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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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!