating in it. The driveway was not paved, of gravel and large pieces of bluestone chip. The cat that got kicked was an older orange tiger cat. Any other details, please ask.
Okay, please wait Seraphina while Martin checks with his brother Chris, who will go into the rectory to ask his master, Hernandez the warlock the about the accuracy of your details. :facepalm:
-
The church is not the placefor dogs. In my mind it is certainly sacriligeous.
AS for a dog sitting on a man's lap during Mass, I find the idea repulsive, in spite of being a dog lover. THis one also sat on the pew. WHy not the floor?
.
NEWSFLASH! Dogs are dirty creatures which do not care too much for hygiene.Allowing a dog to sit where children are likely to put their fingers and even their mouths on occasion is irresponsible and stupid.
I Can't believe that you think this is OK. It is not. VAlues are completely up side down.
I think that the little dog was quite old and infirm. At least it appeared that way. That could be why it was not on the floor. But keep in mind that the kneeler has to go up and down, which would interfere with a dog being on the floor. I was actually okay, eventually, with the dog being there, though I don't normally approve of such things. I agree that dogs are dirty creatures. However, there are many places and things that are filthy, such as shopping carts in grocery stores, which people put their children in, and also hospitals which are some of the filthiest places on earth. I worked for many years in hospitals.
In the grand scheme of things, I can't see that a dog being in a church is a cause for an extreme reaction when there are so many other things to get worked up about. It's okay to disagree.
-
Meg, my response was not directed at you. It would be a topic for another thread. I love dogs, but I can't stand to see them treated as humans. The important point I would like to make is that a church is a sacred place and is not for dogs - Pablo's or this strange man's.
-
The issue with the Saint Benedict medal is up to debate. I received a Saint Benedict Crucifix from Mrs. Pfeiffer, which Father Pfeiffer blessed for me in 2015 November.
We've had two people independently testify to this. We don't know the precise timeline for when they turned against the St. Benedict medal.
-
If I'm reading his disjointed text right... he even signed off as "satan"
Sounds to me like he's calling Matthew (or whomever he's addressing here) Satan.
That post of his drips with diabolical contempt.
-
In the grand scheme of things, I can't see that a dog being in a church is a cause for an extreme reaction when there are so many other things to get worked up about. It's okay to disagree.
If letting a dog stray into the chapel were the worst thing that happened there, we'd all be ecstatic. Let's move on to bigger fish. This evolved from the discussion about whether people at OLMC were sacrificing animals, and it went off the rails.
-
If letting a dog stray into the chapel were the worst thing that happened there, we'd all be ecstatic. Let's move on to bigger fish. This evolved from the discussion about whether people at OLMC were sacrificing animals, and it went off the rails.
I agree.
Regarding bigger fish, I do have to agree with Mr. Chavez that proof is still needed for the accusations of Catholicus. Though I do hesitate to get involved in a debate to which I don't really have any real vested interest or affiliation with. But since there are others (who also have never had anything to do with Boston) have also been involved in the debate, I guess it's okay for me to do so. I tend to try to support the underdog, I don't like to see people ganged-up on. So I'll try to see the situation from Mr. Chavez' POV, if possible.
-
Meg, my response was not directed at you. It would be a topic for another thread. I love dogs, but I can't stand to see them treated as humans. The important point I would like to make is that a church is a sacred place and is not for dogs - Pablo's or this strange man's.
"Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast your pearls before swine."
But I agree that if "dog in the chapel" was the worst thing to happen in Boston, they would have no serious issues and everything would be great. Let's not get distracted by side issues. As Manuel pointed out, those distractions can be pointed to be Pablo, etc. and used to help deceive others still captivated in the cult.
I understand Manuel's point about giving credence to false stories, however a few things must be kept in mind:
1. Some people just want to be deceived. Any excuse will do. In fact, nothing we DO or DON'T DO here on CathInfo is going to wake them up.
2. In the end, it's THEY that will suffer. When they suffer at the hands of Pablo, have their lives destroyed, perhaps lose the Faith someday, etc. that won't be our fault. If they believed the lies about CathInfo, that's going to be on them. If they loved the truth, they wouldn't have been deceived -- at least not for long. People who believe lies will get what they deserve!
3. We don't always know which reports are true and which are false. That 16 year old's story, for example, lasted a little over a DAY before we tore it to pieces and exposed him. I personally lambasted the teen for his behavior, but had to take down the whole thread for legal reasons "because he's a minor". He better not try it again -- he's over 18 now!
4. I don't know of any "false stories" that weren't annihilated in this manner. If Pablo took screenshots during the early stages of our collective "discernment" process (while we were still considering a testimony, which turned out later to be false) and used it for his propaganda -- see #1 and #2.
5. Some stories are "inconclusive" -- we can't prove them right or wrong -- and we keep them in the back of our minds, reserving judgment, and weighing them against other evidence.
You don't have dozens of unverified anecdotes/allegations of sodomy, pedophilia, etc. against an innocent man. It just doesn't happen. You might have ONE false charge, yes. (NOTE: the MSM counts as one person; they are completely united in their government and talking points). Ditto for charges of witchcraft. Most people don't even get ONE unverified report charging them with witchcraft.
As I said earlier, some crimes you're not going to get video evidence. Most sodomites (for example) make sure things aren't being filmed. They want plausible deniability at every step of their crime. (the altar boy visiting with the priest after Mass, the same boy coming to the rectory later, etc.) They're not going to be stupid and CREATE a trail of hard, conclusive, indisputable evidence that might send them to prison later!
-
I want to emphasize this point:
They WANT to be deceived, or they wouldn't be. They WANT to believe that CathInfo is a bunch of evil meanies, so they can keep doing what they're doing. They've already invested a lot in the Boston cult, and it would be disruptive (to say the least!) to try to leave it.
Most of them don't know what they would do for Mass, etc. if they ever had to leave. I bet virtually all of them "don't want to think about it". Remember: they've been told for years, and have accepted deeply, that all the other Trad options "aren't an option". They know what waits for them if they ever leave: the rest of their lives Home Alone.
Pablo could point to any small thing, true or untrue, say that CathInfo is evil, and most of them will believe it because they were inclined to believe it by default!
Call it "normalcy bias".
No one wants to realize that huge chunks of their life must change -- that they screwed up big time in coming this far. Or that they bet on the wrong horse to a horrible degree. Such daunting, scary propositions are first met with denial and all manner of psychological defense mechanisms -- including being quick to believe the cult leader's propaganda and excuses.
-
Here's the thing with Martin, he makes these bizarre statements but then acts all shocked that anyone should derive a less than flattering conclusion from them.
This last thing about the dog was a real head-scratcher. He seems to imply the dog was a regular attendee based on the fact the doors were frequently left open and 'since insects get in, so do dogs because it's no different.' Actually it is a lot different! Then he says the dog was only there once. Then that bit about the Magdoglena at the foot of Christ had me gasping for air, it was so hilariously in bad taste! Is this The Room?
"Oh hi doggy!"
Then I wondered how a sound mind could produce imagery like that. It can't in my opinion and even though I've been pretty furious with him, I never thought I'd see something like that. I have to admit, it unnerved me a bit! If this is an indication of demonic influence, it's got to be one of the strangest manifestations. I'm still going with "unhinged" mostly.
One element of Catholicus' story that is unique is the food angle, and we all know Martin's slavish dedication to the culinary arts in Boston... If Pablo was dabbling in occult culinary practices, I'd have to imagine Martin would be either the first exposed or the main accomplice. This is all theoretical of course. Unfortunately, I simply can't bring myself to trust his judgement.
I won't assume you're deliberately hiding that from us Martin, but maybe certain events might make more sense to you if you allowed for the possibility. He was a great manipulator after all.
Gotta throw it out there!
-
Yeah, the dog is a side issue (there again) but it does show Manuel's muddled thinking, even today in 2019. We can't really trust his judgment. I'm not judging his soul -- just his statements as written.
Having a few bugs in your home or chapel is normal, even unavoidable in some places. But large animals? Come on! Any SANE person can see the difference.
And comparing a dog with Mary Magdalene? Give me a break! Dogs aren't rational. Unless they are acted upon by God in a miraculous manner, they are not going to do things like bow before the Blessed Sacrament or listen attentively to a Franciscan preacher's sermon.
If we are to take Manuel's statements at face value, then OLMC has real issues. They are maintaining an UNSUITABLE chapel with the Blessed Sacrament. If they can't install A/C, get a screen door, have sufficient Faithful to keep an eye on the chapel, have adequate security, etc. in order to keep known stray dogs out of the chapel, then Canon Law says the Blessed Sacrament must not be kept there. There are other requirements as well, for example the chapel must be a dedicated facility.
That's the problem with lame excuses - they are extremely fragile.
I love it when someone just pops an excuse like a bubble. A few years ago, I was burning some railroad ties (a lot of nasty smoke was produced) after dark and someone called the sheriff on me (I live in the country, so there are no city police). I gave the sheriff a whiny excuse, "I'll try to put it out, but it might flare up again later, just so you know."
Sheriff: "Do you need me to call the fire department?"
Me: "No... I'm putting it out, and will do my best, I just want to let you know it might rekindle..."
Sheriff: "Can you handle it or not"
Me: "Yes, sir, I can handle it."
Thus died my excuses.
Applying this to Boston, KY: the "Sheriff" (Canon Law) would say that Fr. Pfeiffer is forbidden from keeping the Blessed Sacrament in that chapel, on the grounds that it's unsuitable. Inadequate ventilation/cooling (they have to keep the door WIDE OPEN letting animals in, to prevent people getting heat stroke) and/or because they have inadequate Faithful to keep watch over the chapel.
-
“They want to be deceived...” can apply to those who supported Catholicus’ accusation as true.
Manuel, those accusations are PARTLY TRUE and PARTLY unverified. None of those accusations have been proven false. Have you not accepted this yet?
-
The Sheriff (in my post, a few posts up) symbolizes "laying down the law, putting the kibbosh on something which is unacceptable."
Whether that something is acrid smoke blowing towards a trailer park, a dog in a chapel with the Blessed Sacrament, or a superstitious, bullying apostate in charge of the formation of seminarians.
Any excuse which tends to permit these unacceptable things is fluff, lame, and needs to be popped.
This could be applied to Pablo's ongoing presence at OLMC.
Fr. Pfeiffer could give excuses: "We don't have enough priests to run the seminary without Pablo. We are often gone to say Mass at mission chapels. We don't have another such volunteer."
"The Sheriff" would respond: "Ok, no problem. Just shut down your seminary, send the seminarians home, and you can re-open when you have adequate staff (cleric and lay) to run a seminary. Have a nice day!"
The excuse giver always comes back with a dressed up version of "But I don't wanna!" in a whiny voice. They want their will, even though their desires are for something unacceptable.
-
The only way these testimonies will ever be sussed out is when the one who testified puts their name to the paper it was written on. We can discuss it all we want but nothing can be sworn to or sworn off. But come on! There are so many warning signs for that place, it's only a question of how sick and evil it has become.
-
Okay, please wait Seraphina while Martin checks with his brother Chris, who will go into the rectory to ask his master, Hernandez the warlock the about the accuracy of your details. :facepalm:
Indeed, if you got the color of the towels wrong, then you're completely discredited !
-
My questioning and doubting of the accusation became a launch pad for the denigration of my character.
No, you did not "question and doubt" the accusation. You categorically denied it without any more proof than Catholicus had to affirm her story. So it became your word against his. Your motivation was revealed when you denounced the talk of possible occult practices as "mumbo jumbo" ... as if you don't believe such things exist, and it was clearly on the basis of that bias that you took your position.
-
Let's playback the dog debate:
The dumb Dougherty's are delighted to debate whether a dog can be in the chapel or not... a convenient diversion.
The hound dog video verified an expensive pedigree was on the property.
BTW, Hernandez bragged about the pricey dog to the "trads"he hates.
He bragged because he knew the dog was expensive and the faithful wondered where he got the money to buy it? Out of the chapel coffers, of course.
But Then, the poor houndoggy died! Gee, but how?
The other, mutt breeds on the property were poisoned. Hernandez used to brag about that too.
But where did they bury poor hound-doggy? We want to visit his grave.
Hound-doggy was burned in a bonfire and the doggy's ashes ended-up in the chapel faithful' potluck meal.
:farmer:
-
Okay, please wait Seraphina while Martin checks with his brother Chris, who will go into the rectory to ask ...Hernandez ... about the accuracy of your details. :facepalm:
Indeed, if you got the color of the towels wrong, then you're completely discredited !
.
:laugh1:
-
The dog was poisoned by a neighbor who hated the dog, and Bradley burned the body on his own fire pit, not the barbecue pit, which was dug too deep by a seminarian, and later filled in.
Do you have evidence that this is true? Did you catch the neighbor in the act? Or might Pablo have done the poisoning and then blamed it on the neighbor?
Come on, your testimony has to be sifted and verified as well. Sauce for the goose is good for the gander...
-
Do you have evidence that this is true? Did you catch the neighbor in the act? Or might Pablo have done the poisoning and then blamed it on the neighbor?
Come on, your testimony has to be sifted and verified as well. Sauce for the goose is good for the gander...
From my brother, from other seminarians, from Bradley (owner of said fire pit), and from the Pfeiffer children.
That was Pablo’s dog. It is unlikely that he would kill his own dog. I believe the witness accounts of those at Boston, especially since one or two have no love for Pablo whatsoever.
But why believe any of us “dumb Dougherty’s”? Right? We’re under the spell of a warlock!
-
Manuel said: "I have accepted that" (i.e. that Catholicus' testimony has not been proven false).
.
Yet the post beforehand, you referred to Catholicus' story as "deceit". ?? Which is it, Manuel? Is the story 1) part true and part unverfied or 2) is it deceit?
.
Please apologize for calling Catholicus' story deceitful, without any evidence.
-
Manuel said: "I have accepted that" (i.e. that Catholicus' testimony has not been proven false).
.
Yet the post beforehand, you referred to Catholicus' story as "deceit". ?? Which is it, Manuel? Is the story 1) part true and part unverfied or 2) is it deceit?
.
Please apologize for calling Catholicus' story deceitful, without any evidence.
I apologize for jumping to a conclusion, without asking questions first, or explaining the many issues I have with the testimony or before stating my objections.
-
Manuel Chavez earlier denying the existence of a fire pit and dog being burned therein:
I reject the accusations which I know to be false, such as with the animal sacrifices and the fire pit, and more
So now you admit that the dog was burned in a fire pit even though earlier you "knew" this "to be false"?
ManuelChavez:
Bradley burned the body on his own fire pit
Is your story evolving?
ManuelChavez:
I remember that dog. It died.
Pablo liked that dog. He did not kill it, nor was it sacrificed to the gods.
I remember the deaths of a few animals, including one dog that was shot by a neighbor, and one that was hit by a car. Another one was killed by an animal trap set up by a seminarian. None of these deaths can be attributed to the demonic.
The bonfires were to allow the seminarians to relax after the day, and before lights out. It was not some ritualistic devil worship. It was a fire pit, and nothing more.
Some people just want to think the absolute worst of others, and so they turn the smallest things into the greatest evils known to man, as long as it fits their own agendas.
There are other, more easily docuмented and verifiable issues with Boston. One needn’t meddle with heresay and second-hand rumors from those with an axe to grind.
So the dog "just died". Now you revise it to state that the dog was "poisoned". You know this how? Was an autopsy performed?
You state that they just had bonfires in said "fire pit" for relaxation.
But now you admit that the dog was burned in said fire pit.
So a dog dies mysteriously and is burned in the fire pit.
Your spin was that the dog died of mysterious causes and nothing happened in the fire pit.
If the dog was poisoned, do you have proof that Pablo did not do the poisoning?
-
You are spinning the facts.
I denied animal sacrifices and the burning of animal sacrifices in the fire pit (...”such as with the animal sacrifices and the fire pit”). The dead dog was not an animal sacrifice. I did not deny the existence of any fire pit, nor did I deny that the dog was burned. The man who lived there decided to burn the dead dog, according to my brother, other seminarians and a few of the Pfeiffer children.
You have misrepresented what I have written.
Not at all. You made your earlier statements with deliberate omissions to put your own spin on it.
-
The dead dog was not an animal sacrifice. ... The man who lived there decided to burn the dead dog, according to my brother, other seminarians and a few of the Pfeiffer children.
Really, you shouldn't deny anything because you weren't there. All you have are heresay and second-hand info.
You are spinning the facts.
Your denial is not a fact. Your brother's story, the seminarian's story and the Pfeiffer children's story are not facts either, because they haven't been verified outside of you. The only facts are that the dog was burned in a fire pit. How, when and in what manner? This is inconclusive. So it is still possible that the animal was sacrificed earlier and then burned later.
-
Otherwise, it is yet another unverified and dubious accusation, and nothing more.
It may yet be verified, just like Catholicus' story was partially verified later. Quit attacking stories that you can't prove as false. Just because a story is not proven true (yet) doesn't mean it's false.
-
Here's what we know.
FACT -- Dog died. Dog was burned in a fire pit.
SPECULATION (without proof) -- Dog killing/burning was part of a Satanic ritual.
SPECULATION (without proof) -- Dog was poisoned.
SPECULATION (without proof) -- Dog was poisoned by the neighbor because he hated it.
SPECULATION (without proof) -- Pablo did NOT poison the dog.
SPECULATION (without proof) -- Dog killing/burning was NOT part of a Satanic ritual.
So, Martin, you counter the first SPECULATION above with several of your own. You counter speculation with speculation, and mistake your own speculations for FACT. That's why your denials are not credible.
-
I have credible witnesses.
For WHAT?
-
I have credible witnesses. The accusation of Satanic animal sacrifice of the dog does not even have a credible, named accuser, let alone any sort of witnesses. It is a baseless accusation, without merit and none who have come forward to support it.
It's SPECULATION, idiot. Do you not even understand English? "Baseless accusation" ... like accusing the neighbor of killing the dog?
-
Those who lived there during the whole dog situation, who knew why the dog was burned and who made that decision.
No, that's part of the FACT part that everyone agrees on. Oh, for crying out loud.
You resemble your Avatar more and more with each post.
-
Initially, you categorically stated without proof: "Pablo did not kill the dog." Later, in a moment of lucidity, you stated that you considered it "unlikely" that Pablo killed the dog. Look at the difference between those two statements, the first involves overreach, presenting as fact something you had no proof for, while the second acknowledges that it's your opinion that that you considered it merely unlikely (tacitly admitting thereby that you had no proof).
You didn't study logic at the Pfeiffer compound, did you?
-
I can and will doubt stories that conflict with established events and settings,
Ha ha. Even though it is only "established" in your own mind, since you weren't there.
-
I clarified my statements, and acknowledged that I must resist the temptation to declare with certainty the events as they have been detailed.
Thank you for seeing the light.
There will always be legitimate room for doubt, especially when dealing with human testimonies.
Not necessarily.
I do not know for certain that Pablo did not kill the dog, ...
I do not know with certainty that Pablo did not burn the corpse as part of a satanic ritual...
You also don't know that the dog was not killed ritualistically BEFORE being burned or even if it was ritualistically tortured (but not killed) and then burned to kill it off.
-
Who am I more likely to believe, a whole group of people who lived in Boston at the time, or a nameless, faceless accuser with nothing but hot air and events that don’t match the eye witness accounts?
That's true but that doesn't mean that you asked the right (or all of) the questions needed. Much of what you testify personally (and know from friends) is probably true, but it's just not the whole story. We're just picking apart the holes and facts which aren't verified.
-
Do you know the difference between speculation and accusation? Please investigate and then return to this thread.
-
Speculation is unverified or unsupported notions, whereas an accusation is the allegation of a wrongdoing. An accusation may be speculative.
Yes, an accusation may be speculative, but speculations are not necessarily accusations. You're assuming that every speculation is an accusation ... and indeed an accusation rooted in speculation would be unjust. At best it may be labeled a suspicion. But you keep claiming that people speculating about various activities are making accusations, when they are not, or, rather, not all of them are.
Am I ACCUSING Pablo of using witchcraft? No. Am I speculating that he might be? Absolutely. That's the difference.
SPECULATION->SUSPICION->ACCUSATION
So, for instance, we see Joe Biden fondling all kinds of young girls. He's under suspicion of perversion due to speculation that his motives maybe something other than affection and insensitivity to "private" space.
-
Speculations can be accusatory or even libelous.
But they are not inherently so.
Joe Biden is a pedophile: possibly libelous.
I suspect Joe Biden of being a pedophile: legitimate suspicion.
People aren't always explicit in differentiating, but everyone knows that when someone says "Joe Biden is a pedophile", it's a suspicion and not a fact. I can say, "Barrack Obama is gαy" or "Michelle Obama is transgender" without having proof ... as an articulation of my suspicion that he/she is.
-
Articulating suspicions is not only permitted but sometimes required. So, for instance, if we see an effeminate priest, we might tell people, "Watch out for that priest ... in case he's a pedophile." We've had that discussion here before. People have a right to be cautious and to advise caution for others. Now, if you were to say, "I know him to be a pedophile." or "He is a pedophile." then you cross a line.
We are with this thread basically saying, "Watch out for Pablo, as there may very well be dark forces in play." As with the pedophile example, it is not permitted but even required for us to sound the alarm bells.
-
Signs of the times:
A CCCC thread which recounted the subversion and betrayal of tradition takes 6 weeks to publish, and peters out after 11,050 hits in 2.5 months.
Meanwhile, a thread about whether the irrelevant Pablo is a warlock for the equally irrelevant Boston seminary will surpass 11,000 hits in 1/6 the time, and shows no signs of slowing down.
The thread which ought to have set the all-time views record for CI is forgotten or boring; the thread which ought to hold nobody's attention, contrarily, has all riveted to their seats.
Somehow, I think this reflects poorly on us.
It almost suggests we deserve the betrayal of the SSPX, and that the failure of the Resistance to launch is likewise merited.
We are being punished, and we seem to be enjoying it.
-
Meanwhile, a thread about whether the irrelevant Pablo is a warlock for the equally irrelevant Boston seminary will surpass 11,000 hits in 1/6 the time, and shows no signs of slowing down.
Well, if for one don't think it's irrelevant. OLMC (Father Pfeiffer, Pablo, etc.) have shredded the moral unity of a Resistance movement. People point to the OLMC disaster as showing bad fruits, etc. And some people are directly affected by being stuck in that cult, including some people here on CI and people that others of us here on CI know.
But the reason it's gone on so long is due the fact that MartinChavez won't stop defending Pablo, and matches post for post any and all suspicions articulated about Pablo. So it creates a long back-and-forth. Sometimes thread dynamics have more to do with how many people are contesting it than with the importance of the subject. If someone were to post a thread about Our Lady being immaculately conceived, it might receive one or two or zero responses ... because it's uncontested by anyone and non-controversial.
-
Speculating that an effeminate priest may be a pedophile, especially in public, can be an act of denigration of character, and can be brought up as a libel situation.
Nope. Stating that he IS a pedophile might be.
-
Here’s the bottom line: speculation is defined as an “educated guess”. It is a projection based on some facts, but is not 100% proveable (at the time). It is factual that Pablo has messed with lay exorcisms in the past. It is factual that he has some sort of “diablo” nickname. It is factual that he knows about curses and such things, because he has accused others (projection?) of being involved. It is factual that animals are killed during rituals and in strange ways, often burned. It is factual that, in Boston, animals have died in strange ways, with Pablo’s dog being burned. It is factual that Pablo is not a practicing Catholic and has stated openly that he dislikes Trads. It is factual that he is a liar, bully and a cheat.
Add all of this up, and it’s valid speculation (with much circuмstantial evidence) that Pablo is involved in witchcraft of some sort. Doesn’t mean he is, but it’s not wrong to think it’s possible.
-
Signs of the times:
A CCCC thread which recounted the subversion and betrayal of tradition takes 6 weeks to publish, and peters out after 11,050 hits in 2.5 months.
Meanwhile, a thread about whether the irrelevant Pablo is a warlock for the equally irrelevant Boston seminary will surpass 11,000 hits in 1/6 the time, and shows no signs of slowing down.
The thread which ought to have set the all-time views record for CI is forgotten or boring; the thread which ought to hold nobody's attention, contrarily, has all riveted to their seats.
Somehow, I think this reflects poorly on us.
It almost suggests we deserve the betrayal of the SSPX, and that the failure of the Resistance to launch is likewise merited.
We are being punished, and we seem to be enjoying it.
Sean,
The dialogue with Martin Dougherty was irrelevant and sucked-up 10 pages of the thread.
But, a warlock's unchallenged occupation of a Resistance Mass Center and the bewitching of priests and laymen is very relevant to all of us.
While Bp Fellay takes away 750 priests from Roman Catholic tradition, Hernandez is allowed to raid and scandalize the Resistance.
It seems the Resistance bishops are even afraid to confront the problem?
Hernandez has to be expelled.
-
The only reason this thread really exploded is because no one expected a defense of Pablo from you in the way you did it. Speaking for myself, I wouldn't have posted at all had that not been the case.
Martin, I think it's time you let Pablo fight his own battles. CathInfo will be alright, and I don't think there's a court in the country that will take a libel case about witchcraft. The only people who really care or would be concerned here are traditional Catholics. This is primarily an internal issue until someone is willing to press charges over there. If we could get past a handful of posts from you that did not require constant sifting through apparent half statements and strategic omissions, if we could trust you, your input wouldn't be held to so much scrutiny.
Take a few steps back and look at the bigger picture.
Putting all your testimony together in a single, comprehensive and straightforward manner would go a long way to fix that lack of trust. It's kind of tough right now to take your word as it is, now that you're playing El Diablo's advocate with Catholicus' account and everyone else who suspects occult activity (everyone posting here). I don't believe anyone is interested in talking about legal ramifications with a cook/chapel coordinator/journalist who was caught up in it... unless you're planning to do something...
-
We cannot play fast and loose with the reputations of others.
You're missing something. Pablo has no "good name". The reason for the loss of Pablo's good name: Pablo. He is already infamous for many reasons.
-
This is the largest site for the resistance. They come here. They read the stories; the real, the exaggerated, the false. All are given equal weight, as long as it fits the accepted narrative.
There have been plenty of people who questioned Catholicus' story and there were some who verified parts of it.
.
Anyone who questions said narrative are insulted and have their characters called into question.
All because of some unsubstantiated claims made by a nameless and faceless individual.
It's not ALL unsubstantiated. SOME. OF. IT. IS. TRUE!! To say it's all unsubstantiated is A LIE!
For heaven's sake, Manuel, we just went through this 2 pages ago and you're back speaking false generalizations and contradicting yourself. You are either retarded or dishonest. Either way, you have no integrity with me.
-
There have been plenty of people who questioned Catholicus' story and there were some who verified parts of it.
.It's not ALL unsubstantiated. SOME. OF. IT. IS. TRUE!! To say it's all unsubstantiated is A LIE!
For heaven's sake, Manuel, we just went through this 2 pages ago and you're back speaking false generalizations and contradicting yourself. You are either retarded or dishonest. Either way, you have no integrity with me.
Haha, I had written a short post, then deleted it because I decided it wasn't my circus. But I saw the same thing. Admission of corroboration, even an apology, then an attempt to brush it under the rug again in closing. Unsubstantiated usually has a negative connotation but I think he knows that. This whole saga has been marked by cagey mental reservation at best and everyone knows it, which is why no one's truth detectors are ever going to be satisfied.
-
The defendant is Pablo
The defense attorney Norm is "whoever tries to defend Pablo"
Go ahead and skip to 0:37 in the video. It's only 3 minutes after that -- very funny, and you'll be having deja vu!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qw1cndokps (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qw1cndokps)
-
Manuel, I don't see what your problem is.
No one is "accepting everything" from Catholicus testimony or anywhere else. Some might be quicker to believe anything negative about Pablo than you -- but can you really blame them? It's like the case with Pope Francis. I personally would be inclined to believe *ANYTHING* that made Pope Francis appear as a Communist, heretic, Freemason, etc. because he has outdone himself so many times. Whose fault is that? Mine, or Pope Francis' fault for being such a heretic?
I will say this -- if it had been posted about anyone but Pablo, it probably would have been immediately deleted by me. Why? Because I don't allow slander and falsehoods on CathInfo. If it were about anyone else, I would have *moral certainty* that it was false. But then again, Catholicus wouldn't have posted it, in this hypothetical.
Imagine if I turned right onto a busy highway, when the coast was clear. A minute later, several cars speed by that same intersection. Person A notes, "Wow. If you had turned onto the highway just 1 minute later, you would have been in a horrible accident, and you would be in the afterlife RIGHT NOW!" Person B replies, "Not really. If there had been cars coming, I wouldn't have turned onto the highway."
However, there was nothing in the testimony that rang false or raised any red flags. It all sounded EXACTLY like Pablo. So it needed to stay published, so others could analyze it.
I know you're concerned about "what will duped cult members think if they read this thread" -- but I'll tell you: as long as they trust Fr. Pfeiffer and Pablo, they're not going to believe ANY truth, on this thread, this forum, or anywhere else.
There are none so blind as those who will not see!
I'm not going to change my mind on leaving Catholicus' testimony stay, so please stop being a broken record on that point.
-
Q talks about how many Americans will REJECT the truth when the truth comes out about countless Deep State swamp creatures: Obama, Hillary, many members of the FBI, CIA, etc.
Does that mean the stuff they reject is somehow flawed? Of course not. The truth is the truth. It's not the fault of Q and other truth-pushers if people reject it for whatever dumb reason. They reject the truth, they will take the consequences. They will suffer, not us.
If we need a "halfway house" with a few hand-picked truths couched in gentle language for new converts, an FSSP as it were, then CathInfo is not volunteering for the role.
If forums were alcohol, CathInfo would be the strongest stuff.
If forums were drugs, CathInfo would be crack cocaine.
If forums were animals, CathInfo would be a lion (or Man, if you want to consider him an animal).
If forums were depression, CathInfo would be despair ѕυιcιdє.
If forums were debt, CathInfo would be bankruptcy and homelessness.
If forums were goodness, CathInfo would be sanctity actual entering into heaven.
If forums were flight, CathInfo would be flying a spacecraft to Mars.
If forums were trees, CathInfo would be a Redwood
If forums were diseases, CathInfo would be a mutated, extra virulent strain of Bubonic Plague
We're the end result, the Real Deal, the final form, the "last book in the series", the Master level, the version for grown ups, where you get it straight, no messing around, no milk for babies here.
-
Manuel is laboring under Fr. Pfeiffer's basic assumption, that people are stupid and a Leader needs to tell them everything via propaganda and cult brainwashing.
I REJECT THIS PREMISE.
I believe people can sort things out for themselves. They can distinguish between not-yet-proven (a.k.a. "unsubstantiated") claims and those which have been corroborated by multiple sources.
Only things that are false, or likely false, or suspected to be false, must be censored or deleted right away. There are plenty of things that are "reasonable", "likely to be true", "in accordance with the known facts" for which corroboration or even PROOF are likely to come in the future. These items I will happy let stand on CathInfo.
We've been there, done with with a huge thread about Ambrose. A huge service was done to the Traditional Catholic world in the process. I'm proud of all the CathInfo members who participated in that thread. They did God's work.
-
Here’s the bottom line: speculation is defined as an “educated guess”. It is a projection based on some facts, but is not 100% proveable (at the time). It is factual that Pablo has messed with lay exorcisms in the past. It is factual that he has some sort of “diablo” nickname. It is factual that he knows about curses and such things, because he has accused others (projection?) of being involved. It is factual that animals are killed during rituals and in strange ways, often burned. It is factual that, in Boston, animals have died in strange ways, with Pablo’s dog being burned. It is factual that Pablo is not a practicing Catholic and has stated openly that he dislikes Trads. It is factual that he is a liar, bully and a cheat.
Add all of this up, and it’s valid speculation (with much circuмstantial evidence) that Pablo is involved in witchcraft of some sort. Doesn’t mean he is, but it’s not wrong to think it’s possible.
You forgot a few things:
Pablo habitually dresses in all black.
He habitually wears sunglasses (to cover the eyes, the "windows of the soul")
Pablo frequently speaks of, and about, the devil -- more than is normal OR healthy
Pablo has often shown a great disdain for Traditional Catholics (the persecuted, outnumbered, faithful remnant!)
Pablo has frequently placed Trad Catholics at the same level as, or below, the devil himself.
Pablo was quoted as saying he practices "Omerta", which is normally associated with the Mafia
Pablo seems to think about and talk about curses way more than normal; he is quite superstitious at best
Pablo made a bold, unusual, extraordinary slander against Fr. Voigt: namely, that he had put a curse on his son, causing his son's eventual death.
Pablo is extremely proud and obsessed with having his will done, which is consistent with how a hypothetical warlock WOULD behave.
Strange behavior has come out of Boston, KY, especially from two formerly good SSPX priests (Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer, Fr. Hewko) -- which is near impossible to explain!
Speaking of inexplicable behavior, these priests have attacked their former confreres, whom they used to love and support (ex: Bp. Williamson) and simultaneously support various priests with "lavender" reputations like Fr. Tetherow and Fr. Roberts, as well as clear frauds like Ambrose Moran.
Pablo is currently in complete control of the Boston, KY compound. He controls the communications, websites, finances, and keep in mind that Fr. Pfeiffer recently got control over the family property -- the real estate itself. So Pablo probably has control over that as well.
-
Long story short,
If you are fighting a righteous cause, don't worry about speaking the truth -- even if that truth shocks or scandalizes some of those still in error!
It doesn't matter what the cause is: pro-life, the Resistance, pro-Creation, anti-Feminism, the list is endless.
The enemies WILL seize on something, true or false, to keep their dupes in line and on THEIR side. Even if you were completely truthful, completely moral, you would NOT leave your enemies with empty hands. They would simply distort, twist, or even outright LIE if that's what it took to keep their followers happily on the other side, against the truth, against you.
Don't ever forget that.
It's frustrating, I hear you! But we can't change that. The SSPX is going to keep their parishioners happy. A cult is going to keep most of its members happily inside the cult. And so on.
-
Again, if some random Pfeifferite is willing to believe Ambrose is not a con man, then nothing I say (or don't say) is going to convince them. They are obviously believing ANYTHING coming from Pablo's (or Fr. Pfeiffer's) mouth at that point.
It is not OUR job to sugar coat the truth -- much less censor the truth! -- in a vain attempt to wake them up.
No, those who are thus deceived WANT TO BE DECEIVED. And the consequences of their self-deception will be ON THEM, up to and including apostasy, having their children lose the Faith, etc. It will all be on their heads, for calling good "evil" and evil "good" -- and for calling the truth "lie" and lies "the truth".
-
Pablo frequently speaks of, and
Pablo seems to think about and talk about curses way more than normal; he is quite superstitious at best
Pablo made a bold, unusual, extraordinary slander against Fr. Voigt: namely, that he had put a curse on his son, causing his son's eventual death.
Hernandez's slander was "projection".
Caught Hernandez doing it during his attempt to solicit money for Dom Thomas, which he wasn't authorized to do.
When questioned, he accused the inquirer of being a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ?
Another "projection".
Warlocks are no joking matter,
as Martin has yet to learn.
-
If forums were alcohol, CathInfo would be the strongest stuff.
If forums were drugs, CathInfo would be crack cocaine.
If forums were animals, CathInfo would be a lion (or Man, if you want to consider him an animal).
If forums were depression, CathInfo would be despair ѕυιcιdє.
If forums were debt, CathInfo would be bankruptcy and homelessness.
If forums were goodness, CathInfo would be sanctity actual entering into heaven.
If forums were flight, CathInfo would be flying a spacecraft to Mars.
If forums were trees, CathInfo would be a Redwood
If forums were diseases, CathInfo would be a mutated, extra virulent strain of Bubonic Plague
:-\
This is a bit melodramatic! ;D
-
Pablo made a bold, unusual, extraordinary slander against Fr. Voigt: namely, that he had put a curse on his son, causing his son's eventual death.
I'm going to put an end to this slander right now. I purchased a copy of Santiago's death certificate. Clearly, the cause of death was AIDS.
-
I'm going to put an end to this slander right now. I purchased a copy of Santiago's death certificate. Clearly, the cause of death was AIDS.
Interestingly, I have long held the view that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity (especially male) is the result of diabolical activity. So perhaps Pablo's dabbling with the dark forces caused fallout against his family.
-
Interestingly, I have long held the view that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity (especially male) is the result of diabolical activity. So perhaps Pablo's dabbling with the dark forces caused fallout against his family.
Lad, I was just curious. Why do you differentiate to some degree concerning diabolical activity when it comes to male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity versus female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity?
-
Lad, I was just curious. Why do you differentiate to some degree concerning diabolical activity when it comes to male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity versus female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity?
I believe that a lot of female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is more emotional in nature, i.e. happening in women who have experienced issues being able to bond with men (rejected, abused, etc.). Female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is much less about sex. Male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is nearly always rooted in sɛҳuąƖ perversion and impurity. Of course these are generalizations. So, for instance, it's much less repugnant to see two women kiss one another than to see two men do it, since for the women it's much more an emotional thing. Mothers, for instance, tend to kiss their children more, boys and girls, on the lips ... whereas men do that less often, and rarely with boys once they reach a certain age. It's due to the fact that for women it's emotional, whereas with men it's more physical.
Interestingly, the ancient Greeks claimed that male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity was superior even to heterosɛҳuąƖ relations because the relationship between two men would be more intellectual. Of course, you rarely see male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity these days being an intellectual bond.
So, to answer your question, the male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a much greater perversion contrary to nature than the female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity. I do not base this on anything more than a gut sense about it.
-
I believe that a lot of female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is more emotional in nature, i.e. happening in women who have experienced issues being able to bond with men (rejected, abused, etc.). Female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is much less about sex. Male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is nearly always rooted in sɛҳuąƖ perversion and impurity. Of course these are generalizations. So, for instance, it's much less repugnant to see two women kiss one another than to see two men do it, since for the women it's much more an emotional thing. Mothers, for instance, tend to kiss their children more, boys and girls, on the lips ... whereas men do that less often, and rarely with boys once they reach a certain age. It's due to the fact that for women it's emotional, whereas with men it's more physical.
Interestingly, the ancient Greeks claimed that male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity was superior even to heterosɛҳuąƖ relations because the relationship between two men would be more intellectual. Of course, you rarely see male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity these days being an intellectual bond.
So, to answer your question, the male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a much greater perversion contrary to nature than the female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity. I do not base this on anything more than a gut sense about it.
Thanks much for this answer. Come to think of it, everything that you say here makes perfect sense and I tend to agree completely with your assessment.
-
I believe that a lot of female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is more emotional in nature, i.e. happening in women who have experienced issues being able to bond with men (rejected, abused, etc.). Female ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is much less about sex. Male ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is nearly always rooted in sɛҳuąƖ perversion and impurity.
I think you are being overly sentimental. Female sodomy is just as carnal and sɛҳuąƖy perverted and impure as male sodomy in my opinion except for the fact that *vulgarity moderated*
-
I'm going to put an end to this slander right now. I purchased a copy of Santiago's death certificate. Clearly, the cause of death was AIDS.
Thanks for this important confirmation RB.
So, it means Hernandez the warlock knew his son had AIDS... but he loudly blamed Santiago's demise on "The trads!".
That's why the nature of Santiago's illness and last days were kept under tight-wraps at the farm.
So, when I previously commented that Hernandez was projecting the accusation of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity on his trad critics, the sin was manifesting itself in catastrophic proportions right his own family :facepalm:
-
We can't know for sure how he got infected. He may also have become infected in a hospital or through sɛҳuąƖ intercourse with a woman. We can't say right away that he was ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. He may also have been a victim to others who gave him the infection.
May Santiagos Soul rest in peace 😢''
-
I think you are being overly sentimental. Female sodomy is just as carnal and sɛҳuąƖy perverted and impure as male sodomy in my opinion except for the fact that ...
No, it's not about sentimentality; my general impression is that many Lesbians don't care very much about the sex. I might be wrong. Look at it this way also. There's a saying in Latin, corruptio optimi pessima. Corruption of the best is worst. Because men have a higher nature, when it gets perverted, it gets much more perverted than a woman's perversion would be. I believe that this Latin maxim is very wise. So, for instance, a Pope fornicating would be worse than a priest fornicating would be worse than some unmarried layman fornicating; similarly, a man engaging in ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity would be worse than a female doing so, since the opposite perversion is actually close to their actual nature, and there's less of a swing.
-
We can't know for sure how he got infected. He may also have become infected in a hospital or through sɛҳuąƖ intercourse with a woman. We can't say right away that he was ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. He may also have been a victim to others who gave him the infection.
May Santiagos Soul rest in peace 😢''
Or from drug use, aka sharing needles. If I didn't know any better, I'd say that Pablo is on drugs. Since Pablo said it was a curse, perhaps he was infected by an Incubus.
-
We can't know for sure how he got infected. He may also have become infected in a hospital or through sɛҳuąƖ intercourse with a woman. We can't say right away that he was ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. He may also have been a victim to others who gave him the infection.
May Santiagos Soul rest in peace 😢''
Sadly, your comment means you didn't know him... and/or you're under the spell of his warlock father.
-
Sadly, your comment means you didn't know him... and/or you're under the spell of his warlock father.
Your are talking non sense. I knew him.
Yes I met him. I knew also about his health problems...
He was a kind person and seems to have a humble attitude but I can't say more then that. But I didn't know him so well.
I think we should not judge him and do not forget...he died.
God bless
-
I find it very tasteless to post the death certificate here like some kind of 'scarlet letter'. No thought for the loved-ones at all. Basically, it's none of our darned business what this man died of, he is a compete stranger to the majority of us, and to imply sin when we have no real proof thereof is sinful itself. We don't need to desecrate the memory of the dead son in order to punish the father that we think is a jerk. This is a new low.
-
I find it very tasteless to post the death certificate here like some kind of 'scarlet letter'. No thought for the loved-ones at all. Basically, it's none of our darned business what this man died of, he is a compete stranger to the majority of us, and to imply sin when we have no real proof thereof is sinful itself. We don't need to desecrate the memory of the dead son in order to punish the father that we think is a jerk. This is a new low.
You need to actually read his motivation for posting it. It was to address the absurd and slanderous allegation made by Pablo against Father Voigt that the latter caused the death of his son by cursing him. Of course no one but PERHAPS a small handful of people actually believe that.
-
Lad- So you think the ends justify the means, eh? I hope nobody ever decides it's necessary to post your family member's death certificates so they can be ogled and dissected for the smug satisfaction of some and the titillation of others. This is wrong. Period.
-
No, it's not about sentimentality; my general impression is that many Lesbians don't care very much about the sex. I might be wrong. Look at it this way also. There's a saying in Latin, corruptio optimi pessima. Corruption of the best is worst. Because men have a higher nature, when it gets perverted, it gets much more perverted than a woman's perversion would be. I believe that this Latin maxim is very wise. So, for instance, a Pope fornicating would be worse than a priest fornicating would be worse than some unmarried layman fornicating; similarly, a man engaging in ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity would be worse than a female doing so, since the opposite perversion is actually close to their actual nature, and there's less of a swing.
I've also heard it said that most geniuses are men, but also most prisoners. Women tend to be closer to average.
Maybe that's why?
-
I find it very tasteless to post the death certificate here like some kind of 'scarlet letter'. No thought for the loved-ones at all. Basically, it's none of our darned business what this man died of, he is a compete stranger to the majority of us, and to imply sin when we have no real proof thereof is sinful itself. We don't need to desecrate the memory of the dead son in order to punish the father that we think is a jerk. This is a new low.
Well yes, we'd like to maintain good taste, but the topic is about the take-over of a traditional Catholic stronghold by a warlock.
They exist in Mexico and conduct their occult practices like a business.
(https://media.npr.org/programs/day/features/2007/feb/witchevent200-d1988092bb77b54c0c337b291a84d9ed78eb10d1-s300-c85.jpg)
The facts are, Paul Hernandez was a fake exorcist, he now practices the occult and he's literally hijacked the Pfeiffer farm.
He's killed chickens and dogs and offered their burnt remains as sacrifice to demonic entities.
He used these offerings to put curses on traditional Catholics and has consistently demonstrated mind control over Catholic priests.
And he brought-in his aids infected son, his married female friend and her family to the Chapel/seminary and is the head of administration there.
All that... goes way, way beyond "bad taste" and is EVIL.
So, who cares if Hernandez's son's death certificate became public and hurt someone's feelings?
If he hadn't slandered a priest, it might have not have been made public?
-
The whole thing is an unholy mess.
-
If he hadn't slandered a priest, it might have not have been made public?
It should be noted that in Kentucky death certificates are PUBLIC records. I have not detracted Santiago because I made no claim as to how he contracted AIDS. It is a matter of justice for Fr. Voigt to show that Hernandez had motive for his calumnies against him.
-
It should be noted that in Kentucky death certificates are PUBLIC records. I have not detracted Santiago because I made no claim as to how he contracted AIDS. It is a matter of justice for Fr. Voigt to show that Hernandez had motive for his calumnies against him.
Fr. Voigt could have defended himself against the outrageous slander that he put a death curse on Santiago, because he certainly knew the nature of his sickness. Unless all three priests were incredibly stupid or willfully ignorant, the diagnosis was known to the priests, Pablo, and probably a few other adults for quite some time before his decease. Santiago came to OLMC to die. Maybe nobody else would have him. Since Fr. Voigt chose not to defend himself by exposing the true cause of death, I cannot agree with making public the information on an international forum. If any individual REALLY wanted or needed to ascertain the information, as you say, in KY, anyone can find out. The intention may have been right, but IMO, the consequences were not well thought out.
If you died of AIDS, or your child, or spouse, would you want it revealed by a stranger in order to clear the name of another who chose neither to clear his own name nor asked for help in so doing? Our Lord didn't think much of St Peter's vow to defend Him. He called Peter Satan!
What is accomplished? Nothing good for Santiago's memory, except, may I point out, that whatever the cause of his AIDS, with months to repent and three priests, he surely confessed if it was the due to sin. Those of us who now kniw what isn't our business should pray for the repose of his soul.
Pablo's rage will kick up 10 notches when he discovers this post, which he surely will if he hasn't already.
-
So, you're afraid of a fat warlock's rage?
:popcorn: just asking
-
Not at all, if you're asking me.
-
I think it was very noble and meritorious that Father Voigt kept silent about this and I’ve been critical of Father in the past.