Vatican book on Templars' demise

BBC ^ | October 5, 2007

[vladimir998]

You know far less about history than you think. If Philip was a papal lackey then please explain to me how Philip, THE LACKEY, got the gumption to kidnap Pope Boniface VIII?

Lackeys usually do not kidnap those they are supposedly lackeys to.

Explain that one, genius.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“Oh come on !!! The Vatican could have stepped in but decided not to. They wanted the Templars gone as well.”

After the Templars were arrested (5,000 in one night by Philip’s police), and were tortured into confessions, yes, the Papacy wanted them gone - because they looked guilty as hell.

Can you produce one document that shows the papacy was plotting against the Templars BEFORE the rumors of their supposed debauchery began circulating? Did you even know that Clement V and Jacque de Molay were working toward the declaration of another crusade in 1307? Did you know that the pope was at first outraged that Philip moved against the Templars without even advising him they were under suspicion of committing crimes? Why not read one of Malcom Barber’s classics on the Templars? Read The New Knighthood, or perhaps, The Trial of the Templars. You might actually learn something.

[ELS]

We need them again.

Ordo Militiæ Templi

[mnehring]

You seem to know your history well my FRiend. Philip manipulated Clement. I honestly doubt that the Vatican had anything to gain by falsely accusing the Templars, albeit, I still believe that an official apology is long overdue.

[mnehring]

First I’ve heard of this order. They claim to be associated, but it seems, as officially the Templars are still excommunicated, this isn’t a Catholic order. The problem with the internet is that it is easy to find hundreds of so called orders that claim association, most of which probably sprung up in the past decade.

[mnehring]

More like, “Redundant”.

..and there I go complementing you in another post only to find this. Please don't blindly follow accusations. We saw what happened in 1307 when that happens.

[Rennes Templar]

Thanks for the ping. Be interesting to see what the Vatican does. I will be surprised if they pronounce some sort of exoneration. The reason the church persecuted the Knights was their holding the teachings of Christ that the same church suppressed: karma and reincarnation, the indwelling Christ potential in all souls, and the evolving of the soul
over many lifetimes. These teachings of Jesus directly threaten the church’s power (and all its subsequent off-shoots), hence their suppression.

[JPJones]

It was all over money.The Templars were the defacto bankers of the European royalty. When the King of France couldn’t pay back his loans, he decided to have them trumped up on heresy charges...............

But it was more than just money, either Charles' father or grandfather begged for help from the Knights to battle someone somewhere (I can't remember) and the Knights failed to help him. So for Charles it was also personal.

[ELS]

The Ordo Militiae Templi do not claim to be directly descended from the original Knights Templar. It is a fully Catholic order with appropriate approval and canonical status from the Archbishop of Siena, Italy. Their rule is a slightly modified version of the rule written by St. Bernard for the original Knights. You can find more information at the Wikipedia entry they have started.

The problem with the internet is that it is easy to find hundreds of so called orders that claim association, most of which probably sprung up in the past decade.

That is certainly true. They spend a lot of time and energy debunking the false claims. Their organization began in 1979.

[JPJones]

not Charles....Philip

[mnehring]

That would be Philip II and you are correct, that was the request to take back Constantinople in the early 1200s. After the third Crusade, there was a desire to try to refocus on Constantinople instead of Jerusalem but most of the seasoned orders, as well as the Church was very cautious after what they just went through. The fourth Crusade that was mentioned by another poster. The Treaty of Le Goulet had just fallen apart and the tensions with England was high. No one at the time thought it was wise to attempt a new crusade with the Holy Roman Empire starting to break into internal squabbles again.

Another, possible conflict was Philip II's oppression of the Cathars which started about the same time. This mass genocide created some divisions among the dukedoms as the Cathars were wealthy and held large amounts of land.

[ConservativeMind]

Vladimir, what do you make of this from the text:

“However, according to Prof Frale, study of the document shows that the knights were not heretics as had been believed for 700 years.

In fact she says “the Pope was obliged to ask for pardons from the knights... the document we have found absolves them”. “

Why would the Pope have asked for the Templars to pardon him?

[PeoplesRepublicOfWA]

Does the parchment disclose the location of the Holy Grail?

[Amadeo]

Post 76 has a clue.

[vladimir998]

I don’t think an apology makes much sense - after all, there are no Templars to apologize to?

[Verginius Rufus]

It would be pretty hard to prove that a group “went underground” for 400 years and then re-emerged. (Where’s the documentation?) It’s much easier to believe that a group might claim a connection to an earlier group if they saw a chance of getting their assets (or for other reasons). But the European Union may have some kind of court that would find in favor of the Freemasons, just to inflict damages on the Vatican.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“Why would the Pope have asked for the Templars to pardon him?”

Did he ask? All I saw was this: “In fact she says “the Pope was obliged to ask for pardons from the knights... the document we have found absolves them”.“

So according to Frale says he was obliged to? According to Frale or according to custom? As is typical for the drive by media, this article blows in terms of detail. I can’t tell from that what Frale means. There is this, however:

“However, according to Prof Frale, study of the document shows that the knights were not heretics as had been believed for 700 years.”

“In fact she says “the Pope was obliged to ask for pardons from the knights... the document we have found absolves them”.”

Thus, it may have been that the pope realized they were NOT heretics and was obliged to ask for pardon for their convictions earlier for heresy. That still doesn’t mean that Clement doubted that they were guilty of heresy or other crimes when those supposed crimes were first revealed to him. Also, it was common to ask pardon of those who were condemned. Executioners, for instance, often asked pardon of those they were going to execute.

[uglybiker]

I wonder what occultic Masonic rituals will be in store for us all?????

Oh, just your usual hedonistic revelry. You know, dancing nekkid around a bonfire...impregnating nubile virgins (or a reasonable facsimile thereof). Maybe stomp out a few crop circles before the night's over.

Nuthin' special.

[uglybiker]

No doubt, there will be many Masons posting on this claiming their hero has been vindicated. Trouble is, you’ll never know they are Masons. Most of them won’t identify themselves as such.

	MASONIC LIST
Send uglybiker a FReepmail if you would like on/off The Masonic PING List
The List of Ping Lists

Stand and be counted, brothers!

[uglybiker]

If the Templars are in fact proven innocent and if the Freemasons can make a sufficiently sound case that they are in fact the Templars, Freemasons should consider appealing to the Vatican for the return of the property.

No Mason in his right mind should claim a direct connection with the Templars. The York Rite/Templar degrees of Freemasonry only emulate the ideals of which the Knights Templar were famous for.

And this Freemason will reserve any judgement of the Processus contra Templarios until he has had a chance to actually read it.