Edit: who’s going to fact check the f@g checkers? Rather being that all-too-rare Christian mass murderer, it was actually an all-too-common Musluman killer waging Islamic holy war on Christians. Thank goodness there was a Christian Frenchman there to stop him.
[PJ Media] At first glance, the story seemed distressingly familiar: back in June 2023, a Syrian asylum seeker went on a stabbing spree at a playground in the French city of Annecy, stabbing four toddlers and two adults. There have been numerous incidents in recent years of Muslim migrants in France stabbing people in random attacks, often while screaming “Allahu akbar.”
A young Frenchman named Henri d’Anselme stopped the attacker’s stabbing spree. Now, d’Anselme has revealed on Legend, a popular French podcast, that a magistrate told him that the perpetrator was not a Christian but a Muslim who had been a member of Bashar al-Assad’s army in Syria and later of the Islamic State. He claimed falsely to be a Christian to gain asylum in Europe.
De Anselme:
…so he shouts “in the name of Jesus Christ,” he starts to say, “My wife, my —” I don’t really know what, finally, I don’t remember very well, and I answer, “No, no, no, not Jesus Christ, you have nothing to do with Jesus,” just, in fact, I tell him NO, I shout that. “To me, you have nothing to do with Jesus Christ, you are the devil,” I said that “you are the devil,” and that’s what I said.
AMDG
14 comments:
Tancred,
I hope you have been discussing these comments with others. Since there has been a general silence over the Decree of Suppression of the Discalced Nuns in Texas by the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican and Bishop Michael Olsen. The bishop's understanding of Islam too is liberal and fake, The Council is traditional.He does n ot correct the mistake in the media.
Remember when Dr. Michael King, President, Fisher More College was told by Bishop Olson that the Traditional Mass had to be stopped and that he wanted to save King’s soul ?
The Fischer More College it seemed were affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla slaus as it was known over the centuries. Bishop Olson wanted them to accept Vatican Council II as a rupture with the past ecclesiology and the old dogmatic interpretation.In other words, he was saying B is an exception for A. So for the bishop Jews did not have to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.
There were reports that Professor Dudley called for the rejection of Vatican Council II.This professor too was interpreting Vatican Council II with B being an exception for A. So the non-traditional and liberal conclusion was rejected by him, though accepted by Bishop Olsen.
Prof. Dudley, Bishop Olson and the FSSP priests were assuming Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) was an explicit exception to all needing to be 'card carrying members of the Church', for salvation.Invisible cases were visible for all of them in that controversy. With this irrational premise Vatican Council II had to emerge as a rupture with Tradition. With alleged exceptions for the dogma EENS not every one needs to enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. This of course would be a new doctrine for the 16th century. This wouild be the staple error today of the Archbishop of Paris. French Catholics do not know about all this. It still is a secret for them.Nothing is mentioned on Legend.
Appeals need to be filed with Diocesan Tribunals when thiis keeps happening .
Remember how the Franciscans of the Immaculate community was closed down and restrictions were placed on the Latin Mass. The issue was Vatican Council II. Pope Francis interpreted the Council with B being an exception for A. Fr.Stefano Manelli F.I did not tell the pope or a diocesan tribunal that B is not an exception for A. He too was interpreting Vatican Council II with B being an exception for A.
Even at the Vigano trial this fact was not brought out.The Discalced Sisters also did not appeal against the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.
Since there are alleged exceptions for the dogma EENS they have also changed the Nicene Creed. They now understand, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins', as meaning that there are three or more known baptisms without the baptism of water, and they include desire, blood and invincible ignorance.This is first class heresy. It is a mortal sin.But in this way they can say that they are not Feeneyite.
The Francsicans of the Immaculate did not bring out this point with the help of a Canon Lawyer.Neither did the Discalced Sisters.They have now been reduced to a lay state. Neither did the Fisher More College. Neither did the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in New Hampshire, when a Decree of Precepts and Prohibitions was issued against them by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Fr. Georges de Lain. This point was also not brought out in the court case filed by Fr. De laire against Michael Voris. Voris should have noted that Laire was using a fake interpretation of Vatican Council II. This was dishonest.The interpretation of Vatican Council II by the diocese of Manchester, USA, today is still unethical. -Lionel Andrades
Nope, I basically ignore your comments.
NO ONE IS TELLING THE FRENCH CATHOLICS ABOUT THIS
In France Catholics do not know that Vatican council II is traditional . It is in harmony with the traditional concept of Islam and other religions.
When the Archbishop of Paris opened the renovated cathedral of Notre Dame he was interpreting Vatican Council II with the B being an exception for A. Do you agree ?
When every month the Latin Mass group meets outside his office to protest against the closure of the Latin Mass, they are all, interpreting Vatican Council II with B being an exception for A. Do you agree ?
For me B is not an exception for A. Do you have any comments or questions ?
If you do understand what I am saying this could be shocking for you.It is the end of liberalism in the Church.
It means Vatican Council II ( rational) does not contradict the concept of Tradition held by the Discalced Carmelite nuns in Texas whom Cardinal Fernandez has told informed that they do not have the Catholic faith. So a Decree of Suppression has been issued against them just for being tradition. The norm in the Church is liberalism created with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and dishonestly.
It would mean that when the bishop of Dijon, France asked the FSSP to leave, Vatican Council II, rational would contradict his liberalism.But this was not known to the laity in Dijon.
So the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, after being informed was unethical and political in their interpretation of Vatican Council II, during the trial of Archbishop Vigano. The archbishop was in the dark since he too was interpreting the Council and all the Catechisms, with the B being an exception for the A.
So the next time a bishop closes the Latin Mass in his diocese, in the name of Vatican Council II, immediately petitions must be filed stating that the Council can only be interpreted rationally . The bishop has a moral obligation to interpret Vatican Council II rationally in harmony with Tradition. The Council at every liturgy and rite is in harmony with the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Roman Missal of the 16th century.
In Italy, in a secular court it would be dishonest for the bishop to continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the fake premise ( invisible people are visible), the B is an exception for the A.
Even conservatives who attend the Novus Ordo Mass in for example, Washington, could legally challenge the archbishop's irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.
Why must I, Lionel, for example, interpret Vatican Council II and all the Catechisms and Creeds irrationally, when I have a ratinal choice ? Why must any Catholic be forced to do this ?- Lionel Andrades
FOR ME THERE IS TRUE WORSHIP IN ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Tancred,
I belive that there is true worship in only the Catholc Church. Muslims may pray and we can hope God will answer their prayers, but in general they are going to Hell. There prayers are of no value without Jesus Christ. Mohammad died without Catholic faith and the baptism of water. So he was oriented to Hell according to Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Today Jesus is appeaing to Muslims, not only in dreams but also in Near Death Experiences. He is showing them that Mohammad is lost.Now it is the Muslims today who in secret evangelise other Muslism. Since they have been shown how Muslims are going to Hell in large numbers.As Dante was shown, they are seeing Mohammad in lnferno.
This information is also part of traditional Catholic theology supported by Vatican Council II interpreted rationally. If a Catholic bishop was legally asked if he affirmed Vatican Council II with LG 8,14,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc referring to invisible and hypothetical cases in 1965-2025 he would have to answer - Yes or No.
A. If he said YES he would ve affirming the past exclusivist ecclesiology, the Athanasius Creed, the old Catechisms and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
B. If he said No, then in public he will be be interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and so dishonestly. This would not be Catholic. He would be unethical. It would indicate that he also interprets the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms unethically for poltical left reasons. He would be a modernist. People would know. Since he would not be affirming de fide teachings ( Creeds etc) canon law would apply to him. He could not hold office in the Catholic Church.
Now people think Pope Francis affirms the Creeds, since this question has still not been put to him.
If this issue is taken to the Diocesan Tribunal, the Signatura or the local secular court, the bishop will have to answer , Yes or No.
So the next time a bishop closes down the Latin Mass, in for example France, immedieately petitions must be filed , questioning the honesty of the bishop. Since Vatican Council II, rational, supports only the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Roman Missal of the 16th century. This must be the philosophical and theological norm at even the Novus Ordo Mass, in the ordination of a bishop and in the election of pope by a college of cardinals. So when Cardinal Arthur Roche closes down a Latin Mass in the name of Vatican Council II, immediately his interpretation of the Council, must be held suspect and action should be taken.- Lionel Andrades
-
Tancred,
Thanks for posting these messages about my Catholic Faith in harmony with Tradition and Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.My interpretation of Magisterial Documents is rational and the conclusiion is in harmony with the Magisterium of the past. So what I write here is apostolic and Magisterial.I belong to the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and do not interpret Vatican Council II irrationally like Pope Francis and the College of Cardinals.I can be contacted in Rome through a fax number.- Lionel Andrades
Maybe 'the Muslim thugs' would be howling for mercy if they were forced to read these turgid rants by the lunatic-in-residence.
ROBERTO DEI MATTEI’S INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II HAS BEEN MASONIC : SO ALSO HIS THEOLOGY ON ISLAM
From the blog Renew America
'Let us consider the Catholic character in Italy: the referendum on divorce approved, the referendum on abortion approved. If one held a referendum on euthanasia, that also would be approved.
These are the Italian Catholics! Materialism and consumerism! It began with the French Revolution: the successive philosophical currents were all Masonic and anticlerical. Italy was formed and unified by Masons, all Masons: the Royal House of Savoy, Giuseppe Garibaldi, Giuseppe Mazzini – all were Masons. If one was not with them, one did not have a career!'
https://renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/190131
Lionel :
The interpretation of Vatican Council II by Roberto dei Mattei is Masonic. He does not not interpret the Council rationally even after nbeing informed, since then he would have to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , the Feeneyite version. He would be opposed by the Zionists and Masons in Italy. He writes articles which are accepted by the leftist newspapers in Italy. This would end if he interpreted the Councils, Creeds and Catechisms rationally and so in harmony with Tradiiton.. He has been a contributor to the blog The Eponymous Flower of Tancred.- Lionel Andrades
Get your own blog, you psycho.
You still use a fax? You really are a dinosaur.
The exotic Lionel would have a spell bound audience in Malawi.
FOLLOWING BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER
When Bishop Athanasius Schneider was interviewed by Taylor Marshall he said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. This is central to what I am saying. There are no literal cases of LG 8,14,16,UE 3, NA 2, GS 22 in 2025. So invisble cases cannot be objective examples of salvation outside the Church and so explicit exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.
With this point I would like to open a conversation with the traditionalists who all interpret LG 8 etc as being exceptions for the Council of Florence 1442, on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So they imply that LG 8 etc refer to physically visible cases. It is the same with Pope Francis.
When St. Thomas Aquinas referred to the man in the forest in ignorance who would be saved after God would send a preacher to him he obviously was referring to a hypothetical case which could not be an exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which Aquinas affirmed, with no known exceptions. This dogma defined by three Church Councils and not contradicted by Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church - tella us that all Muslims, in general, like Jews and other non Christians, are oriented to Hell without 'faith and baptism' .So to save souls from Hell, it is important for have Governments which uphold, the non separation of Church and State and in which the Social Reign of Christ the King can be made practical in all political legislation. - Lionel Andrades
MUSLIM POLICE IN ROME CONSIDER JESUS AND VATICAN COUNCIL II 'TERRORIST' BUT NOT MOHAMMAD AND THE KORAN
Here in Rome when you affirm the traditional teaching outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation and cite Vatican Council II and the Catechims of the Catholic Church and the past Magisterium, the Muslim police , consider you a terrorist. In other words Jesus, the Bible, Vatican Council II and all the Creeds, Councils and old Catechisms are terrorist. They will warn people against you and place restrictions on others meeting you etc. They will tell people not to give you funds.However they will not consider Mohammad and the Quran as terrorist.Muslims are allowed to come into the churches. This is even though Mohammad taught that there was exclusive salvation in Allah and him only.Those who did convert to Muslim Tradition could be killed. The Muslim police in Rome, who have replaced the white Christian police, will uphold the blasphemy law against Mohammad, but consider Jesus and his teachings (in Rome, the center of Catholicsism) as being hate, fundamentalism, terrorism etc.
There is no official statement here saying that Catholics can no mo recite the Bible ( John 3:5. Mark 16:16) to support the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There is no official announcement saying that , Vatican Council II ( Ad Gentes 7 etc), Catechism of the Catholiic Church ( 845,846,1257 ), the Atahanssuius Creed etc which state outside the Church there is no salvation, is prohibited. Yet in the churches in Rome pressure is brought upon priests and religious sisters to not affirm Vatican Council II etc and neither criticize the teachings of the Koran.
The Muslim police are present even at the SSPX St. Catherine of Siena chapel in Rome.They decide who is allowed to speak to whom, in church and outside. - Lionel Andrades
"The Muslim police" seem to be everywhere, Lionel. It must be a crap on an existence for you. Why don't you try the more tolerant Morocco?
NOW EVEN VATICAN COUNCIL II IS TERRORIST IN ITALY
I am a Pakistani living in Rome for 20 years. The Catholic bishop of Islamabad-Rawalpindi sent me to Rome to become a priest. In Rome, I affirm the Catechisms, the Councils and Creeds, all interpreted rationally and I am considered 'terrorist'. I am not a traditonalist who rejects Vatican Council II. I accept Pope Francis as the pope. I go for Holy Mass in Italian. So is the Catholic Church in Rome terrorist ? Is Jesus terrorist?
The Anti Christ Population Replacement Program (PRP) is complete in Rome. Pakistani Muslims have replaced the white Christian in banking, hospitals, the Carabiniei, other police,libraries, schools etc. The white Catholic though is still there in the Army. In some areas of Rome I would not be welcome. Centocelle and Finocchio would be no -go areas for me, as a practising Catholic. The prefect of Rome has warned against religious radicalism on the outskirts of Rome among second generation Muslims, during the Jubillee year. This was reported in the daily newspaper Il Messaggero.
The irony is that in the Catholic churches of Rome the security man behind the television screen is a Muslim. No one asks him if he considers Mohammad and the Quran terrorist. Mohammad taught that there was salvation in only him.It is not enough to believe in Allah alone. Those who did not believe in Allah and Mohammad also should be killed is the teaching of the Islamic tradition ( hadees).
But Muslims who are employed at convents etc are not asked if they consider Mohammad and the Quran terrorist.They will not answer. But they will consider the Catholic who says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, based upon Vatican Council II, a terrorist.But he only follows the teaching of the popes over the centuries and the Church Fathers and the Apostles. Catholics in general here accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church (845,846,1257).
Nuns are being threathened here with violence for helping me with food. A Brazilian nun was sent home only for helping me.Another nun, an Italian, was beaten but it was hushed up by her community in Rome.
Muslims began a campaign against a Brazilian nun. Her French Marian community realized too late that they were following Islamic Shariah law when they sent her back to Brazil. So they made the good Sister the Provincial of their community in Brazil. But she is not allowed to travel to Italy or even France another Sister from her community told me. She is labelled a terrorist.
Recently Britain approved Blasphemy Laws like those in Pakistan. It is the same in Canada. Meanwhile in Pakistan there are Mirzaites, who are Muslims who do accept Mohammad as the last Prophet. They are in jails there because of their religous faith.They are in jail under the Islamic Blasphemy Laws, which are now approved in England. A few weeks back one of the Mirazite ( Qadiani) leaders was shot dead in Pakistan.The Bahais who are Muslims are forced to register themselves as non Muslims. This has to be stated on their passport.
Now even Vatican Council II is suspect in Italy ? - Lionel Andrades
Post a Comment