Yeah I had alittle chat with Free Mason guy, he says this is strict rumor and they have no proof, but also another one of the Rumors include the Knights of St. John 
, so really its a bit confusing.
, so really its a bit confusing.-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Rennes le Chateau
This post is resulting a really interesting exercise. In fact, let me thank you all this experience. I can't remember any forum with such wise people. I love to learn more and more each day, and probably I will in such this forum.
There is one more point related with Templars and so that I never saw clear. Rennes-le-Chateau, in the southwestern Languedoc. In ancient times the city was the Visigothic Capital, with the name of Redae, and it was supposed to be too, in first centuries of Dark Age, the Head City of a Jewish state in the Languedoc. The most strange of all, is that templars took control of the zone and founded there one of their biggest power focus, digging deep caves and mines.
A century ago a churchman of the actual-time little village of Rennes-le-Chateau found something strange, so strange that the Viena Habsburgs (related with the House of Lorena) gave the cleric a huge monetary rent (i think it could be a brive) and French Government even today seems to keep the discover as a State Secret, something amazing if it's only supposed to be an arqueologic site, don't you think?
Afterwards, why the cult of Maria of Magdala is so important in Rennes- le-Chateau and, in fact, in all Languedoc? Probably is the only place where you can find that. And several texts, sculptures and more, connect Templars with a huge devotion to Maria de Magdala. Mmmmmm.... strange.
So it will be very interesting to hear the opinion of a friend living that zone or knowing it well. Perhaps he (or she) would help us to see the truth (or perhaps it will do it even more a mistery).
This post is resulting a really interesting exercise. In fact, let me thank you all this experience. I can't remember any forum with such wise people. I love to learn more and more each day, and probably I will in such this forum.
There is one more point related with Templars and so that I never saw clear. Rennes-le-Chateau, in the southwestern Languedoc. In ancient times the city was the Visigothic Capital, with the name of Redae, and it was supposed to be too, in first centuries of Dark Age, the Head City of a Jewish state in the Languedoc. The most strange of all, is that templars took control of the zone and founded there one of their biggest power focus, digging deep caves and mines.
A century ago a churchman of the actual-time little village of Rennes-le-Chateau found something strange, so strange that the Viena Habsburgs (related with the House of Lorena) gave the cleric a huge monetary rent (i think it could be a brive) and French Government even today seems to keep the discover as a State Secret, something amazing if it's only supposed to be an arqueologic site, don't you think?
Afterwards, why the cult of Maria of Magdala is so important in Rennes- le-Chateau and, in fact, in all Languedoc? Probably is the only place where you can find that. And several texts, sculptures and more, connect Templars with a huge devotion to Maria de Magdala. Mmmmmm.... strange.
So it will be very interesting to hear the opinion of a friend living that zone or knowing it well. Perhaps he (or she) would help us to see the truth (or perhaps it will do it even more a mistery).
My old man was a free mason as well, and I must say they are pretty weird. When he died, I got all his mesonic stuff. I thought about joining them at one point, but wasn't much for their rather "old fashioned" views of women and minorities (although it is rather funny that when growing up I do not remember one time where my mother didn't win an argument and my father didn't back down in the end )
As for Church history, I would only trust what can be proven through other sources (Arabic, Hebrew, Greek, or even the far reaches of Christendom might be truthful). Even with those sources you have to remember the views which characterize their societies, and remember they could have been just as bias to the truth. Personally I think the Pope, and the Church in general, told one to many lies in it's own intrust to be an overly reliable source. With that said I do not think it was an intentional conspiracy against the truth, and was probably more distorted truths and half truths than out right lies even in the most extremely obvious or dubious of points. Simple point do not beleive everything you read, even if it is 1,000 years old (or based on information form that time) Best idea is to look at all available sources, and put your idea of what happened somewhere in the middle of the two extremes you have been given. That (in most cases) is probably the closest to the truth you will ever get. Even in the reasonable past (last 200 years) there is most definitely at least a very bias aspect to much of what you will be able to find.
) As for Church history, I would only trust what can be proven through other sources (Arabic, Hebrew, Greek, or even the far reaches of Christendom might be truthful). Even with those sources you have to remember the views which characterize their societies, and remember they could have been just as bias to the truth. Personally I think the Pope, and the Church in general, told one to many lies in it's own intrust to be an overly reliable source. With that said I do not think it was an intentional conspiracy against the truth, and was probably more distorted truths and half truths than out right lies even in the most extremely obvious or dubious of points. Simple point do not beleive everything you read, even if it is 1,000 years old (or based on information form that time)
Best idea is to look at all available sources, and put your idea of what happened somewhere in the middle of the two extremes you have been given. That (in most cases) is probably the closest to the truth you will ever get. Even in the reasonable past (last 200 years) there is most definitely at least a very bias aspect to much of what you will be able to find.
Re: Rennes le Chateau
Oh yeahh!! And don`t forget about Rene/Rogier de Trenkavel, who was probably of Merovingian blood, and .. and.. etc.
Oh yeahh!! And don`t forget about Rene/Rogier de Trenkavel, who was probably of Merovingian blood, and .. and.. etc.
Ylzania,
The priest found something, but what it was we will never know.
The thing is, the authors did not do enough to prove to me that he was anything more than a lucky man who got rich. The attempt to link him through friendship to a Habsburg who is then tenously linked back to the Merovingians (through a Dagobert heir who may not have existed) just wasn't enough for me to even make the cleric part of the story.
I agree that some accepted historic truths are based on similar evidence, but it just wasn't enough for me.
There have been a number of other books on the subject, but most of those appear to be based on the original with wilder theories added.
One thing the book made me wish was for more sources to have been writen during the dark ages! But then again, they don't call them the dark ages for nothing
The priest found something, but what it was we will never know.
The thing is, the authors did not do enough to prove to me that he was anything more than a lucky man who got rich. The attempt to link him through friendship to a Habsburg who is then tenously linked back to the Merovingians (through a Dagobert heir who may not have existed) just wasn't enough for me to even make the cleric part of the story.
I agree that some accepted historic truths are based on similar evidence, but it just wasn't enough for me.
There have been a number of other books on the subject, but most of those appear to be based on the original with wilder theories added.
One thing the book made me wish was for more sources to have been writen during the dark ages! But then again, they don't call them the dark ages for nothing
The overall point I think to be made is that you cannot trust any piece of evidence without either corroborating it with another on the same subject or extrapolating legitimacy on another subject through the sources veracity on the first. It doesnt matter whether it is the 11th century papacy or the Nixon administration, every political/religious/social group sometimes bends the truth to accomadate their own views. Personally i believe that this can add to the appreciation of the period. We can gain as much from lies as from the plainest truth.
AS to the Dark Ages, there is substantial evidence from the Near East, obviously from the later Roman Empire, but the real problem comes with evidence from the nordic countries, SAxony, Wendish lands etc etc.. Many of the missionaries sent there did not leave behind written accounts so all the information is either second hand or based on archaeology.
AS to the Dark Ages, there is substantial evidence from the Near East, obviously from the later Roman Empire, but the real problem comes with evidence from the nordic countries, SAxony, Wendish lands etc etc.. Many of the missionaries sent there did not leave behind written accounts so all the information is either second hand or based on archaeology.
wow, the people on the paradox forums know their history. and im sure most are "amatuer" history buffs like myself. i think we all should have become archiologists (sry for spelling) anyway, as far as religious discoveries that are considered extrordinary, (i mean like relics, not visions and such), reported discoveries of relics or attempts to discover relics, always seem to be pushed aside. i wouldnt say covered up, but discounted maybe? i saw a show on history channel or discovery where this team wanted to dig for the Arc of the Covenant where they thought it was buried according to their extensive research, and they really convinced me that it might be where they belived it was. however, even w/ their compelling research, the gov't (i think it was isreal, maybe turkey) would not let them dig. and it was a location in the desert, no people or animals would have been bothered.
also, there is a big thing about noah's ark being on mt. ararat in turkey, but the turkish gov't doesnt let any more teams search for it there now i heard. and the peice of the "true" cross the crusaders lost to Saladin disappeared, but was not recored as being destroyed by the muslims, who kept it as a bargaining chip. a few other examples i cant think of right now, but the gist is, holy relic searches and discoveries seem to be brushed under the carpet. maybe its because if they are found to be genuine they would cause more strife than good? at least at this time in our history?
oops, got very long winded, sry. anywho, a little more on the templars and the Masonic lodge, the symbol on the american dollar w/ the pyramid and the eye is a masonic symbol. they are kinda seen as old school now w/ most members being seniors in the states at least. not sure how popular they are in UK now. but they, and their ideas have a lot to do w/ the creation and ideals of the US gov't. many take their secrecy to be hiding something evil or being distrustfull, but i can assure you, they are all exellent men.
i saw someone post they didnt like the Free Mason's attitude to minorities, but i can tell you all the masons i know dont disrespect minorities or or prejudice. it is a "brotherhood" for men only, but the Easter Star is the Free Mason's for women. sry so long winded, got carried away
(sry for spelling) anyway, as far as religious discoveries that are considered extrordinary, (i mean like relics, not visions and such), reported discoveries of relics or attempts to discover relics, always seem to be pushed aside. i wouldnt say covered up, but discounted maybe? i saw a show on history channel or discovery where this team wanted to dig for the Arc of the Covenant where they thought it was buried according to their extensive research, and they really convinced me that it might be where they belived it was. however, even w/ their compelling research, the gov't (i think it was isreal, maybe turkey) would not let them dig. and it was a location in the desert, no people or animals would have been bothered. also, there is a big thing about noah's ark being on mt. ararat in turkey, but the turkish gov't doesnt let any more teams search for it there now i heard. and the peice of the "true" cross the crusaders lost to Saladin disappeared, but was not recored as being destroyed by the muslims, who kept it as a bargaining chip. a few other examples i cant think of right now, but the gist is, holy relic searches and discoveries seem to be brushed under the carpet. maybe its because if they are found to be genuine they would cause more strife than good? at least at this time in our history?
oops, got very long winded, sry. anywho, a little more on the templars and the Masonic lodge, the symbol on the american dollar w/ the pyramid and the eye is a masonic symbol. they are kinda seen as old school now w/ most members being seniors in the states at least. not sure how popular they are in UK now. but they, and their ideas have a lot to do w/ the creation and ideals of the US gov't. many take their secrecy to be hiding something evil or being distrustfull, but i can assure you, they are all exellent men.
i saw someone post they didnt like the Free Mason's attitude to minorities, but i can tell you all the masons i know dont disrespect minorities or or prejudice. it is a "brotherhood" for men only, but the Easter Star is the Free Mason's for women. sry so long winded, got carried away
No, the Free Masons generally allow anyone to join so long as they profess a belief in a "higher power".
And the French branch of the Free Masons actually dropped even this requirement around 1870, although this resulted in their being ostracized by the other Masonic associations.
I apologise profusly for my shocking use of english in my previous post.
Oh, right. I was convinced that they were anti-catholic, dont know why?? i think it may have been something in the 19th century where catholics and catholic organisations in france were particularly against free masonry...
Oh, right. I was convinced that they were anti-catholic, dont know why?? i think it may have been something in the 19th century where catholics and catholic organisations in france were particularly against free masonry...