Popularized theories of Secret Societies claiming some role in the Templar Order are proven hoaxes of pseudo-history. Genuine Templar Chivalry wholly rejects Secret Societies, and serves to provide a Balance of Powers against tyranny, as the proven solution for defending human rights.
As a matter of historical fact, the idea of a “Secret Society” is fundamentally the opposite of everything which the original Knights Templar embodied, stood for, and fought for. The genuine Order of Knights of the Temple was never a “secret” institution. Rather, all of its true functions and intentions were indeed “very public”, boldly and openly declared, with maximal transparency:
The Templar Order was founded on the basis of public international law, by a public written Charter, which publicly declared the principles which the Knights and Dames swore to and lived by, and the true purposes of their missions:
The Templars wore official trademark uniforms of the Order, not only for military functions, but also for all activities in the general public whenever pursuing missions of the Order. By the chivalric tradition of heraldry, the Templars often displayed various heraldic banners and emblems, publicly and visibly declaring their family, Royal House of allegiance, and other alliances.
Everywhere a Templar went, the People were visually informed and reminded of what values and traditions the Templars stand for.
Unfortunately, various proponents or adherents of negative “Secret Societies” eventually tend to present themselves to those seeking or pursuing the goodness of genuine Templarism.
By false claims of being “Templars”, based on false stories of pseudo-history, they try to mislead seekers away from authentic Templar Chivalry. This is intended to hijack inspiration from the Templar legacy, to misdirect seekers into the elitist philosophies and destructive agendas of the Secret Societies.
Fortunately, that is merely a “side show” to the “main attraction” of the legitimate world of true Chivalry of venerable historical institutions, and one can quickly learn to “brush off” such attempts as petty distractions, as if shooing a fly.
The following are the traditional telltale signs, indicating an amateur, misguided or fictitious negative “Secret Society” attempting to interfere with seekers discovering or exploring the Templar Order:
Pseudo-Historical – Generally, such proponents make vague references to shadowy connections with some claimed “Priory of Sion” or “Merovingian Bloodline”.
Typically, such claims are enhanced by pseudo-historical “name dropping”, disconnected and irrelevant to any Templar heritage, such as references to Charlemagne, Napoleon, the Holy Roman Empire, or whatever might be expected to falsely generate an air of importance, prestige or mystique.
Sometimes, with only slightly more detail, such claims assert some implied authority or influence over the historical institution of the Knights Templar.
Self-Proclaimed – Notoriously, the proponents repeatedly insist that they are “Real” Templars, without any basis nor any explanation, only because they say so about themselves. They typically emphasize the word “Real” to pointedly assert their alleged superiority over all Cultural Templars, and even over the original Templar Order itself.
Elitist Egotism – Commonly, such proponents display a trademark egotism and elitism, such as demands for artificial “Respect” for their unproven claimed status (instead of earning respect, by simply demonstrating the humble service by merit which is the mark of a true monastic Templar).
Predictably, proponents of a negative Secret Society tend to emphasize how “important” its purported members are, with vague references to supposed “high level connections”. Often, their claimed “secrecy” itself is highlighted to give an artificial air of importance and implied superiority. These are the surest indications that in fact, they have nothing.
Blind Ultimatum – Occasionally, an ultimatum is given that one must instantly and blindly accept all of their claims, or else “you will never hear from us again”, as if some supposed great opportunity of life-changing benefit would be “lost forever” (in contrast with real historical institutions, which reliably have strategic patience over centuries).
The mentality and behavior of false “Templars” – always driven by philosophies from historical Secret Societies – are diametrically opposed to, and categorically excluded by, the very concept of any legitimate institution, and the very nature of all authentic principles of the Templar Order.
Merit – Legitimate public institutions must be based upon earned merit, providing substance of value to humanity, with open doors for all to benefit from that substance, thereby justifying the existence of those institutions.
Truth – Such earned merit must be promoted by factual Truth, subject to public scrutiny to verify both the reality and legitimacy of their claimed positive missions.
Note that traditions which have been forced to survive “underground”, only as long as needed to avoid persecution, are very different from a “Secret Society”:
Members surviving as an underground network, of an otherwise public institution, do not engage in any such elitism, egotism, deception or subversion, but rather simply pursue their positive purposes quietly and privately, hoping to be left alone in peace.
The Temple Rule of 1129 AD defines the Knights Templar as “servants… according to canonical law” (Rule 9), and declares the Templar Order to be a “canonical institution… according to the precepts” of Canon law (Rule 274) ((Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard, Rule 9, Rule 274.)).
Historically, the Code of Canon Law prohibits any involvement in “societies… which plot against the Church or against legitimate civil authority” representing the People, including any elitist or anti-humanitarian agenda, requiring automatic mandatory excommunication ((The Vatican, The Code of Canon Law of 1917, Canon 2335.)) ((The Vatican, The Code of Canon Law: Apostolic Constitution, Second Ecumenical Council (“Vatican II”), Enacted (1965), Amended and ratified by Pope John Paul II, Holy See of Rome (1983), Canon 1374.)) ((The Vatican, Declaration on Masonic Associations, Enacted (26 November 1983); Including the old 1917 Code (Canon 2335) in the new 1983 Code (Canon 1374): “The new Code of Canon law… [includes] other associations… contained in wider categories… their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church, and therefore membership in them remains forbidden.”)). In particular, “Members of forbidden [secret] societies cannot be admitted… to pious associations” such as an Order of Chivalry ((Reverend P. Trudel, A Dictionary of Canon Law (1919), 2nd Revised Edition, B. Herder Book Co., London (1920); Based upon the Code of Canon Law of 1917 AD, which codified the authentic Body of Canon Law of 1150 AD, “535. Societies, Condemned”.)).
The Apostles of Jesus condemned Secret Societies, and prohibited any participation in them: “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove [reject] them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.” (Ephesians 5:11-12)
The Temple Rule specifically prohibits any and all forms of elitism and egotism, commanding that “no person shall be elevated among you” (Rule 34), and that none who seeks “to promote himself gradually [shall] remain unpunished” (Rule 46), holding “both the strong and the weak equal” (Rule 38).
As the typical Secret Society Agendas of elitist supremacy are ultimately derived from egotism, the Temple Rule categorically excludes all forms of egotism:
It requires Knights and Dames to be “without any arrogance and without any show of pride” (Rule 18), forbids all members to have any “pride or arrogance” (Rule 19), and even prohibits working equipment to have “resplendent beauty… seen by others, nor pride” (Rule 52). ((Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard: Rules 34, 46, 38, Rules 18, 19, 52.))
Addressing the typical ambitions of elitism, the Temple Rule also strictly bans any subversive agendas for control, establishing the Common Law crime of “Conspiracy” against rights, defined as combination for any unlawful purpose against others, requiring expulsion from the Order for any “conspiracy… in combination” (Rule 229).
Confirming the very public nature of the Templar Order, and its unequivocal dedication to uplifting humanity, the Temple Rule also commands to “set an example of good works and wisdom”, so that the People of the general public “will be bestowed with honour” (Rule 37). ((Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard: Rules 229, 37.))
Seekers exploring Templarism inevitably encounter stories of a Secret Society called the “Priory of Sion”, described as an independent “Order”. Even the concept of its identity is transparently false, as betrayed by its very name:
By definition, a “Priory”, which is a type of Commandery, is only a subdivision of what must be an Order of public legitimacy ((Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia (1911), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 12, “Priory”, p.428.)). No genuine Order would ever be called merely a “Priory”, and no Priory can exist without a higher chivalric or ecclesiastical Order in public law backing it.
Proponents of a Priory of Sion assert that it was founded in 1099 AD, was a parallel “Sister Order” to the Knights Templar, and that its Grand Masters overlapped with the Templar Grand Mastery until 1188 AD. Self-styled groups reviving this fictitious fraternity thus claim some vague authority or implied supremacy over the Grand Mastery of the Templar Order.
“Priory of Sion” Parchment Forgery ca. 1956-1967
Adherents to a supposed Priory of Sion fraternity typically claim to represent, and to be dedicated to protecting, a “Secret Bloodline of Jesus” from Mary Magdalene, somehow being a “Secret Bloodline” of the Merovingian Dynasty.
The inherent implication of “Bloodline Superiority” is used to justify an historically documented Evil Agenda of installing false “Kings” on the “thrones” of the world, “erect[ed] on the ruins” of society, to impose a tyrannical Globalist dictatorship of self-styled elitism at the expense of all humanity ((Victor E. Marsden, Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Liberty Bell Publications, Reedy, West Virginia (1930), reprinted from The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, The Britons Publishing Society, London (1922); Protocol 23.4: declares to “erect on the ruins the throne of the King of the Illuminati”; Protocol 24: declares Kings controlled by “dynastic roots of King David”, meaning the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline of Jesus” hoax.)).
While some individual Templars historically may have believed in Jesus and Mary Magdalene having a family, an associated claim of “Bloodline Superiority” is very different, and that concept itself is fundamentally flawed and wholly contrary to authentic Templar principles:
Jesus himself rejected the idea of genealogical supremacy, declaring that “the flesh profiteth nothing” (John 6:63), and his Apostles taught to “avoid… genealogies… for they are unprofitable and vain [egotistical]” (Titus 3:9)
Some lineage of descendants from the historical Jesus and Mary Magdalene may or may not exist. In either case, however, it is certain that the Secret Societies do not have it nor represent it, and that it gives no legal nor spiritual basis for any claim to secular power for ruling over sovereign nations.
Such a “Secret Bloodline” philosophy claiming elitist control, in violation of all God-given human rights, has no place in authentic Templarism, and always was – and still is – strictly rejected and actively opposed by the Templar Order.
The idea of a “Priory of Sion” as a supposed “Order” was based upon the entirely unrelated monastery, the “Abbey of Our Lady”, which was the only single Christian Order established on Mount Zion during the relevant time period:
That Vatican Abbey was built on the Temple Mount (in a different part separate from the Temple of Solomon) ca. 1099 AD, and was wholly merged into the Vatican’s Jesuit Order in 1617 AD, such that it no longer exists. ((Memoires de la Societe Nationale des Antiquaires de France, Vol. XLVIII, French National Library in Paris, File Reference No. 8-O2F-762.))
That Abbey was never used in connection with the Templar Order, and neither of those two Orders were ever involved in the Templar Grand Mastery.
Godfrey de Bouillon, Commander of the Crusades which were rejected by the later Templar Order
Promoters of “Priory of Sion” groups typically claim a connection to the founders of the Templar Order through Godfrey de Bouillon (1060-1100 AD), a Commander of the First Crusade, who was a descendant of Charlemagne:
Godfrey became the first Regent of the new Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1099 AD, with his coronation ceremony held in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and thus used the title “Defender of the Holy Sepulchre” (Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri) ((Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Title of Godfrey of Bouillon, in Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research (1979), Vol.52, pp.83-86;)) ((Alan V. Murray, The Title of Godfrey of Bouillon as Ruler of Jerusalem, in Collegium Medievale (1990), Vol.3, pp.163-178.)) ((John France, The Election and Title of Godfrey de Bouillon, in Canadian Journal of History (1983), No.18.3, pp.321-329.)).
Despite creating for himself a title using the word “Defender”, Godfrey de Bouillon was a Vassal of the German Empire, who actually fought against the Vatican (ca. 1076-1087 AD) and helped King Henry IV of Germany to seize Rome from the Pope ((The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Godfrey of Bouillon”, p.624.)), although he later joined as one of the leaders of the Vatican’s First Crusade in 1095 AD.
Furthermore, Godfrey de Bouillon simply being a “Crusader” did not make him a Templar: The Templar Order explicitly criticized and rejected the “Crusades” in its own official Charter, the Temple Rule of 1129 AD (Rule 2) ((Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard, Rule 2.)). As a Commander, Godfrey was directly responsible for much of what the Templars in fact condemned about the Crusades.
Additionally, at the earliest inception of the Templar Order ca. 1118 AD, King Baldwin II of Jerusalem made sure to remove the Knights Templar from the jurisdiction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre: “The King came to them and… the King succeeded in persuading the Prior of the Sepulchre to release them from obedience… and they left”. ((Ernoul & Bernard, Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Tresorier (ca. 1188), Ed. L. de Mas Latrie, Paris (1871), Chapter 2, pp.7-8.))
Thus, Godfrey’s association with the Holy Sepulchre (only for his coronation event) also fails to indicate any connection to the Knights Templar.
Godfrey de Bouillon died (in 1100 AD) a full 18 years before the Knights Templar were even created (in 1118 AD), and thus was never a Knight of the Templar Order, and was never a member of its Grand Mastery. He was never married, and thus had no heirs and no resulting lineage. ((Alan Murray, The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Dynastic History 1099-1125, Unit for Prosopographical Research, Linacre College, Oxford (2000), pp.155-165.))
He was succeeded by his younger brother King Baldwin I of Jerusalem. As documented by the contemporary chronicler William of Tyre, Baldwin I was very different from his brother, independent, “well nurtured in the liberal studies [and] became a Cleric [Clergy]” in the Church, and thus did not represent any beliefs nor lineage of anything from Godfrey. ((William Archbishop of Tyre, A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea (12th century), manuscripts translated by: Emily Atwater Babcock and August Charles Krey, “Columbia University Records of Civilization”, Columbia University Press (1943).))
The claim of a Priory of Sion fraternity being involved in any Templar roots was conclusively disproven by the 21st century British Barrister Dominic Selwood, a scholar from Oxford and Sorbonne, and historian for the London Daily Telegraph newspaper.
Selwood debunked the “conspiracy theory… that the Templars were founded by a secret society called the Priory of Sion”.
About the modern book which popularized the Priory of Sion hoax and its Templar claims, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (1982), which was used as the entire basis for the movie The Da Vinci Code (2006), Selwood published this conclusion:
“[This book] led its readers on a whirlwind pseudo-history journey. … Unsurprisingly, the authors had been duped, as were their many followers: most famously Dan Brown, who used the idea in ‘The Da Vinci Code’. In fact, the Templars were founded by Hugh of Payns, a high-ranking Knight from Champagne. And he was very open about what the Order was for.” ((Dominic Selwood, Knights Templar III: Birth of the Order (2013), historian for Daily Telegraph of London, article.))
Indeed, the very existence of the Temple Rule itself proves that the Templar Order was never any type of Secret Society, but rather was a very public institution, with full transparency of its principles, purposes and missions.
Unlike all legitimate Orders of Chivalry, which are extensively documented in the historical record, there is no trace of any historical “Priory of Sion” fraternity ever having existed.
According to Jonathan Riley-Smith, Professor Emeritus of ecclesiastical history at Cambridge University and a leading authority on the Crusades: “I do know what was going on in Jerusalem in the 12th century… and what these people say – did not happen.” ((Ed Bradley, The Priory of Sion: Is The ‘Secret Organization’ Fact or Fiction? (27 April 2006), article from “60 Minutes” journalistic exposé, CBS News.))
Pierre Plantard, convicted of criminal fraud in 1953, planted forgeries of false Templar affiliation in 1966, and admitted to forgeries in 1993
The only indication of any existence of a “Priory of Sion” society was a French registration of a fraternity of that name, filed in 1956 by Pierre Plantard, which was also dissolved that same year.
Plantard had been recently convicted and sentenced for criminal fraud in 1953, specifically with a proven history of creating fictitious organizations.
Police found that the “Priory” was not named after any “Sion” related to Jerusalem nor any other Templar site, but rather a modern local “Mont Sion” near Plantard’s home “in Annemasse, France”.
The only single piece of claimed evidence of any history of the Priory was a purported list of its Grand Masters, including famous historical figures such as Leonardo Da Vinci. The list was part of a file labeled as “Dossiers Secrets d’Henri Lobineau”, found in the Biblioteque Nationale de France in Paris.
Director of the Police Archives at Paris headquarters, historian Claude Charlot, proved that those documents had been forged and deposited in the Biblioteque by Plantard from 1965-1967. ((Jean-Luc Chaumeil, Rennes-le-Chateau – Gisors – Le Testament du Prieure de Sion: Le Crepuscule d’une Tenebreuse Affaire, Editions Pegase (2006).)) ((Ed Bradley, The Priory of Sion: Is The ‘Secret Organization’ Fact or Fiction? (27 April 2006), article from “60 Minutes” journalistic exposé, CBS News.))
In 1993, the French Instruction Judge Thierry Jean-Pierre ordered a raid of Plantard’s home, which uncovered a hoard of falsified documents, and Plantard officially admitted under oath that he had fabricated everything, including the involvement of claimed Grand Masters of the Priory. ((Affaire Pelat: Le Rapport du Judge (8-14 January 1994), Le Point, No.1112, p.11; Philippe Laprevote, Note sur l’Actualite du Prieure de Sion, in Politica Hermetica (1996), No.10, pp.140-151.))
Therefore, any claim of affiliation with a self-styled “Priory of Sion” fraternity does not mean that the individual or group would be backed by some powerful “Secret Society”:
At best, it is proven to mean they are unwitting followers of a hoax, deceived into reviving its claims supporting an historical Evil Agenda of power and control. At worst, it is actually an admission of knowingly promoting an already publicly exposed criminal fraud, and otherwise aiding and abetting a proven illegal organization pursuing criminal purposes.
Those researching the historical Knights Templar or practicing modern Templarism also frequently encounter revivals of a Secret Society of a supposed “Merovingian Secret Bloodline”, claimed to be a “Secret Bloodline of Jesus” of ancient royalty from the Biblical King David.
Although no direct link to the Knights Templar is claimed, building solely upon the “Bloodline of Jesus” claim, it is superficially presumed that because the Knights Templar are Defenders of the Church and the Faith, Templars supposedly “must have been” and now “must be” protectors and supporters of any groups calling themselves a “Merovingian” Secret Society.
The original and restored Templar Order has a very different opinion about that presumption, which is disproven by the facts of genuine Templar heritage.
‘Childeric III King of the Franks’ by Emile Signol 1837 AD, accurate portrait of last Merovingian King, deposed in 752 AD exposing the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodlines” Hoax
The founders of the Merovingian Dynasty were “Kings of the Salian Franks” ((The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, New York (1911), Volume 18, “Merovingians”, p.172.)), an ancient people of northern coastal continental Europe, who merged with the Saxons in the 3rd century, and thereafter were considered purely Saxons ((Ulrich Nonn, Die Franken, Kohlhammer Verlag (2010), p.82.)).
The Merovingian Kings ruled ancient France for 295 years (457 AD – 752 AD), and 35 of those 36 Kings had royal legitimacy by conquest and governance, or by direct sovereign succession. These are “Public” lineages, which by definition are legitimate and recognized.
However, a Bavarian Secret Society promoted theories of self-styled “Merovingian Secret Bloodlines”, which by definition are illegitimate and unrecognized claims. This created a “Black Nobility” (meaning illegitimate) seeking power by surrounding and influencing the legitimate Saxon Merovingian Kings.
Therefore, this persistent Secret Society claim is most accurately called the “Pseudo-Merovingian” hoax.
Unfortunately, some modern descendants from Merovingian ancestors confuse the legitimate Saxon lineages with the illegitimate Bavarian Black Nobility “Pseudo-Merovingian” Secret Society claims, and end up reviving and promoting the original hoax.
The Merovingian Dynasty was named after the legendary figure “Merovech (Meroveus)”, believed to be the 5th century son of the mythical “Quinotaur” Sea-God ((“Fredegar” (Pseudonym), Chronicle of Fredegar (7th century), Book III, Part 9; Manuscript (715 AD), Bibliotheque Nationale de France, Artifact No. “MS Latin 10910”.)) ((The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Franks”, p.238; “Merovingians… to whom national tradition had ascribed a sea-god as ancestor.”)), a pagan deity of the Salian Franks prior to their conversion to Christianity in 496 AD.
This mythological past, of being “descended from the gods”, was used by the Pseudo-Merovingian political factions as a device to promote Frankish rule in Western Europe ((Malcolm Todd, The Early Germans, 2nd Edition, Wiley-Blackwell (2004).)) ((The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Franks”, p.239.)). This is most concisely referred to as the “Son of the Gods” legend.
After the baptism of the Merovingian King Clovis I adopting Roman Catholic Christianity in 496 AD, the legend of being “descended from a fish” was transformed into claiming lineage from a “Secret Bloodline of Jesus”, merely by loose association with early Christians using a “fish” symbol in relation to Jesus, with no other basis whatsoever ((History Channel, Behind the Da Vinci Code, A&E Home Video (2006), documentary film.)) ((D.H. Green, Language and History in the Early Germanic World, Cambridge University Press (1998).)).
Merovingian rule over France began ca. 457 AD with King Childeric I, as the “son of Merovech”, independent of Merovech’s legend as a “son of” a mythical Sea-God. Childeric I earned full legitimacy by merit of conquest, defending France from invading Visigoths and Saxons, so he did not rely on that mythology for any claim to power.
The Merovingian Dynasty ended in March 752 AD, when Pope Zachary deposed King Childeric III ((Rendine & McCusker, The Popes: Histories and Secrets, New York (2002), p.145.)), specifically on the basis of the “Secret Bloodlines” claim lacking sufficient royal lineage ((Charles Knight, The English Cyclopaedia, Vol. IV, London (1867), p.733.)). Childeric III was of “uncertain parentage”, so he needed to rely on the mythology of a “secret” lineage to hold power, which was exposed and rejected ((Pierre Riché, The Carolingians: A Family Who Forged Europe, Translated by Michael Idomir Allen, University of Pennsylvania Press (1993), p.65.)).
The Merovingian Dynasty was replaced by the Carolingian Dynasty, by constitutional succession of Regency power from Charles Martel, and not by any “bloodline” succession.
Because all Merovingian Kings before Childeric III gained legitimacy by conquest, governance, recognition and sovereign succession, the Merovingian Dynasty continues to hold legitimacy as a non-ruling Royal House, retaining sovereign legal capacity under customary international law.
However, as proven by this history, both the “Secret Bloodline of Jesus” adapted mythology hoax, and the related “Merovingian Secret Bloodlines” hoax, can never again be used for any claim to power, nor for any royal or chivalric status.
The 19th century French historian Emile Leon Gautier (1832-1897 AD), Archivist of the Imperial Archives and Chief of the National Archives in Paris, established details of the Pseudo-Merovingian Secret Society:
He described its “Secret Bloodlines” claim as a self-styled “Race”, described its political faction of illegitimate “Black Nobility” as “Merovingian Princes”, and referred to the Secret Society manipulating Merovingian Kings as “Merovingian string-pulling” (a metaphor of ‘political puppets’).
Gautier documented that this Secret Society developed and promoted a subversive counter-civilization against “Unity” of the People, thereby consolidating their own power, to impose the oppression of feudalism:
“Merovingian Princes… [caused] the great division… [which] represents two civilizations… so to speak two different races [bloodlines]. Who can find… a common aim, or Unity? … this [was] decidedly impossible amid all the Merovingian string-pulling, and it was necessary… that a powerful Unity should be newly founded in our Western world.” ((Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter III.))
According to Gautier, the solution to that problem, which provided the necessary “Unity” for the People, was in fact the Code of Chivalry, and the existence of Orders of Chivalry.
He further documented how this Secret Society created the feudal system for control, imposing it by manipulation and deception:
“Feudalism, so disastrous to the Church and to the Good, was really inevitable in the midst of the terrible troubles of the 9th century. No union was possible… and barbarism threatened to descend… upon the astonished world. It was then… that the weak entertained the very natural idea of seeking the protection of the strong; and, rallying round them, cried, ‘Defend us, defend us!’ Such was Feudalism.” ((Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter IV.))
Gautier established that “The Code of Chivalry tempered this rudeness”, providing a counter-balance to the feudal system and its corrupt oppression and abuses of power:
The Code of Chivalry of 1066 AD required to “defend all weaknesses” specifically against abuses by the strong (Commandment III), and to “perform thy feudal duties, [only] if they be not contrary to the laws of God” (Commandment VII). ((Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter II, “Commandment III”, Chapter IV, “Commandment VII”.))
This 11th century doctrine, that Knights and Dames in Nobility are fundamentally obligated to oppose all forms of tyranny or abuse of power, finds historical precedent in the 8th century Nobility, which successfully overthrew the Pseudo-Merovingian Secret Society, by deposing and replacing the Merovingian Dynasty:
The Vatican documented that “The Merovingian dynasty, traditionally accustomed to absolutism, and incapable of altering its point of view, was gradually deprived of all exercise of authority by the triumphant Nobility… [which] finally supplanted it.” ((The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Franks”, p.240.))
Throughout the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, all Orders of Chivalry, and especially the Templar Order, were dedicated to serving as the necessary counter-balance, and the primary line of defense, against such Secret Society oppression, thereby establishing and maintaining a Balance of Powers.
Generally it is difficult for decent people to believe that there can exist organizations which are founded upon willful opposition to the values of Chivalry, actively teaching and pursuing an historical “Agenda” which is deliberately and admittedly “Evil”, knowingly and intentionally imposing suffering against all of humanity.
‘Faust und Mephisto beim Schachspiel’ (ca. 1825 AD) by Friedrich August Moritz Retzsch, also called “Chess with the Devil”
As described by the famous quote from the 19th century poet Charles Baudelaire: “The Devil’s greatest trick is to convince you that he does not exist.” ((Charles Pierre Baudelaire, The Generous Gambler (February 1864), published in Oevres Complètes de Charles Baudelaire, Volume IV: Petits Poèmes en Prose, Les Paradis Artificiels Michel Lévy Frères (1869), Chapter XXIX, “Le Joueur Généreux”; “La plus belle des ruses du diable est de vous persuader qu’il n’existe pas.”))
The obvious example of organized crime families and gangs is sufficient to remind us that clan-like groups in the shadows, entirely dedicated to a lifestyle of criminality and corruption, do in fact exist.
Likewise, various Secret Societies committed to an “Evil Agenda” also tend to exist, as confirmed by much direct evidence in the historical record.
In the modern era, certain negative “Secret Societies” have attempted to promote theories that they are essentially “all powerful”, having a pervasive hidden control over world affairs. However, claims of the actual power, reach and influence of such groups are often greatly exaggerated. That is a transparent and superficial tactic of “fear-mongering” to intimidate the Good, while appealing to egotism to motivate their minions of Evil.
Many negative Secret Societies often attempt to misappropriate or impersonate the heroic legacy of the Knights Templar (and several other positive institutions), to mask their own Evil Agenda, and alternately to deflect blame for their crimes against humanity.
The authentic Order of Knights of the Temple, as the legitimate institution of the original Knights Templar, remains focused on its proven historical missions of Chivalry, dedicated to human rights and freedoms under the rule of law, defending the weak against abuses of power by the forces of oppression.
As a result, it is necessary for the Templar Order to expose the wrongdoing of Secret Societies, to empower humanity to see through their deceptions, and also to uphold the Truth and inherent Goodness of genuine Templar Chivalry.
Commonly, proponents of a claimed “Secret Society” are not even members of any actual organization, but merely isolated scattered individuals.
Small groups of egotists tend to discover the same Evil Agenda and methods, from the same few historical documents. They then attempt to revive some elitist philosophy for destructive control, to feed their egos by indirect association with the false mystique of past groups who promoted that Agenda.
Accordingly, what is much touted as the “Secrets” supposedly exclusive to the self-styled “elites”, the prized “Above 33rd Degree” or “Above Top Secret” knowledge, is essentially little more than the “same old bag of dirty tricks”, recycled across the centuries by criminal egomaniacs.
‘The Temptation of Christ on the Mountain’ (ca. 1310 AD) by Duccio di Buoninsegna, depicting Jesus banishing the Devil
The historical documents of the Evil Agenda were preserved in archives of museums and libraries in diverse countries, but were overlooked by most scholars and unnoticed by the general public. Most who were curious were too easily discouraged by the superficial propaganda trick of simply calling documentary evidence a “Conspiracy Theory”.
Fortunately, modern Templars also know how to read, and have made extensive scholarly studies and strategic analysis of the documented Evil Agenda methods, to prepare to deal with the enemies of humanity whom all Knights and Dames were always sworn to oppose.
As a result, the Templar Order fully possesses the positive “Good Guys” version of the “Above 33rd Degree Secret Knowledge”, sharply focused into practical and hard-hitting counter-measures in defense of humanity.
Most importantly, the very limited “bag of dirty tricks” of the Evil Agenda methods can only be used or effective if kept hidden in darkness, because they would never survive being exposed to the light of Truth.
Thus, the most powerful winning strategy to defeat any Secret Society, is simply to publish all their “secrets”, empowering the People to reject their manipulations.
Once the basic dirty tricks are widely known, the People will be armed to detect and resist the insidious deceptions of that Agenda, and to boycott and shut down its proponents. Those who then attempt to use those “secret” dirty tricks will thereby expose themselves as Enemies of Humanity, to be brought to Justice by the outraged demands of the People.
It is important to remember, that the negative Secret Societies which promote the historical anti-humanitarian Agenda are fundamentally elitist. Their core philosophy is represented by the perverted symbolism of a hierarchical pyramid of control.
This is inherently unsustainable, and inevitably self-destructive, as competing factions will always fight each other to “rule the world” from the “top of the pyramid”. By definition this model of control only has room for one small group at the top, making vicious in-fighting both unavoidable and perpetual.
While the reality of this built-in defect makes all of the egomaniacal elitist Secret Societies doomed to their own self-destruction, the problem for civilization is how much harm, damage and mass suffering they will be allowed to inflict upon society, until they eventually implode.
Because of the disproportionate mass suffering caused by tyranny before it self-destructs, it is of dire necessity for humanity to stand up, and boycott, resist and reject all individuals and institutions who are exposed as supporting or advancing any part of the known Evil Agenda of Secret Societies.
Moreover, it is the proven historical mission and sacred obligation of all legitimate Orders of Chivalry, and all genuine Knights and Dames, to serve humanity by providing Truth and Justice as the tools, and tireless effort as leadership by example, for the fight to reclaim Goodness in modern civilization.
Learn about the Real Enemies of the Order which Templars oppose.
Learn about the Evils of False Defamation as a primary Agenda method.
Learn about how the Code of Chivalry requires opposing Abuses of Power.
You cannot copy content of this page
