NAFPS Selections: The Truth about Chuck And Lency Spezzano And The Psychology of Vision Pt. 9

[From the New Age Frauds and Plastic Shamans forum, by "Sandy S," July 07, 2014]:

The Truth about Chuck And Lency Spezzano And The Psychology of Vision, Pt. 9

Quote

    What Is The Nature of The Relationship Between Psychology of Vision And Oneness University?

    There is no relationship between the two organizations. Some of us attended healing programs there years ago, but for a number of reasons it felt true to me to distance Psychology of Vision from Oneness U. For about a year after making that decision, I stated in my seminars that I did not recommend that people attend their programs.

Of all the twisted misrepresentations spread on Lenora's online screed, this one is the most blatant. I won't waste my time repeating all the evidence we have already presented on this forum disproving this fantasy. The fact remains that Oneness University was a major influence on SALPOV teachings and is now too deeply embedded for the Spezzanos to remove. If they deny OU teachings then they must also deny much of their own curriculum and shut down their money-making operation.

SALPOV tried to remedy this by erasing all online connection with OU. My, how Soviet of them.

I'd love to hear in detail why Lenora does not approve of Oneness University. Both SALPOV and OU seem equally crazy to me. Perhaps her objections coincided with some negative press OU got for being a huge scam. So much for loyalty. Yet, OU philosophy is alive and well in SALPOV.

I'd like to take issue with her use of the word "seminar." This indicates equality among the participants, and as we have plainly seen in SALPOV promotional material and manuals, this is never the case. I am very familiar with the seminar method and have seen no evidence this is practiced in SALPOV. "Indoctrination" would be a more appropriate term. In a recent Facebook exchange, a loyal SALPOV follower attempted to approach and comfort Lenora as a fellow equal human being over the terrible and "nasty" treatment we critics are dishing out, and the Queen Bee let it be known she did not require the advice of underlings in no uncertain terms. This is consistent with the Great Chain of Being as outlined in the SALPOV Trainers Manual: God - Spezzanos - Trainers - Easy marks - Rabble - Troublemakers.

Notice the absence of detail in this post. No dates, no specific reasons. This is a pretty shifty-eyed and Nixonian answer. How did the Spezzanos first become enamored of OU? How much of OU philosophy worked its way into SALPOV theology and terminology? What caused Lenora to back away and exactly when did that happen? Why has this OU objection never appeared from an official online SALPOV source until this 2014 statement by Lenora?

The question among the SALPOV watchers on whether Lenora lives in a world of delusion or is indeed a true con artist remains open.