Monday, September 21, 2015

LOL



FYI: The "blow her cover" is a reference to my post PIUS TOLD US TO READ IT. I did not copy Dona's comment from her own FB page. Dona's comment was in response to a post by Jose Martinez on his own FB page. Jose's initial posting was set to "public" as you can see from the screenshot below, so there was no "cover" to blow. LOL. Fools.




15 comments:

  1. Anon 8:38, what a moron you are!! Most pricks do self-inflate!! What an idiot. Go back to HS and retake biology or watch your dog.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Tim's handlers". Ha-ha. They don't know you very well, Tim!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fr. Matthew BlockleySeptember 21, 2015 at 12:22 PM


    I must admit that even I am finding the phallic language coming from the publication " an insiders view of the NCW rather putrid to say the least. If I remember correctly the phallic stage of child psychosexual development is the third stage of development of a child. Insiders view of the NCW has made several comments- like the one above " inflated prick" Thiis indicates to me they have a very unhealthy understanding degrading understanding of human sexuality in particular the theology of the body. I'm also left wondering if the insiders view is left stuck in the phallic stage of psychosexual development. If NCW writers are stuck or delayed in the third stage what about the other stages. I am referring to what psychologists call the anal stage. To be delayed I'm the anal stage of develop,emt means could possibly mean a person is anal retentive in later life. An anal retentive person would be one who writes about pricks. Use of language from the Diana page should now be a concern on Guam for every citizen who wishes to protect children from dehumanizing use of language.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Father Blockley, I would encourage you to read, the totally out of space comments, of Fr Mario Pezzi on his views of sex within the marriage of Catholic couples, to realize how twisted and really profoundly sick most of the leaders of the NCW are when it comes to the subject of Sex.
      There is a profound and depraved view of the act of love within the confine of a commited maried relationship, that is very troubling.
      It is, therefore, not surprising to find that the "cathechists" below the chain of command, are also very troubled, if this is what is coming down from the top.
      All this of course, without even considering the influence of sexual abusers within their ranks and files, as well as the terrible influence of a sick character like the Samnut.

      Delete
  4. Always keep in mind: Fr. Pius directs their lives, including the fictional "Diana's" blog. Because he is their head catechist and their default "bishop," and he sanctions "Diana's" blog, we now see what the NCW on Guam represents.

    They have a problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jose, you have a point. Let's say a woman joins the NCW because of a trouble marriage. The woman is physically abused. Divorce is just out of the question. The ultimate solution is for the woman to bring her husband into the NCW. Husband refuses, abuse continues, woman continues to stay true to marriage vows. This woman is sick.

      Adult children not conforming to the Catholic teachings are told to leave home by parents. One must follow the path and statutes to the teeth. Boot them out and feed them to the dogs. They only believe in the teachings of the Bibke and very little prayers are said. Didn't Sy. Monica pray for 30 years for the conversion of her son St. Thomas Aquinas who became a great doctor and theologian of the Church?

      These are just two examples of how the NCW manipulates lives. It has become THE WAY or the HIGHWAY,

      Delete
    2. The conditioning of members leading up to the 2nd scrutiny is where the manipulation is the strongest.

      In fact, the fear of not progressing with your community can be traumatic if, for example, Fr. Pius decides to make an example out of you by threatening to move your community forward but sending you back to the beginning. It's a tactic he seems to enjoy in demonstration of his ultimate authority over the communities. Many times, you are made to feel like you deserve to fail and that it would be your sinful self for failing the scrutiny.

      Other times he holds the whole community hostage because of one person, and he lets the community know that it is the fault of this one person holding all of them back. Manipulation and coercion at it's worst.

      Delete
  5. I wonder if "Mr. Applebee" wrote this post! After all he says that he is busy fighting Satan and paving the floors of hell for him....Andrew?

    ReplyDelete
  6. BTW Andrew, did you get your stoge from the community in Agat?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why is it that all posting from followers of the Way are anonymous? Not brave enough or confident enough to reveal your name? If you speak the truth you need not fear the consequences, because you have the truth to back you up. Put your big pants on and reveal your names.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tommy – To your question….. I, too, am bewildered why (with the possible exception of Zoltan, and perhaps a few others), “the vast majority” of the comments made on JW from the Neo side is “anonymous”, if what they are insisting on posting is the truth –- not AAA, not the VG, not Pius, not Diana, not any of the so-called “leaders” of the Neo (catechists, responsibles, etal), not even Kiko or Carmen – while so many of us non-Neos are writing with our real identities for all to see. (I know there have been several newspaper writings with Neo names, but few and far between. Kudos to them! Thanks to the media for not accepting anonymous letters!)

      This is just a conjecture, but may I take a crack at answering. Perhaps it is because (1) these are very humble folks who do not want to take credit for speaking out the truth, and would prefer to “suffer the persecution” in silence; or (2)they are too afraid to be associated with what they are writing because they know it is NOT the truth. And the good Neos who know better are afraid of being singled out for retribution for speaking out the truth, and would prefer to keep the truth under the lid lest they offend their leaders. This is subjugation; not freedom of speech!

      How else would you explain Christ’s admonition to “not light a lamp and put it under a bushel basket, but put it out in the open for all to see”? Just speculating!

      [To be fair - to some non-Neos who continue to comment as anonymous, I don’t know what your reasons are – I was of them in the beginning - but I admonish you to shed your anonymity too and strengthen our approach of openness and transparency.]

      Why don’t we both come out in the open (Neos/non-Neos) – in an open, public debate – put the issues on the table, and let the public decide who’s lying, by listening to us expound and rebut each other. This is not the first time I had suggested an open-forum debate. How about it, eh? I’m willing to be a participant! – jrsa (9/21/15)


      Delete
  8. If this brouhaha doesn't spell disaster for the Diana blog, I don't know what will. Yes, how can you follow this blogger and believe everything he, she, it says if you don't even know if it is a he, a she or an it. But one thing for sure, Pius knows because he asks people to read it and follow it. And since he lends his name to it thru endorsement, he unwittingly is the face of this blog. Time to close this Diana blog. And they criticize Tim's blog. There is credibility when you put your name on your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Desperately grasping at straws. That is how I would describe the anonymous ncw cowards on the Fr. Pius sanctioned website, "An Insider's View." The only thing "blown" is alot of hot air on "Diana's" blog.

    To boot, in their drive to admonish and denigrate one of their own, they admitted to the validity of the content of Chuck White's assertion in his series on the 2nd Scrutiny of the NCW. Too funny!

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch