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 the Temple of Solomon was indeed a very public institution:
The 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 lived by and were sworn to be held to. 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 informed and reminded of what values and traditions the Templar Order stood for.
Unfortunately, from time to time certain proponents or adherents of “secret societies” tend to present themselves to those seeking or pursuing the goodness of genuine Templarism. Such occurrence is merely a side show to the legitimate world of Chivalry of venerable historical institutions.
Generally such proponents make vague references to shadowy connections with some claimed “Priory of Sion” or “Merovingian Bloodline”. Characteristically, these claims are enhanced by irrelevant and disconnected historical “name dropping” such as references to Charlemagne, Napoleon, or whatever might be expected to generate an air of importance, prestige or mystique.
Only somewhat more specifically, such claims assert some implied authority or influence over the historical institution of the original Knights Templar. Notoriously, the proponents repeatedly insist (without basis nor any explanation) that they are “Real” Templars, emphasizing “Real” to pointedly assert their alleged superiority over all cultural Templars.
Typically, such claims involve a trademark egotistical behaviour, such as demands for artificial respect (instead of earning respect simply by demonstrating the humble service by merit which is the mark of a true Templar). Another telltale sign of a misguided “secret society” is an emphasis on how “important” its purported members are, with vague references to supposed “high level connections”. Often, “secrecy” itself is highlighted to give an artificial air of importance and implied superiority. Sometimes, an ultimatum is given that one must instantly and blindly accept all their claims, or else “you will never hear from us again”, as if some life-changing great opportunity of any benefit would be “lost forever”.
It should be self-evident, that such mentality and behavior are diametrically opposed to, and categorically excluded by, the very concept of any legitimate historical institution, and the very nature of all authentic principles and practices of the original Knights Templar.
Legitimate public institutions must be based upon merit, providing substance of value to humanity, with open doors for all to benefit from that substance, thereby justifying the existence of the institution. Such merit must be promoted by factual truth, subject to public scrutiny to verify both the legitimacy and truth of the 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) [1]. 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 [2] [3] [4]. In particular, “Members of forbidden [secret] societies cannot be admitted… to pious associations” such as an Order of Chivalry [5].
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) [6]
The Temple Rule specifically prohibits any and all forms of elitism, 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). It strictly bans any subversive agendas, establishing the Common Law crime of conspiracy, defined as combination for any unlawful purpose against the rights of others, requiring expulsion from the Order for any “conspiracy… in combination” (Rule 229).
Confirming the very public nature of the Templar Order, the 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). [7]
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). [8]
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 alleged identity is visibly 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 [9]. No genuine Order would ever be called merely a “Priory”, and no “Priory” could ever exist without a legitimate chivalric or ecclesiastical Order in public law being its host institution.
Proponents claiming affiliation with a “Priory of Sion” secret society 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 associating themselves with such quasi-fraternity thus claim some vague authority or implied supremacy over the Grand Mastery of the Templar Order.
Adherents to a supposed “Priory of Sion” fraternity typically claim to represent a “Secret Bloodline” of the Merovingian dynasty, which in turn is claimed to be hereditary descendants from the historical Jesus and Mary Magdalene. The implication of resulting “bloodline superiority” is used to justify a historically documented anti-humanitarian agenda of installing falsely claimed “Kings” on the thrones of all of Europe and the rest of the world, to impose tyrannical globalist domination of self-styled elitism at the expense of all others.
While many (but not all) Templars historically believed in Jesus and Mary 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” (Titus 3:9) [10].
Any claim to elitist domination directly violates all true religious teachings of Christianity, ignores the genuine doctrines of “Divine Right of Kings” as obligations (and not privileges), and fundamentally contradicts all proven Templar values and traditions of defending human rights and Justice. Such a philosophy, used to claim hegemonic control in violation of the God-given rights of others, has no place in authentic Templarism, and has always been (and continues to be) strictly rejected 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 purely Roman Catholic 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. [11] That Abbey was never used in connection with the Templar Order, and neither of those two Holy Orders were ever involved in the Grand Mastery of the Knights Templar.
Godfrey de Bouillon, Commander of the Crusades which were rejected by the later Templar Order
Self-styled “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, crowned at a ceremony in the Holy Sepulchre, and thus used the title “Defender of the Holy Sepulchre” (Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri) [12] [13] [14]. 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 [15], 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: Indeed, the Templar Order explicitly criticized and rejected the “Crusades” in its own official Charter, the Temple Rule of 1129 AD (Rule 2) [16]. As a Commander, Godfrey was 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”. [17] Thus, Godfrey’s association with the Holy Sepulchre 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. [18] 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” in the Church, and thus did not represent any beliefs nor lineage of anything from Godfrey. [19]
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”.
Selwood concluded that the modern book which popularized the Priory of Sion claim, ‘The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail‘, “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.” [20]
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 chivalric Orders, which are institutions extensively documented in the historical record, there is no trace of any “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.” [21]
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, with a 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. [22] [23]
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. [24]
Therefore, any claim of affiliation with a self-styled “Priory of Sion” fraternity does not mean that the person or group is backed by some powerful “secret society”. Rather, at best it is proven to mean they are promoters or followers of a crude hoax, which was an attempt to revive an egomaniacal agenda of power and control. At worst, it is actually an admission of promoting an already publicly exposed and well-known 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 claims of a secret society either from, or dedicated to protecting, a supposed “Merovingian Bloodline”. Just as the fictitious “Priory of Sion” fraternity (which relied entirely upon the mystique of the Pseudo-Merovingian theory) was proven a hoax, the popularized Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” claim itself is also abundantly proven to be mere fantasy.
Although no direct link to the Knights Templar is claimed, proponents of Pseudo-Merovingian groups describe them as representing a “Secret Bloodline” of Jesus Christ of ancient royalty from the Biblical King David. Building solely upon that claim, it is superficially presumed that since the Knights Templar are dedicated to defending the Church and the Faith, Templars supposedly “must have been” and now “must be” protectors and supporters of any groups purporting to be a “Merovingian” secret society.
The last Merovingian King Childeric III, deposed in 752 AD for lacking royal lineage, exposing the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline of Jesus” 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 [25] [26], a pagan deity of the Salian Franks prior to their conversion to Christianity. This mythological past, of allegedly being “descended from the gods”, was used by some political factions as a device to promote Frankish rule in Western Europe [27] [28].
That legend of being “descended from a fish” was used to claim Pseudo-Merovingian lineage from a “Secret Bloodline” of Jesus Christ, merely by loose association with early Christians using a “fish” symbol in relation to Jesus, with no other basis whatsoever [29] [30].
Merovingian rule over France began ca. 457 AD with Childeric I, as the “son of Merovech”, despite Merovech’s claim being primarily as a legendary “son of” a mythical fantasy creature. Their dynasty ended in March 752 AD, when Pope Zachary deposed Childeric III [31], specifically on the basis of the secret bloodline claim lacking sufficient royal lineage [32].
The Merovingian Dynasty continued from its earlier Kings as a legitimate non-ruling Royal House. However, it was replaced by the Carolingian Dynasty by constitutional succession of Regency power from Charles Martel, and not by “bloodline” succession.
Therefore, although the Merovingian Dynasty was the ruling Royal House of ancient France for 295 years, and at least 36 of the Merovingian Kings had royal legitimacy, the Pseudo-Merovingian claim of a “Secret Bloodline” of Jesus being distinctly Merovingian was disproven even in its own rime as false, readily exposed as a baseless hoax, and a fraud against the people.
The 19th century French historian Emile Leon Gautier, Archivist of the Imperial Archives and Chief of the National Archives in Paris, described the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” faction as a quasi-race, as an opposing counter-civilization, and explained how they were responsible for destabilizing France to consolidate their own power:
“New kingdoms were created… by the fancy of the Merovingian Princes, who desired to have an extensive kingdom… Thus there is still the great division… [which] represents two civilizations, two tendencies, and so to speak two different races. Who can find the ‘love of country’… without a common aim, or unity? … but this ‘country’ and this ‘love’ were decidedly impossible amid all the Merovingian string-pulling, and it was necessary… that a powerful unity should be newly founded in our Western world.” [33]
According to Gautier, the solution to that Pseudo-Merovingian problem, which eventually developed the necessary humanitarian “unity” for the people, was in fact the Code of Chivalry, and the existence of chivalric Orders of Holy Knights.
Gautier exposed how the Pseudo-Merovingian political faction 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 like a pall 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.” [34]
For these reasons, the historical Code of Chivalry included a mandate to “perform thy feudal duties, [only] if they be not contrary to the laws of God” (Commandment VII). Gautier established that “The Code of Chivalry tempered this rudeness” of the feudal system imposed by Pseudo-Merovingian manipulations. The same Code also required all Knights to “defend all weaknesses” specifically against abuses by the strong (Commandment III). [35]
This 11th century doctrine, that nobiliary Knights are fundamentally obligated to oppose any monarchial or feudal tyranny, finds historical precedent in the 8th century nobility which successfully achieved the downfall of the Pseudo-Merovingian political faction. 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.” [36]
The Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” faction pursued only an agenda of oppressive control, which in fact made them the enemies of humanity, and thus actually made them the very same “enemies of God” who the Knights Templar were sworn to oppose. All genuine knightly orders of Chivalry, and especially the Order of the Temple of Solomon, were dedicated to serving as the counterbalance, and the primary “line of defense”, against such secret society oppression and abuses of power through feudalism.
The historical record thus conclusively proves that everything about the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” faction was deceptive and wrongful, and nothing about it had any true basis nor merit. They usurped power by false mythological claims, and plunged all of Europe into one of the most infamous systems of oppression in history. They were later exposed for fraudulently claiming “royal blood” by the mythical “descended from the gods” hoax, were deposed, and then replaced by the Carolingian Dynasty.
Therefore, nothing of the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” tradition has any place in authentic Templarism. Any proponents or revivalists of this theory have no claim whatsoever to any Templar heritage, and no right to any assistance nor cooperation from the Templar Order, and all genuine Templar Knights and Dames are still sworn to oppose their historical anti-humanitarian agenda.
Generally it is difficult for decent people to believe that there can exist organizations which are founded upon conscious opposition to the values of Chivalry, actively teaching and pursuing an agenda which is deliberately “evil” in character, and knowingly and intentionally using methods which are against humanity itself.
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.” [37]
‘Faust und Mephisto beim Schachspiel’ (ca. 1825 AD) by Friedrich August Moritz Retzsch, also called “Chess with the Devil”
The obvious example of organized crime “families” and “gangs” is sufficient to remind us that clan-like groups, 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 so-called “secret societies” have attempted to create a mythos of their pervasive hidden control over the world. However, claims of the actual power, reach and influence of such groups are often greatly exaggerated. That is transparent as a superficial tactic of fear-mongering to intimidate the good, while appealing to egotism to motivate the evil-minded.
Self-styled “secret societies” often seek to misappropriate the heroic legacy of the Knights Templar (also of the Rosicrucians and Freemasonry), as a cover to falsely sanctify their dark agenda, and alternately as a ruse to deflect blame for their own wrong-minded crimes.
The authentic Order of the Temple of Solomon, as the legitimate institution of the original Knights Templar, remains focused on its proven historical core missions of preserving sacred knowledge and divine spirituality for the benefit of humanity, and defending the weak against abuses of power by the forces of oppression. Accordingly, 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 values.
Commonly, proponents of a secret society are not even members of any actual organization, but rather are isolated pockets of scattered individuals. Such small groupings of egotists happen to learn the same evil agenda and methods, which they typically discover from the same few and rare documents in the historical record. They then attempt to revive the elitist philosophy of deception for destructive control, as a means of inflating their egos by mere indirect association with the false mystique of past groups who originated that agenda.
Accordingly, what is much touted as the “secrets” supposedly exclusive to self-styled “elites”, the supposedly coveted and prized “above 33rd degree” or “above top secret” knowledge, is essentially little more than the same bag of dirty tricks of subversive criminality. That wrongful agenda, including full details of its methods, was written in certain historical documents, and preserved in archives of governmental and university museums and libraries in diverse countries, but was simply overlooked by scholars and unnoticed by the general public.
‘The Temptation of Christ on the Mountain’ (ca. 1310 AD) by Duccio di Buoninsegna, depicting Jesus banishing the Devil
Fortunately, modern Templars also know how to read, and have made extensive scholarly studies and expert strategic analysis of the documented evil agenda methods, to do their homework on the enemies of humanity who all Knights and Dames were always sworn to oppose. As a result, the Templar Order fully possesses the positive “white light” version of the “secret above 33rd degree” knowledge, sharply focused into practical and hard-hitting counter-measures in defense of humanity.
Most importantly, the various evil agenda methods can only be used or be effective if shrouded in the darkness of secrecy, because they would never be tolerated by the people if properly exposed to the light of day. Thus, the most powerful winning strategy to defeat any “secret society” is to reveal their methods to the public, empowering humanity to reject their manipulations, by shining the light of Truth to expel the darkness.
Once the basic bag of dirty tricks is sufficiently 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. In this way, those individuals and organizations who attempt to use those “secret” methods of dirty tricks will thereby expose themselves as enemies of humanity, to be righteously shunned and ostracized by the people as and when each one is exposed, to stop them from inflicting harm upon others.
Also important to remember, is that the secret societies which promote the historical anti-humanitarian agenda are fundamentally elitist. Their core philosophy is represented by perverted symbolism of a hierarchical pyramid of control. As a result, their very concept is inherently unsustainable, and inevitably self-destructive, as this always leads to factions competing for their own domination of the society itself, under the delusion of positioning themselves to “rule the world” from the top of the pyramid. In other words, since by definition such a control model only has room for one small faction at the top, vicious in-fighting is 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.
For this reason, it is of paramount importance, and dire necessity, for all of humanity to rise up in boycott of, resistance to, and rejection of all individuals and institutions who are exposed as supporting or advancing the identifiable “evil agenda” of secret societies.
Moreover, it is the proven historical mission and primary 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 necessary fight to restore goodness and the positive heritage of humanity to modern civilization.
Documents of the historical record provide compelling evidence that the evil agenda from the 5th century Pseudo-Merovingian “descended from the gods” hoax was the basis for the infamous 18th century Bavarian Illuminati, and that the 20th century “Priory of Sion” hoax promoting a modified Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” hoax was an attempt to revive the same evil agenda of the Bavarian Illuminati.
“Bavarian Illuminati” Pendant (18th century), artifact of original symbolism of the secret society
Tracing the documented connections between those three versions of essentially the same “secret society” reveals that while their claims are false, their evil agenda of subversive deception and manipulated destruction for oppressive control over all humanity is very real. Moreover, the connections prove that the very same agenda has been used and continued by such secret societies throughout history to the present day.
The authoritative historian Emile Leon Gautier (1832-1897 AD), an Archivist of the Imperial Archives and Chief of the historical section of the National Archives in Paris, documented that “the race of the Mayençais, [a] race of traitors” in Bavaria created a “Satanic Counter Code” to oppose the 11th century Code of Chivalry:
“Thou shalt never be loyal to anyone; thou shalt never keep thy word… Thou shalt betray and sell honest men; Thou shalt uphold evil and abase [attack] the good; Thou shalt ravish the poor and disinherit the orphan; despoil widows; dishonor the Church; Thou shalt lie without shame; and violate thine oaths.” [38]
Another version of this same agenda was written in a “15th century Rothschild journal”, verified by British Museum scholars, as a letter from a Bavarian secret society to feudal lords in France in 1489 AD, presenting a protocol of destruction for control, all by deception:
“Make your sons merchants, that little by little they may despoil [the people of their possessions]… Make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away [people’s] lives… Arrange that your sons… always mix themselves up with the affairs of State, in order that by putting [the people] under your yoke [control] you may dominate the world… [and] you will reach the actuality of power”. [39]
The original full text of a detailed agenda, in the most complete version called the “Protocols of the Illuminati”, came from a transcript of a private speech by Mayer Amschel Rothschild to a secret society of oligarchs in 1773 AD [40].
The “Protocols of the Illuminati” were first discovered in 1785 AD when a courier from the headquarters of the Bavarian Illuminati was struck by lightning [41] [42] [43] [44], causing the document to be seized by the police, who turned it over to the Bavarian government through a magistrate. This officially proved that it was a working document of the Bavarian Illuminati, which was already in active use as an agenda prior to that time [45].
The Vatican documented that the Bavarian government outlawing the Illuminati in 1785 AD had caused its expansion in France [46]. This also caused its resurgence only 8 years later on the outskirts of Bavaria in 1793 AD as the “Mayençais”, the French word for people of the Republic of Mainz, located on the northwest end of Bavaria (the southeast region of modern Germany), which officially existed only during the year 1793 AD. Mainz was the primary source of resistance against the French Revolutionary Army (which represented the people opposing elitist feudal lords).
Just as the historian Gautier described the Mayençais as a “race of traitors”, he also described the Pseudo-Merovingian political faction as a “tribe” which created “great division… [of] two civilizations… two different races”, described as the feudalistic secret bloodline faction versus the rest of humanity. [47]
This identification is confirmed by the London Encyclopaedia of 1839 AD, which defines the general term “Merovingian” as being associated with a “race of French kings”, using the word “race” five times [48]. The Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1911 also describes the Pseudo-Merovingian political faction as a “race”, describing that “the Merovingian kings displayed considerable energy, both in their foreign wars and in the numerous wars against one another in which they found an outlet for their barbarian instincts. … [H]ovever, the race began to decline”. [49]
In fact, the legitimate Merovingians were not a “race” at all, but simply of normal European ancestry. This indicates that the “race” claim was a self-styled tribal description adopted by the Pseudo-Merovingian political clan to artificially create an air of mystique, to support their ambitions of dynastic rule. It is highly significant that no other royal lines are referred to in historical records as a “race”, but only as a “royal house” or “royal dynasty”. This reveals that the self-styled description, of claiming to be a “race” when they are not, is a distinctive and identifying characteristic of the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” political faction.
These facts establish that the 5th century Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” faction was the original source of the 11th century Satanic Counter-Code later used by the 18th century Mayençais of Bavaria.
The name “Merovingian” was derived from the name of its founder “Merovech”, which is actually a Latinized form of the Old High German name Marwig, meaning “famous fight”, evidencing Germanic origins consistent with Bavaria [50]. This indicates that it was a Bavarian self-styled tribal political clan of “black nobility” (meaning illegitimate) which was the negative faction undermining the 5th century French Merovingian Dynasty (otherwise legitimate), which resurfaced as the 18th century Bavarian and French Mayençais, whose evil agenda was then pursued by the infamous 18th century Bavarian Illuminati.
The historical record thus proves that the evil agenda of the Satanic Counter-Code originated from the 5th century Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” faction, and was directly continued by the 18th century Bavarian Illuminati in a more detailed and elaborate form as the Protocols of the Illuminati.
Another authenticated copy of the same “Protocols” agenda (from 1773 AD discovered in 1785 AD) was intercepted in 1818 AD from a courier of the “Alta Vendita” Lodge of the Italian “Carbonari” branch of the Bavarian Illuminati [51].
Another two authenticated copies of the same “Protocols” were translated from French by Professor Sergius Nilus, a Russian Orthodox Priest, from one edition printed in Paris in 1897 AD [52], and another edition as “documents stolen from… a secret meeting of the initiated in France” in 1901 [53] [54].
The Nilus Edition was authenticated and preserved in the British Museum since 1906, and translated from Russian by the British investigative journalist Victor E. Marsden of the London Morning Post newspaper, who was appointed special correspondent of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, and who published the Protocols in English in 1921. [55]
Agenda Transparently Pseudo-Merovingian – The Bavarian “Protocols of the Illuminati” specifically evidence its direct connection with the Pseudo-Merovingian “Secret Bloodline” political faction as a self-styled tribal clan [56]:
Protocol 14 plans to impose a new form of feudal “serfdom” (i.e. neo-feudalism), through precisely the same methods used by the Pseudo-Merovingian negative faction throughout the 5th – 8th centuries to develop the feudalism of the 9th century.
Protocol 15 declares the method of relying on the “mysticism of authority”, using “the emblems of inviolability from mystical causes”, precisely as the 5th century Pseudo-Merovingians manufactured the hoax of royal lineage from a pagan Sea God, and as the 20th century Priory of Sion promoted the hoax of Pseudo-Merovingians supposedly being the “Secret Bloodline” of Jesus.
Protocol 24 states that descendants of the supposed “dynastic roots of King David”, referring to the Pseudo-Merovingian “fish god” bloodline falsely associated with Jesus (only by the Christian “fish” symbol), would be the advisors to future Kings under a global dictatorship.
Agenda Explicitly “Evil” by Intent – The authenticated “Protocols of the Illuminati” explicitly admit that the agenda is knowingly and intentionally “evil”. Despite justifying that evil by superficial mention of some “greater good”, it admits that any such “good” is only for the secret society alone, at the expense and great suffering of all the rest of humanity:
Protocol 1.11 – Committing to immorality and deception in leadership: “The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler… must have recourse both to cunning and to make-believe.”
Protocol 1.23 – Declaring “evil” by deception as a policy: “Violence must be the principle, and cunning and make-believe the rule… This evil is the one and only means to attain the end… Therefore, we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end.”
Protocol 3.7 – Declaring genocide of humanity: “We always give support in accordance with an alleged brotherly rule… We are interested in just the opposite… the killing out of the People.”
Protocol 10.19 – Declares economic slavery imposed through crimes against humanity, by the plan “to utterly exhaust humanity with dissention, hatred, struggle, envy and even by the use of torture, by starvation… so that the ‘People’ see no other escape than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and all else.”
Protocol 15.9 – Referring to humanity as “cattle” to be “sacrificed” as their intentional “victims”: “It behooves not to stop at any means or to count the victims sacrificed… We have not counted the victims of the seed of the People’s cattle”.
Protocol 22.3 – Admits “evil” for tyrannical control, and confirms “all that evil which for so many centuries we have had to commit… [for] the bringing of everything into order… on the condition, of course, of strict observance of the laws established by us.”
Protocol 23.4 – Declaring that by destroying civilization the secret society will “erect on the ruins the throne of the King of the Illuminati.”
Winston Churchill published a statement in 1920, identifying the evil agenda of the Bavarian Protocols of the Illuminati as a “world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence [evil]”, perpetrated by “this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld” of such secret societies [57].
Agenda by Pseudo-History to Mask Identity – The Protocols specifically evidence a strategy of using the mystique of deceptive pseudo-history to deflect blame onto positive institutions, by masquerading through misuse of their image and sacred symbolism:
Protocol 4.2 – Admits to misappropriating the image of legitimate positive fraternities, which thereby “blindly serve as a screen for us and our objects, but the plan of action of our force, even its very abiding place, remains for the whole people an unknown mystery.”
Protocol 5.4 – Admits to falsely deflecting blame on legitimate positive chivalric and ecclesiastical Orders: “We have contrived to discredit them in the eyes of the unthinking mob as an overt organization, while we ourselves all the while have kept our secret organization in the shade.”
Protocol 15.3 – Planning to “confirm the aureole of power… by such a majestic inflexibility of might [which] shall carry on its face the emblems of inviolability from mystical causes. … The People do not lay on finger on him who hypnotizes them” by such mystique.
Protocol 22.4 – Planning false mystique to impose tyranny by force against all rights: “Our authority will be the crown of order… [to] inspire a mystical bowing of the knee before it… True force makes no terms with any right, not even with that of God.”
Agenda Supporters Condemned to Destruction – The written agenda of the Protocols itself admits that even its own collaborators are actually marked for destruction:
Protocol 15.1 – Admits that the secret factions which “serve us and have served us, we shall disband and send into exile to continents far removed… In this way we shall proceed with those [collaborators] who know too much”.
Protocol 15.9 – “We execute [supporters] in such [a way] that none save the brotherhood can ever have a suspicion of it, not even the victims themselves of our death sentence. They all die when required”.
Protocol 23.4 – Declares that their agents will only serve “to erect on the ruins the throne of the King of the Illuminati; but their part will be played out the moment he enters into his Kingdom. Then it will be necessary to sweep them away.”
By the agenda’s own written plans, those who are seduced by the egotism and motivated by false promises of implied rewards (for serving as agents of evil) would be treated merely as disposable pawns. Evil gives no reward – it only consumes and destroys everything it touches. As a result, all who choose to support this agenda only condemn themselves to a predetermined “death sentence” even (and especially) if their sabotage against humanity is successful.
Therefore, the historical “evil agenda” of secret societies is conclusively exposed as unsustainable, irrational, illogical, and arguably clinically insane. Any and all individuals or organizations who choose to support the agenda or any related secret societies are simply fools, blinded by egomaniacal ambitions, who thereby condemn themselves to self-destruction. Meanwhile, however, humanity must rise up to defend itself against the real mass suffering caused by their delusional attempts.
Evil Agenda Continuously Implemented – These facts prove the reality of an historical Satanic agenda, as an admittedly “evil agenda” against humanity. The fact that this agenda has been continuously and systematically implemented throughout the modern era, has been confirmed by many authoritative and great people:
In 1864 AD, the French lawyer and 10 year veteran of the Ministry of State, Maurice Joly, described it as a “political system… that has not varied in its methods for one single day”, and is “intended to corrupt honesty itself; but public consciousness still lives, and the heavens will one day interfere in the games being played against it” [58].
In 1925, the scholar Herjulf Vikingson concluded that this agenda and its methods belong to the “Enemies of Humanity” [59]. In 1956, Director of the US Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), J. Edgar Hoover, condemned it as “the evil, which has been introduced into our midst… a philosophy, which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent.”
History thus proves that it is necessary for humanity to rise up, stand up for right over wrong, and demonstrate to all adherents of those perverse agendas that we refuse to be deceived, and refuse to allow evil-doers to “divide and conquer”.
The Templar Path to Victory by Truth – Fortunately, the Templar Order does not need to engage in any proverbial “cloak and dagger” conflicts with any secret societies, which is best left to their own inherent in-fighting.
The utter destruction of the evil agenda, to restore the freedom and prosperity of humanity, requires nothing more than promoting Wisdom, Truth and Justice. Victory for the forces of good over evil can be assured, by simply educating the general public to detect, expose, boycott and reject any and all who attempt to further that historically proven agenda.
In this way, modern Templars can fulfill their traditional role as “warrior monks”, by serving as scholars and educators, shining the light of Truth to eradicate evil as “information warriors”, with all of the same effectiveness as if by battle with swords and lances.
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 all Agenda methods.
[1] Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard, Rule 9, Rule 274.
[2] The Vatican, The Code of Canon Law of 1917, Canon 2335.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.”
[5] 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”.
[6] The Holy Bible, The New Testament, Authorized King James Version (AKJV), Ephesians 5:11-12.
[7] Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard, Rules 34, 46, 38, 229, 37.
[8] Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard, Rule 18, Rule 19, Rule 52.
[9] Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia (1911), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 12, “Priory”, p.428.
[10] The Holy Bible, The New Testament, Authorized King James Version (AKJV), John 6:63, Titus 3:9.
[11] Memoires de la Societe Nationale des Antiquaires de France, Vol. XLVIII, French National Library in Paris, File Reference No. 8-O2F-762.
[12] Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Title of Godfrey of Bouillon, in Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research (1979), Vol.52, pp.83-86;
[13] Alan V. Murray, The Title of Godfrey of Bouillon as Ruler of Jerusalem, in Collegium Medievale (1990), Vol.3, pp.163-178.
[14] John France, The Election and Title of Godfrey de Bouillon, in Canadian Journal of History (1983), No.18.3, pp.321-329.
[15] The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Godfrey of Bouillon”, p.624.
[16] Henri de Curzon, La Règle du Temple, La Société de L’Histoire de France, Paris (1886), in Librairie Renouard, Rule 2.
[17] Ernoul & Bernard, Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Tresorier (ca. 1188), Ed. L. de Mas Latrie, Paris (1871), Chapter 2, pp.7-8.
[18] Alan Murray, The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Dynastic History 1099-1125, Unit for Prosopographical Research, Linacre College, Oxford (2000), pp.155-165.
[19] 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).
[20] Dominic Selwood, Knights Templar III: Birth of the Order (2013), historian for Daily Telegraph of London, article.
[21] Ed Bradley, The Priory of Sion: Is The ‘Secret Organization’ Fact or Fiction? (27 April 2006), article from “60 Minutes” journalistic exposé, CBS News.
[22] Jean-Luc Chaumeil, Rennes-le-Chateau – Gisors – Le Testament du Prieure de Sion: Le Crepuscule d’une Tenebreuse Affaire, Editions Pegase (2006).
[23] Ed Bradley, The Priory of Sion: Is The ‘Secret Organization’ Fact or Fiction? (27 April 2006), article from “60 Minutes” journalistic exposé, CBS News.
[24] 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.
[25] Pseudo-Fredegar, Chronicle of Fredegar, 7th century, Book III, 9; Manuscript (715 AD), Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Latin 10910.
[26] The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Franks”, p.238.
[27] Malcolm Todd, The Early Germans, 2nd Edition, Wiley-Blackwell (2004).
[28] The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Franks”, p.239.
[29] History Channel, Behind the Da Vinci Code, A&E Home Video (2006), documentary film.
[30] D.H. Green, Language and History in the Early Germanic World, Cambridge University Press (1998).
[31] Rendine & McCusker, The Popes: Histories and Secrets, New York (2002), p.145.
[32] Charles Knight, The English Cyclopaedia, Vol. IV, London (1867), p.733.
[33] Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter III.
[34] Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter IV.
[35] Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter IV, “Commandment VII”, Chapter II, “Commandment III”.
[36] The Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company (1909), The Encyclopedia Press, New York (1913), Volume 6, “Franks”, p.240.
[37] 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.”
[38] Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in: Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter IV, “Commandment X”.
[39] Victor E. Marsden, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, The Britons Publishing Society, London (1922), “Introduction: A Fifteenth Century ‘Protocol’”, reprinted in Victor E. Marsden, Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Liberty Bell Publications, Reedy, West Virginia (ca. 1930), p.7.
[40] William Guy Carr, Pawns in the Game, 4th Edition, St. George Press, Los Angeles (1962), p.193, footnote on unnumbered p.198, archived in Prince George B.C. Public Library; See Nesta Webster, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, pp.255-257.
[41] Adam Weishaupt, Apologie der Illuminaten, Frankfurt und Leipzig (Nuremberg) (1786), p.229.
[42] Adam Weishaupt, Apologie der Illuminaten, Frankfurt und Leipzig (Nuremberg) (1786), p.62.
[43] Abbé Barruel, Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism: The Antichristian Conspiracy, 2nd Edition, Part I, “Weishaupt’s Discourse for the Mysteries”, T. Burton, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London, p.244.
[44] Herausgegeben von Jan Rachold, Die Illuminaten Quellen und Text zur Aufklarungsideologie des Illuminatenordens (1776-1785), Akademie-Verlag, Berlin (1984), p.363, quoting Frankfurt & Leipzig, Kurze Rechtfertigung Meiner Absichten (1787).
[45] William Guy Carr, Pawns in the Game, 4th Edition, St. George Press, Los Angeles (1962), p.32.
[46] Vatican, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, Robert Appleton Company, New York (1910), Hermann Gruber, “Illuminati: History”.
[47] Emile Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883), translated in Henry Frith, Chivalry, George Routledge & Sons, London (1891), Chapter III, “Commandment IV”.
[48] Original Editor of Encyclopaedia Metropolitana, London Encyclopaedia, 1st Edition, Printed for Thomas Tegg, London (1839), Volume 14, “Merovingian Character”, “Merovingian Race”, p.306.
[49] University of Cambridge, Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Encyclopaedia Britannica, New York (1911), Volume 18, “Merovingian”, p.172.
[50] D.H. Green, Language and History in the Early Germanic World, Cambridge University Press (1998).
[51] Fritz Springmeier, Top 13 Illuminati Bloodlines, Tankobon (1995), pp.179-180 (Japanese); See: Fritz Springmeier, Bloodlines of the Illuminati, 3rd Edition, Pentracks Publications (2005) (English).
[52] Boris Fyodorov, Pyotr Stolypin’s Attempt to Resolve the Jewish Question (Russian).
[53] Victor E. Marsden, Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Liberty Bell Publications, Reedy, West Virginia (ca.1930), inside cover text.
[54] Mikhail Menshikov, Plots Against Humanity, “Letters to Friends & Family” (“Pis’ma k Blizhnim”) series, The New Times (Novoye Vremya), Saint Petersburg (April 1902).
[55] Victor E. Marsden, Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Liberty Bell Publications, Reedy, West Virginia (ca.1930), inside cover text, and “Introduction (1922)” reprinted from The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, The Britons Publishing Society, London (1922).
[56] 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).
[57] Winston Churchill, Illustrated Sunday Herald, “Zionism versus Bolshevism” (February 1920).
[58] Maurice Joly, Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, A. Mertens and Son, Brussels (1864), “Modest Forword”.
[59] Herjulf Vikingson, Introduction: The Secret World Government, Chicago (04 July 1925), in Maj.Gen. Cherep-Spiridovich, The Secret World Government or “The Hidden Hand”, The Anti-Bolshevist Publishing Association, New York (1926).
You cannot copy content of this page
