Back ] Home ] Next ]  RETURN TO LEGENDS, MYSTERIES, BELIEFS, COVERUP MAIN PAGE

.

LEGENDS, MYSTERIES, BELIEFS, CONSPIRACIES, COVERUP

 

The Who and What of the Illuminati

By DCCSA

Being a follower of Christ means we should NOT fear anything or anyone but God. Perfect love for Almighty God casts out our fear. Don't think for a moment you are going to vote the Illuminati out of office. They control the major and minor political parties. They control the process of government, they control the process of information flow, they control the process of creating money and finally they control Christendom. (However, God controls the hearts of His people.) In short the Illuminati are generational Satanic bloodlines which have gained the most power. A generational Satanist described the Illuminati as "Satan's elite." The Illuminati is the secret occult oligarchies which rule the world. God Himself has told us that the whole world lies in the power of the wicked one. Indeed a small group of Satanic families control their nation and the world from behind the scenes. They have Satanic power through their secret societies and exercise this power from behind the scenes .Long ago, powerful kings discovered how they could control other men by torture, magical practices, wars, politics, religion and interest taking. These elite families designed strategies and tactics to perpetuate their occult practices. Layers upon layers of secrecy have hidden these families from the public. Alexander Hislop wrote a classic called "The Two Babylons." He researched the occult world and the connections between the different groups. His classic book shows that there is a continuity between the ancient occultism of the Mystery Religions and modern day religion. Many have paid the ultimate price and died as they dared to challenge the power structure to get to the real facts. The Illuminati mocks and imitates God's 12 tribes. And this is why Jesus called the Illuminati, who say they are Jews but are not, the "Synagogue of Satan. Satan blessed the 12 bloodlines of the Illuminati. The Illuminati are the elite of Satanism. The 13th bloodline of the Illuminati is the bloodline from which comes the Antichrist. The tribe of Dan was used as a Judas Iscariot type seed. The royalty of the tribe of Dan have descended down through history as a powerful Satanic bloodline. The 13th or final blood line was copied after God's royal lineage of Jesus. This was the Satanic House of David with their blood which they believe is not only from the House of David but also from the lineage of Jesus, who they claim had a wife and children. The 13th Satanic bloodline was instilled with the direct seed of Satan so that they would not only carry Christ's blood--but also the blood of his "brother" Lucifer. Yes this is what they really believe. Yes they do have very real power from Satan. The occult world has remained hidden from the history books. Publishing and education have been controlled privileges. The Illuminati have ruled behind the scenes. The Mystery Religions each had their secret councils which ruled them, and these councils themselves came under the guidance of a secret supreme Grand Council or Governing Body. The Mystery Religions in turn ruled the masses and the political leaders. Enough research into the Illuminati will clearly show that history books have been doctored. The hidden truth is how great power was concentrated in the hands of oligarchies around the world.

Who were these powerful people? If there is a conspiracy who are the conspirators? The history books are full of information about the elites and the masses. Yet very close examination and with the light of the KJV Holy Bible, one can see that the elite have continued their power for centuries. The Illuminati elite have worked hand in glove with other elites to control the masses. Wars between kings were not really wars between elite factions, but contrived wars to control the masses by their greedy elite masters. Power doesn't have to have high visibility to be active. In fact, due to the evil dark nature of these evil bloodlines they have traditionally tried to remain secret. Yet there have been some people who have stepped out of the generational Satanic bloodlines of the Illuminati and who have given their lives to Christ. This is how the truth comes out when someone in those generational Satanic bloodlines come out to the light of Jesus Christ.  Those who are still in the Illuminati are much too fearful to tell anything of generational Satanism. The power is very real and the fears of those within the Illuminati are well grounded since most have seen occult ritual torture and murder first hand.  Several people from different places have confirmed that there are 13 Illuminati bloodlines. Fritz Springmeyer is among the top researchers of the Illuminati. Several ex-Illuminati people have confirmed the list of 13 families. Who are the families. Here are the names of some of the more obvious powerful families: Mellon's, Carnegies, Rothschild's, Rockefellers, Dukes, Astor's, Dorrance's, Reynoldses, Stiliman's, Bakers, Pyne's, Cuilman's, Watson's, Tukes, Kleinwort's, DuPont's, Warburg's, Phippses, Graces, Guggenheims, Milner's, Drexel's, Winthrop's, Vanderbilt's, Whitney's, Harkenesses.  Have you not noticed how well these and other super rich Illuminated families get along quite well with Communists. Can you not see something wrong with that picture of how they manage and do business with those who supposedly want to take away the wealth of these men and give it to the people? Yet this is only to support the delusion that Communists are the enemies of all Capitalists. Here is the BASIC UNDERSTANDING YOU MUST GRASP. Communists, like the super rich families, are not the enemies of MONOPOLY CAPITALISM: they are the enemies of FREE ENTERPRISE."  Some of the Illuminati secret and semi-secret organizations are: the Order of the Garter, RIIA, Bohemian Grove, Bilderbergers, the Cosmos Club, the CFR, the Club of Rome, the Council of 9, the Council of 13 which is the Grand Druid Council, the Jason Society, the Jason Group, the Ordo Saturis, the OTO groups, MI-6, MJ-12, the Mothers of Darkness, the Pilgrim Society, the Prieure de Sion, the Process Church, the Sanhedrin, and the Temple of Power. Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Eph 5:12 For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. Eph 5:13 But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. Eph 5:14 Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light. The god of this world is in its full reality is Lucifer, Satan, the devil. But he is a defeated foe to those who have already died to self and have hid their life with Jesus Christ in the One True Living God. The thirteen bloodlines of the Illuminati are: 1-The Astor Bloodline. 2-The Bundy Bloodline. 3-The Collins Bloodline. 4-The Dupont Bloodline. 5-The Freeman Bloodline. 6-The Kennedy Bloodline. 7-The Li Bloodline. 8-The Onassis Bloodline. 9-The Reynolds Bloodline. 10-The Rockefeller Bloodline. 11-The Rothschild Bloodline. 12-The Russell Bloodline. 13-The Van Duyn BloodlineMerovingian (European Royalty) .

The British Royalty are tied in with the 13th Bloodline. Many of the American political leaders have been related to the British Royalty incl. George Bush and Dan Quayle. It is from this 13th Satanic bloodline of the tribe of Dan, Judas Iscariot, most powerful Satanic bloodline from which the Antichrist, Prince Charles of Wales comes. The 13th or final blood line was copied after God's royal lineage of Jesus. This was the Satanic House of David with their blood which they believe is not only from the House of David but also from the lineage of Jesus, who they claim had a wife and children, in this Satanic perverted yet powerful belief system. The 13th Satanic bloodline was instilled with the direct seed of Satan they would carry the blood Lucifer. Yes this is what they really believe that Lucifer was Christ's brother, that Jesus Christ did not die on a Roman Cross on Calvery, but married Mary Magdeline and produced this bloodline which has a divine right to rule the world. Their god is Lucifer. The very spirit of Lucifer Satan the devil will soon indwell Prince Charles of Wales to be the antichrist and seek to have all worship him as god of this world. The 13th Illuminati Bloodline is where the Anti-Christ will come from. This bloodline believes that it has both the Holy Blood of Jesus and the blood (or seed) of Satan in its bloodline. This bloodline is so extensive in its many branches that its membership takes in many of the Presidents of the United States, including George Bush and George Washington.  All of the Mormon Presidents in history, whether RLDS or LDS, trace their blood back to this 13th bloodline. Within the Illuminati rituals, the emphasis of the 13th bloodline is that they are the seed of Satan. They really believe that they are the direct descendants of Jesus's spiritual brother Lucifer. Some of the earliest attempts to trace the seed of Satan were some books which did extensive research on the Tribe of Dan and the decedents of Cain. "The Curse of Canaan" is an interesting book along with its mate World Order by Eustice Mullins. Another good book if you can find it is Gerald Massey's A Book of the Beginning (Secaucus, NJ: University Books, Inc., 1974.) The book shows in detail how the inhabitants of the British Isles came originally from Egypt. This is Important because the Druidism of the British Isles was simply a derivative from the Egyptian Satanic witchcraft/magic of Ancient Egypt.  The Illuminati is the continuation of the Mystery Religions of Babylon and Egypt. And the bloodlines of the Illuminati go back to people who at one time lived in Babylon and Egypt.  You may see on the GJiGT just how the House of David (the Satanic one) and the blasphemous Holy Merovingian Blood of the 13th family fit as you may know Prince Charles is the Antichrist. The 13th Illuminati family does goes back to ancient times. Is this via the Tribe of Dan or via some Druidic bloodline or is it via the Merovingian's or all three. The 13th bloodline has amassed a great deal of power and wealth on this planet. The 13th bloodline lacks nothing to bring forth their Anti-Christ who will appear to have all the correct credentials. I would not even be surprised if their Anti-Christ in order to appear real will expose another Anti-Christ. The 13th bloodline has kept its genealogies very secret, yet you may find the bloodline of Prince Charles going all the way back to David and the tribe of Judah on the GJiGT.  The tribe of Dan was prophesied to be the black sheep of the nation of Israel which would bite the other tribes of Israel. The tribe of Dan had the snake and the eagle as its two logos. The tribe of Dan left its calling card all over Europe as it migrated west in the names of many places. The tribe of Dan ruled the Greeks, the Roman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian empire and many others which used the eagle as its logo. Great Britain is the mother country of Satanism. Scotland has long been an occult center. The national symbol of Scotland is the dragon (the snake), and for years the chief of Scotland was called the dragon. The Gaelic language is an important language for Satanism, although English and French are also use extensively by the Illuminati. The planning sessions for world takeover that some ex-Satanists experienced were held in French.  The British Royal Family have long been involved with the occult. They have also been actively involved with Freemasonry. British MI6 has been a major vehicle for the Satanic hierarchy working behind the secret veil of Freemasonry to control world events. British MI6 is the most secret intelligence organization in the world. It is properly known as British Secret Service not to be confused with the U.S. agency by that name but performing a different function entirely. It is the personal secret service of Prince Charles, who may be the richest man in the world with some estimates of his personal net worth as high as 26 Trillion Dollars. The British Royalty have served as important figureheads to British Freemasonry lending credibility and respectability. British Freemasonry has managed to keep itself free of much of the criticism that the other national Masonic groups have brought on themselves. However, much of the credibility of British Freemasonry is undeserved. British Freemasonry in the lower level Masons by their dues and activities are unwittingly supporting an organization that is led by Satanists at the top. The English Grand Masonic Lodge, all Freemasonry, all of the occult, the Vatican, and all major national and military intelligence agencies are all working together. The view from the top of this Satanic Antichrist pyramid structure helps maintain an overall view perspective. When you go to the top of the Antichrist structure and scheme of things you have to look at the prince himself. "And the dragon gave him his power and his throne and great authority." The dragon is "symbolic" to others, but not to Prince Charles. He has a red dragon on his coat of arms. It comes from the flag of Wales, and it is in this title, Prince of Wales, that Charles is heir-apparent to the throne of Great Britain. At his coronation (investiture as Prince of Wales) in 1969, he sat on a chair with a large red dragon emblazoned on it. During the ceremony, his mother Queen Elizabeth II said, "This dragon gives you your power, your throne and your own authority." His response to her was, "I am now your Liege-man, and worthy of your earthly worship." Liege is an old English word meaning "Lord". "I am now your Lord-man, and worthy of your earthly worship." Another reference to the red dragon is in Revelations 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. Prince Charles is the ONLY person in the world to whom "And the dragon gave him his power and his throne and great authority" can literally be applied to!  Another symbol on Prince Charles' Coat of Arms is that of The Order of the Garter. The Order of the Garter is the parent organization over Free Masonry, worldwide. When a man becomes a 33rd Degree Mason, he swears allegiance to that organization, and thereby to Prince Charles.

According to "The 'Morals and Dogma' of the Ancient and Accepted Rite of Freemasonry" written by Albert Pike (Grand Commander, Sovereign Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, July 14, 1889) Lucifer is the GOD of Freemasonry (see page 321 of the 1942 edition). On page 819 you will find just one example of why there are many people in Freemasonry who believe that it is natural to be a Christian and a Mason. Masonry intentionally misleads the low degree initiates and hides the truth that the god of Freemasonry is Lucifer, except to those in the 30th and higher degrees. "The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are on display there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them." Further proof of Lucifer worshipping amongst Freemason can be seen in how they measure the year. For instance the year 1998 (up until September) is according to freemasonry the year 5997 AL (that is 5997 anno Lucifer). On March 6th, 1996 on CNN, Prince Charles showed the world that he and his two sons William and Harry, had been the first people to be voluntarily implanted with a microchip (traceable biochip) in their right hands, allegedly for security purposes. On June 26th 1994, Charles announced that when he becomes king he will relinquish the monarch's role as head of the Church of England. He said he would rather be seen as "defender of faith", or "defender of the faiths," rather than "defender of THE faith." "I happen to believe that the Catholic subjects of the sovereign are as important [as the Protestants], not to mention the Islamic, Hindu and Zoroastrian," he told the independent Television network. There are currently at least two biographies available on Charles that describe his desire to unite all the world's religions 'in order for peace' (see Daniel 11:37). Various reports have appeared in London and Arab news papers over the last few years, claiming that Charles has converted to Islam. This supposedly took place when he met with the mufti of Cyprus Shaykh Nazim Adil (in 1993).Now while there's no actual evidence to prove that he has converted to Islam, there is no evidence to prove that he hasn't. In fact his lecture delivered in February 1994 at Oxford extolling the virtues of Islam, his frequent visits to Islamic holy places, his dedication of a South London mosque, outfitted in traditional Sunnah attire; and his 1993 trip to see the Quran of Sayiddina `Uthman (in Tashkent, Uzbekistan) with Shaykh Hisham Kabbani, only lend credence to the claim. Of course, this is just the sort of tactic to expect from the antichrist. That is to say, if he were to openly come out and say that he had converted to Islam, this would make many Jews wary of him. Whereas, if he were to spread rumors that he was a Muslim and not publicly deny them, then he could get Muslims on side whilst not alienating Jews. On June 2nd 1953, with the knights of the garter carrying and holding the canopy over her head, Elizabeth II was anointed and crowned as "Queen of thy people Israel". Both Prince Charles and his mother believe that the throne upon which the queen was crowned, the famous coronation chair at Westminster Abbey in London, is the rightful throne of King David. One of the reasons for this is because up until recently it contained a 336 pound stone known as Jacob's Pillar (also referred to as Jacob's head-rest, the stone of Scone, or the stone of destiny). For more information on the significance of this stone see Genesis 28:18. In 1296, Edward I stole the stone and took it to England, where it was placed in Westminster Abbey, and used since 1308 for English coronations. On St Andrews Day, 30th November 1996, on Queen Elizabeth's orders, the stone was taken back to Scotland and installed in Edinburgh Castle. Many people believe that this stone will be used to crown the antichrist (posing as the messiah). (See also Ezekiel 21:27, Genesis49:10, Daniel 9:24, and Ezekiel 37:22). Many blasphemous European royalty including Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth II claim to be of the Blood line of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. According to the lie, Jesus didn't die on the cross and rise from the dead. Instead they claim he married Mary Magdalene and fathered a number of children. This bloodline is referred to as the "Holy Grail", with those possessing it believing themselves the rightful heirs to the throne of Jerusalem. They believe that a new king of "the holy seed of David" will preside over the "Masonic kingdom" of Israel and the world. Prince Charles' link to the non-existent bloodline of Christ is through the Merovingian Kings of France. He is allegedly descended from the Merovingian Hildegarde.

Princess Diana's Bloodline can also be traced back to the Merovingians. This is why Prince Philip selected her. His World Business Forum comprises 200 of the world's top corporate leaders and consolidates 26% of the world's wealth. Charles is literally able to steer the environmental ethics & business agendas of the world's most powerful multinational companies. The holdings of the House of Windsor constitute enormous wealth including the Archer-Daniel's-Midland company (they are stockholders with controlling interest) which controls 75% of the world's grain. In times of famine, the royal family will literally be able to control who eats and who starves. Prince Charles considers himself to be psychic and believes in guidance from the spirit realm. The Queen (also involved in spiritism) and Prince Philip both believe that Charles, "is the Chosen One - placed in line for the throne through a divine, preordained plan." In the early 1990's representatives of Israel and the Palestinians were invited to a secret meeting in London, during which it was decided to try secret negotiations in Oslo, Norway. The Israelis were represented by Yitzchak Rabin, and the Palestinians were represented by King Hussein of Jordan (both 33rd degree masons). The third party at that meeting was Lord Victor Mischcon (also a 33rd degree mason), and personal attorney for Prince Charles. Prince Charles attended the funeral of Yitzchak Rabin. Within two hours after the funeral, according to the Jerusalem Post, Prince Charles was in Prime Minister Shimon Peres' office "insisting" that he attend a meeting at the Orient House, (in the Palestinian sector of Jerusalem), to begin negotiations to give back the Golan Heights to Syria. To truly understand Charles, it is important to understand his father, Prince Philip. Philip is a eugenicist who wants reduce the population of this planet from a current level of about 6.0 billions persons, to much less than 1 billion within the next two generations. To quote Prince Philip "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation. "Prince Charles may seem like a wimp, however he is quite athletic, an expert horseman, a qualified jet fighter pilot in the Royal Air Force, a qualified helicopter pilot in the Royal Navy, and a senior military officer in all three branches of armed services. No one else on Earth has the religious, political, financial, historic, and other ties that Charles has! Prince Charles media exposure has exceeded that of any other man in history! Still not convinced, then read 2Thessalonians 2:9-12 2 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness

The Quest for the Grail Is Finally Solved in a New Novel

The hero of The Voice is a fictionalized Paul Fitzgerald, a middle-aged American living in London. It is the end of the year 2003, and a totally wired-up electronic world is about to celebrate the winter solstice. However, before the world moves one step farther into the future, the voices from the past call to Paul in his sleep, beckoning him to come and revisit them. Although Paul resists at first, he is compelled into another world, and when he awakens comes face to face with a beautiful blond woman, and a black knight who has been haunting him in his dreams. While not dreaming, Paul tries to sort the dreams into reality. But he soon discovers that his employer, Transitron, a huge communications corporation, has a profound interest in his dream life as well. When Paul finally realizes Transitron’s technology enables the company to penetrate the secrets held in Paul’s dreams, the chase ensues. A mysterious astrologer for the ‘royals’ leads Paul back to his family’s conquest of Ireland in the twelfth century, and there he confronts the voices from the past and rediscovers his ancient purpose. Through their dreams and their understanding of myth, authors Fitzgerald and Gould have  reconstructed the past and its meaning for the future. They have seen behind the veil of secrecy, probed the network of ancient families and their alliances, and discovered a "truth" behind the movement of history. It is a truth that cannot be denied, and will be vital to everyone's understanding of the new millennium: a high-tech world of holographic dreaming and a worldwide telecommunications industry ready to assume control of life beyond the "seen" world. "Time was like some computer program that was coming to an end," observes the character of Paul Fitzgerald in The Voice. "Whether contained in the Mayan calendar, Biblical scripture, or Sumerian texts, the cycle of human history known to the Hindus as the Kali Yuga was about to be completed, and whether we liked it or not, the three dimensions of our world were about to be coalesced into a  fourth." As they prepare for the coming change, authors Fitzgerald and Gould ask, "Where do we  belong in this brave new world as the old familiar realities quickly dissolve into mere electronic  emulations of the real world that was? And more importantly, is this world an accident of human progress, or a carefully designed plan conceived millennia ago by a secret brotherhood intent on  controlling the destiny of the entire planet and the thoughts of every human being on it?" Fitzgerald and Gould promise, "The Voice will take you back to the birth of the ancient Grail quest 5500 hundred years ago, and reveal what that means for the restoration of the Grail through  electronics today and why this will restore the Grail for eternity." By Gould and Fitzgerald.

Was Jesus Married? A Careful Look at the Real Evidence

By Rev. Dr. Mark D. Roberts

Part 1: These days, one of the questions I often receive about Jesus has to do with his marital status. This question didn't just drop out of heaven, however. It was born of the popularity of Dan Brown's controversial novel, The Da Vinci Code. This novel advocates the thesis that Jesus was in fact married to the woman we know as Mary Magdalene, that they had a child together, and that this "truth" was covered up by the church for self-serving reasons. Many readers of The Da Vinci Code, believing the fictional history of the novel to be true, have been buzzing about the possibility of Jesus' having been married. In a recent survey conducted by the online religious website beliefnet, 19% of respondents said they believe that Mary Magdalene was in fact Jesus' wife. In this article I will examine the historical evidence for and against Jesus' purported marriage. Whether we'd like to think of him as married or not is not particularly relevant here. What matters is historical evidence. We don't need more ranting and raving about this issue, no matter what the position of the ranters and ravers. Rather, in the mythical words of Joe Friday, we need "Just the facts, ma'am." Finding the facts isn't easy, however, because we have very little overt historical evidence for or against the marriage of Jesus. The earliest and most reliable records of his life - the New Testament gospels - do not tell us explicitly whether Jesus was married or not. They don't mention his having a wife. Nor do they state that he was unmarried. The silence of the New Testament gospels has given rise to a cacophony of conflicting voices. Some see in these writings a plot to cover up the truth about Jesus. Others see the silence of the gospels as proof that Jesus could not have been married. It does seem rather fantastic to imagine that if Jesus had been married to Miriam of Magdala, whom we know as Mary Magdalene, or to any other woman for that matter, this fact would have been completely omitted from all of the earliest records of Jesus' life. Those who claim that the earliest Christians conspired to hide this information because it confirmed the fact that Jesus wasn't divine forget that the supposed conspirators often gave their lives because they believed Jesus to have been divine. Would they have died for something they knew to be a lie? I rather doubt it. Nevertheless, there are some who argue that the silence of the New Testament gospels should be taken as strong evidence for the marriage of Jesus. Let us turn to this argument.

Part 2: New Testament Evidence for the Married Jesus

The New Testament contains no explicit answer to the question of Jesus' marital state. It never mentions his wife, nor that he was unmarried. In fact, whenever the New Testament gospels refer to Jesus' natural relatives, they speak only of his father, mother, and siblings, but never of a wife. Although almost all scholars of all religious persuasions take this as strong evidence of the singleness of Jesus, a few have proposed that, in fact, Jesus was married. In 1970, for example, William E. Phipps published Was Jesus Married? The Distortion of Sexuality in the Christian Tradition. In this book Phipps argued that the silence of the New Testament about the marital status of Jesus indicates that Jesus was in fact married. Why? Because virtually every Jewish man in Jesus' day did marry, especially those who were considered to be Rabbis. One major problem with this argument, among several, is that it makes no room for an exception. Jesus was not required by law - either governmental or religious - to marry. And, though he was in many ways a normal Jewish man (see Chapter 2 of my book Jesus Revealed), in others ways he was utterly unusual. If, when he reached the age at which young men in his day married, Jesus and his family realized that he had a special calling which would make marriage quite difficult, then he could surely have remained single. Yes, this would have been perceived as an unusual, even a counter-cultural choice. But then Jesus never shied away from the unusual or counter-cultural, especially when it came to his relationships with women. Unlike other Jewish teachers of his day, Jesus had close relationships with women, many of whom were his followers (Luke 8:2-3) and learned from him (Luke 10:38-42). Several of these women are mentioned by name in the New Testament gospels, including, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Susanna, who together helped to support Jesus and his other disciples financially (Luke 8:2-3). But nothing in the New Testament suggests that Jesus was ever married to any of these women, or to any other woman, for that matter. But, you might wonder, what about Mary Magdalene? Isn't there evidence that suggests she was in fact married to Jesus? In the rest of this article I'll examine this evidence, looking both at the New Testament and at the non-biblical gospels that are touted to contain evidence of Jesus' marriage to Mary Magdalene. For now we must acknowledge that the main argument in favor of Jesus' marriage is at best weakly circumstantial. It fails to reckon with the unique calling of Jesus and his tendency to flaunt certain cultural conventions. Moreover, it forces us to believe that the most reliable accounts of Jesus' life failed to mention one of the most salient aspects of that life. How unlikely!

Part 3: Mary Magdalene in the New Testament

These days the question of Jesus' marriage generally focuses on his supposed wife: Mary Magdalene. What exactly can we know about this woman, both from the New Testament and from other ancient documents? In this part I'll focus on the New Testament evidence. The extra-biblical material will be examined below. Once again, my main point is to look carefully at the real historical evidence, not to posit wild theories or defend orthodoxy simply because I happen to be an orthodox Christian. I begin with the New Testament gospels because they are the oldest evidence we have, having been written only a few decades after the death of Jesus, and containing sources that are much older. Several women named Mary are mentioned in the biblical gospels, including Jesus' mother and Mary from Bethany (sister of Martha and Lazarus, the woman whom Jesus praised for learning from him, Luke 10:38-42). One of these "Marys" is referred to as "Magdalene," which means "from the village of Magdala." Mary Magdalene is first mentioned as one of the women who accompanied Jesus on his preaching mission and helped to support him financially (Luke 8:1-3). Luke adds that seven demons had been cast out of her, presumably by Jesus (Luke 8:2). Nothing in this passage suggests that there was anything unusual about Mary's relationship with Jesus, other than the very unusual fact that she was included among Jesus' retinue. Jewish teachers in Jesus' day usually didn't teach women or include them as followers. In his inclusive practice Jesus was virtually unique, and his relationship with Mary and her female counterparts quite counter-cultural. The next time we run into Mary Magdalene she is among the women who observe the crucifixion of Jesus (Mark 15:40). Then, on Easter morning she and a couple of female companions go to the tomb of Jesus, only to find it empty. Mary, according to John 20, encounters Jesus near the tomb, and then goes to announce his resurrection to the other disciples (John 20:1-18). In a sense, she is the first Christian evangelist, the first person to pass on the good news of Easter. This is all we know about Mary Magdalene from the biblical gospels. Several centuries after these texts were written, Mary became associated with the prostitute who bathed and anointed Jesus' feet (Luke 7:36-50). But there's nothing in Scripture that makes this connection. We have no reason to believe that Mary had ever been a prostitute. There's also nothing whatsoever in the biblical material to suggest that Mary was Jesus' wife, or, as some have suggested, that he had a sexual relationship with her outside of marriage. What is exceptional about Mary, when understood in her own cultural setting, is that she was one of Jesus' closest followers. Moreover, she was the first witness to the risen Christ, a role of exceptional honor and privilege. Surely Jesus held Mary in the highest regard, though not as his wife. Ironically, the efforts to turn Mary the disciple of Jesus into Mary the wife of Jesus actually minimize how truly extraordinary she was as a central follower, supporter, and witness of Jesus. Because nothing in the New Testament suggests that Jesus and Mary were married, those who advocate this position claim to rely on the evidence of non-canonical "gospels." Do these extra-biblical writings in fact reveal a secret marriage between Jesus and Mary? Throughout the rest of this article I'll scrutinize this evidence.

Part 4: Mary Magdalene in the Non-Canonical Gospels

Most people are not familiar with the non-canonical gospels. Thus when they hear that these writings reveal Jesus' marriage to Mary Magdalene, they are at a loss to evaluate this claim, and often accept it at face value. Many even assume that the non-canonical evidence for Jesus' marriage must be strong and ample since some writers get so excited about it. In fact the actual evidence is both weak and scanty, as we'll see. In the rest of this article I'll summarize what we learn about Mary Magdalene from the non-biblical writings. These writings can be found in several published sources. (See note at the end of this article.) They can also be accessed online. A word of caution before we begin to look at the non-canonical evidence: Dating of the non-biblical gospels is perilous because we have so little solid evidence. Those who want to see these gospels as reliable historical sources often push their authorship as early as possible, sometimes even into the first century A.D. For reasons I can't pursue here, this dating is unlikely in almost every case. Most credible scholars date the writing of the non-canonical gospels in the second or third century A.D. These texts are, at any rate, later than the biblical gospels by a long shot (with the possible exception of the Gospel of Thomas, which may have been written in the first century, though this is not at all certain). Several of the non-canonical gospels are named after one of the original disciples of Jesus, including Mary, but these disciples had nothing to do with the actual writing of the extra-biblical gospels. For each of the gospels I'll suggest when they might have been written, choosing a date that in that reflects scholarly consensus, where such is available.

Part 4a: Mary Magdalene in the Gospel of Thomas

Since I've mentioned the Gospel of Thomas, and since it's probably the earliest and best known of the non-canonical gospels, let's begin by seeing how it portrays Mary Magdalene. Mary plays a tiny role in the Gospel of Thomas, asking Jesus a question about the disciples: "Whom are your disciples like?" (section 21, trans. Thomas O. Lambdin). This is the only place she speaks. She is mentioned at the end of this gospel in a most curious passage, which reads: Simon Peter said to them, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of Life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven." (section 114) One would be hard pressed to see in this passage much hope for women, let alone for the thesis that Jesus and Mary were married. This passage, in its own strange way, does affirm what we already know from the canonical gospels: that Mary was included among Jesus' followers and that Jesus himself intentionally included women. Of course in the biblical record he valued them as women, not as beings that had eternal value if they became male. Maleness, in this text, should not be understood literally, but as a symbol of one's spiritual or divine nature. So, one who is looking for evidence of a secret marriage between Jesus and Mary will be disappointed by the earliest of the non-canonical gospels. The Gospel of Thomas, in its peculiar way, simple underscores what we know of Mary from the biblical gospels.

Part 4b: Mary Magdalene in The Gospel of Peter

The Gospel of Peter, written in the second century A.D., focuses only on the last hours in the life of Jesus. It is noteworthy for its view that Jesus felt no pain when crucified (section 10) and for its exoneration of Pontius Pilate for the death of Jesus (sections 1, 45-46). Mary Magdalene appears only on Easter morning, when she and her women friends come to the tomb of Jesus to weep for him. She is described as "a female disciple [Greek mathetria ] of the Lord" (section 50,). At the tomb, Mary and her friends see an angel who announces the resurrection of Jesus, and they run away frightened (section 56-57). In the Gospel of Peter we find no evidence whatsoever for a marriage between Mary and Jesus. But, once again, Mary is portrayed as a female disciple of Jesus.

Part 4c: Mary Magdalene in The Dialogue of the Savior

The Dialogue of the Savior, also written in the second century A.D., is a dialogue between the Savior (never called Jesus or Christ) and some of his disciples, including Mary. The disciples ask questions about esoteric religious things, and Jesus gives equally esoteric answers. Although Mary is one of the frequent interrogators of the Savior, at one point she makes an observation. The text explains, "This word she spoke as a woman who knew the All" (Section 139, trans. Harold Attridge). In other words, Mary has special knowledge of spiritual reality. There is no hint in The Dialogue of the Savior of a marriage between Jesus and Mary (or the Savior and Mary). She is seen, once again, as central among the disciples of the Savior, and as a person with special insight.

Part 4d: Mary Magdalene in The Sophia of Jesus Christ

The Sophia of Jesus Christ is a post-resurrection dialogue between the risen Christ and some of his followers, including Mary. It may have been written as early as the middle of the second century A.D. Twice in this gospel Mary asks questions of Christ, such as "Holy Lord, where did your disciples come from, and where are they going, and (what) should they do here?" (section 114, trans. Douglas M. Parrott). Mary is not singled out further, nor is there a suggestion of a marriage to Jesus.

Part 4e: Mary Magdalene in The Pistis Sophia

The Pistis Sophia is a Gnostic gospel written sometime during the third century A.D. It is a revelation of Christ in which Mary plays a prominent role, asking the majority of the questions about all measure of esoteric matters. Mary is praised in The Pistis Sophia as one "whose heart is more directed to the Kingdom of Heaven than all [her] brothers" (Chapter 17, trans. Carl Schmidt and Violet MacDermott). Jesus says that she is "blessed beyond all women upon the earth, because [she shall be] the pleroma of all Pleromas and the completion of all completions" (section 19). In other words, Mary will have the fullness of knowledge and therefore spiritual life within her. So impressed is Jesus with Mary's spiritual excellence that he promises not to conceal anything from her, but to reveal everything to her "with certainty and openly" (section 25). She is the blessed one who will "inherit the whole Kingdom of the Light" (section 61). From The Pistis Sophia we see the growing interest in Mary among Gnostic Christians, who valued knowledge ( gnosis in Greek) above all. She has come to be regarded as a source of hidden revelation because of her intimate relationship with Jesus. Nothing in this gospel suggests a marriage between them, however.

Part 4f: Mary Magdalene in The Gospel of Mary

The Gospel of Mary, written in the second century, goes even further than The Pistis Sophia in portraying Mary as a source of secret revelation because of her close relationship to the Savior. At one point Peter asks, "Sister, We know that the Savior loved you more than the rest of women. Tell us the words of the Savior which you remember--which you know but we do not nor have we heard them" (section 10, trans. George W. MacRae and R. McL. Wilson). So Mary reveals what the Lord made known to her in a vision, the content of which seems like mumbo-jumbo to anyone other than a second-century Gnostic. The Gospel of Mary reports that several of the disciples were none too impressed by Mary's purported insights into heavenly things. Andrew responded to her revelation by saying "I at least do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas" (section 17). Then Peter asked, "Did he really speak privately with a woman and not openly to us? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?" But Levi speaks up for Mary, "Peter, you have always been hot-tempered. Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Savior knows her very well. That is why he loved her more than us" (section 18). Ah, at last, here's fuel for the fire of a secret marriage between Mary and Jesus. She is the recipient of his secret revelations and private speeches. The Savior, who is not called Jesus in The Gospel of Mary, even preferred Mary to the other disciples, loving her more than them. Mary's relationship with Jesus has clearly entered a new dimension we have not seen before. But there is nothing here to suggest that Jesus and Mary were married. Jesus' love for Mary leads him to reveal special truth to her, not to take her as his wife. Nothing in The Gospel of Mary points to a sexual or spousal relationship between Jesus and Mary.

Part 4g: Mary Magdalene in The Gospel of Philip

Finally we come to The Gospel of Philip, the last of the extra-biblical gospels to mention Mary Magdalene, and the one that excites proponents of her marriage to Jesus more than any other ancient document. The Gospel of Philip is one of the latest of the non-canonical gospels, written well into the third-century. It is not a gospel in any ordinary sense, but rather a collection of theological observations written from a Gnostic point of view. Some but not all of these observations mention Jesus. Two passages refer to Mary Magdalene, who plays a tiny role in this gospel. The first of these passages reads, "There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary his mother and her sister and Magdalene, the one who was called his companion" (section 59). Much has been insinuated about the word companion, which, in the Greek original is koinonos. But, contrary to the wishful thinking of some, this word doesn't mean spouse or sexual consort. It means "partner", and is used several times in the New Testament with this ordinary meaning (for example, when Paul refers to himself as Philemon's koinonos in the Philemon 1:17). The second passage in The Gospel of Philip that concerns Mary is the most suggestive: "And the companion of the Savior is Mary Magdalene. But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, 'Why do you love her more than all of us?' The Savior answered and said to them, 'Why do I not love you like her?' When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. Then the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness" (sections 63-63). Even if we suppose that this passage, which appears in no other document, and which was written two centuries after the biblical gospels, conveys historically accurate information, the passage itself seems to disprove Jesus' marriage to Mary. Surely if Jesus had been married to Mary then his special affection for her wouldn't have been an offense. And surely Jesus could have satisfied the disciples' question by explaining that Mary was his wife. But he doesn't do this. Instead he explains his special affection for Mary by pointing to her ability to see the light, that is, to have knowledge. Nothing in this passage suggests that Jesus and Mary were married, even if we read it literally. Moreover, given what is said elsewhere in The Gospel of Philip about kissing (sections 58-59), it's possible that this passage isn't even meant to be taken literally. The text may very use the metaphor of kissing to say that Jesus revealed truth to Mary. If this is true, the The Gospel of Mary is consistent with what we have seen elsewhere in the Gnostic gospels. That's it. That's the best non-canonical evidence for the marriage of Jesus and Mary: a passage which, even if taken at face value as a historically accurate account, which one would be silly to do, seems to contradict the hypothetical marriage. The only way to find this marriage in the non-canonical gospels is to interject it there yourself. The texts simply do not support this theory that Jesus and Mary were married.

Part 5: Conclusions

One who has read The Da Vinci Code and been persuaded to accept its fictional history as fact will no doubt object at this point: "But you don't understand. Jesus' marriage to Mary was a secret. These texts only give tiny clues. The real truth of Jesus' marriage was hidden, and that's why the non-canonical gospels say so little about it." Of course this could be true, theoretically speaking. But I'd argue that we have much more evidence for Jesus having been an alien from outer space than the husband of Mary Magdalene. After all, he is transfigured on a mountain with glowing beings (Mark 9:2-8) and he ascends to heaven in a cloud (Acts 1:9). One can make up all sorts of theories about Jesus, but the only way to evaluate these theories is with the facts of the ancient texts we have. And these texts simply do not support the theory of Jesus' marriage.You may well wonder why I have spent so much time analyzing the biblical and the non-biblical evidence for the alleged marriage of Jesus. Couldn't the it have been dismissed in a few summary observations, thus saving me the time it took to write this stuff and you the time it took to read it? Yes, I could have simply pooh-poohed the whole thing as fictional nonsense. But this wouldn't be helpful to you when your friend, having just read The Da Vinci Code, is sure that the non-canonical gospels are really full of evidence about Jesus' marriage to Mary Magdalene. Given the sustained popularity of Dan Brown's novel , the issue of Jesus' marriage to Mary is a live one today and will continue to be for quite a long time. Many people, both Christians and non-believers, have been led to believe that Jesus was probably married to Mary, and that there is lots of non-canonical evidence for this marriage. They take Dan Brown's historical fiction as gospel-truth, so to speak. Moreover, I have spent time going over the non-canonical material in detail because most Christians (and non-Christians) are unfamiliar with these texts. So when somebody says, "The non-canonical gospels really show that Jesus was married," most believers don't know how to respond. Now you have seen the evidence, and you know how to respond. You have more direct exposure to the non-biblical gospels than 99.9% of the population. So when someone states confidently that the non-canonical gospels reveal Jesus' marriage to Mary, you can respond, "Well, have you ever studied what the non-canonical gospels actually say about Jesus and Mary?" To which the answer will almost always be "No." To which you can add, "You know, I've actually looked at this evidence, and there is nothing there. Mary appears rarely in the non-canonical gospels, and when she does appear, it's usually as a close disciple of Jesus, and sometimes as one who reveals special knowledge that Jesus revealed first to her. That's it." Another reason I have taken time on this issue is that most proponents of the marriage of Jesus thesis have an agenda. They are trying to strip Jesus of his uniqueness, and especially his deity. They want a Jesus who was a mere human being, one with spiritual insight, but otherwise ordinary. The supposed marriage of Jesus is taken by many to be proof that he really wasn't God in the flesh, but only a mortal man. Along with Christians throughout the ages, I believe that Jesus was fully God and fully human. To be sure I can't fully comprehend or explain this mystery, but I believe it nevertheless. My faith in the unique nature of Jesus doesn't demand that he was single, ironically enough. Jesus could have married and maintained his sinless, human-divine nature. But the fact is that he didn't do this. We can speculate about the reasons. I imagine that Jesus realized his unique calling was incompatible with marriage and family life. But I don't know this for a fact. And I do care about facts. Yes, I'm aware of the postmodern critique of knowledge and truth. And I'm aware of my own inadequacy when it comes to discerning truth and falsehood. (I've written about these very things in my book, Dare to Be True.) But Christianity isn't a figment of the imagination. It's not wishful thinking. It's based upon what God has done in history, most of all through Jesus Christ. Thus we should make every effort to find out what really happened. We should look at the best evidence we have when we make our historical judgments. Wild theories that depend on unreliable evidence produced centuries after an event might make for entertaining fiction, but they aren't the stuff of genuine faith. Perhaps the most amazing facts concerning the relationship of Mary Magdalene and Jesus are those that emerge from the pages of Scripture, and which, ironically, are also supported in much of the non-canonical literature as well. Mary was a close follower of Jesus, who accompanied him on his journeys, helped to support him financially, learned from him, remained faithful to him even in his darkest hour when his male disciples fell away, was the first to see him after the resurrection, and was the first person in history to announce to others the good news that Jesus is risen. Jesus' intentional inclusion of Mary, in a day when Jewish teachers almost never had female disciples or taught women, is a striking symbol of the inclusiveness of the kingdom of God. Most women living under God's reign will still fill traditional roles of wife and mother, though single women have new freedom and power to serve God in their singleness (1 Corinthians 7). But women will not be defined primarily by their roles in the family, but by their relationship to Jesus as his disciple. This was true of Mary Magdalene in the first century, and it's true of every female Christian today. Once when Jesus was preaching he was approached by his natural family. The crowd told him that they were there to see him. Jesus responded, "Who are my mother and brothers?" Then, looking at his disciples, he answered the question: "Here are my mother and brothers! Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother" (Mark 3:33-35). Ironically, therefore, Jesus is more inclusive and counter-cultural than those who would tie Mary Magdalene's significance primarily to her filling the traditional role of wife. Though much in Scripture supports the importance of natural family, the relationship that matters most of all is our relationship with Jesus Christ as his disciple. We disciples are, together, the true and only bride of Christ (Ephesians 5:21-33).

Publisher's note: The articles herewith published do not necessarily reflect or represent the opinions of the International News Agency, its employees and editorial staff.

THE HIGH HISTORY OF THE HOLY GRAIL

By Vincent Bridge

Joseph Campbell, in his epic study The Masks of God places Wolfram's Parzival squarely on the dividing line between ancient and modern. Emma Jung, whose psychological insights are invaluable, identifies the Grail cycle as the beginning of the immanent spirituality of Christianity, in opposition to the more ancient transcendent view. Adolf Hitler considered the Hallows of the Grail to be an important component of his plan for world conquest. Sort of a psychic equivalent to a Panzer battalion. The Grail would seem to be the ultimate slippery idea. Even the word itself has a half-dozen different derivations: from gradual, gradulis in Latin, to a wide plate or dish, gradule in Old French, to the really strange meanings such as Sang Real or royal blood. A persistent whiff of Sufism lingers on, along with traces of other arcane undercurrents, such as Goddess worship, "witchcraft," and contact with such megalithic concepts as landscape zodiacs. To approach the Grail is to enter into Fairyland, the Magic Kingdom, but one such as Walt Disney could never have imagined. The Grail is, or becomes, all things to all seekers. Perhaps it is best seen as a state of mind, one in which the numinous exists in sharp and bright detail, while the mundane becomes charged with significance and meaning. If The Castle, or Temple of the Grail is the Garden, then the Angel of the Fiery Sword becomes a Grail Knight. And to enter one must simply ask: "Whom does the Grail Serve?" We are talking of nothing less than the redemption of the human condition, the true promise of Christianity, reneged on by the Church and forgotten by all but those who take up the Quest. Like all great and essentially timeless ideas, the Grail is a product of a specific time and place, a specific and exact set of enabling conditions that allowed the emergence of this seminal myth. To understand the Grail, we must look first to history

Elenor of Aquitaine was in many ways the most remarkable woman of the middle ages. Indeed, she was perhaps one of the most amazing women of all time. Outright sovereign of Aquitaine, the richest and fairest province of France, she was married very young to the King of France. The saintly Louis seems never to have known quite what to do with this powerful, beautiful and headstrong woman. Elenor started the fashion of the Court of Love, which flourished throughout Europe and reached its peak at the turn of the thirteenth century. Elenor's daughter, Marie de Champagne, inherited her mother's love of Provencal troubadours and all the other trappings of the cult of courtly love. Elenor and her court accompanied Louis the Young on his expedition to the Holy Land, known as the disastrous and ineffectual Second Crusade. Elenor returned from crusading and soon embarked on the great royal romance of the period. Henry Plantagenet, Henry II of England, swept her off her feet. He married her with the aid of large bribes and good friends in Rome. Their children included two of the most renowned and infamous characters in the long panorama of English history: Richard the Lion-Hearted and King John, the signer of the Magna Carta. With illustrious siblings as these, it is easy to lose track of a simple princess, no matter what her literary tastes.

Marie de Champagne deserves a better niche in history if only for her encouragement of poetry. She brought to her court the greatest storyteller of the age, Chrétien de Troyes. Through Chrétien the undercurrents of the Grail mythos surfaced into literature. Not much is known about Chrétien, his origins or his early works. He was born around 1130 and by 1170, he was famous as the author of a version of Ovid's Book of Love, now lost, and a version of the Tristan story which has also disappeared. Erec is his first medieval bestseller. This poem introduces in a formal way the Matter of Britain to the cosmopolitan audience at the court of Marie de Champagne, and from there passed throughout the courts of Europe. Erec sets the basic pattern for all Arthurian Romances, but though the splendors of the Celtic world are here on display, the Grail is not yet in evidence. Chrétien followed up his success with three more Arthurian tales. Cliges is a Roman myth with an Arthurian background. It wasn't all that popular. There are only two copies extant. But it did introduce certain key elements in the Matter of Britain. Cliges contains the first mention of the Round Table and the first specific mention of Camelot. Chrétien may have picked up this name from Camulodunum, the Roman name for Colchester. The Knight of the Cart and The Knight with the Lion are perhaps Chrétien's masterpieces. Certainly Ywain or the knight with the lion with its marvels, strange adventures and courtly love, its finely drawn characters and well wrought unity is a masterpiece. The Knight of the Cart , our introduction to Lancelot, fares less well. The action is unexplained and unmotivated, requiring a broader canvas in order to give the causes and consequences of the adventure. The overall feeling is that of a piece of a larger work rather than a completed work of art in itself. We can imagine Chrétien working on just that problem of scope in the early 1180's.While Chrétien produced most of the Arthurian stage dressing that would define the very concept of Romance over the next three hundred years, the Grail has yet to appear. Chrétien's last work, left unfinished at his death, was Perceval, or the History of the Grail. With this uneven masterpiece, Chrétien plants the seed germ of the spiritual qualities that will, within only thiry years, become the driving force behind works as unique as Wolfram's Parzival and Walter de Mapp's Queste del Saint Graal. While the scope of Perceval, or the History of the Grail is broad enough to encompass the entire medieval world view, it is riddled with difficulties and inconsistencies. Chrétien himself claimed that he was merely reworking the material that he had found in an old manuscript. Perhaps the marvels and strange doings of his Celtic original simply proved too much for Chrétien's more down to earth approach. At any rate, his version ends after Gawain's adventure of the Perilous Bed. We can be sure that Chrétien began his last work, commissioned by Phillip of Flanders, with great enthusiasm. Chrétien refers to the story as the greatest ever told in any court. His opening scenes are full of color and verve. He tells of his hero's blunders and gaucheries with a keen comic sensitivity of effect. He invests the encounter with the Fisher King with just the right amount of awe and reverence mixed in with the mystery and strangeness. And Chrétien is equally successful with the startling appearance of the Loathly Damsel and her violent denunciation of Perceval, whose growth from boyish boorishness to knightly grace has been well drawn and realized. With the shift of narrative focus to Gawain, the tale begins to unravel. By the time the story returns to Perceval, it is obvious that Chrétien is deeply confused and that some important concept concerning this "graal" has been lost or misunderstood. But the clues are there, painted in broad strokes in the Grail procession scene. To understand the mystery of the Grail, it will be necessary to have the outline of Chretien's scene in the Grail Castle firmly in mind. Our first glimpse of the Grail offers many guideposts in the tangled thickets of theological and eschatological speculations to follow. Chrétien faithfully followed his original, even when he didn't understand it.

Perceval's early life echoes the boyhoods of the great Celtic Solar Heroes Culchuin and Finn. His entry to the great hall of Camelot is taken from the tale of Kulwich in the Welsh Mabinogion. After his knighting, Perceval sets out in search of further adventures and arrives at the castle of the Fisher King. The Fisher King presides over a vast, empty hall, large enough for four hundred men. An old man is seated on a couch pulled close to the central fire. The Fisher King presents Perceval with a Sword, a richly appointed weapon, a marvel that "could not break save only in one peril which no one knew save him who forged and tempered it." A procession passes through the hall. First, a squire carries a Spear dripping spackles of blood onto the floor. Two squires with ten-branched candlesticks follow. A beautiful maiden enters carrying a "Graal" which blazes so brightly that it puts out the light of the candles and the stars. Following her is another maiden carrying a talleor, a casket or tabernacle. Perceval watches all this but fails to ask its meaning.  In the morning, the castle is empty and disappears as soon as Perceval moves across the drawbridge. He comes upon a lady holding a headless body. She informs Perceval that all could have been healed if he had only asked of the grail. She also tells him that his sword will break in a careless moment, but that it can be renewed in the lake where the smith, Trebuchet, dwells. On the surface, this is no stranger than any other marvelous encounter in any of a dozen Celtic adventure tales. It is only when the hermit, whom Perceval visits for confession after five years of godless adventure, begins to explain and chastise that we sense that something is missing or misunderstood. Why does the hermit rebuke Perceval so severely for not asking of the Grail when he was merely following the teachings of his chivalrous mentor? And, in any case, Perceval did not know that he should ask, or that there was any penalty for not asking. It somehow doesn't seem quite fair. But even more disturbing is the hermit's assertion that the "Graal" carried by the beautiful maiden did not contain a salmon or lamprey as Chrétien implied it should, but simply a consecrated wafer intended for the King's father. Church orthodoxy specifically excluded women from serving in such a priestly capacity. Yet the Grail Maiden passes unexplained. At any rate, a dish wide enough to hold a large fish seems a strange choice to hold a smallish wafer. And, if its purpose is simply sacramental, why does it accompany each course? The old hermit's explanations are more tantalizing than satisfying, and suggests that Chrétien found the need to alibi and cover over his religious tracks. The idea of a miraculous dish is an ancient Celtic motif. The later romances give the Fisher King the name of Bron, a close proximity to the ancient Welsh Bran, whose cauldron supplied the needs of any and everyone. Bran was wounded in the foot, echoing the Fisher King's injury, a spear wound through the thigh. It's a mistake to assume, as does Professor Loomis and other authorities, that Chrétien simply misinterpreted Bran's horn, corz, which also had miraculous abilities, as cors, or body, thereby connecting the dish and the body of Christ which accidentally created the spiritually potent image of the Holy Grail. This pun is definitely a clue to the real intention, but it is hardly an accident. And there is still the matter of a woman celebrating a form of the Mass, something unheard of in orthodox tradition. Where could this have come from? To simply say "from Celtic sources" is to beg the point. For all the pagan influences in the Grail story, it is still almost numerously Christian. But it is a Christianity far removed from the corruption and politics of Rome. This doesn't explain the eruption of Grail literature in the thirty or so years between the major Romances. For that, a broader perspective is needed. These thirty years, from roughly 1185 to 1215, marked, in many ways, the nadir of medieval Christianity. The papal squabbles of the mid-century, along with the general sense of discouragement after the failure of the Second Crusade, created a religious vacuum, into which more "heretical" forms of Christianity stepped. These heresies took root so quickly because of the contrast they presented with the church of Rome. These priests lived with and cared about their flock. It was common for prelates in Rome to spent their whole tenure in absentee, and the lower clergy was often as venal and corrupt as the local landowner. The decline of the church was given an extra push in the 1160's and 70's by the wide circulation of Abelairdian rationalism. Abelaird, best remembered today for his romance with his pupil Heloise, discussed the superstitions of the church with such clear-headedness that many intellectuals agreed that change was necessary, even essential. If the second crusade has been disappointing, then the fall of Jerusalem in the autumn of 1187 was devastating. It was seen as a sign of God's disfavor. A crusade was proclaimed, joined by such personages as the Kings of Germany, France and England. Frederick Barbarrossa died along the way and even though Elenor's golden child, Richard I of England, pursued the crusade with all the force of his fiery personality, Jerusalem remained in the hands of the infidels.

Richard, Heart-of-the-Lion, was something of a troubadour himself and gave his own stamp of approval to the new mode of romance. He seemed to literally embody the Matter of Britain and its chivalric traditions. We can be sure that the new poetry of the grail accompanied the crusaders because Richard's nephew, Marie's son, Henry of Champagne was elected King of Jerusalem. It is tempting to envisage the poet Gautier de Danans chanting his continuation of Chrétien's masterwork in the great hall of Acre, with Richard and his Queens, his sister Johanna and his wife Berengaria, nodding their approval. In 1191, the whole of the Arthurian tradition was verified by the monks of Glastonbury. Staking their claim as the "Vale of Avalon," the good monks disinterred the body of a Bronze Age chieftain and his queen. The bodies were supposedly marked with a cross identifying them and King Arthur and Guinevere. Naturally, this created an international sensation, and along with it, an appetite for stories about Arthur, his knights and their adventures in search of the Grail. There were several good reasons for this sudden discovery. First and foremost stands the political reason. The Plantagenet conquest of Wales was still quite recent and the nationalist guerrillas, to give them a modern appellation, believed that Arthur, rex quondum et futurum, the once and future king would rise from his rocky tomb in Gwenydd and ride to battle against the invaders. It was politically sound to produce Arthur's body, safely buried on English soil. But, looking closer, there is something very interesting about Glastonbury's claims on Arthur and the Grail. Tradition has it that Joseph of Arimathea brought Christianity, and possibly the Virgin Mother herself, to Britain within a decade of Jesus' death. The first Christian church in the world was then the small circular wattled structure at Glastonbury. The Celtic Church, which was responsible for bringing culture, indeed one might say even civilization, back to Europe after the fall of Rome, survived at least until the eighth century. It survived even longer in the wilds of Ireland and Scotland. We find Robert the Bruce being crowned by a Culdee bishop as late as the early fourteenth century. Glastonbury functioned as if it were a school, or spiritual center of some sort. Its place was high on the list of Celtic Church pilgrimages and from the earliest times was associated with the Virgin Mother. Arthur was associated at an early era by his adoption of the image of the Virgin as a personal banner. (See Gildas and Geoffrey of Monmouth). If Arthur has an actual historical focus, it is the late 400's, just after the last legions were recalled to Rome and before the overwhelming wave of Saxon invasions in the early 500's. Arthur at this point is a "Restitutor" or rescuer of Roman civilization. His choice of the Virgin, rather than the crucifix of Rome, indicates that along with restoring the Empire, Arthur intended to change the focus away from apostolic Catholicism toward the more inspiration oriented Celtic Church. That he failed is perhaps the great tragedy of the Dark Ages. At any rate, it is not hard to see the glimmers of this earlier and more spiritual form of Christianity as the undercurrent of ideas that emerged as Chretien's "graal." The connection is never made directly, accept in the later romances, but the Matter of Britain was basically a front for the Celtic Church. In this seemingly secular form, the spiritual motifs of a truly Gnostic Christianity emerged in the intellectual current of the age. The Roman Church neither encouraged nor discouraged the Grail Romances, even though it was obvious that an earlier and possibly heretical form of Christianity was being represented. As we shall see, the Church was not above persecuting heretics, but there was absolutely no attempt to discredit the Grail stories. Perhaps the reason for this is that even the Roman Church found it hard not to believe that the origins of the Celtic Church went back to the very family of Christ. "Royal Blood," indeed.

Around 1200, Robert de Borron, following the popularity of the continuations of Chretein, produced Joseph of Arimathea, the prequel to the series the ties it all very neatly into the Celtic Church. He reveals the themes of a hidden or inner teaching given to Joseph after Christ's resurrection. These teachings appear to center around the Grail, here called a Chalice, and constitute the heart of the "mysteries." Mention is also made of a journey westward, to the "Vale of Avaron (Avalon?)" and provision is made for the future hero, Percival, who will fulfill the Quest. There is a certain murkiness to this story, perhaps as a result of trying to tell the important part (for those with ears to hear) and still stay within certain defined limits that would allow the Roman Church to ignore the tale. Things had changed by 1200. A powerful Pope, Innocent III, had regained the upper hand in his struggles with the Holy Roman Empire and began to turn his attention to unifying the whole world under his spiritual rule. By the grace of God, of course. And this led directly to the most disgraceful incidents in the history of the Roman Church. The Fourth Crusade and the Crusade against the Cathars were waged against fellow Christians. The Fourth Crusade ended with the sack of Constantinople. The Crusaders, tricked by those crafty and godless Venetians, fell upon the first city of Christendom and plundered and sacked with a vengeance. The Knights Templars found the shroud, whose adoration would produce charges of idol worship eventually resulting in their downfall. Innocent III rejoiced in the "unification of the Church." But not quite. A resurgence of a Gnostic heresy in the south of France threatened to become the majority religion and Innocent responded in the manner he knew best: call out the troops. The extermination of heretics in the south of France would continue for half a century, long after Innocent III went to his just rewards in whatever afterlife he actually believed in.

Why exterminate the Cathars, or the Perfecti as they called themselves. Why not also attack the Celtic Church which was also active at the same time? It boils down to a question of legitimacy. If Rome was afraid to open the question of the Celtic Church, it was because of the nagging suspicion that the Celtic Church had the greater claim to legitimacy and could just possibly prove it. There were connections between the Perfecti and the Celtic Church. By concentrating on the Perfecti, heresy could be severely rebuked as an object lesson that would force at least superficial adherence to Rome. The Cathars became scapegoats for the whole underground current of Celtic/Grail/Gnostic Christian survivals. It seems to have worked. For by 1220, around the time the first wave of anti-Cathar crusading was winding down, Grail Romances were falling out of favor. Other than Malory, whose rendition of Walter de Mapp's 1220 Queste de Saint Greal has become our story book Grail, there is only the "Elucidation" of Chrétien by an anonymous author. This is a half hearted attempt to give another explanation for all these mystical goings on. It is unsuccessful and is often not included in the Grail texts. Clearly, the Grail had a specific significance for those who listened so avidly to these stories of wonder and marvel. The grail's significance is simply its connection with the Holy Family. The Grail suggests in the strongest possible terms that another route to salvation -- one that had nothing to do with the Church of Rome -- was available around the turn of the thirteenth century. This is most clearly seen in the two most unique of all Grail legends, that of the "Perlesvaus" and Wolfram's Parzival. Wolfram's tale is almost devoid of any mention of the clergy. His Parzival finds grace through knightly prowess in pursuit of a Gnostic, or experiential faith. His Grail is the stone that fell from heaven. This "stone" would eventually become, over the centuries, the philosopher's stone of the alchemist. The "Perlesvaus" ties the matter to Glastonbury and may even have been written there shortly after the discovery of Arthur's Tomb. This story differs somewhat from other Grail legends, but its connection with the megalithic zodiac around Glasonbury, which Katherine Maltwood identified in the 1930's from a close reading of the "Perlesvaus," suggests the area's older connection with the gateway to Anwen, the Celtic underworld where the original cauldron of Bran was hidden. There is even an ancient Welsh poem about Arthur's trip to Anwen to capture the cauldron. The pattern is clear. Around the turn of the thirteenth century, the Grail Romances offered a direct challenge to the authority of Rome, one that Rome could not answer for fear of exposing her own shaky position. Innocent III felt strong enough, after the fall of Constantinople, to turn the iron grip of Christian chivalry on the most exposed and concentrated group of heretics hoping to quiet the lot of them. Indeed, the fear and horror of the Cathar Crusade did put the fear of the Pope back into the hearts of Christians everywhere. And if the Celtic heresy could not be brought to the sword directly, then the land of England could be put under interdiction, a terrible form of religious coercion in which the church effectively goes on strike. It will not marry or bury or hold services while under interdiction. Innocent III, for good measure, also excommunicated King John. All of this was resolved by England becoming a Papal Fief for a few years. The Celtic Church gradually faded away over the next century.

The image of the Grail, though, did not fade away. The Matter of Britain still retained its popularity, though without the spiritual overtones. The spiritual current went underground, surfacing in the Renaissance, and then again in the Rosecrucians, and again in the nineteenth century. Wolfram says that to know the Grail you must "learn your ABC's without the aid of black magic." Robert de Borron's Joseph is quite explicit. The mystery of the Grail is the inner teaching. Jesus taught Joseph strange words to vibrate over the cup that held the holy blood. This attempt to clear away the underbrush of the Grail texts has shown that the source of the Grail is that strange mixture of Celtic and Christian beliefs that developed in the west of England and Ireland before the Empire crumbled. It was defended by Arthur, and almost brought by him on to the stage of European history at just that juncture when the politics of the Empire would have allowed a completely new direction, a completely new version based on the inner teaching of the Christian mysteries. By the eighth century, the time of Charles the Great, Rome had established her death grip on the religious community, and Charles, out of guilt, or through the trickery of the Pope, allowed himself to accept the Imperial Throne from the hands of the Patriarch of Rome. The fraudulent Donation of Constantine, which supported the temporal power of the Church, clinched the situation. From that point on, Rome was locked in a desperate struggle against the various Gnostic survivals, some of whose claim to be the real "Church" was considerably better than Rome's. To admit any other claim was to lose the position of defender of orthodoxy; for if there were many churches, than Rome was not THE church, catholic and universal. This power struggle would color the next seven hundred years, ending finally with Luthor's thesis nailed to the door of the seminary. That rupture could not be healed, even by the sword. In the Grail, we see, even at this late date, the radiant quality of that early church. The importance of the Grail, for us now, as we plunge into the next cycle of spiritual evolution, lies in its symbolic nature. Within the Grail can be found a synthesis of all western mystical and magical traditions. It is the source of that underground stream of meaning that flows through the occult and esoteric teachings of the last two thousand years. The Grail is all things to all people, and to all it is The Mystery. Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.

Publisher's note: The articles herewith published do not necessarily reflect or represent the opinions of the International News Agency, its employees and editorial staff.

INTO MYSTERIES, PARANORMAL AND CONSPIRACIES? BETWEEN SCIENCE AND HOAXES? READ RELATED ARTICLES IN THE SECTION: PARANORMAL AND SUPERNATURAL MAIN PAGE

1-The Bloodline of the Holy Grail. 2-The Who and What of the Illuminati. 3-The Highlight History of the Holy Grail. 4-Was Jesus Married? A Careful Look at the Real Evidence.  5-Was Mary Magdalene Mrs. Jesus? 6-The Skulls & Bones Society.  7-Who Killed Princess Di?   8-Who Killed Princess Grace?   9-The Men Who Killed John F. Kennedy. 10-DID HITLER ESCAPE THE BUNKER?      11-THE PEARL HARBOR DECEPTION. 12-VATICAN'S WORLD NEW ORDER CONSPIRACY. 13-Did FDR know in advance? Was there a cover up when the truth was revealed? truth was revealed?  14-Why did Hitler and Nazis hate Jews and want to kill them? 15-UFO Sightings by Astronauts.  16-George Bush (Sr.) and UFOs.  17-Eisenhower’s 1954 Meeting With Extraterrestrials: The Fiftieth Anniversary of First Contact? 18-UFO/ET Phenomena Observed by CSETI Field Teams..   19-The humanoid extraterrestrial race was not willing to enter into technology exchanges that might help weapons development, and instead was focused on spiritual development. 20-The Truth Behind the Shroud of Turin.  21-Shrouded in Deceit. Leonardo's Last Laugh. He outwits priests. 22-The Templars and the Shroud of Turin.23-Da Vinci's The Last Supper Mary Magdalene on Jesus' Right. 24-WAS MARY MAGDALENE THE WIFE OF JESUS? 25-Bride of Christ in the Old Testament.         26-Veneration of Mary Magdalene.  27-THE GOSPEL OF MARY REVISITED. 28-TIME TRAVELER: Is Time Travel Possible? Has it been accomplished? Who are those who claim to have traveled through time? What do scientists think about time travel?    29-TIME TRAVEL SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS.   30-Minkowski's 4th Dimensional World.   31-Time Travel Paradoxes. 32-QUANTUM STRANGENESS AND SPACETIME.   33-Time Travel and Modern Physics...and much more.

 

BEST BOOKS ON UFOs AND EXTRATERRESTRIALS FROM AMAZON.COM AND TIMES SQUARE PRESS http://www.timessquarepress.com

TIMES SQUARE PRESS-ELITE ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL. ( Est. 1984)  In Collaboration with Amazon.com Company

 

 

UFOS and Extraterrestrials Civilizations Books Published by Amazon.com Company (California) and Times Square Press (New York)

Purchase any book by clicking on icons or links

A New Series of fascinating books by Maximillien de Lafayette. Click on icons or links to take you directly to amazon.com website (Publishers of the books in partnership with Times Square Press) and purchase the book (s) of your choice

INSIDE A UFO. ALIEN ABDUCTION, HYPNOSIS, PSYCHIATRY, QUANTUM PHYSICS AND RELIGIONS FACE TO FACE: Skeptics and Believers From A To Z

INSIDE A UFO. ALIEN ABDUCTION, HYPNOSIS, PSYCHIATRY, QUANTUM PHYSICS AND RELIGIONS FACE TO FACE: Skeptics and Believers From A To Z by Maximillien De Lafayette (Paperback - Dec 19, 2007)

400 pages, 8 inches by 10 inches. Shipped within 24 hours Browse the Table of Contents

 

FROM ZETA RETICULI TO EARTH.  TIME, SPACE, AND THE UFO TECHNOLOGY: Scientific Frontiers of Alien Space Crafts.FROM ZETA RETICULI TO EARTH. TIME, SPACE, AND THE UFO TECHNOLOGY: Scientific Frontiers of Alien Space Crafts. by Maximillien De Lafayette (Paperback - Dec 5, 2007)

400 pages, 8 inches by 10 inches. Shipped within 24 hours. Browse Table of Contents

 

UFOs and the Alien Agenda. The complete book of UFOs, encounters, abductions & aliens bases on earth: The whole story of UFOs, Aliens and AbducteesUFOs and the Alien Agenda. The complete book of UFOs, encounters, abductions & aliens bases on earth: The whole story of UFOs, Aliens and Abductees by Maximillien De Lafayette (Paperback - Dec 24, 2007)

400 pages, 8 inches by 10 inches. Shipped within 24 hours.