Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The last charge (Knights Templar are back...)
The Guardian (U.K.) ^ | 3-19-08 | Patrick Barkham

Posted on 03/19/2008 8:30:19 AM PDT by Renfield

Almost 700 years after the Pope burned their leader at the stake, the Knights Templar are back. Or are they? Patrick Barkham tries to find out why the long-vanished order of Crusaders might suddenly be advertising in the press....

~~~snip~~~

Apart from the odd misplaced apostrophe and various arcane references to "annulling the bull", the advert gravely announced that the Knights Templar would petition the Pope to "restore the Order with the duties, rights and privileges appropriate to the 21st century and beyond". It called on all Templar groups and "brothers in arms" around the world to get in touch, either via its website, www.theknightstemplar.info, or an address in west London, which could clearly become a mecca for long-lost Templars and baffled Telegraph readers alike....

(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: History; Miscellaneous; Religion
KEYWORDS: catholics; godsgravesglyphs; knightstemplar; papacy; pope; templars

1 posted on 03/19/2008 8:30:20 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam; SunkenCiv

Any interest in the Knights Templar?


2 posted on 03/19/2008 8:30:46 AM PDT by Renfield (Turning apples into venison since 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

You might want to talk to Tom Hanks.........


3 posted on 03/19/2008 8:31:27 AM PDT by TexasNative2000 (Is this tagline governed by McCain-Feingold?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
Anyone who claims to be a Knight Templar today is a member of a secret society and is, if Catholic, under a latae sententiae excommunication which can be rescinded only if they renounce their membership in the secret society.
4 posted on 03/19/2008 8:34:07 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
which could clearly become a mecca for long-lost Templars

Mecca? Jerusalem perhaps, never Mecca.

5 posted on 03/19/2008 8:40:00 AM PDT by Dixie Yooper (Ephesians 6:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
under a latae sententiae excommunication - what are the chances the Pope would rescind this?
6 posted on 03/19/2008 8:43:51 AM PDT by SF Republican (Conservatives wanted all or nothing, and they got it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
Another possible worm is the reaction that the restoration of the Templars would cause among some Islamic groups who associate the Templars with the Crusades.

That's precisely why this should be seriously considered. A big f-you to the "Crusades for we, not for thee" Jihadis.

7 posted on 03/19/2008 8:46:25 AM PDT by Dr.Deth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SF Republican
what are the chances the Pope would rescind this?

Without renunciation of membership in the secret society, none. This particular excommunication is reserved to the local ordinary, usually.

8 posted on 03/19/2008 8:48:08 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: uglybiker

They’re putting the band back together again.


9 posted on 03/19/2008 9:16:23 AM PDT by shuckmaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shuckmaster; Renfield
I'm still looking for proof that ANY group calling itself 'Kights Templar' (Masons included) are descended from the originals.
10 posted on 03/19/2008 10:35:55 AM PDT by uglybiker (I do not suffer from mental illness. I quite enjoy it, actually.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·

 
Gods
Graves
Glyphs
Thanks Renfield. Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. An "Oh So Mysteriouso" topic.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
GGG managers are Blam, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
 

· Google · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology magazine · Biblical Archaeology Society ·
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo ·
· History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·


11 posted on 03/19/2008 11:12:23 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/______________________Profile updated Saturday, March 1, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Ah yes....excommunication. Isn't that where mortal men tell God who He's allowed to talk to?

L

12 posted on 03/19/2008 11:22:36 AM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Isn't that where mortal men tell God who He's allowed to talk to?

Your post essentially reads: "Wideawake, I have no idea what the word 'excommunication' means. Can you explain it to me?"

Well, Lurker, I'd be happy to.

Excommunication means that Church recognizes that one of its members has committed a sin of the kind that merits the sinner's exclusion from the sacraments it administers.

13 posted on 03/19/2008 11:27:46 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Excommunication means that Church recognizes that one of its members has committed a sin of the kind that merits the sinner's exclusion from the sacraments it administers.

Oh gee, thanks.

So in other words as far as God is concerned, it doesn't mean squat.

Thanks for clearing that up.

L

14 posted on 03/19/2008 12:06:38 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
So in other words as far as God is concerned, it doesn't mean squat.

Except for the fact that He, in the person of the Holy Spirit, guides the Church and commands obedience to its precepts.

15 posted on 03/19/2008 12:11:41 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Except for the fact that He, in the person of the Holy Spirit, guides the Church

The Pope is God? Who knew?

L

16 posted on 03/19/2008 12:12:25 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
The Pope is God? Who knew?

What your post actually says is: "Wideawake, I've read the New Testament, but I'm a little confused. Was Jesus God or was Peter God? I can't remember, can you tell me?"

Again, Lurker, I'd be happy to.

Jesus was God, and Peter was a mortal man that Jesus selected to perform certain tasks on His behalf.

17 posted on 03/19/2008 12:21:44 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
What your post actually says, and I quote, is this:

Except for the fact that He, in the person of the Holy Spirit, guides the Church

So your position is that Jesus is running the Catholic Church?

Do I have that about right?

L

18 posted on 03/19/2008 12:27:45 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
So your position is that Jesus is running the Catholic Church?

Insofar as jesus is the Son of God and the Son and Holy Spirit are one, He is guiding the Church - not administrating it.

"Running" is too vague a term since it could mean either.

19 posted on 03/19/2008 12:39:20 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
"Running" is too vague a term since it could mean either.

Did Jesus 'excommunicate' the Knights Templar or did the Pope do it?

L

20 posted on 03/19/2008 1:03:46 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Did Jesus 'excommunicate' the Knights Templar or did the Pope do it?

The Knights Templar were not, as a body, excommunicated. Their order, as a canonical entity, was dissolved.

21 posted on 03/19/2008 1:09:19 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
The Knights Templar were not, as a body, excommunicated

But you said: "Anyone who claims to be a Knight Templar today is a member of a secret society and is, if Catholic, under a latae sententiae excommunication"

Talk about a distinction without a difference....

L

22 posted on 03/19/2008 1:25:54 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Talk about a distinction without a difference....

The distinction is quite differentiated.

The original Knights Templar were not a secret society, but a religious order established according to the norms of canonical law.

Anyone who claims to be a Knight Templar today cannot claim membership in the original Knights Templar, since that order was dissolved as a canonical organization centuries ago.

The "Knights Templar" today are any of a number of secret societies that claim to be somehow occultly linked with that long-dissolved order. There is, of course, no actual, historical link.

Membership in a secret society incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

23 posted on 03/19/2008 1:35:51 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
The "Knights Templar" today are any of a number of secret societies that claim to be somehow occultly linked with that long-dissolved order.

Every one of them? You have proof of this?

Membership in a secret society incurs a latae sententiae excommunication

So if as a Catholic I had a 'secret society' called "Lurkers Secret Society" I would be automatically excommunicated?

Exactly which Pope wrote that?

L

24 posted on 03/19/2008 1:39:34 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: uglybiker

ping


25 posted on 03/19/2008 1:47:56 PM PDT by mnehring (So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of all money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Every one of them? You have proof of this?

Name one person who claims to be a Knight Templar who believes he bears no relationship whatever with the original.

So if as a Catholic I had a 'secret society' called "Lurkers Secret Society" I would be automatically excommunicated?

So if as a Catholic I had a 'secret society' called "Lurkers Secret Society" I would be automatically excommunicated? Exactly which Pope wrote that?

Such a society would have to meet the criteria defined by Pope Clement XII back in 1738 - to summarize the bare essentials: a group whose rules require one to conceal his membership in the group from all non-members including even his family and pastors, which requires a solemn oath to be taken to conceal the secrets of the society, and which undertakes corporate actions or requires rules of conduct that are concealed from outsiders.

26 posted on 03/19/2008 1:55:16 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Name one person who claims to be a Knight Templar who believes he bears no relationship whatever with the original.

How interesting that you won't answer my question.

It's a strong indicator that the person doing it is full of horse manure.

L

27 posted on 03/19/2008 1:57:16 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
How interesting that you won't answer my question.

Every KT claimant I have ever encountered in reality or on the web claims some kind of affinity with the historical Knights templar. That's the best I can do for you. Can you give me a counterexample?

You're getting pretty frustrated with my ability to definitely answer all your other questions, I see.

28 posted on 03/19/2008 2:02:07 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Such a society would have to meet the criteria defined by Pope Clement XII back in 1738 - to summarize the bare essentials: a group whose rules require one to conceal his membership in the group from all non-members including even his family and pastors, which requires a solemn oath to be taken to conceal the secrets of the society, and which undertakes corporate actions or requires rules of conduct that are concealed from outsiders.

So every single undercover CIA and FBI agent is automatically excommunicated?

L

29 posted on 03/19/2008 2:06:11 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: wideawake; Lurker
The original Knights Templar were not a secret society, but a religious order established according to the norms of canonical law.

Thank you. It really is sad that this military order who really had an amazing and interesting history of its own is so buried in all the conspiracy theories and groups who want to claim to have some sort of connection. (IMHO, only one group has even the slightest claim to some sort of relationship, and they don't claim direct relationships, only inspiration and very lose family ties- but that isn't for here).

I believe we need to distribute copies of Foucault's Pendulum before they are allowed to continue to post.

30 posted on 03/19/2008 2:07:15 PM PDT by mnehring (So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of all money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
I believe we need to distribute copies of Foucault's Pendulum

Read it.

L

31 posted on 03/19/2008 2:11:26 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
The Knights Templar were not, as a body, excommunicated. Their order, as a canonical entity, was dissolved.

Right again, the Pastoralis Praeeminentiae (may have the spelling wrong on that) ordered the capture of all Templars for crimes against the crown and church, but only some individual leaders were excommunicated.

32 posted on 03/19/2008 2:14:00 PM PDT by mnehring (So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of all money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wideawake; Lurker

Catholic definition of secret societies.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14071b.htm


33 posted on 03/19/2008 2:17:25 PM PDT by mnehring (So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of all money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
So every single undercover CIA and FBI agent is automatically excommunicated?

Not at all. Non-members of both organizations have investigative oversight of them, and the laws governing their activities are matters of public record, as are the oaths they take.

34 posted on 03/19/2008 2:18:27 PM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

widewake, you seem to have the patience of Job.


35 posted on 03/22/2008 8:12:48 PM PDT by rmichaelj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: rmichaelj

You’re too kind.


36 posted on 03/24/2008 6:57:20 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Amazing isn't it. Those who claim to be the purest Biblical Literalists have given dominion over the interpretation of the word of God to past Popes and conventions of politically appointed Bishops, but deny any such authority to today's more enlightened and accountable members of the clergy. Go figure.
37 posted on 03/25/2008 3:14:53 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson