Monday, February 10, 2014

DIANA SAYS HE/SHE IS NOT A PRIEST

Diana says she's not a priest, but if true, then who she is much worse. (Of course, why should we believe anything these people say?)



Diana says:
Where did you receive this false information? I assure you, I am not a priest. I am a female, and as a female I cannot be ordained as a priest. I have been walking in the Way for 7 years and I am a Co-Responsible in the Way. I assure you, I am a female member in the Way. 

Actually Diana is a "composite" person.  Even if she is a she and not a he or a priest, the fact that she has been "walking in the Way for 7 years" and is a "Co-Responsible" is even more frightening. The priests come and go. In the Way, it is the "Responsibles" who have the real power. The community members are subject to them for life.

And given the fact that Diana doesn't even know what a conventual mass is, and that she uses mention of it in the GIRM as justification for neo members acting as concelebrants at their strange liturgies, after SEVEN YEARS in the Way and now a Co-Responsible...well, that's even more damning than if she/he is a priest.

The reason I refer to her as a "composite" person is because her postings are an amalgamation of the same neo-think that has caused many of us to seriously question whether or not these neo-priests have any clue to anything outside their Kiko-catechesis!

Here is another example:

Diana says:

According to the approved Statutes of the Way Chapter III, Art. 13, Section 3:......Regarding the distribution of Holy Communion under the two species, the neocatechumens receive it standing, remaining at their place. 

In a regular mass, the people can receive communion either under one or two species, but in the Way, it is received under two species. 

161. If Communion is given only under the species of bread, the priest raises the host slightly and shows it to each, saying, Corpus Christi (The Body of Christ). The communicant replies, Amen, and receives the Sacrament either on the tongue or, where this is allowed and if the communicant so chooses, in the hand. As soon as the communicant receives the host, he or she consumes it entirely.

If, however, Communion is given under both kinds, the rite prescribed in nos. 284-287 is followed.

Because our Statutes says that we can receive it under two species, nos. 284-287 is followed, which says that the chalice must be big (which is what the Way has). It also describes the size of the bread, which must be neither too thick or too thin.


Okay, let's review. Diana says that because the Neo is allowed to receive communion under both species (Body and Blood), they are not required to observe GIRM 161 which requires them to consume the host immediately, and are otherwise directed to the instructions found in the GIRM 284-287 which governs distribution under both species. Let's read what the GIRM says:

284. When Communion is distributed under both kinds,

The chalice is usually administered by a deacon or, when no deacon is present, by a priest, or even by a duly instituted acolyte or another extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, or by a member of the faithful who, in case of necessity, has been entrusted with this duty for a single occasion;

Whatever may remain of the Blood of Christ is consumed at the altar by the priest or the deacon or the duly instituted acolyte who ministered the chalice. The same then purifies, wipes, and arranges the sacred vessels in the usual way.

Any of the faithful who wish to receive Holy Communion under the species of bread alone should be granted their wish.

285. For Communion under both kinds the following should be prepared:

a. If Communion from the chalice is carried out by communicants’ drinking directly from the chalice, a chalice of a sufficiently large size or several chalices are prepared. Care should, however, be taken in planning lest beyond what is needed of the Blood of Christ remains to be consumed at the end of the celebration.

b. If Communion is carried out by intinction, the hosts should be neither too thin nor too small, but rather a little thicker than usual, so that after being dipped partly into the Blood of Christ they can still easily be distributed to each communicant.

286. If Communion of the Blood of Christ is carried out by communicants’ drinking from the chalice, each communicant, after receiving the Body of Christ, moves and stands facing the minister of the chalice. The minister says, Sanguis Christi (The Blood of Christ), the communicant responds, Amen, and the minister hands over the chalice, which the communicant raises to his or her mouth. Each communicant drinks a little from the chalice, hands it back to the minister, and then withdraws; the minister wipes the rim of the chalice with the purificator.

287. If Communion from the chalice is carried out by intinction, each communicant, holding a communion-plate under the chin, approaches the priest who holds a vessel with the sacred particles, a minister standing at his side and holding the chalice. The priest takes a host, dips it partly into the chalice and, showing it, says, Corpus et Sanguis Christi (The Body and Blood of Christ). The communicant responds, Amen, receives the Sacrament in the mouth from the priest, and then withdraws.

The instruction assumes that the communicant has immediately consumed the host as required by GIRM 161, otherwise, the communicant would still have host in hand while drinking from the chalice. The idea that this section permits the neo-communicant to not consume immediately is another example of neo-think.

The really funny part is where Diana relies on 285b to explain why the neo-bread is so much bigger:
It also describes the size of the bread, which must be neither too thick or too thin.
This is a huge LOL because 285b refers to communion by intinction wherein the communicant cannot touch the host AT ALL! See par 287.

Now remember, this is a Co-Responsible, in the Way for 7 years who is telling us this stuff. 7 Years of Neo training. Need we say more? No. But we will. Please Diana, send more.

20 comments:

  1. Of course, what does it matter? Truth? What truth? If Kiko can tell the pope to go to hell and that he'll do it his way, why should we believe anything from this group? It doesn't even matter who they are. It's what they SAY and DO. Every comment confirms that they are outside the Catholic Church.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is very disturbing. I was contemplating attending a catechesis but after reading the comments of those in the Neo from this blog I have changed my mind. I don't know everything about the faith, but I definitely know that Holy Communion should never be tampered with. I am already a great sinner and do not want to sin further against the most Precious Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Better for me to stay away.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can always attend RCIA in your parish even if you are baptized.

      Delete
  3. Actually, it's the catechists, not responsibles, who exercise the techniques of psychological control. Sometimes after a scrutiny, the Powers That Be will mix and match communities, demoting some community members to communities at a lower stage and replacing responsibles with others who passed the scrutiny. It is at this point that some members quit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Just for clarification Tim the responsible of a community doesn't have much power as much as their catechist. The responsible only does what the catechists ask of him or her in their specific community. But yes as you can see from "Diana" that as you continue to walk the things the catechists say start to etch deeper and deeper into your mind until you believe it's the truth. It's really sad.

    And just so people know Kiko has a "catechisis" about three angels. One angel was Satan making man sin, the second was Gabriel announcing Mary's birth, and the third is him and the catechists bringing the Good News to the "pagans". This is the man that leads the way. An "angel" as he says. And the catechists will spew the same word to those under them. "We are angels sent from God for you." And many people in the Way truly believe the lie. Lord help us all

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have been noticing Ric E's posts. THANKS for your inside info. I've read books, websites but the stuff you say convinces me beyond a shadow of a doubt. Something very diabolical is going on here.

      Delete
  5. Thanks Ric. Yep, understand the power and control of the Catechists. However, I marvel at the power, influence, and wealth of the Responsibles, the Gennarini's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh yes Tim I marvel at it as well. The Gennarini's are under the head cathechists of the Way Kiko and Carmen. As you have said previously they are Kiko's lieutentants for the U.S. and as such they are responsible for the Way all around the U.S. including Guam. They have this special place because they are personal friends of Kiko. I've met them personally when they came to Guam and didn't think there was much "joy" in them as the people in the Way constantly tell you they have.

      Delete
  6. what is the theological/spiritual/psychological training the Catechists have to tinker with members psyche, soul, mind. TINKER I SAY....how many complaints about Pius Sammut BELITTLING members on the blog the last few days. Seems they haven't forgotten these wounds. These are the concerns we have and are freely expressing...sorry if you think they are attacks. The Seminarians are shouted at. Eye witnesses. Why? Because the Officials are too young, inexperienced...they cannot possibly have the wisdom of the years. That's a lot of suffering going on;yes we are talking about it here and now.. Thanks Tim.

    ReplyDelete
  7. When fr. Pius first came to Guam and the Mariana islands he was very insulting to me. But honestly, I had pity for the poor man, he had no class, no style, his personal hygiene was shocking, so like a bad smell, I just wanted him to go away. He is such a sad person almost tragic like. Well, what can you do, just remove yourself from anything that's ugly. Unfortunately, I get sick when I see anyone who is ugly.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Any inside information about a seminarian who was beaten inside the Guam seminary with the knowledge of the archbishop.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Any inside information about a seminarian who was beaten inside the Guam seminary with the knowledge of the archbishop.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Shouldn't the seminarians have their own room to pray, study and sleep? This two by two stuff is enough. Not proper.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Diana wrote on her blog showing a web site to KIKO'S painting of the Holy Family. According to what I read, he re-interpreted St. Andrei Rublev's painting of the Trinity to that of the Holy Family....explanation please!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think I may have solved who Diana is. The only person I can think of the Jennifer Dulla who writes for the Umatuna si Yu'us. She is very much involved in writing about the happenings of the Neo in the Catholic Sunday paper.

    As she mentions in her blog, she does not work for the Church which is true. She does contribute her writings on a weekly bases aside from her permanent job!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know Jennifer Dulla. I hope and pray she is not Diana. The Jennifer I know, although a neo, is a faithful catholic and good person. I hope that she is also smarter than Diana in that she would never write or promote such awful drivel.

      Delete
    2. Maybe. In any event, Dulla supports the most pro-abortion politicians on Guam, and that's scandalous enough.

      Delete
    3. Anon 4:24 pm I do believe you are right. After doing some reading in the Umatuna si Yu'us and comparing it to the style for writing on Diana's blog they seem to be one and the same.

      Delete
    4. Actually it doesn't matter who Diana is. The reluctance to use a real name and the cowardice this evinces is a discredit to the very idea of evangelization. Imagine the apostles using fake names.The secrecy, the cowardice, the hiding...and we're supposed to believe the NCW is authentically Catholic?

      Delete
    5. At 9:14, yes, she works for him. I pointed this out to her a couple of times. Even though it doesn't matter who Diana is, it is true that when I made that post about Rory, he did show up in the comments rather quickly. Since I doubt he's a regular reader, someone (who works for him?) might have told him.

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch