-Caveat Lector-
from alt. [rosslyntemplar] Digest Number 156
-----
As always, Caveat Lector.
Om
K
-----
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 13:03:28 -0000
From: "Paul McGowan KOTpl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: : Re: Origins of neo-templar ordersRe:
Hi
Hostpitaller Vs Templars.
Im sure Ramsey actually meant and quoted in more than one instance the KOSJ.
This would actually be correct as when the suppression Order was issued (in
scotland it wasnt) The Templars in Scotland co-joined with the KOSJ to form
a Holding Company (legal documentation is available through muesems,
libraries etc) called
The Knights of St John and the Temple of Solomon in Scotland
Ramsey was neither confused or trying to hide anything as any further
documentation refering to the Order aftre the suppression (in scotland)
refered to the above.
Have fun
Paul McGowan
The views expressed are purely personal and do not represent views of any
organisation
=====
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 21:34:24 PST
From: "David Rodgers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Origin of neo-templar orders
<<<<<why would you discount the hospitallers so derisively?
many - perhaps the majority - of templars transferred to the
hospitallers after the dissolution of the templars
why shouldn't the hospitallers have been the vehicle for the ex-templars
and their subsequent torch carriers?
regardsPatrick>>>>>
You raise a good point. However, I would discount a union of the
Templars with the Hospitallers as the reason that masonic lodges are
called lodges of St. John. The Templars are known to have venerated John
the Baptist. Ramsey's claim that Crusader Masons, i.e., Templars, united
with Knights of St. John of Jerusalem is IMO a veiled reference to the
Templars' adoption of Johannite doctrine which they were exposed to in
Outremer. They were continually in conflict with the Hospitallers, and
Jacques DeMolay rejected Phillip the Fair's proposal of combining the
two orders. A simmering resentment of the Hospitaller's acquisition of
Templar properties seems evident from the violence done Hospitaller
holdings during the Peasants' Revolt, if you accept that it was
Templar-orchestrated (it's inexplicable otherwise).
The one thing that I'm sure we can agree on is that no "Crusader
Masons" formed a union with the Hospitallers, giving rise to lodges of
St. John. The Hospitallers' successors, the Knights of Malta, would be
the first to reject such a connection, good Catholics that they are.
DWR
______________________________________________________________________________
_
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
