By Sir Laurence Gardner, Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 5, Number 2 (February-March 1998)
We know from the Gospel chronology that the Bethany
second-marriage anointing of Jesus by Mary Magdalene was in
the week before the Crucifixion. And we know that at that stage Mary
was three-months pregnant and therefore should have given birth in
the following September.
So, what do the Gospels tell us about events in September AD 33? In
fact, the Gospels tell us nothing, but the story is taken up
in
The Acts of the Apostles which detail for September the event
which we have come to know as "the Ascension".
The one thing that the Acts do not do, however, is call the event
"the Ascension". This was a name given to the ritual when
the Roman Church doctrines were established over three centuries
later. What the text actually says is:
"And when he had spoken
these things...he was taken up, and a cloud received
him out of their sight."
It then continues that "a
man in white" said to the disciples:
"Why stand ye gazing up
into heaven? This same Jesus...shall so come in like manner
as ye have seen him go."
Then, a little later in
the Acts, it says that "heaven" must receive Jesus until "the time
of restitution". Given that this was the very month in which Mary
Magdalene’s child was due, is there perhaps some connection between
Mary’s confinement and the so-called Ascension? There
certainly is, and the connection is made by virtue of the time of
restitution.
Not only were there rules to govern the marriage ceremony of a
Messianic heir, but so too were there rules to govern the marriage
itself. The rules of dynastic wedlock were quite unlike the Jewish
family norm, and Messianic parents were formally separated at the
birth of a child. Even prior to this, intimacy between a dynastic
husband and wife was only allowed in December, so that births of
heirs would always fall in the month of September,
the month of Atonement, the holiest month of the Jewish
calendar.
Indeed, it was this very rule which Jesus’s own parents (Joseph and
Mary) had themselves broken. And this was the reason why the
Jews were split in opinion as to whether Jesus was, in fact,
their true Messiah.
When a dynastic child was conceived at the wrong time of year, the
mother was generally placed in monastic custody for the birth so as
to avoid public embarrassment. This was called being "put away
privily", and Matthew states quite plainly that when Mary’s
pregnancy was discovered,
"Joseph, her husband,
being a just man and not willing to make her a public example, was
minded to put her away privily".
In this instance, special
dispensation for the birth was granted by the archangel Simeon who
at that time held the distinction of "Gabriel", being the angelic
priest in charge. Both the
Dead Sea Scrolls and
the Book of Enoch (which
was excluded from the Old Testament) detail that the "archangels" (or
chief ambassadors) were the senior priests at
Qumran, retaining the traditional titles of
"Michael",
"Gabriel", "Raphael", "Sariel", etc.
In the case of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, however, the
rules of wedlock had been obeyed to the letter, and their first
child was properly conceived in December AD 32, to be born in
September AD 33.
From the moment of a dynastic birth, the parents were physically
separated, for six years if the child was a boy, and for three years
if the child was a girl. Their marriage would only be recommenced at
the designated time of restitution. Meanwhile, the mother and child
would enter the equivalent of a convent, and the father would enter
"the Kingdom of Heaven". This Kingdom of Heaven was
actually the
Essene High Monastery at Mird, by the Dead Sea, and the
ceremony of entry was conducted by the angelic priests under the
supervision of the appointed Leader of the Pilgrims.
In the Old Testament book of Exodus, the Israelite pilgrims were led
into the Holy Land by a "cloud", and in accordance with this
continued Exodus imagery, the priestly Leader of the Pilgrims was
designated with the title "Cloud". (VN: we published the some books of Enoch and his writings, so check them out....If you read these below you will have a greater understanding of the
Bible, and history, the early Bible, before the Khazars took Enoch out of the Bible, and the catholic leaders and pagans
messed with it.
http://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2011/08/lost-book-of-enoch-watchers-and-giants.html
http://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-hidden-significance-of-enoch-part-1.html
http://beforeitsnews.com/power-elite/2015/05/noah-the-truth-is-bigger-than-you-thought-the-journey-begins-2449028.html)
So, if we now read the
Acts verses as they were intended to be understood, we see that
Jesus was taken up by the Cloud (the
Leader of the Pilgrims) to the Kingdom of Heaven (the
High Monastery). And the man in white (an angelic
priest) said that Jesus would return at the time of
restitution (when his Earthly marriage was restored).
If we now look at St
Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews we discover that he explains the said
Ascension event in some greater detail, for Paul tells of how
Jesus was admitted to the Priesthood of Heaven when he actually had
no entitlement to such a sacred office. He explains that Jesus was
born (through his father Joseph) into the Davidic line of
Judah, a line which held the right of kingship but had no
right to priesthood, for this was the sole prerogative of the line
of Aaron and
Levi.
But, says Paul, a special dispensation was granted, and he tells that
"for the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a
change also of the law". As a result of this express "change of the
law", it is explained that Jesus was enabled to enter the
Kingdom of Heaven in the priestly Order of Melchizedek.
So, in September AD 33, the first child of Jesus and Mary
Magdalene was born, and Jesus duly entered the Kingdom of Heaven.
There is no reference to this child being a son (as there is for the
two subsequent births), and given that Jesus returned three years
later, in AD 36, we know that Mary must have had a daughter.
By following the chronology of the Acts, we see that in
September AD 37 a second child was born; and then another in AD 44.
The period between these two births to the second restitution in AD
43 was "six years", which denotes that the AD 37 child was a
son. This fact is also conveyed by the use of cryptic
wording, the same cryptic wording afforded to the AD 44 child, so we
know that this third child was also a son.
In accordance with the scribal codes detailed in the Dead Sea
Scrolls, everything cryptic within the New Testament is set
up beforehand by some other entry which explains that the inherent
message is "for those with ears to hear". Once these codes and
allegories are understood, they never ever vary. They mean the same
thing every time they are used, and they are used every time that
same meaning is required.
For example, the Gospels explain that Jesus was called "the Word of
God": "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us... full of
grace and truth." John goes to great lengths to explain the
relevance of this definition, and subsequent entries give details
such as "the Word of God stood by the lake" and "the Word of God was
in Samaria".
Messages conveying information about fertility and new life are
established in the Parable of the Sower whose seed "bore
fruit and increased". Thus, when it is said that "the Word of God
increased", "those with ears to hear" would recognize at once that
"Jesus increased", that is to say, he had a son. There are two such
entries in the Acts, and they fall precisely on cue in AD 37 and
AD 44.
Probably the most misrepresented book of the New Testament is The
Book of The Revelation of St John the Divine,
misrepresented by the Church, that is; not by the book
itself. This book is quite unlike any other in the Bible. It is
dubbed with terrible supernatural overtones, and its straightforward
imagery has been savagely corrupted by the Church
to present the text as some form of foreboding or prophecy of warning!
But the book is not called "The Prophecy" or "The Warning". It is
called "The Revelation".
So, what does the book reveal? Chronologically, its story follows
The Acts of the Apostles, and the Book of The Revelation
is, in fact, the continuing story of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and their
sons, particularly
the elder son, Jesus Justus. It follows his life and
details his marriage, along with the birth of his own son. This
much-misunderstood New Testament book is not a foreboding or a
warning as the fearful Church would have us believe.
It is precisely what it says it is:
a revelation.
As we saw earlier, ordained priests of the era were called "fishers";
their helpers were called "fishermen", and baptismal candidates were
called "fishes". Jesus became an ordained fisher when he entered the
Kingdom of Heaven, but until that time (as explained by St Paul)
he held no priestly office.
In the rite of ordination, the officiating Levite priests of the
Sanctuary would administer five loaves of bread and two fishes to
the candidates, but the law was very firm in that such candidates
had to be circumcised Jews. Gentiles and uncircumcised Samaritans
were on no account afforded any such privilege.
Indeed, it was this particular ministerial ritual which Jesus had
flouted at the so-called "feeding of the five-thousand", because he
presumed the right to grant access to his own new liberal
ministry by offering the loaves and fishes to an
unsanctified gathering. Apart from eventually becoming a fisher,
Jesus was also referred to as
"the Christ", a Greek definition which meant "the
King". In saying the name "Jesus Christ",
we are actually saying "King Jesus", and his kingly heritage was of the
Royal House of Judah (the House of David), as mentioned numerous
times in the Gospels and in the Epistles of St Paul.
From AD 33, therefore, Jesus emerged with the dual status of a "Priest
Christ" or, as is more commonly cited, a "Fisher King". This
definition, as we shall see, was to become an hereditary and
dynastic office of Jesus’ heirs, and the succeeding "Fisher
Kings" were paramount in the history of the Grail
bloodline.
Prior to the birth of her second son in AD 44, Mary Magdalene was
exiled from Judaea following a political uprising in which she was
implicated. Along with Philip, Lazarus and a few retainers, she
traveled (by arrangement with King Herod-Agrippa II) to live
at the Herodian estate near Lyon, in
Gaul (which later became France).
From the earliest times, through the mediaeval era, to the great
Renaissance, Mary’s flight was portrayed in illuminated manuscripts
and great artworks alike. Her life and work in France, especially in
Provence and the Languedoc, appeared not
only in works of European history but also in the Roman Church
liturgy, until her story was suppressed by the Vatican.
Mary Magdalene’s exile is told in The Book of The Revelation
which describes that she was pregnant at the time. It tells also of
how the Roman authorities subsequently persecuted Mary, her son and
his heirs:
"And she, being with
child, cried...and pained to be delivered...and behold, a great red
dragon, having seven heads...and seven crowns...stood before the
woman...for to devour her child... And she brought forth a
man-child...and the woman fled into the wilderness... And the dragon
was wroth with the woman, and went to make war forever with the
remnant of her seed...which...have the testimony of Jesus Christ."
It was to Gaul
that Mary was said to have carried the Sangréal (the
Blood Royal, the Holy Grail); and it was in Gaul
that the famous line of Jesus and Mary’s immediate descendant heirs,
the Fisher Kings, flourished for 300 years.
The eternal motto of the Fisher Kings was "In Strength",
inspired by the name of their ancestor, Boaz (the
great-grandfather of King David), whose name similarly meant
"In Strength". When translated
into Latin, this became "In Fortis", which was
subsequently
corrupted to "Anfortas", the name of the Fisher
King in Grail romance.
We can now return to the Grail’s traditional symbolism as a chalice
containing the blood of Jesus. We can also consider graphic designs
dating back well beyond the Dark Ages to about 3,500 BC. And in
doing this, we discover that a chalice or a cup
was the longest-standing
symbol of the female. Its representation was that of the
Sacred Vessel, the vas uterus, the womb.
And so, when fleeing into France, Mary Magdalene carried the
Sangréal
in the Sacred Chalice of her womb,
just as the
Book of The Revelation
explains. And the name of this second son was Joseph.
The equivalent traditional symbol of the male was a blade
or
a horn, usually represented by a sword or a unicorn. In
the Old Testament’s
Song of Solomon and in the Psalms of David, the fertile
unicorn is associated with the kingly line of Judah; and it was for
this very reason that the Cathars of Provence used the
mystical beast to
symbolize the Grail bloodline. (VN: Remember, the Cathars were murdered in France by both the King and Catholic Church around the same time as they tortured and murdered the Knights Templar. The knights brought back "treasure" from the middle East, but no one has ever found the "treasure", except for documents found in Solomon's temple which bore witness to much of this information. That was why they had to die.)
Mary Magdalene died in Provence in AD 63. In that
very year,
Joseph of Arimathea built the famous chapel at
Glastonbury in England as a memorial to the Messianic Queen.
This was the first ’above-ground’ Christian church in the world, and
in the following year Mary’s son
Jesus Justus dedicated it to his mother. Jesus the Younger
had in fact been to England with Joseph before, at the age of
twelve, in AD 49. It was this event which inspired William Blake’s
famous song, Jerusalem:
"And did those feet in
ancient time, walk upon England’s mountains green."
But who was Joseph of
Arimathea, the man who assumed full control of affairs at the
Crucifixion? And why was it that Jesus’ mother, his wife and the
rest of the family accepted Joseph’s intervention without
question?
As late as the year 900, the Church of Rome decided to announce that
Joseph of Arimathea was the uncle of Jesus’ mother Mary.
And from that time, portrayals of Joseph have shown him as being
rather elderly at the Crucifixion, when Mother Mary was herself in
her fifties. Prior to the Roman announcement, however, the
historical records of Joseph depicted a much younger man. He was
recorded to have died at the age of 80 on 27 July AD 82, and thus
would have been aged 32 at the time of the Crucifixion.
In fact, Joseph of Arimathea was none other than
Jesus Christ’s own brother, James, and his title
had nothing whatever to with a place name. Arimathea never
existed. It therefore comes as no surprise that
Joseph negotiated with Pilate to place Jesus in
his own family tomb.
The hereditary "Arimathea" title was an English
corruption of the Graeco-Hebrew style
ha-Rama-Theo, meaning "of the Divine Highness", or
"of the Royal Highness" as we’d define it today. Since
Jesus was the senior Messianic heir - the Christ, Khristos or King -
then his younger brother was the Crown Prince - the Royal Highness,
Rama-Theo. In the
Nazarene hierarchy, the Crown Prince always held the
patriarchal title of "Joseph", just as Jesus was a titular
"David"
and his wife was a "Mary".
In the early fifth century, Jesus and Mary’s descendent Fisher Kings
became united by marriage to the Sicambrian Franks,
and from them emerged a whole new ’reigning’ dynasty. They were the
noted
Merovingian Kings who founded the French monarchy
and introduced the well-known fleur-de-lys (the
ancient Jewish symbol of circumcision) as the royal
emblem of France.
From the Merovingian succession, another strain of the
family established a wholly independent Jewish kingdom in southern
France: the Kingdom of Septi-mania, which we now know
as the Languedoc. And the early princes of
Toulouse, Aquitaine and
Provence were all descended in the Messianic
bloodline of the Holy Grail. Septimania was
granted to the
Royal House of David in 768, and Prince Bernard of Septimania
later married a daughter of
Emperor Charlemagne.
Also from the Fisher
Kings came another important parallel line of succession in
Gaul. Whereas the Merovingian Kings continued
the patrimonial ’male’ heritage of Jesus, this other line
perpetuated the
matriarchal heritage of Mary Magdalene in a ’female’ line. They
were the dynastic Queens of Avallon in Burgundy, the
House del Acqs, meaning "of the waters", a style granted to Mary
Magdalene in the early days when she voyaged on the sea to
Provence.
Those familiar with Arthurian and Grail lore will by now have
recognized the ultimate significance of this Messianic family
of the Fisher Kings, the Queens of Avallon and the
House del Acqs (corrupted in Arthurian romance to "du Lac").
The descendant heirs of Jesus posed an enormous
threat to the
Roman High Church because they were the dynastic
leaders of the
true Nazarene Church. In real terms, the Roman
Church should never have existed at all, for it was no
more than a ’hybrid’ movement comprised of various pagan doctrines
attached to a fundamentally Jewish base.
Jesus was born in 7 BC and his birthday was on the
equivalent of 1 March, with an ’official’ royal birthday on 15
September to comply with dynastic regulation. But, when establishing
the Roman High Church in the fourth century, Emperor Constantine
ignored both of these dates and supplemented 25 December
as the new Christ’s Mass Day, to coincide with the pagan Sun
Festival.
Later, at the Synod of Whitby in 664, the bishops
expropriated the Celtic festival of Easter (Eostre),
the Goddess of Spring and Fertility, and attached a
wholly new Christian significance. In so doing, they changed
the date of the Celtic festival to sever its traditional association
with the Jewish Passover.
Christianity, as we know it, has evolved as a ’composite
religion’
quite unlike any other.
If Jesus was its
living catalyst, then
Christianity should rightly be based on the teachings of
Jesus himself, the moral and social codes of a fair-minded,
tolerant ministry, with the people as its benefactors.
But orthodox Christianity
is not based on the teachings of Jesus:
it is based on the teachings of the Roman Church,
which are entirely
different. There are a number of reasons for this, the
foremost of which is that Jesus was deliberately sidestepped in
favor of the
alternative teachings of Peter and Paul, teachings which
were thoroughly denounced by the Nazarene Church of
Jesus and his brother James. (VN: this explains why Paul turned James into the Romans and he was crucified as was Jesus, but he requested that he be crucified upside down.)
Only by removing Jesus from the frontline could
the
Popes and
cardinals reign supreme. When formally instituting
Christianity as the state religion of Rome, Constantine
declared that "he alone" was the true "Saviour Messiah", not
Jesus!. As for the Bishops of Rome (the Popes),
they were granted an apostolic descent from St Peter,
not a legitimate Desposynic descent from Jesus and his
brothers, as was retained within the Nazarene Church.
The only way for the Roman High Church to restrain the
heirs of
Mary Magdalene was to discredit Mary herself and to deny her
bridal relationship with Jesus. But what of Jesus’
brother James? He, too, had heirs, as did their other
brothers, Simon, Joses and
Jude. The Church could not escape the Gospels which state that
Jesus was the Blessed Mother Mary’s "first-born son", and so Mary’s
own motherhood also had to be repressed.
As a result, the Church portrayed Mother Mary as a
virgin, and Mary Magdalene as a whore, neither of which description
was mentioned in any original Gospel. Then, just to cement Mother
Mary’s position outside the natural domain, her own mother, Anna,
was eventually said to have
borne her by way of "Immaculate Conception"!
Over the course of time, these contrived doctrines have had widespread
effect. But, in the early days, it took rather more to cement the
ideas because the original women of the Nazarene mission had a
significant following in the Celtic Church, women such as Mary
Magdalene, Martha, Mary Jacob-Cleophas and
Helena-Salome who had run schools and social missions throughout
the Mediterranean world. These women had all been disciples of
Jesus, and close friends of his mother, Mary, accompanying
her to the Crucifixion, as confirmed in the Gospels.
The Church’s only salvation was to deny women
altogether; to deny them not only rights to
ecclesiastical office, but to deny them rights to any status in
society. Hence, the Church declared that women were all heretics and
sorceresses!
In this, the bishops were aided by the words of Peter and Paul, and on
the basis of their teachings the Roman High Church was
enabled to
become wholly sexist.
In his Epistle to
Timothy,
Paul wrote:
"I suffer not a woman to
teach, nor to usurp any authority over the man, but to be in
silence."
In the Gospel of Philip,
Peter is even quoted as saying that
"Women are not worthy of
life".
The bishops even quoted
the words of Genesis, wherein God spoke to Eve about Adam, saying
"He shall rule over thee".
The Church Father
Tertullian summed up the whole Roman attitude when writing
about the emergent disciples of Mary Magdalene:
"These heretical woman!
How dare they! They are brazen enough to teach, to engage in
argument, to baptize... It is not permitted for a woman to speak in
church...nor to claim...a share in any masculine function-least of
all in priestly office."
Then, to cap it all, came
the
Roman Church’s most amazing document,
The Apostolic Order. This was compiled as an
’imaginary’ conversation between the apostles after the Last Supper.
Contrary to the Gospels, it supposed that Mary Magdalene had been
present at the Supper, and it was agreed that the reason why Jesus
had not passed any wine to Mary at the table was because he had seen
her laughing!
On the basis of this extraordinary, fictitious document,
the bishops ruled that, even though Mary might have been
a companion of
Jesus, women were not to be afforded any place within the
Church because they were not serious! This sexist attitude has
persisted within the Church to the present day. Why? Because Mary
Magdalene had to be discredited and removed from the reckoning
so that her heirs could be ignored. But things are now changing,
and, in the Anglican Church at least, women are being restored to
the priestly station.
Notwithstanding the avid sexist movement, the Messianic heirs
retained their social positions outside the Roman Church
establishment. They progressed their own Nazarene and Celtic
Church movements and founded
Desposynic kingdoms in Britain and Europe. They were a
constant threat to the Roman High Church and to the figurehead
monarchs and governments empowered by that Church. They were the
very reason for the implementation of the brutal Inquisition
because they upheld a moral and social code which was contrary
to High Church requirement.
This was especially apparent during the Age of Chivalry,
which embraced a respect for womanhood, as exemplified by the
Knights Templars whose constitutional oath supported a
veneration of "the Grail Mother", Queen Mary Magdalene.
Prior to the Middle Ages, the individual stories of this family were
historically well-known. But when the Church began
its reign of fanatical persecution (the great Inquisition),
the whole
Nazarene and Desposynic heritage was
forced underground.
But why the vengeful onset of the Inquisition? Because the
Knights Templars had not only returned from the Holy Land
with
documents that undermined the Church’s teachings, but they also
established their own
Cistercian churches in opposition to Rome. These were
not just any churches; they were the greatest religious monuments
ever to grace the skylines of the western world: the Notre
Dame cathedrals of France.
Despite their present-day image, these impressive Gothic cathedrals
had nothing whatever to do with the established
Christian Church. They were funded and built by the Knights
Templars, and they were dedicated to Mary Magdalene-Notre
Dame, Our Lady-whom they called "the Grail of the world".
This, of course, defeated every dogma that the High Church had
encouraged, and the bishops retaliated by re-dedicating numerous
other churches to Mary, the mother of Jesus. But, in so doing, they
made a strict decree that all artistic portrayals of Mother Mary,
the Madonna, must henceforth show her dressed in "blue and white
only"-so as not to grant her any rights to ecclesiastical office in
the male-only priesthood.
Mary Magdalene, on the other hand, was being portrayed (by the
world’s greatest artists) wearing the red mantle of
cardinal status or the black robe of a Nazarite High
Priestess, and there was nothing the
Church could do about it. The bishops’ only option was to proclaim
the practice sinful and heretical-because, in having previously
elected to
ignore Mary Magdalene and her heirs, she was outside
their jurisdiction.
It was at that time that Grail lore was itself
denounced as a heresy by the Vatican. The
sixth-century writings of Merlin were expressly banned by the
Ecumenical Council, and the original Nazarene Church of Jesus
became an "underground stream", aided by such notable sponsors as
Leonardo da Vinci and Sandro Botticelli.
In those days, the Church policed and controlled most literature in
the public domain; and so, in order to avoid outright censorship,
the Grail tradition became allegorical and its message was
communicated by way of secret watermarks, esoteric writings, Tarot
cards and symbolic artwork.
But why should Grail lore and the writings of Merlin
have posed such a problem for the High Church? Because, within the
context of their adventurous texts, they told the descendant story
of the Grail bloodline, a bloodline which had been ousted from its
dynastic position by the Popes and Bishops of Rome who
had elected to reign supreme by way of a contrived "apostolic
succession".
This apostolic succession was said to have been handed down
from the first bishop, St Peter (and, indeed, this is still the
promoted view). But one only has to study the Church’s own Apostolic
Constitutions to discover that this is simply not true. Peter
was never a Bishop of Rome, nor of anywhere else, for that
matter!
The Vatican’s Constitutions record that the first Bishop
of Rome was
Prince Linus of Britain, the son of Caractacus the Pendragon.
He was installed by St Paul in AD 58, during Peter’s own lifetime.
From the 1100s, the powerful Knights Templars and their
cathedrals posed an enormous threat to the ’male-only’ Church by
bringing the heritage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene to the
fore in the public domain.
The cardinals knew that their whole establishment would tumble if the
Messianic descendants gained the upper hand. They had to be crushed!
And so the brutal Inquisition was implemented, a
hideous persecution of all who dissented from the rule of the
bishops.
It all began in 1208, when Pope Innocent III sent 30,000
soldiers into the Languedoc region of southern France.
This was the home of
the Cathars ("the Pure Ones") who were
said to be the guardians of a great and sacred treasure, a
mysterious secret which could overturn orthodox Christianity.
The Pope’s so-called Albigensian Crusade lasted for 36
years, during which time, tens of thousands of innocent people were
slaughtered, but the treasure was never found.
The main thrust of the Inquisition (or "Holy Office")
was instituted by Pope Gregory IX during the course of this
massacre, in 1231, and it was set against anyone who supported
"the Grail heresy". By 1252, the torture of victims was
formally authorized, along with execution by burning.
"Heresy" was a wonderful charge to level against captives, because
only the Church could define it. The victims were
tortured until they confessed, and having confessed they were
executed. If they did not confess, then the torture continued until
they died anyway. One recorded form of torture was to spread the
victim, little by little, with fat (beginning with his feet), and
then to roast him alive in sections, limb by limb, over an open
fire.
These savage persecutions and punishments were openly
waged for more than 400 years, and were also extended against
Jews, Muslims and Protestant dissenters. But the Inquisition
was never formally terminated. As recently as 1965 it was
renamed "the Sacred Congregation", and its powers
are theoretically still in force today.
Undaunted by the Inquisition, the Nazarene
movement pursued its own course, and the story of the bloodline
was perpetuated in literature such as the Grand Saint Grail
and the High History of the Holy Grail. These writings
were largely sponsored by the Grail courts of France (the courts of
Champagne, Anjou and others), and also by the Knights Templars
and the
Desposyni; and, at that stage, Arthurian Romance became a
popular vehicle for the Grail tradition.
In the light of this, the Templars became a specific
target of
the Inquisition in 1307 when the henchmen of Pope
Clement V and
King Philip IV of France were set in their direction. The papal
armies scoured Europe for the Templar documents and treasure, but,
like
the Cathar inheritance, nothing was found. However, many
Knights were tortured and executed in the process, and their
companions escaped to countries outside the papal domain.
But the Templar hoard was not lost, and while the
Vatican emissaries were searching, the treasure and
documents were locked away in the Chapter House Treasury vaults of
Paris. They were under the protection of the Templar Grand Knights
of St Anthony, "the Guardian Princes of the Royal Secret",
who loaded the hoard one night onto 18 galleys of the Templar fleet
at La Rochelle.
By daybreak, the fleet had sailed for Scotland, and on
arrival they were welcomed by King Robert the Bruce who,
along with the whole Scottish nation, had been excommunicated by the
Pope for challenging the Catholic King Edward of England. In
Scotland, the Templars and their treasure remained,
and the Knights fought with Bruce at Bannockburn in 1314 to regain
Scotland’s independence from Plantagenet England.
Subsequent to the Battle
of Bannockburn, Bruce and the St Anthony Templars
founded the new
Order of the Elder
Brothers of the Rosy Cross
in 1317, from which time the Kings of Scots became hereditary Grand
Masters, with each successive Stewart King holding the
honored Grand Priory title of "Prince Saint Germain".
So, why was it that King Arthur, a Celtic commander of the
sixth century, was so important to the Knights Templars
and
the Grail courts
of Europe? Quite simply, because Arthur had been unique, with a
’dual’ heritage in the Messianic line.
King Arthur was by no means mythical, as many have
supposed. Far from it. But he has generally been looked for in the
wrong places. Researchers, misguided by the fictional locations of
the romances, have searched in vain through the chronicles of
Brittany, Wales and the west of England. But the details of
Arthur are to be found in the Scots’ and Irish annals. He
was indeed "the High King of the Celtic Isle", and he
was the sovereign commander of the British troops in the late sixth
century.
Arthur was born in 559, and he died in battle in 603. His
mother was
Ygerna del Acqs, the daughter of Queen Viviane of Avallon,
in
descent from Jesus and Mary Magdalene. His father
was High King Aedà n of Dalriada (the Western Highlands of
Scotland, now called Argyll), and Aedà n was the British Pendragon ("Head
Dragon" or "King of Kings") in descent from
Jesus’ brother James. It is for this reason that the stories
of Arthur and Joseph of Arimathea are so closely
entwined in the Grail romances.
Indeed, the coronation records of Scotland’s King Kenneth MacAlpin
(a descendant of Aedà n the Pendragon) specifically refer to
his own descent from the dynastic Queens of Avallon.
King Aedà n’s paternal legacy emerged through the most ancient
House of Camulot (England’s Royal Court of Colchester)
in a line from the first Pendragon, King Cymbeline (who is
well-known to students of Shakespeare).
By that time, Messianic descendants had founded
Desposynic kingdoms in Wales and across the Strathclyde and
Cambrian regions of Britain. Arthur’s father, King Aedà n of Scots,
was the first British monarch to be installed by priestly
ordination, when he was crowned and anointed by Saint Columba
of the Celtic Church in 574. This, of course, infuriated the Roman
Church bishops because they claimed the sole right to appoint kings
who were supposed to be crowned by the
Pope!
As a direct result of this coronation, Saint Augustine was
eventually sent from Rome in 597 to dismantle the Celtic Church. He
proclaimed himself Archbishop of Canterbury three years later, but
his overall mission failed and the Nazarene tradition
persisted in Scotland, Ireland and Wales and across the breadth of
northern England.
An important fact to remember is that the Grail dynasts
were never territorial governors of lands. Like Jesus himself, they
were designated "Guardians" of the people. The Merovingians of
Gaul, for example, were Kings of the Franks,
never Kings of France.
King Aedà n,
Robert the Bruce and their Stewart successors
were Kings of the Scots, never Kings of Scotland.
It was this implicitly ’social’ concept which the High Church
found so difficult to overcome, for the bishops preferred to
have dominion over ’territorial kings’, while the people’s
senior lord and master was supposed to be the Pope. Only by
maintaining ultimate spiritual
control over individuals could the Church reign
supreme, and so whenever a Grail dynast came to the
fore he was met by the wrath of the papal machine.
In 751 the bishops managed to depose the Merovingian
succession in
Gaul, and they established a new tradition whereby kings
of the Carolingian succession (that of Charlemagne) had to be
approved and crowned by the Pope. But the Church could never topple
the Desposynic lines in Scotland, even though
the old Celtic kingdoms of England had been dismantled by
Germanic Anglo-Saxons from the sixth century.
Even into the Middle Ages - long after the Norman Conquest of England
- the Nazarene Church and the long-prevailing cult of
Mary Magdalene were prominent in Europe. Women’s rights of
equality were upheld throughout the Celtic structure-and this was an
enormous problem for the male-only priesthood of orthodox
Christianity.
The underlying principle of the Grail monarchs was always one of
Service, in accordance with the Messianic code established by Jesus
when he washed his apostles’ feet at the Last Supper. And so the
true Grail dynasts were kings and guardians of their realms,
but they were never rulers.
This key aspect of the Grail code was perpetuated at the
very heart of nursery tale and folklore. Never did a valiant
cardinal or bishop ride to the aid of an oppressed subject or a
damsel in distress, for this has always been the social realm of
Grail princes and their appointed knights.
The Grail code recognizes advancement by merit and
acknowledges community structure, but, above all, it is entirely
democratic. Whether apprehended in its physical or spiritual
dimension, the Grail
belongs to leaders and followers alike. It also belongs to the land
and the environment, requiring that all should be "as one" in a
common, unified Service.
Throughout the ages, parliaments and governments have had as much
trouble as the Church in confronting the
Messianic social code, and the position is no different
today. Presidents and prime ministers are ’elected’ by the people.
They are supposed to represent the people. But do they? In actual
fact, they don’t. They are always affiliated to a political party,
and they achieve their positions by way of majority party vote. But
not everybody takes the trouble to vote, and sometimes there are
more than two parties to vote for. Consequently, at any given time,
more than half the people of a nation may not be represented by the
political party in power. In this regard, even though a ’majority
vote’ has been applied, the democratic principle fails.
What emerges is not "government by the people, for the people", but
"government of the people".
Jesus confronted a very similar situation in the first century.
At that time, Jerusalem and Judaea were under Roman occupation, with
King Herod and the Governor, Pontius Pilate, both
appointed by Rome. But who represented the people? The people were
not Romans; they were Holy Land Jews-Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes
and the like. Apart from that, there were large numbers of
Samaritans and Gentiles (non-Jews, the
Arab races). Who represented them? The answer is "no
one", until Jesus made it his mission to do so.
This was the beginning of the Grail code of non-affiliated princely
service - a code perpetuated by the Messianic dynasts in their
continuing role as "common fathers" to the people. The Grail
code is based on the principles of liberty,
fraternity and
equality, and it was particularly apparent in the
American and French revolutions, both of which discarded the
lordship of despotic aristocracy. But what has replaced it? It has
been replaced by party politics and largely
non-representative government.
From the Middle Ages there were a number of chivalric
and military orders specifically attached to the Messianic
Blood Royal in Britain and Europe. They included the
Order of the Realm of Sion and the
Order of the Sacred Sepulchre. But the most prestigious
of all was the
Sovereign Order of the Sangréal the Knights of the
Holy Grail. This was a dynastic order of Scotland’s
Royal House of Stewart, the royal house which in the 14th
century introduced the unicorn of the Cathars
as the sovereign emblem of Scotland. Shortly afterwards, they
introduced the prestigious Order of the Unicorn, which
carried the Grail motto "All as One".
Like King Arthur, the Stewart Kings also had a
dual Desposynic heritage from both Jesus
and his brother
James. In fact, from the 1370s they were the senior
house of the Messianic line, and they were Europe’s longest-reigning
dynasty, holding their crown for 317 years until finally deposed by
the Anglican Church in 1688. They were deposed because, in
compliance with the Grail code, they claimed affinity to God and the
nation before Parliament, the Church and the aristocracy.
Today, the senior legitimate descendant in this line is HRH Prince
Michael Stewart, Count of Albany (The
Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland).
And now to a question that
I have frequently been asked in the months since Bloodline of
the Holy Grail was published. The question is:
why is all this information coming to light at this particular
time?
The fact is that the information has never been suppressed by those
whom it concerns. It has been suppressed by outside
power-seekers
who have sought to serve their own ends, rather than serve the
communities they are supposed to represent.
Today, however, we are in a new age of ’questing’, as
many people grow more disillusioned with the establishment dogmas
that prevail. We live in an age of satellite communications,
sound-barrier travel, computers and the Internet-so the world is
effectively much smaller than before. In such an environment, news
travels very quickly, and the truth is far more difficult to
restrain.
Also, the very fabric of the ’male-dominated’ Church and
governmental structures is being questioned, and it is generally
perceived that the old doctrines of spiritual control and
territorial management are not working. More and more people are
searching for the original, uncluttered roots of their faith, and
for their purpose in society. They are seeking more effective forms
of administration to combat the all-too-apparent slide into social
and moral decline. They are, in fact, questing for the Holy Grail.
This quest for new enlightenment is considerably heightened by the
coming new millennium, and there is a widespread feeling that this
should also present a new Renaissance, an era of
rebirth wherein the precepts of the Grail code are
acknowledged and practiced-the precepts of liberty, fraternity and
equality.
Grail lore spells out loud and clear that the wound of the Fisher
King
must be healed if the wasteland is to return to fertility. And so,
given that I had been afforded privileged access over past years to
the archives of the Knights Templars, the Celtic
Church and the
Messianic sovereign houses of Europe, the time arrived
for me to play my own small part in trying to heal the age-old wound
of the Fisher King. The result was my book,
Bloodline
of the Holy Grail.
