Bloodline of the Holy Grail: The Hidden Lineage of Jesus Revealed [First Edition] 9781852308704, 1-85230-870-2, 1-86204-152-0

Citation preview

HOME PAGE | S UBS I NFO | BACK I S S UES | PRODUCTS LI S T | ORDER FORM

The Hidden History of Jesus and the Holy Grail The early Christian Church leaders adopted scriptures and teachings that would obscure the truth about the royal bloodline of Jesus. Part 1 (Go to Part 2; Go to Part 3)

Ext r act e d f r om Ne xus Magazine , Volume 5 , Numbe r 2 (Fe br uar yMar ch 19 9 8 ). PO Box 3 0 , Maple t on Q ld 4 5 6 0 Aust r alia. e dit or @ne xusmagazine .com Te le phone : +6 1 (0 )7 5 4 4 2 9 2 8 0 ; Fax: +6 1 (0 )7 5 4 4 2 9 3 8 1 Fr om our we b page at : ht t p:/ / www.ne xusmagazine .com Fr om a le ct ur e pr e se nt e d by S ir Laur e nce Gar dne r , Kt S t Gm, KCD Aut hor of Bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail at The Ranch, Ye lm, Washingt on, US A 3 0 Apr il 19 9 7 Vide ot ape t r anscr ibe d by Rut h Par ne ll

HOME PAGE | S UBS I NFO | BACK I S S UES | PRODUCTS LI S T | ORDER FORM

The Hidden History of Jesus and the Holy Grail The early Christian Church leaders adopted scriptures and teachings that would obscure the truth about the royal bloodline of Jesus. Part 3 - (final)

Ext r act e d f r om NEXUS Magazine , Volume 5 , Numbe r 4 (J une -J uly 19 9 8 ). PO Box 3 0 , Maple t on Q ld 4 5 6 0 Aust r alia. e dit or @ne xusmagazine .com Te le phone : +6 1 (0 )7 5 4 4 2 9 2 8 0 ; Fax: +6 1 (0 )7 5 4 4 2 9 3 8 1 Fr om our we b page at : ht t p:/ / www.ne xusmagazine .com Fr om a le ct ur e pr e se nt e d by S ir Laur e nce Gar dne r , Kt S t Gm, KCD Aut hor of Bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail at The Ranch, Ye lm, Washingt on, US A 3 0 Apr il 19 9 7 Vide ot ape t r anscr ibe d by Rut h Par ne ll

(Back t o Par t 1) (Back t o Par t 2 )

W

e know f r om t he Gospe l chr onology t hat t he Be t hany se cond-

mar r iage anoint ing of J e sus by Mar y Magdale ne was in t he we e k be f or e t he Cr ucif ixion. And we know t hat at t hat st age Mar y was t hr e e -mont hs pr e gnant and t he r e f or e should have give n bir t h in t he f ollowing S e pt e mbe r . S o, what do t he Gospe ls t e ll us about e ve nt s in S e pt e mbe r AD 3 3 ? I n f act , t he Gospe ls t e ll us not hing, but t he st or y is t ake n up in The Act s of t he Apost le s which de t ail f or S e pt e mbe r t he e ve nt which we have come t o know as "t he Asce nsion". The one t hing t hat t he Act s do not do, howe ve r , is call t he e ve nt "t he Asce nsion". This was a name give n t o t he r it ual whe n t he Roman Chur ch doct r ine s we r e e st ablishe d ove r t hr e e ce nt ur ie s lat e r . What t he t e xt act ually says is: "And whe n he had spoke n t he se t hings...he was t ake n up, and a cloud r e ce ive d him out of t he ir sight ." I t t he n cont inue s t hat "a man in whit e " said t o t he disciple s: "Why st and ye gazing up int o he ave n? This same J e sus...shall so come in like manne r as ye have se e n him go." The n, a lit t le lat e r in t he Act s, it says t hat "he ave n" must r e ce ive J e sus unt il "t he t ime of r e st it ut ion". Give n t hat t his was t he ve r y mont h in which Mar y Magdale ne ' s child was due , is t he r e pe r haps some conne ct ion be t we e n Mar y' s conf ine me nt and t he so-calle d Asce nsion? The r e ce r t ainly is, and t he conne ct ion is made by vir t ue of t he t ime of r e st it ut ion. Not only we r e t he r e r ule s t o gove r n t he mar r iage ce r e mony of a Me ssianic he ir , but so t oo we r e t he r e r ule s t o gove r n t he mar r iage

it se lf . The r ule s of dynast ic we dlock we r e quit e unlike t he J e wish f amily nor m, and Me ssianic par e nt s we r e f or mally se par at e d at t he bir t h of a child. Eve n pr ior t o t his, int imacy be t we e n a dynast ic husband and wif e was only allowe d in De ce mbe r , so t hat bir t hs of he ir s would always f all in t he mont h of S e pt e mbe r -t he mont h of At one me nt , t he holie st mont h of t he J e wish cale ndar . I nde e d, it was t his ve r y r ule which J e sus' s own par e nt s (J ose ph and Mar y) had t he mse lve s br oke n. And t his was t he r e ason why t he J e ws we r e split in opinion as t o whe t he r J e sus was, in f act , t he ir t r ue Me ssiah. Whe n a dynast ic child was conce ive d at t he wr ong t ime of ye ar , t he mot he r was ge ne r ally place d in monast ic cust ody f or t he bir t h so as t o avoid public e mbar r assme nt . This was calle d be ing "put away pr ivily", and Mat t he w st at e s quit e plainly t hat whe n Mar y' s pr e gnancy was discove r e d, "J ose ph, he r husband, be ing a j ust man and not willing t o make he r a public e xample , was minde d t o put he r away pr ivily". I n t his inst ance , spe cial dispe nsat ion f or t he bir t h was gr ant e d by t he ar change l S ime on who at t hat t ime he ld t he dist inct ion of "Gabr ie l", be ing t he ange lic pr ie st in char ge . Bot h t he De ad S e a S cr olls and t he Book of Enoch (which was e xclude d f r om t he Old Te st ame nt ) de t ail t hat t he "ar change ls" (or chie f ambassador s) we r e t he se nior pr ie st s at Q umr an, r e t aining t he t r adit ional t it le s of "Michae l", "Gabr ie l", "Raphae l", "S ar ie l", e t c. I n t he case of J e sus and Mar y Magdale ne , howe ve r , t he r ule s of we dlock had be e n obe ye d t o t he le t t e r , and t he ir f ir st child was pr ope r ly conce ive d in De ce mbe r AD 3 2 , t o be bor n in S e pt e mbe r AD 33. Fr om t he mome nt of a dynast ic bir t h, t he par e nt s we r e physically se par at e d-f or six ye ar s if t he child was a boy, and f or t hr e e ye ar s if t he child was a gir l. The ir mar r iage would only be r e comme nce d at t he

de signat e d t ime of r e st it ut ion. Me anwhile , t he mot he r and child would e nt e r t he e quivale nt of a conve nt , and t he f at he r would e nt e r "t he Kingdom of He ave n". This Kingdom of He ave n was act ually t he Esse ne High Monast e r y at Mir d, by t he De ad S e a, and t he ce r e mony of e nt r y was conduct e d by t he ange lic pr ie st s unde r t he supe r vision of t he appoint e d Le ade r of t he Pilgr ims. I n t he Old Te st ame nt book of Exodus, t he I sr ae lit e pilgr ims we r e le d int o t he Holy Land by a "cloud"-and in accor dance wit h t his cont inue d Exodus image r y, t he pr ie st ly Le ade r of t he Pilgr ims was de signat e d wit h t he t it le "Cloud". S o, if we now r e ad t he Act s ve r se s as t he y we r e int e nde d t o be unde r st ood, we se e t hat J e sus was t ake n up by t he Cloud (t he Le ade r of t he Pilgr ims) t o t he Kingdom of He ave n (t he High Monast e r y). And t he man in whit e (an ange lic pr ie st ) said t hat J e sus would r e t ur n at t he t ime of r e st it ut ion (whe n his Ear t hly mar r iage was r e st or e d). I f we now look at S t Paul' s Epist le t o t he He br e ws we discove r t hat he e xplains t he said Asce nsion e ve nt in some gr e at e r de t ail, f or Paul t e lls of how J e sus was admit t e d t o t he Pr ie st hood of He ave n whe n he act ually had no e nt it le me nt t o such a sacr e d of f ice . He e xplains t hat J e sus was bor n (t hr ough his f at he r J ose ph) int o t he Davidic line of J udah-a line which he ld t he r ight of kingship but had no r ight t o pr ie st hood, f or t his was t he sole pr e r ogat ive of t he line of Aar on and Le vi. But , says Paul, a spe cial dispe nsat ion was gr ant e d, and he t e lls t hat "f or t he pr ie st hood be ing change d, t he r e is made of ne ce ssit y a change also of t he law". As a r e sult of t his e xpr e ss "change of t he law", it is e xplaine d t hat J e sus was e nable d t o e nt e r t he Kingdom of He ave n in t he pr ie st ly Or de r of Me lchize de k. S o, in S e pt e mbe r AD 3 3 , t he f ir st child of J e sus and Mar y Magdale ne

was bor n, and J e sus duly e nt e r e d t he Kingdom of He ave n. The r e is no r e f e r e nce t o t his child be ing a son (as t he r e is f or t he t wo subse que nt bir t hs), and give n t hat J e sus r e t ur ne d t hr e e ye ar s lat e r , in AD 3 6 , we know t hat Mar y must have had a daught e r . By f ollowing t he chr onology of t he Act s, we se e t hat in S e pt e mbe r AD 3 7 a se cond child was bor n; and t he n anot he r in AD 4 4 . The pe r iod be t we e n t he se t wo bir t hs t o t he se cond r e st it ut ion in AD 4 3 was "six ye ar s", which de not e s t hat t he AD 3 7 child was a son. This f act is also conve ye d by t he use of cr ypt ic wor ding-t he same cr ypt ic wor ding af f or de d t o t he AD 4 4 child-so we know t hat t his t hir d child was also a son. I n accor dance wit h t he scr ibal code s de t aile d in t he De ad S e a S cr olls, e ve r yt hing cr ypt ic wit hin t he Ne w Te st ame nt is se t up be f or e hand by some ot he r e nt r y which e xplains t hat t he inhe r e nt me ssage is "f or t hose wit h e ar s t o he ar ". Once t he se code s and alle gor ie s ar e unde r st ood, t he y ne ve r e ve r var y. The y me an t he same t hing e ve r y t ime t he y ar e use d, and t he y ar e use d e ve r y t ime t hat same me aning is r e quir e d. For e xample , t he Gospe ls e xplain t hat J e sus was calle d "t he Wor d of God": "And t he Wor d was made f le sh, and dwe lt among us...f ull of gr ace and t r ut h." J ohn goe s t o gr e at le ngt hs t o e xplain t he r e le vance of t his de f init ion, and subse que nt e nt r ie s give de t ails such as "t he Wor d of God st ood by t he lake " and "t he Wor d of God was in S amar ia". Me ssage s conve ying inf or mat ion about f e r t ilit y and ne w lif e ar e e st ablishe d in t he Par able of t he S owe r whose se e d "bor e f r uit and incr e ase d". Thus, whe n it is said t hat "t he Wor d of God incr e ase d", "t hose wit h e ar s t o he ar " would r e cognise at once t hat "J e sus incr e ase d"-t hat is t o say, he had a son. The r e ar e t wo such e nt r ie s in t he Act s, and t he y f all pr e cise ly on cue in AD 3 7 and AD 4 4 . Pr obably t he most misr e pr e se nt e d book of t he Ne w Te st ame nt is The

Book of The Re ve lat ion of S t J ohn t he Divine -misr e pr e se nt e d by t he Chur ch, t hat is; not by t he book it se lf . This book is quit e unlike any ot he r in t he Bible . I t is dubbe d wit h t e r r ible supe r nat ur al ove r t one s, and it s st r aight f or war d image r y has be e n savage ly cor r upt e d by t he Chur ch t o pr e se nt t he t e xt as some f or m of f or e boding or pr ophe cy of war ning! But t he book is not calle d "The Pr ophe cy" or "The War ning". I t is calle d "The Re ve lat ion". S o, what doe s t he book r e ve al? Chr onologically, it s st or y f ollows The Act s of t he Apost le s, and t he Book of The Re ve lat ion is, in f act , t he cont inuing st or y of J e sus, Mar y Magdale ne and t he ir sons, par t icular ly t he e lde r son, J e sus J ust us. I t f ollows his lif e and de t ails his mar r iage , along wit h t he bir t h of his own son. This much-misunde r st ood Ne w Te st ame nt book is not a f or e boding or a war ning as t he f e ar f ul Chur ch would have us be lie ve . I t is pr e cise ly what it says it is: a r e ve lat ion. As we saw e ar lie r , or daine d pr ie st s of t he e r a we r e calle d "f ishe r s"; t he ir he lpe r s we r e calle d "f ishe r me n", and bapt ismal candidat e s we r e calle d "f ishe s". J e sus be came an or daine d f ishe r whe n he e nt e r e d t he Kingdom of He ave n, but unt il t hat t ime (as e xplaine d by S t Paul) he he ld no pr ie st ly of f ice . I n t he r it e of or dinat ion, t he of f iciat ing Le vit e pr ie st s of t he S anct uar y would administ e r f ive loave s of br e ad and t wo f ishe s t o t he candidat e s, but t he law was ve r y f ir m in t hat such candidat e s had t o be cir cumcise d J e ws. Ge nt ile s and uncir cumcise d S amar it ans we r e on no account af f or de d any such pr ivile ge . I nde e d, it was t his par t icular minist e r ial r it ual which J e sus had f lout e d at t he so-calle d "f e e ding of t he f ive -t housand", be cause he pr e sume d t he r ight t o gr ant acce ss t o his own ne w libe r al minist r y by of f e r ing t he loave s and f ishe s t o an unsanct if ie d gat he r ing. Apar t f r om e ve nt ually be coming a f ishe r , J e sus was also r e f e r r e d t o as "t he Chr ist "-a Gr e e k de f init ion which me ant "t he King". I n saying t he name

"J e sus Chr ist ", we ar e act ually saying "King J e sus", and his kingly he r it age was of t he Royal House of J udah (t he House of David), as me nt ione d nume r ous t ime s in t he Gospe ls and in t he Epist le s of S t Paul. Fr om AD 3 3 , t he r e f or e , J e sus e me r ge d wit h t he dual st at us of a "Pr ie st Chr ist " or , as is mor e commonly cit e d, a "Fishe r King". This de f init ion, as we shall se e , was t o be come an he r e dit ar y and dynast ic of f ice of J e sus' he ir s, and t he succe e ding "Fishe r Kings" we r e par amount in t he hist or y of t he Gr ail bloodline . Pr ior t o t he bir t h of he r se cond son in AD 4 4 , Mar y Magdale ne was e xile d f r om J udae a f ollowing a polit ical upr ising in which she was implicat e d. Along wit h Philip, Lazar us and a f e w r e t aine r s, she t r ave lle d (by ar r ange me nt wit h King He r od-Agr ippa I I ) t o live at t he He r odian e st at e ne ar Lyon, in Gaul (which lat e r be came Fr ance ). Fr om t he e ar lie st t ime s, t hr ough t he me diae val e r a, t o t he gr e at Re naissance , Mar y' s f light was por t r aye d in illuminat e d manuscr ipt s and gr e at ar t wor ks alike . He r lif e and wor k in Fr ance , e spe cially in Pr ove nce and t he Langue doc, appe ar e d not only in wor ks of Eur ope an hist or y but also in t he Roman Chur ch lit ur gy-unt il he r st or y was suppr e sse d by t he Vat ican. Mar y Magdale ne ' s e xile is t old in The Book of The Re ve lat ion which de scr ibe s t hat she was pr e gnant at t he t ime . I t t e lls also of how t he Roman aut hor it ie s subse que nt ly pe r se cut e d Mar y, he r son and his he ir s: "And she , be ing wit h child, cr ie d...and paine d t o be de live r e d...and be hold, a gr e at r e d dr agon, having se ve n he ads...and se ve n cr owns...st ood be f or e t he woman...f or t o de vour he r child... And she br ought f or t h a man-child...and t he woman f le d int o t he wilde r ne ss... And t he dr agon was wr ot h wit h t he woman, and we nt t o make war f or e ve r wit h t he r e mnant of he r se e d...which...have t he t e st imony of J e sus Chr ist ." I t was t o Gaul t hat Mar y was said t o have car r ie d t he S angr é al (t he

Blood Royal, t he Holy Gr ail); and it was in Gaul t hat t he f amous line of J e sus and Mar y' s imme diat e de sce ndant he ir s, t he Fishe r Kings, f lour ishe d f or 3 0 0 ye ar s. The e t e r nal mot t o of t he Fishe r Kings was "I n S t r e ngt h"-inspir e d by t he name of t he ir ance st or , Boaz (t he gr e at -gr andf at he r of King David), whose name similar ly me ant "I n S t r e ngt h". Whe n t r anslat e d int o Lat in, t his be came "I n For t is", which was subse que nt ly cor r upt e d t o "Anf or t as", t he name of t he Fishe r King in Gr ail r omance . We can now r e t ur n t o t he Gr ail' s t r adit ional symbolism as a chalice cont aining t he blood of J e sus. We can also conside r gr aphic de signs dat ing back we ll be yond t he Dar k Age s t o about 3 ,5 0 0 BC. And in doing t his, we discove r t hat a chalice or a cup was t he longe st -st anding symbol of t he f e male . I t s r e pr e se nt at ion was t hat of t he S acr e d Ve sse l-t he vas ut e r us, t he womb. And so, whe n f le e ing int o Fr ance , Mar y Magdale ne car r ie d t he S angr é al in t he S acr e d Chalice of he r womb-j ust as t he Book of The Re ve lat ion e xplains. And t he name of t his se cond son was J ose ph. The e quivale nt t r adit ional symbol of t he male was a blade or a hor n, usually r e pr e se nt e d by a swor d or a unicor n. I n t he Old Te st ame nt ' s S ong of S olomon and in t he Psalms of David, t he f e r t ile unicor n is associat e d wit h t he kingly line of J udah; and it was f or t his ve r y r e ason t hat t he Cat har s of Pr ove nce use d t he myst ical be ast t o symbolise t he Gr ail bloodline . Mar y Magdale ne die d in Pr ove nce in AD 6 3 . I n t hat ve r y ye ar , J ose ph of Ar imat he a built t he f amous chape l at Glast onbur y in England as a me mor ial t o t he Me ssianic Q ue e n. This was t he f ir st ' above -gr ound' Chr ist ian chur ch in t he wor ld, and in t he f ollowing ye ar Mar y' s son J e sus J ust us de dicat e d it t o his mot he r . J e sus t he Younge r had in f act be e n t o England wit h J ose ph be f or e , at t he age of t we lve , in AD

4 9 . I t was t his e ve nt which inspir e d William Blake ' s f amous song, J e r usale m: "And did t hose f e e t in ancie nt t ime , walk upon England' s mount ains gr e e n." But who was J ose ph of Ar imat he a, t he man who assume d f ull cont r ol of af f air s at t he Cr ucif ixion? And why was it t hat J e sus' mot he r , his wif e and t he r e st of t he f amily acce pt e d J ose ph' s int e r ve nt ion wit hout que st ion? As lat e as t he ye ar 9 0 0 , t he Chur ch of Rome de cide d t o announce t hat J ose ph of Ar imat he a was t he uncle of J e sus' mot he r Mar y. And f r om t hat t ime , por t r ayals of J ose ph have shown him as be ing r at he r e lde r ly at t he Cr ucif ixion, whe n Mot he r Mar y was he r se lf in he r f if t ie s. Pr ior t o t he Roman announce me nt , howe ve r , t he hist or ical r e cor ds of J ose ph de pict e d a much younge r man. He was r e cor de d t o have die d at t he age of 8 0 on 2 7 J uly AD 8 2 , and t hus would have be e n age d 3 2 at t he t ime of t he Cr ucif ixion. I n f act , J ose ph of Ar imat he a was none ot he r t han J e sus Chr ist ' s own br ot he r , J ame s, and his t it le had not hing what e ve r t o wit h a place name . Ar imat he a ne ve r e xist e d. I t t he r e f or e come s as no sur pr ise t hat J ose ph ne got iat e d wit h Pilat e t o place J e sus in his own f amily t omb. The he r e dit ar y "Ar imat he a" t it le was an English cor r upt ion of t he Gr ae co-He br e w st yle ha-Rama-The o, me aning "of t he Divine Highne ss", or "of t he Royal Highne ss" as we ' d de f ine it t oday. S ince J e sus was t he se nior Me ssianic he ir -t he Chr ist , Khr ist os or King-t he n his younge r br ot he r was t he Cr own Pr ince -t he Royal Highne ss, Rama-The o. I n t he Nazar e ne hie r ar chy, t he Cr own Pr ince always he ld t he pat r iar chal t it le of "J ose ph"-j ust as J e sus was a t it ular "David" and his wif e was a "Mar y". I n t he e ar ly f if t h ce nt ur y, J e sus and Mar y' s de sce nde nt Fishe r Kings be came unit e d by mar r iage t o t he S icambr ian Fr anks, and f r om t he m e me r ge d a whole ne w ' r e igning' dynast y. The y we r e t he not e d

Me r ovingian Kings who f ounde d t he Fr e nch monar chy and int r oduce d t he we ll-known f le ur -de -lys (t he ancie nt J e wish symbol of cir cumcision) as t he r oyal e mble m of Fr ance . Fr om t he Me r ovingian succe ssion, anot he r st r ain of t he f amily e st ablishe d a wholly inde pe nde nt J e wish kingdom in sout he r n Fr ance : t he Kingdom of S e pt i-mania, which we now know as t he Langue doc. And t he e ar ly pr ince s of Toulouse , Aquit aine and Pr ove nce we r e all de sce nde d in t he Me ssianic bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail. S e pt imania was gr ant e d t o t he Royal House of David in 7 6 8 , and Pr ince Be r nar d of S e pt imania lat e r mar r ie d a daught e r of Empe r or Char le magne . Also f r om t he Fishe r Kings came anot he r impor t ant par alle l line of succe ssion in Gaul. Whe r e as t he Me r ovingian Kings cont inue d t he pat r imonial ' male ' he r it age of J e sus, t his ot he r line pe r pe t uat e d t he mat r iar chal he r it age of Mar y Magdale ne in a ' f e male ' line . The y we r e t he dynast ic Q ue e ns of Avallon in Bur gundy, t he House de l Acqsme aning "of t he wat e r s", a st yle gr ant e d t o Mar y Magdale ne in t he e ar ly days whe n she voyage d on t he se a t o Pr ove nce . Those f amiliar wit h Ar t hur ian and Gr ail lor e will by now have r e cognise d t he ult imat e signif icance of t his Me ssianic f amily of t he Fishe r Kings, t he Q ue e ns of Avallon and t he House de l Acqs (cor r upt e d in Ar t hur ian r omance t o "du Lac"). The de sce ndant he ir s of J e sus pose d an e nor mous t hr e at t o t he Roman High Chur ch be cause t he y we r e t he dynast ic le ade r s of t he t r ue Nazar e ne Chur ch. I n r e al t e r ms, t he Roman Chur ch should ne ve r have e xist e d at all, f or it was no mor e t han a ' hybr id' move me nt compr ise d of var ious pagan doct r ine s at t ache d t o a f undame nt ally J e wish base . J e sus was bor n in 7 BC and his bir t hday was on t he e quivale nt of 1 Mar ch, wit h an ' of f icial' r oyal bir t hday on 15 S e pt e mbe r t o comply wit h dynast ic r e gulat ion. But , whe n e st ablishing t he Roman High Chur ch

in t he f our t h ce nt ur y, Empe r or Const ant ine ignor e d bot h of t he se dat e s and supple me nt e d 2 5 De ce mbe r as t he ne w Chr ist ' s Mass Day-t o coincide wit h t he pagan S un Fe st ival. Lat e r , at t he S ynod of Whit by in 6 6 4 , t he bishops e xpr opr iat e d t he Ce lt ic f e st ival of East e r (Eost r e ), t he Godde ss of S pr ing and Fe r t ilit y, and at t ache d a wholly ne w Chr ist ian signif icance . I n so doing, t he y change d t he dat e of t he Ce lt ic f e st ival t o se ve r it s t r adit ional associat ion wit h t he J e wish Passove r . Chr ist ianit y, as we know it , has e volve d as a ' composit e r e ligion' quit e unlike any ot he r . I f J e sus was it s living cat alyst , t he n Chr ist ianit y should r ight ly be base d on t he t e achings of J e sus himse lf -t he mor al and social code s of a f air -minde d, t ole r ant minist r y, wit h t he pe ople as it s be ne f act or s. But or t hodox Chr ist ianit y is not base d on t he t e achings of J e sus: it is base d on t he t e achings of t he Roman Chur ch, which ar e e nt ir e ly dif f e r e nt . The r e ar e a numbe r of r e asons f or t his, t he f or e most of which is t hat J e sus was de libe r at e ly side st e ppe d in f avour of t he alt e r nat ive t e achings of Pe t e r and Paul-t e achings which we r e t hor oughly de nounce d by t he Nazar e ne Chur ch of J e sus and his br ot he r J ame s. Only by r e moving J e sus f r om t he f r ont line could t he Pope s and car dinals r e ign supr e me . Whe n f or mally inst it ut ing Chr ist ianit y as t he st at e r e ligion of Rome , Const ant ine de clar e d t hat "he alone " was t he t r ue "S aviour Me ssiah", not J e sus! As f or t he Bishops of Rome (t he Pope s), t he y we r e gr ant e d an apost olic de sce nt f r om S t Pe t e r -not a le git imat e De sposynic de sce nt f r om J e sus and his br ot he r s, as was r e t aine d wit hin t he Nazar e ne Chur ch. The only way f or t he Roman High Chur ch t o r e st r ain t he he ir s of Mar y Magdale ne was t o discr e dit Mar y he r se lf and t o de ny he r br idal r e lat ionship wit h J e sus. But what of J e sus' br ot he r J ame s? He , t oo,

had he ir s, as did t he ir ot he r br ot he r s, S imon, J ose s and J ude . The Chur ch could not e scape t he Gospe ls which st at e t hat J e sus was t he Ble sse d Mot he r Mar y' s "f ir st -bor n son", and so Mar y' s own mot he r hood also had t o be r e pr e sse d. As a r e sult , t he Chur ch por t r aye d Mot he r Mar y as a vir gin, and Mar y Magdale ne as a whor e -ne it he r of which de scr ipt ion was me nt ione d in any or iginal Gospe l. The n, j ust t o ce me nt Mot he r Mar y' s posit ion out side t he nat ur al domain, he r own mot he r , Anna, was e ve nt ually said t o have bor ne he r by way of "I mmaculat e Conce pt ion"! Ove r t he cour se of t ime , t he se cont r ive d doct r ine s have had wide spr e ad e f f e ct . But , in t he e ar ly days, it t ook r at he r mor e t o ce me nt t he ide as be cause t he or iginal wome n of t he Nazar e ne mission had a signif icant f ollowing in t he Ce lt ic Chur ch-wome n such as Mar y Magdale ne , Mar t ha, Mar y J acob-Cle ophas and He le na-S alome who had r un schools and social missions t hr oughout t he Me dit e r r ane an wor ld. The se wome n had all be e n disciple s of J e sus, and close f r ie nds of his mot he r , Mar y, accompanying he r t o t he Cr ucif ixion, as conf ir me d in t he Gospe ls. The Chur ch' s only salvat ion was t o de ny wome n alt oge t he r ; t o de ny t he m not only r ight s t o e ccle siast ical of f ice , but t o de ny t he m r ight s t o any st at us in socie t y. He nce , t he Chur ch de clar e d t hat wome n we r e all he r e t ics and sor ce r e sse s! I n t his, t he bishops we r e aide d by t he wor ds of Pe t e r and Paul, and on t he basis of t he ir t e achings t he Roman High Chur ch was e nable d t o be come wholly se xist . I n his Epist le t o Timot hy, Paul wr ot e : "I suf f e r not a woman t o t e ach, nor t o usur p any aut hor it y ove r t he man, but t o be in sile nce ." I n t he Gospe l of Philip, Pe t e r is e ve n quot e d as saying t hat "Wome n ar e not wor t hy of lif e ". The bishops e ve n quot e d t he wor ds of Ge ne sis, whe r e in God spoke t o Eve about Adam, saying "He shall r ule ove r t he e ".

The Chur ch Fat he r Te r t ullian summe d up t he whole Roman at t it ude whe n wr it ing about t he e me r ge nt disciple s of Mar y Magdale ne : "The se he r e t ical woman! How dar e t he y! The y ar e br aze n e nough t o t e ach, t o e ngage in ar gume nt , t o bapt ise ... I t is not pe r mit t e d f or a woman t o spe ak in chur ch...nor t o claim...a shar e in any masculine f unct ion-le ast of all in pr ie st ly of f ice ." The n, t o cap it all, came t he Roman Chur ch' s most amazing docume nt , The Apost olic Or de r . This was compile d as an ' imaginar y' conve r sat ion be t we e n t he apost le s af t e r t he Last S uppe r . Cont r ar y t o t he Gospe ls, it suppose d t hat Mar y Magdale ne had be e n pr e se nt at t he S uppe r , and it was agr e e d t hat t he r e ason why J e sus had not passe d any wine t o Mar y at t he t able was be cause he had se e n he r laughing! On t he basis of t his e xt r aor dinar y, f ict it ious docume nt , t he bishops r ule d t hat , e ve n t hough Mar y might have be e n a companion of J e sus, wome n we r e not t o be af f or de d any place wit hin t he Chur ch be cause t he y we r e not se r ious! This se xist at t it ude has pe r sist e d wit hin t he Chur ch t o t he pr e se nt day. Why? Be cause Mar y Magdale ne had t o be discr e dit e d and r e move d f r om t he r e ckoning so t hat he r he ir s could be ignor e d. But t hings ar e now changing, and, in t he Anglican Chur ch at le ast , wome n ar e be ing r e st or e d t o t he pr ie st ly st at ion. Not wit hst anding t he avid se xist move me nt , t he Me ssianic he ir s r e t aine d t he ir social posit ions out side t he Roman Chur ch e st ablishme nt . The y pr ogr e sse d t he ir own Nazar e ne and Ce lt ic Chur ch move me nt s and f ounde d De sposynic kingdoms in Br it ain and Eur ope . The y we r e a const ant t hr e at t o t he Roman High Chur ch and t o t he f igur e he ad monar chs and gove r nme nt s e mpowe r e d by t hat Chur ch. The y we r e t he ve r y r e ason f or t he imple me nt at ion of t he br ut al I nquisit ion be cause t he y uphe ld a mor al and social code which was cont r ar y t o High Chur ch r e quir e me nt . This was e spe cially appar e nt dur ing t he Age of Chivalr y, which

e mbr ace d a r e spe ct f or womanhood, as e xe mplif ie d by t he Knight s Te mplar s whose const it ut ional oat h suppor t e d a ve ne r at ion of "t he Gr ail Mot he r ", Q ue e n Mar y Magdale ne . Pr ior t o t he Middle Age s, t he individual st or ie s of t his f amily we r e hist or ically we ll-known. But whe n t he Chur ch be gan it s r e ign of f anat ical pe r se cut ion (t he gr e at I nquisit ion), t he whole Nazar e ne and De sposynic he r it age was f or ce d unde r gr ound. But why t he ve nge f ul onse t of t he I nquisit ion? Be cause t he Knight s Te mplar s had not only r e t ur ne d f r om t he Holy Land wit h docume nt s t hat unde r mine d t he Chur ch' s t e achings, but t he y also e st ablishe d t he ir own Cist e r cian chur che s in opposit ion t o Rome . The se we r e not j ust any chur che s; t he y we r e t he gr e at e st r e ligious monume nt s e ve r t o gr ace t he skyline s of t he we st e r n wor ld: t he Not r e Dame cat he dr als of Fr ance . De spit e t he ir pr e se nt -day image , t he se impr e ssive Got hic cat he dr als had not hing what e ve r t o do wit h t he e st ablishe d Chr ist ian Chur ch. The y we r e f unde d and built by t he Knight s Te mplar s, and t he y we r e de dicat e d t o Mar y Magdale ne -Not r e Dame , Our Lady-whom t he y calle d "t he Gr ail of t he wor ld". This, of cour se , de f e at e d e ve r y dogma t hat t he High Chur ch had e ncour age d, and t he bishops r e t aliat e d by r e -de dicat ing nume r ous ot he r chur che s t o Mar y, t he mot he r of J e sus. But , in so doing, t he y made a st r ict de cr e e t hat all ar t ist ic por t r ayals of Mot he r Mar y, t he Madonna, must he nce f or t h show he r dr e sse d in "blue and whit e only"so as not t o gr ant he r any r ight s t o e ccle siast ical of f ice in t he male only pr ie st hood. Mar y Magdale ne , on t he ot he r hand, was be ing por t r aye d (by t he wor ld' s gr e at e st ar t ist s) we ar ing t he r e d mant le of car dinal st at us or t he black r obe of a Nazar it e High Pr ie st e ss-and t he r e was not hing t he Chur ch could do about it . The bishops' only opt ion was t o pr oclaim t he

pr act ice sinf ul and he r e t ical-be cause , in having pr e viously e le ct e d t o ignor e Mar y Magdale ne and he r he ir s, she was out side t he ir j ur isdict ion. I t was at t hat t ime t hat Gr ail lor e was it se lf de nounce d as a he r e sy by t he Vat ican. The sixt h-ce nt ur y wr it ings of Me r lin we r e e xpr e ssly banne d by t he Ecume nical Council, and t he or iginal Nazar e ne Chur ch of J e sus be came an "unde r gr ound st r e am", aide d by such not able sponsor s as Le onar do da Vinci and S andr o Bot t ice lli. I n t hose days, t he Chur ch police d and cont r olle d most lit e r at ur e in t he public domain; and so, in or de r t o avoid out r ight ce nsor ship, t he Gr ail t r adit ion be came alle gor ical and it s me ssage was communicat e d by way of se cr e t wat e r mar ks, e sot e r ic wr it ings, Tar ot car ds and symbolic ar t wor k. But why should Gr ail lor e and t he wr it ings of Me r lin have pose d such a pr oble m f or t he High Chur ch? Be cause , wit hin t he cont e xt of t he ir adve nt ur ous t e xt s, t he y t old t he de sce ndant st or y of t he Gr ail bloodline -a bloodline which had be e n oust e d f r om it s dynast ic posit ion by t he Pope s and Bishops of Rome who had e le ct e d t o r e ign supr e me by way of a cont r ive d "apost olic succe ssion". This apost olic succe ssion was said t o have be e n hande d down f r om t he f ir st bishop, S t Pe t e r (and, inde e d, t his is st ill t he pr omot e d vie w). But one only has t o st udy t he Chur ch' s own Apost olic Const it ut ions t o discove r t hat t his is simply not t r ue . Pe t e r was ne ve r a Bishop of Rome nor of anywhe r e e lse , f or t hat mat t e r ! The Vat ican' s Const it ut ions r e cor d t hat t he f ir st Bishop of Rome was Pr ince Linus of Br it ain, t he son of Car act acus t he Pe ndr agon. He was inst alle d by S t Paul in AD 5 8 , dur ing Pe t e r ' s own lif e t ime . Fr om t he 110 0 s, t he powe r f ul Knight s Te mplar s and t he ir cat he dr als pose d an e nor mous t hr e at t o t he ' male -only' Chur ch by br inging t he

he r it age of J e sus and Mar y Magdale ne t o t he f or e in t he public domain. The car dinals kne w t hat t he ir whole e st ablishme nt would t umble if t he Me ssianic de sce ndant s gaine d t he uppe r hand. The y had t o be cr ushe d! And so t he br ut al I nquisit ion was imple me nt e d-a hide ous pe r se cut ion of all who disse nt e d f r om t he r ule of t he bishops. I t all be gan in 12 0 8 , whe n Pope I nnoce nt I I I se nt 3 0 ,0 0 0 soldie r s int o t he Langue doc r e gion of sout he r n Fr ance . This was t he home of t he Cat har s ("t he Pur e One s") who we r e said t o be t he guar dians of a gr e at and sacr e d t r e asur e -a myst e r ious se cr e t which could ove r t ur n or t hodox Chr ist ianit y. The Pope ' s so-calle d Albige nsian Cr usade last e d f or 3 6 ye ar s-dur ing which t ime , t e ns of t housands of innoce nt pe ople we r e slaught e r e d-but t he t r e asur e was ne ve r f ound. The main t hr ust of t he I nquisit ion (or "Holy Of f ice ") was inst it ut e d by Pope Gr e gor y I X dur ing t he cour se of t his massacr e , in 12 3 1, and it was se t against anyone who suppor t e d "t he Gr ail he r e sy". By 12 5 2 , t he t or t ur e of vict ims was f or mally aut hor ise d, along wit h e xe cut ion by bur ning. "He r e sy" was a wonde r f ul char ge t o le ve l against capt ive s, be cause only t he Chur ch could de f ine it . The vict ims we r e t or t ur e d unt il t he y conf e sse d, and having conf e sse d t he y we r e e xe cut e d. I f t he y did not conf e ss, t he n t he t or t ur e cont inue d unt il t he y die d anyway. One r e cor de d f or m of t or t ur e was t o spr e ad t he vict im, lit t le by lit t le , wit h f at (be ginning wit h his f e e t ), and t he n t o r oast him alive in se ct ions, limb by limb, ove r an ope n f ir e . The se savage pe r se cut ions and punishme nt s we r e ope nly wage d f or mor e t han 4 0 0 ye ar s, and we r e also e xt e nde d against J e ws, Muslims and Pr ot e st ant disse nt e r s. But t he I nquisit ion was ne ve r f or mally t e r minat e d. As r e ce nt ly as 19 6 5 it was r e name d "t he S acr e d

Congr e gat ion", and it s powe r s ar e t he or e t ically st ill in f or ce t oday. Undaunt e d by t he I nquisit ion, t he Nazar e ne move me nt pur sue d it s own cour se , and t he st or y of t he bloodline was pe r pe t uat e d in lit e r at ur e such as t he Gr and S aint Gr ail and t he High Hist or y of t he Holy Gr ail. The se wr it ings we r e lar ge ly sponsor e d by t he Gr ail cour t s of Fr ance (t he cour t s of Champagne , Anj ou and ot he r s), and also by t he Knight s Te mplar s and t he De sposyni; and, at t hat st age , Ar t hur ian Romance be came a popular ve hicle f or t he Gr ail t r adit ion. I n t he light of t his, t he Te mplar s be came a spe cif ic t ar ge t of t he I nquisit ion in 13 0 7 whe n t he he nchme n of Pope Cle me nt V and King Philip I V of Fr ance we r e se t in t he ir dir e ct ion. The papal ar mie s scour e d Eur ope f or t he Te mplar docume nt s and t r e asur e -but , like t he Cat har inhe r it ance , not hing was f ound. Howe ve r , many Knight s we r e t or t ur e d and e xe cut e d in t he pr oce ss, and t he ir companions e scape d t o count r ie s out side t he papal domain. But t he Te mplar hoar d was not lost , and while t he Vat ican e missar ie s we r e se ar ching, t he t r e asur e and docume nt s we r e locke d away in t he Chapt e r House Tr e asur y vault s of Par is. The y we r e unde r t he pr ot e ct ion of t he Te mplar Gr and Knight s of S t Ant hony-"t he Guar dian Pr ince s of t he Royal S e cr e t "-who loade d t he hoar d one night ont o 18 galle ys of t he Te mplar f le e t at La Roche lle . By daybr e ak, t he f le e t had saile d f or S cot land, and on ar r ival t he y we r e we lcome d by King Robe r t t he Br uce who, along wit h t he whole S cot t ish nat ion, had be e n e xcommunicat e d by t he Pope f or challe nging t he Cat holic King Edwar d of England. I n S cot land, t he Te mplar s and t he ir t r e asur e r e maine d, and t he Knight s f ought wit h Br uce at Bannockbur n in 13 14 t o r e gain S cot land' s inde pe nde nce f r om Plant age ne t England. S ubse que nt t o t he Bat t le of Bannockbur n, Br uce and t he S t Ant hony Te mplar s f ounde d t he ne w Or de r of t he Elde r Br ot he r s of t he Rosy

Cr oss in 13 17 -f r om which t ime t he Kings of S cot s be came he r e dit ar y Gr and Mast e r s, wit h e ach succe ssive S t e war t King holding t he honour e d Gr and Pr ior y t it le of "Pr ince S aint Ge r main". S o, why was it t hat King Ar t hur , a Ce lt ic commande r of t he sixt h ce nt ur y, was so impor t ant t o t he Knight s Te mplar s and t he Gr ail cour t s of Eur ope ? Q uit e simply, be cause Ar t hur had be e n unique , wit h a ' dual' he r it age in t he Me ssianic line . King Ar t hur was by no me ans myt hical, as many have suppose d. Far f r om it . But he has ge ne r ally be e n looke d f or in t he wr ong place s. Re se ar che r s, misguide d by t he f ict ional locat ions of t he r omance s, have se ar che d in vain t hr ough t he chr onicle s of Br it t any, Wale s and t he we st of England. But t he de t ails of Ar t hur ar e t o be f ound in t he S cot s' and I r ish annals. He was inde e d "t he High King of t he Ce lt ic I sle ", and he was t he sove r e ign commande r of t he Br it ish t r oops in t he lat e sixt h ce nt ur y. Ar t hur was bor n in 5 5 9 , and he die d in bat t le in 6 0 3 . His mot he r was Yge r na de l Acqs, t he daught e r of Q ue e n Viviane of Avallon, in de sce nt f r om J e sus and Mar y Magdale ne . His f at he r was High King Ae dàn of Dalr iada (t he We st e r n Highlands of S cot land, now calle d Ar gyll)-and Ae dàn was t he Br it ish Pe ndr agon ("He ad Dr agon" or "King of Kings") in de sce nt f r om J e sus' br ot he r J ame s. I t is f or t his r e ason t hat t he st or ie s of Ar t hur and J ose ph of Ar imat he a ar e so close ly e nt wine d in t he Gr ail r omance s. I nde e d, t he cor onat ion r e cor ds of S cot land' s King Ke nne t h MacAlpin (a de sce ndant of Ae dàn t he Pe ndr agon) spe cif ically r e f e r t o his own de sce nt f r om t he dynast ic Q ue e ns of Avallon. King Ae dàn' s pat e r nal le gacy e me r ge d t hr ough t he most ancie nt House of Camulot (England' s Royal Cour t of Colche st e r ) in a line f r om t he f ir st Pe ndr agon, King Cymbe line (who is we ll-known t o st ude nt s of

S hake spe ar e ). By t hat t ime , Me ssianic de sce ndant s had f ounde d De sposynic kingdoms in Wale s and acr oss t he S t r at hclyde and Cambr ian r e gions of Br it ain. Ar t hur ' s f at he r , King Ae dàn of S cot s, was t he f ir st Br it ish monar ch t o be inst alle d by pr ie st ly or dinat ion, whe n he was cr owne d and anoint e d by S aint Columba of t he Ce lt ic Chur ch in 5 7 4 . This, of cour se , inf ur iat e d t he Roman Chur ch bishops be cause t he y claime d t he sole r ight t o appoint kings who we r e suppose d t o be cr owne d by t he Pope ! As a dir e ct r e sult of t his cor onat ion, S aint August ine was e ve nt ually se nt f r om Rome in 5 9 7 t o dismant le t he Ce lt ic Chur ch. He pr oclaime d himse lf Ar chbishop of Cant e r bur y t hr e e ye ar s lat e r , but his ove r all mission f aile d and t he Nazar e ne t r adit ion pe r sist e d in S cot land, I r e land and Wale s and acr oss t he br e adt h of nor t he r n England. An impor t ant f act t o r e me mbe r is t hat t he Gr ail dynast s we r e ne ve r t e r r it or ial gove r nor s of lands. Like J e sus himse lf , t he y we r e de signat e d "Guar dians" of t he pe ople . The Me r ovingians of Gaul, f or e xample , we r e Kings of t he Fr anks-ne ve r Kings of Fr ance . King Ae dàn, Robe r t t he Br uce and t he ir S t e war t succe ssor s we r e Kings of t he S cot s-ne ve r Kings of S cot land. I t was t his implicit ly ' social' conce pt which t he High Chur ch f ound so dif f icult t o ove r come , f or t he bishops pr e f e r r e d t o have dominion ove r ' t e r r it or ial kings' , while t he pe ople ' s se nior lor d and mast e r was suppose d t o be t he Pope . Only by maint aining ult imat e spir it ual cont r ol ove r individuals could t he Chur ch r e ign supr e me , and so whe ne ve r a Gr ail dynast came t o t he f or e he was me t by t he wr at h of t he papal machine . I n 7 5 1 t he bishops manage d t o de pose t he Me r ovingian succe ssion in Gaul, and t he y e st ablishe d a ne w t r adit ion whe r e by kings of t he Car olingian succe ssion (t hat of Char le magne ) had t o be appr ove d and cr owne d by t he Pope . But t he Chur ch could ne ve r t opple t he

De sposynic line s in S cot land, e ve n t hough t he old Ce lt ic kingdoms of England had be e n dismant le d by Ge r manic Anglo-S axons f r om t he sixt h ce nt ur y. Eve n int o t he Middle Age s-long af t e r t he Nor man Conque st of Englandt he Nazar e ne Chur ch and t he long-pr e vailing cult of Mar y Magdale ne we r e pr omine nt in Eur ope . Wome n' s r ight s of e qualit y we r e uphe ld t hr oughout t he Ce lt ic st r uct ur e -and t his was an e nor mous pr oble m f or t he male -only pr ie st hood of or t hodox Chr ist ianit y. The unde r lying pr inciple of t he Gr ail monar chs was always one of S e r vice , in accor dance wit h t he Me ssianic code e st ablishe d by J e sus whe n he washe d his apost le s' f e e t at t he Last S uppe r . And so t he t r ue Gr ail dynast s we r e kings and guar dians of t he ir r e alms, but t he y we r e ne ve r r ule r s. This ke y aspe ct of t he Gr ail code was pe r pe t uat e d at t he ve r y he ar t of nur se r y t ale and f olklor e . Ne ve r did a valiant car dinal or bishop r ide t o t he aid of an oppr e sse d subj e ct or a damse l in dist r e ss, f or t his has always be e n t he social r e alm of Gr ail pr ince s and t he ir appoint e d knight s. The Gr ail code r e cognise s advance me nt by me r it and acknowle dge s communit y st r uct ur e , but , above all, it is e nt ir e ly de mocr at ic. Whe t he r appr e he nde d in it s physical or spir it ual dime nsion, t he Gr ail be longs t o le ade r s and f ollowe r s alike . I t also be longs t o t he land and t he e nvir onme nt , r e quir ing t hat all should be "as one " in a common, unif ie d S e r vice . Thr oughout t he age s, par liame nt s and gove r nme nt s have had as much t r ouble as t he Chur ch in conf r ont ing t he Me ssianic social code , and t he posit ion is no dif f e r e nt t oday. Pr e side nt s and pr ime minist e r s ar e ' e le ct e d' by t he pe ople . The y ar e suppose d t o r e pr e se nt t he pe ople . But do t he y? I n act ual f act , t he y don' t . The y ar e always af f iliat e d t o a

polit ical par t y, and t he y achie ve t he ir posit ions by way of maj or it y par t y vot e . But not e ve r ybody t ake s t he t r ouble t o vot e , and some t ime s t he r e ar e mor e t han t wo par t ie s t o vot e f or . Conse que nt ly, at any give n t ime , mor e t han half t he pe ople of a nat ion may not be r e pr e se nt e d by t he polit ical par t y in powe r . I n t his r e gar d, e ve n t hough a ' maj or it y vot e ' has be e n applie d, t he de mocr at ic pr inciple f ails. What e me r ge s is not "gove r nme nt by t he pe ople , f or t he pe ople ", but "gove r nme nt of t he pe ople ". J e sus conf r ont e d a ve r y similar sit uat ion in t he f ir st ce nt ur y. At t hat t ime , J e r usale m and J udae a we r e unde r Roman occupat ion, wit h King He r od and t he Gove r nor , Pont ius Pilat e , bot h appoint e d by Rome . But who r e pr e se nt e d t he pe ople ? The pe ople we r e not Romans; t he y we r e Holy Land J e ws-Phar ise e s, S adduce e s, Esse ne s and t he like . Apar t f r om t hat , t he r e we r e lar ge numbe r s of S amar it ans and Ge nt ile s (nonJ e ws, t he Ar ab r ace s). Who r e pr e se nt e d t he m? The answe r is "no one "unt il J e sus made it his mission t o do so. This was t he be ginning of t he Gr ail code of non-af f iliat e d pr ince ly se r vice -a code pe r pe t uat e d by t he Me ssianic dynast s in t he ir cont inuing r ole as "common f at he r s" t o t he pe ople . The Gr ail code is base d on t he pr inciple s of libe r t y, f r at e r nit y and e qualit y, and it was par t icular ly appar e nt in t he Ame r ican and Fr e nch r e volut ions, bot h of which discar de d t he lor dship of de spot ic ar ist ocr acy. But what has r e place d it ? I t has be e n r e place d by par t y polit ics and lar ge ly nonr e pr e se nt at ive gove r nme nt . Fr om t he Middle Age s t he r e we r e a numbe r of chivalr ic and milit ar y or de r s spe cif ically at t ache d t o t he Me ssianic Blood Royal in Br it ain and Eur ope . The y include d t he Or de r of t he Re alm of S ion and t he Or de r of t he S acr e d S e pulchr e . But t he most pr e st igious of all was t he S ove r e ign Or de r of t he S angr é al-t he Knight s of t he Holy Gr ail. This was a dynast ic or de r of S cot land' s Royal House of S t e war t , t he r oyal house which in t he 14 t h ce nt ur y int r oduce d t he unicor n of t he Cat har s

as t he sove r e ign e mble m of S cot land. S hor t ly af t e r war ds, t he y int r oduce d t he pr e st igious Or de r of t he Unicor n, which car r ie d t he Gr ail mot t o "All as One ". Like King Ar t hur , t he S t e war t Kings also had a dual De sposynic he r it age f r om bot h J e sus and his br ot he r J ame s. I n f act , f r om t he 13 7 0 s t he y we r e t he se nior house of t he Me ssianic line , and t he y we r e Eur ope ' s longe st -r e igning dynast y, holding t he ir cr own f or 3 17 ye ar s unt il f inally de pose d by t he Anglican Chur ch in 16 8 8 . The y we r e de pose d be cause , in compliance wit h t he Gr ail code , t he y claime d af f init y t o God and t he nat ion be f or e Par liame nt , t he Chur ch and t he ar ist ocr acy. Today, t he se nior le git imat e de sce ndant in t his line is HRH Pr ince Michae l S t e war t , Count of Albany (whose own book, The For got t e n Monar chy of S cot land, is sche dule d f or publicat ion by Ele me nt Books in May 19 9 8 ). And now t o a que st ion t hat I have f r e que nt ly be e n aske d in t he mont hs since Bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail was publishe d. The que st ion is: why is all t his inf or mat ion coming t o light at t his par t icular t ime ? The f act is t hat t he inf or mat ion has ne ve r be e n suppr e sse d by t hose whom it conce r ns. I t has be e n suppr e sse d by out side powe r -se e ke r s who have sought t o se r ve t he ir own e nds, r at he r t han se r ve t he communit ie s t he y ar e suppose d t o r e pr e se nt . Today, howe ve r , we ar e in a ne w age of ' que st ing' , as many pe ople gr ow mor e disillusione d wit h t he e st ablishme nt dogmas t hat pr e vail. We live in an age of sat e llit e communicat ions, sound-bar r ie r t r ave l, comput e r s and t he I nt e r ne t -so t he wor ld is e f f e ct ive ly much smalle r t han be f or e . I n such an e nvir onme nt , ne ws t r ave ls ve r y quickly, and t he t r ut h is f ar mor e dif f icult t o r e st r ain. Also, t he ve r y f abr ic of t he ' male -dominat e d' Chur ch and

gove r nme nt al st r uct ur e s is be ing que st ione d, and it is ge ne r ally pe r ce ive d t hat t he old doct r ine s of spir it ual cont r ol and t e r r it or ial manage me nt ar e not wor king. Mor e and mor e pe ople ar e se ar ching f or t he or iginal, unclut t e r e d r oot s of t he ir f ait h, and f or t he ir pur pose in socie t y. The y ar e se e king mor e e f f e ct ive f or ms of administ r at ion t o combat t he all-t oo-appar e nt slide int o social and mor al de cline . The y ar e , in f act , que st ing f or t he Holy Gr ail. This que st f or ne w e nlight e nme nt is conside r ably he ight e ne d by t he coming ne w mille nnium, and t he r e is a wide spr e ad f e e ling t hat t his should also pr e se nt a ne w Re naissance , an e r a of r e bir t h whe r e in t he pr e ce pt s of t he Gr ail code ar e acknowle dge d and pr act ise d-t he pr e ce pt s of libe r t y, f r at e r nit y and e qualit y. Gr ail lor e spe lls out loud and cle ar t hat t he wound of t he Fishe r King must be he ale d if t he wast e land is t o r e t ur n t o f e r t ilit y. And so, give n t hat I had be e n af f or de d pr ivile ge d acce ss ove r past ye ar s t o t he ar chive s of t he Knight s Te mplar s, t he Ce lt ic Chur ch and t he Me ssianic sove r e ign house s of Eur ope , t he t ime ar r ive d f or me t o play my own small par t in t r ying t o he al t he age -old wound of t he Fishe r King. The r e sult was my book, Bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail.

About t he S pe ake r: S ir Laur e nce Gar dne r , Kt S t Gm, KCD, is an int e r nat ionally known sove r e ign and chivalr ic ge ne alogist . He holds t he posit ion of Gr and Pr ior of t he Ce lt ic Chur ch' s S acr e d Kindr e d of S aint Columba, and is dist inguishe d as t he Che valie r Labhr àn de S aint Ge r main. S ir Laur e nce is also Pr e side nt ial At t aché t o t he Eur ope an Council of Pr ince s, a const it ut ional advisor y body e st ablishe d in 19 4 6 . He is f or mally at t ache d t o t he Noble House hold Guar d of t he Royal House of S t e war t , f ounde d at S t Ge r main-e n-Laye in 16 9 2 , and is t he J acobit e Hist or iogr aphe r Royal.

Edit or' s Not e s:

(Back t o Par t 1) (On t o Par t 3 ) I t was not unt il t he e ar ly se ve nt e e nt h ce nt ur y t hat t he f ir st acce pt able English language Bible t r anslat ion was made -f or t he S cot s King J ame s VI (S t uar t ), J ame s I of England. This was t he Aut hor ize d Ve r sion, upon which t he maj or it y of subse que nt English-language Bible s have be e n base d. But e ve n t his was not a dir e ct t r anslat ion f r om anyt hing; it was most ly t r anslat e d f r om t he Gr e e k, par t ly f r om t he Lat in, and t o some e xt e nt f r om t he wor ks of ot he r s who' d made ot he r ille git imat e t r anslat ions be f or e . I n t he ir r e nde r ing of t he Ne w Te st ame nt , King J ame s' t r anslat or s e nde avour e d t o appe ase bot h t he Pr ot e st ant s and t he Cat holics. This was t he only way t o pr oduce a ge ne r ally acce pt able t e xt , but t he ir at t e mpt t o appe ase was not e nt ir e ly succe ssf ul. The Cat holics t hought t he t r anslat or s we r e siding wit h t he Pr ot e st ant s and t r ie d t o blow up King J ame s in t he House s of Par liame nt , and t he Pr ot e st ant s said t he t r anslat or s we r e in le ague wit h t he Cat holics. Anyway, t he Bible sur vive d but t he t r anslat or s t r ie d as we ll f or some t hing calle d "polit ical cor r e ct ne ss". We know about it t oday; it applie d t he n. Good e xample s of t his ar e f ound in many inst ance s-one in par t icular whe r e t he dir e ct t r anslat ion r e f e r r e d t o a gr oup of pe ople calle d "he ave nly soldie r s". The y didn' t like t his ve r y much, so it ' s act ually cr osse d out , and unde r ne at h it says "he ave nly ar my". But some body e lse came along and said, "No, t his is st ill not good e nough; it de not e s an ar me d unit he r e ; t his is not polit ically cor r e ct ," and so it was cr osse d out again, and t he y r e sur r e ct e d an old wor d t hat had not be e n wr it t e n in t he English language f or ce nt ur ie s. The y calle d it "t he he ave nly host ". Nobody knows what t he he ave nly host is. I n f act it ' s quit e ast ounding how many obscur e , old and obsole t e wor ds we r e br ought back int o use t o pr ovide polit ical cor r e ct ne ss f or t he King

J ame s Bible , but which nobody could unde r st and. At t he same t ime , William S hake spe ar e was doing like wise in his plays. I f we look at t he r e f e r e nce books t hat e xist e d pr ior t o J ame s and S hake spe ar e and at t hose t hat e xist e d j ust af t e r J ame s and S hake spe ar e , we se e t hat t he English-language vocabular y was incr e ase d by mor e t han f if t y pe r ce nt as a r e sult of wor ds inve nt e d or br ought back f r om obscur it y by t he wr it e r s of t he e r a. The pr oble m was t hat nobody, le t alone t he dict ionar y compile r s, kne w what most of t he se wor ds me ant . But t he y had some how t o be de f ine d, and "he ave nly host " e me r ge d, quit e ambiguously, as "a he ave nly lot of pe ople "! S o alt hough e mine nt ly poe t ic, t he language of t he Aut hor ize d English Bible is quit e unlike any language e ve r spoke n by anyone in England or anywhe r e e lse . I t be ar s no r e lat ion t o t he Gr e e k or Lat in f r om which it was t r anslat e d. I t was ce r t ainly not t he language spoke n by God, as some pr ie st s once t old me . But f r om t his appr ove d canonical int e r pr e t at ion, all ot he r English language Bible s have e me r ge d in t he ir var ious f or ms. De spit e t hat , f or all of it s f ault s, de spit e it s be aut if ul ve r se pat t e r ns and t he ne w wor ds, it st ill r e mains t he close st of all English language t r anslat ions f r om t he or iginal Gr e e k manuscr ipt s. All ot he r ve r sions, t he S t andar d ve r sions, t he Ne w ve r sions, t he Re vise d ve r sions, t he Mode r n English ve r sions, have be e n signif icant ly cor r upt e d and t he y' r e quit e unsuit able f or se r ious st udy by anyone be cause t he y have t he ir own spe cif ic age nda. We can cit e an e xt r e me ve r sion of how t his wor ks in pr act ice . We can look at a Bible cur r e nt ly issue d t oday in Pacif ic Papua Ne w Guine a whe r e t he r e ar e t r ibe s who e xpe r ie nce f amiliar it y on a daily basis wit h no ot he r animal but t he pig. I n t he cur r e nt e dit ion of t he ir Bible , e ve r y animal me nt ione d in t he t e xt , whe t he r or iginally an ox, lion, ass, she e p or what e ve r , is now a pig! Eve n J e sus, t he t r adit ional "Lamb of God", in t his Bible is "t he Pig of God"!

S o, t o f acilit at e t he be st possible t r ust in t he Gospe ls, we must go back t o t he or iginal Gr e e k manuscr ipt s wit h t he ir of t e n-use d He br e w and Ar amaic wor ds and phr ase s. And in so doing we discove r t hat , j ust as wit h t he Nat ivit y st or y, a good de al of r e le vant cont e nt has be e n misr e pr e se nt e d, misunde r st ood, mist r anslat e d or simply j ust lost in t he t e lling. S ome t ime s t his has happe ne d be cause or iginal wor ds have no dir e ct count e r par t in ot he r language s. We ' ve all be e n t aught t hat J e sus' f at he r J ose ph was a car pe nt e r . "Why not ? I t says so in t he Gospe ls." But it didn' t say t hat in t he or iginal Gospe ls. By t he be st t r anslat ion, it act ually said t hat J ose ph was a Mast e r of t he Cr af t . The wor d "car pe nt e r " was simply a t r anslat or ' s conce pt of a cr af t sman. Anyone associat e d wit h mode r n Fr e e masonr y will r e cognise t he t e r m "t he Cr af t ". I t ' s got not hing what e ve r t o do wit h woodwor k. The t e xt simply de not e d t hat J ose ph was a mast e r ly, le ar ne d and scholar ly man. Anot he r e xample is t he conce pt of t he Vir gin Bir t h. Our Englishlanguage Gospe ls t e ll us t hat J e sus' mot he r Mar y was a vir gin; t he y ke e p t e lling us t hat she was a vir gin. We ll, le t ' s conside r t he wor d "vir gin". We unde r st and t he wor d; it t e lls us t hat t his was a woman wit h no e xpe r ie nce of se xual union. But t his was t r anslat e d not f r om t he Gr e e k init ially but f r om t he Lat in. That was e asy be cause t he Lat in calle d he r vir go; Mar y was a vir go. I t didn' t me an t he same t hing at all! Vir go in Lat in me ant not hing mor e t han "a young woman". To have me ant t he same t hing as "vir gin" doe s t o us t oday, t he Lat in would have be e n vir go int act a, t hat is t o say, "a young woman int act ". Le t ' s look back be yond t he Lat in t e xt ; le t ' s se e why t he y calle d he r vir go, a young woman. Maybe t he y act ually got some t hing r ight which we ' ve got wr ong lat e r on. We discove r t hat t he wor d t r anslat e d t o me an vir go, a young woman, was t he old He br e w wor d almah which me ant "a young woman". I t had no se xual connot at ion what e ve r . Had Mar y act ually be e n physically vir go int act a, t he He br e w wor d use d

would have be e n be t hula, not almah. S o, have we be e n comple t e ly misguide d by t he Gospe ls? No; we ' ve be e n misguide d by t he English language t r anslat ions of t he Gospe ls. We ' ve also be e n misguide d by a Chur ch e st ablishme nt t hat has done e ve r yt hing in it s powe r t o de ny wome n any nor mal lif e st yle in t he Gospe l st or y. The Ne w Te st ame nt ' s ke y wome n ar e vir gins or whor e s or some t ime s widows-ne ve r e ve r yday gir lf r ie nds, wive s or mot he r s, and ce r t ainly not e ve r pr ie st e sse s or holy sist e r s. Not wit hst anding t hat , t he Gospe ls t e ll us t ime and t ime again t hat J e sus was de sce nde d f r om King David t hr ough his f at he r J ose ph. Eve n S t Paul t e lls us t his in his Epist le t o t he He br e ws. But we ar e t aught t hat J e sus' f at he r was a lowly car pe nt e r and his mot he r was a vir ginne it he r of which de scr ipt ions can be f ound in any or iginal t e xt . S o it f ollows t hat t o ge t t he be st out of t he Gospe ls we ' ve r e ally got t o r e ad t he m as t he y we r e wr it t e n, not as we de cide t o int e r pr e t t he m accor ding t o mode r n language . Pr e cise ly whe n t he f our main Gospe ls we r e wr it t e n is unce r t ain. What we do know is t hat t he y we r e f ir st publishe d at var ious st age s in t he se cond half of t he f ir st ce nt ur y. The y we r e unanimous init ially in t e lling us t hat J e sus was a Nazar e ne . This is act ually uphe ld in t he Roman annals; and t he f ir st -ce nt ur y chr onicle s of t he J e ws and t he Bible ' s Act s of t he Apost le s conf ir m t hat J e sus' br ot he r J ame s and S t Paul we r e le ade r s of t he se ct of t he Nazar e ne s. This de f init ion of "Nazar e ne " is ve r y impor t ant t o t he Gr ail st or y be cause it has be e n so of t e n misr e pr e se nt e d t o sugge st t hat J e sus came f r om t he t own of Nazar e t h. For t he past 4 0 0 ye ar s, English language Gospe ls have pe r pe t uat e d t he e r r or by wr ongly t r anslat ing "J e sus t he Nazar e ne " as "J e sus of Nazar e t h". The r e was no conne ct ion be t we e n Nazar e t h and t he Nazar e ne s. I n f act , t he se t t le me nt at Nazar e t h was e st ablishe d in t he AD 6 0 s, t hir t y ye ar s or

so af t e r t he Cr ucif ixion. Nobody in J e sus' e ar ly lif e came f r om Nazar e t h-it was not t he r e ! The Nazar e ne s we r e a libe r al, J e wish se ct oppose d t o t he st r ict He br e w r e gime of t he Phar ise e s and S adduce e s. The Nazar e ne cult ur e and language we r e he avily inf lue nce d by t he philosophe r s of ancie nt Gr e e ce , and t he ir communit y suppor t e d t he conce pt of e qual oppor t unit y f or me n and wome n. Docume nt s of t he t ime r e f e r r e d not t o Nazar e t h but t o t he Nazar e ne socie t y. Pr ie st e sse s e xist e d in e qual oppor t unit y wit h pr ie st s, but t his was so dif f e r e nt f r om what t he male dominat e d He br e w socie t y want e d and what t he lat e r , male -dominat e d Roman Chur ch r e quir e d. I t has t o be r e me mbe r e d t hat J e sus was not a Chr ist ian: he was a Nazar e ne -a r adical, we st e r nise d J e w. The Chr ist ian move me nt was f ounde d by ot he r s in t he wake of his own mission. The wor d "Chr ist ian" was f ir st r e cor de d and use d in AD 4 4 in Ant ioch, S yr ia. I n t he Ar ab wor ld, t he wor d use d t oday, as t he n, t o de scr ibe J e sus and his f ollowe r s is Nazar a. This is conf ir me d in t he Muslim Kor an: J e sus is Nazar a; his f ollowe r s ar e Nazar a. The wor d me ans "Ke e pe r s" or "Guar dians". The f ull de f init ion is Nazr ie ha-Br it , "Ke e pe r s of t he Cove nant ". I n f act , t he Br it aspe ct of t hat is t he ve r y r oot of t he count r y name of Br it ain. Br it -ain me ans "Cove nant -land". I n t he t ime of J e sus t he Nazar e ne s live d in Galile e , and in t hat myst ical place which t he Bible calls "t he Wilde r ne ss". The Wilde r ne ss was act ually a ve r y de f ine d place . I t was e sse nt ially t he land ar ound t he main se t t le me nt at Q umr an which spr e ad out t o Mir d and ot he r place s. I t was whe r e t he De ad S e a S cr olls we r e pr oduce d-discove r e d at Q umr an in 19 4 8 . S ome whe r e af t e r t he Cr ucif ixion, Pe t e r and his f r ie nd Paul we nt of f t o Ant ioch, t he n on t o Rome , and t he y be gan t he move me nt t hat be came Chr ist ianit y. But as r e cor de d in t he ot he r annals, J e sus, his br ot he r

J ame s and t he maj or it y of t he ot he r apost le s cont inue d t he Nazar e ne move me nt and pr ogr e sse d it int o Eur ope . I t be came t he Ce lt ic Chur ch. The Nazar e ne move me nt as a Chur ch is docume nt e d wit hin t he Ce lt ic Chur ch r e cor ds as be ing f or mally imple me nt e d as t he Chur ch of J e sus in AD 3 7 , f our ye ar s af t e r t he Cr ucif ixion. The Roman Chur ch was f or me d 3 0 0 ye ar s lat e r , af t e r Paul and Pe t e r ' s Chr ist ians had be e n pe r se cut e d f or t hr e e ce nt ur ie s. Thr ough many ce nt ur ie s t he Nazar e ne -base d Ce lt ic Chur ch move me nt was dir e ct ly oppose d t he r e f or e t o t he Chur ch of Rome . The dif f e r e nce was a simple one : t he Nazar e ne f ait h was base d on t he t e achings of J e sus himse lf . The gut s of t he r e ligion, t he mor al code s, t he be haviour al pat t e r ns, t he social pr act ice s, t he laws and j ust ice s r e lat e d t o Old Te st ame nt t e aching but wit h a libe r al me ssage of e qualit y in mind-t his was t he r e ligion of J e sus. Roman Chr ist ianit y is "Chur chianit y". I t was not t he me ssage of J e sus t hat was impor t ant : t his Chur ch t ur ne d J e sus int o t he r e ligion. I n shor t , t he Nazar e ne Chur ch was t he t r ue social Chur ch. The Roman Chur ch was t he Chur ch of t he Empe r or s and t he Pope s; t his was t he I mpe r ial hybr id move me nt . Apar t f r om st r aight f or war d misunde r st andings, misint e r pr e t at ions and mist r anslat ions, t he canonical Gospe ls suf f e r f r om nume r ous pur pose f ul ame ndme nt s. S ome or iginal e nt r ie s have be e n change d or de le t e d; ot he r e nt r ie s have be e n adde d t o suit t he Chur ch' s ve st e d int e r e st . Back in t he f our t h ce nt ur y whe n t he t e xt s we r e t r anslat e d int o Lat in f r om t he ir or iginal Gr e e k and S e mit ic t ongue s, t he maj or it y of t he se e dit s and ame ndme nt s we r e made . Eve n e ar lie r , about AD 19 5 -one t housand, e ight hundr e d ye ar s agoBishop Cle me nt of Ale xandr ia made t he f ir st known ame ndme nt f r om t he Gospe l t e xt s. He de le t e d a subst ant ial se ct ion f r om t he Gospe l of Mar k, wr it t e n mor e t han a hundr e d ye ar s be f or e t hat t ime , and he j ust if ie d his act ion in a le t t e r . "For e ve n if t he y should say some t hing

t r ue , one who love s t he Tr ut h should not ...agr e e wit h t he m... For not all t r ue t hings ar e t o be said t o all me n." I nt e r e st ing. What he me ant was t hat e ve n at t hat ve r y e ar ly st age t he r e was alr e ady a discr e pancy be t we e n what t he Gospe l wr it e r s had wr it t e n and what t he bishops want e d t o t e ach. Today, t his se ct ion de le t e d by S t Cle me nt is st ill missing f r om t he Gospe l of Mar k. But whe n Mar k is compar e d wit h t he Gospe l t hat we know t oday, e ve n wit hout t hat se ct ion we f ind t hat t oday' s Gospe l is a good de al longe r t han t he or iginal! One of t he se addit ional se ct ions compr ise s t he whole of t he Re sur r e ct ion se que nce ; t his amount s t o t we lve f ull ve r se s at t he e nd of Mar k, chapt e r 16 . I t ' s now known t hat e ve r yt hing t old about t he e ve nt s af t e r t he Cr ucif ixion was adde d by Chur ch bishops or t he ir scr ibe s some t ime in t he lat e f our t h ce nt ur y. Alt hough t his is conf ir me d in t he Vat ican ar chive s, it is dif f icult f or most pe ople t o gain acce ss-and e ve n if t he y do, old Gr e e k is ve r y dif f icult t o unde r st and. But what e xact ly was in t his se ct ion of Mar k t hat Cle me nt saw f it t o r e move ? I t was t he se ct ion t hat de alt wit h t he r aising of Lazar us. I n t he cont e xt of t he or iginal Mar k t e xt , howe ve r , Lazar us was por t r aye d in a st at e of e xcommunicat ion: spir it ual de at h by de cr e e , not physical de at h. The account e ve n had Lazar us and J e sus calling t o e ach ot he r be f or e t he t omb was ope ne d. This de f e at e d t he bishops' de sir e t o por t r ay t he r aising of Lazar us as a spir it ual mir acle , not as a simple r e le ase f r om e xcommunicat ion. Mor e impor t ant ly, it se t t he sce ne f or t he st or y of t he Cr ucif ixion of J e sus himse lf , whose own subse que nt r aising f r om spir it ual de at h was de t e r mine d by t he same t hr e e -day r ule t hat applie d t o Lazar us. J e sus was r aise d (r e le ase d or r e sur r e ct e d) f r om de at h by de cr e e on t he st at ut or y t hir d day. I n t he case of Lazar us, howe ve r , J e sus f lout e d t he r ule s by r aising his f r ie nd af t e r t he t hr e e -day pe r iod of

symbolic sickne ss. At t hat point , civil de at h would have be come absolut e in t he e ye s of t he le gal e lde r s. Lazar us would have be e n wr appe d in sacking and bur ie d alive . His cr ime was t hat he had le d a viole nt pe ople ' s-r e volt t o saf e guar d t he public wat e r supply which had be e n dive r t e d t hr ough a ne w Roman aque duct in J e r usale m. But J e sus pe r f or me d t his r e le ase while not holding any pr ie st ly e nt it le me nt t o do so. What happe ne d was t hat He r od-Ant ipas of Galile e compe lle d t he High Pr ie st of J e r usale m t o r e le nt in f avour of J e sus-and t his was r e gar de d as an unpr e ce de nt e d mir acle ! But t he r e was mor e t o t he r e move d se ct ion of Mar k, be cause in t e lling t he st or y of Lazar us t he Mar k account made it pe r f e ct ly cle ar t hat J e sus and Mar y Magdale ne we r e act ually man and wif e . The Lazar us st or y in J ohn cont ains a r at he r st r ange se que nce t hat has Mar t ha coming f r om t he Lazar us house t o gr e e t J e sus, whe r e as he r sist e r , Mar y Magdale ne , r e mains inside unt il summone d by J e sus. But in cont r ast t o t his, t he or iginal Mar k account said t hat Mar y Magdale ne act ually came out of t he house wit h Mar t ha and was t he n chast ise d by t he disciple s and se nt back indoor s t o await J e sus' inst r uct ion. This was a spe cif ic pr oce dur e of J udaic law, whe r e by a wif e in r it ual mour ning was not allowe d t o e me r ge f r om t he pr ope r t y unt il inst r uct e d by he r husband. The r e ' s a good de al of inf or mat ion out side t he Bible t o conf ir m t hat J e sus and Mar y Magdale ne we r e man and wif e . But is t he r e anyt hing r e le vant in t he Gospe ls t oday, anyt hing t hat t he e dit or s misse d t hat t e lls us t he st or y? We ll, t he r e ar e some spe cif ic t hings and t he r e ar e some ancillar y t hings. The r e ar e se ve n list s give n in t he Gospe ls of t he wome n who pe r mane nt ly se e me d t o f ollow J e sus ar ound, and t he se include J e sus' mot he r ; but in six of t he se se ve n list s t he f ir st name , e ve n ahe ad of his mot he r , is Mar y Magdale ne . Whe n one st udie s ot he r list s of t he pe r iod which r e lat e t o any f or m of hie r ar chical socie t y, one not ice s

t hat t he "f ir st lady" was always t he f ir st name list e d. The t e r m "Fir st Lady" is use d in Ame r ica t oday. The f ir st lady was t he most se nior ; she was always name d f ir st -and as t he Me ssianic Q ue e n, Mar y Magdale ne would have be e n name d f ir st , as inde e d she was. But is t he mar r iage de f ine d in t he Gospe ls? We ll, it is. Many have sugge st e d t hat t he we dding at Cana was t he mar r iage of J e sus and Mar y Magdale ne . This was not t he we dding ce r e mony as such, alt hough t he mar r iage is de t aile d in t he Gospe ls. The mar r iage is t he quit e se par at e anoint ings at Be t hany. I n Luke we have a f ir st anoint ing by Mar y of J e sus, t wo-and-a-half ye ar s be f or e t he se cond anoint ing. I t doe sn' t occur t o many pe ople t hat t he y ar e dif f e r e nt st or ie s, but t he y ar e t wo-and-a-half ye ar s apar t . Re ade r s of t he f ir st ce nt ur y would have be e n f ully conve r sant wit h t he t wo-par t r it ual of t he sacr e d mar r iage of a dynast ic he ir . J e sus, as we know, was a "Me ssiah", which me ans quit e simply an "Anoint e d One ". I n f act , all anoint e d se nior pr ie st s and Davidic kings we r e Me ssiahs. J e sus was not unique . Alt hough not an or daine d pr ie st , he gaine d his r ight t o Me ssiah st at us by way of de sce nt f r om King David and t he kingly line , but he did not achie ve t hat Me ssiah st at us unt il he was act ually physically anoint e d by Mar y Magdale ne , in he r capacit y as a high pr ie st e ss, shor t ly be f or e t he Cr ucif ixion. The wor d "Me ssiah" come s f r om t he He br e w ve r b "t o anoint ", which it se lf is de r ive d f r om t he Egypt ian wor d me sse h, "t he holy cr ocodile ". I t was wit h t he f at of t he me sse h t hat t he Phar aoh' s sist e r -br ide s anoint e d t he ir husbands on mar r iage . The Egypt ian cust om spr ang f r om kingly pr act ice in old Me sopot amia. I n t he Old Te st ame nt ' s S ong of S olomon we he ar again of t he br idal anoint ing of t he king. I t is de f ine d t hat t he oil use d in J udah was t he f r agr ant oint me nt spike nar d, an e xpe nsive r oot oil f r om t he Himalayas, and we le ar n t hat t his anoint ing r it ual was pe r f or me d always while t he

husband/ king sat at t he t able . I n t he Ne w Te st ame nt , t he anoint ing of J e sus by Mar y Magdale ne was inde e d pe r f or me d while he sat at t he t able , and wit h t he br idal anoint me nt of spike nar d. Af t e r war ds, Mar y wipe d his f e e t wit h he r hair , and on t he f ir st occasion of t he t wo-par t mar r iage she we pt . All of t he se t hings signif y t he mar it al anoint ing of a dynast ic he ir . Ot he r anoint ings of Me ssiahs, whe t he r on cor onat ion or admission t o t he se nior pr ie st hood, we r e always conduct e d by me n, by t he High Zadok or t he High Pr ie st . The oil use d was olive oil, mixe d wit h cinnamon and ot he r spice s; ne ve r , e ve r spike nar d. S pike nar d was t he e xpr e ss pr e r ogat ive of a Me ssianic br ide who had t o be a Mar y, a sist e r of a sacr e d or de r . J e sus' mot he r was a Mar y; so, t oo, would his wif e have be e n a Mar y, by t it le at le ast if not by bapt ismal name . S ome conve nt ual or de r s st ill maint ain t he t r adit ion by adding t he t it le "Mar y" t o t he bapt ismal name s of t he ir nuns: S ist e r Mar y The r e sa, S ist e r Mar y Louise . Me ssianic mar r iage s we r e always conduct e d in t wo st age s. The f ir st st age , t he anoint ing in Luke , was t he le gal commit me nt t o we dlock. The se cond st age , t he anoint ing in Mat t he w, Mar k and J ohn, was t he ce me nt ing of t he cont r act . And in J e sus and Mar y' s case , t he se cond anoint ing at Be t hany was of e xpr e ss signif icance . He r e t he Gr ail st or y be gins, be cause , as e xplaine d in books of J e wish law at t he t ime and by Flavius J ose phus in The Ant iquit ie s of t he J e ws, t he se cond par t of t his mar r iage ce r e mony was ne ve r conduct e d unt il t he wif e was t hr e e mont hs pr e gnant . Dynast ic he ir s such as J e sus we r e e xpr e ssly r e quir e d t o pe r pe t uat e t he ir line s. Mar r iage was e sse nt ial, but t he law had t o pr ot e ct t he m against mar r iage t o wome n who pr ove d bar r e n or ke pt miscar r ying, and t his pr ot e ct ion was pr ovide d by t he t hr e e -mont h-pr e gnancy r ule . Miscar r iage s would not of t e n happe n af t e r t hat t e r m, and once t he y

got t hr ough t hat pe r iod it was conside r e d saf e e nough t o comple t e t he mar r iage cont r act . Whe n anoint ing he r husband at t his st age , t he Me ssianic br ide , in accor dance wit h cust om, was said t o be anoint ing him f or bur ial. This is conf ir me d in t he Gospe ls. The br ide would f r om t hat day car r y a vial of spike nar d ar ound he r ne ck, f or t he r e st of he r husband' s lif e ; she would use it again on his e nt ombme nt . I t was f or t his ve r y pur pose t hat Mar y Magdale ne would have gone t o t he t omb, as she did on t he S abbat h af t e r t he Cr ucif ixion. S ubse que nt t o t he se cond Be t hany anoint ing, t he Gospe ls r e lat e t hat J e sus said: "Whe r e soe ve r t his Gospe l shall be pr e ache d t hr oughout t he whole wor ld, t his also t hat she hat h done shall be spoke n of f or a me mor ial of he r ." I n his f amous r e nde r ing of t he e ve nt , t he Re naissance ar t ist Fr a Ange lico act ually de pict e d J e sus placing a cr own on t he he ad of Mar y Magdale ne . But de spit e t he f act t hat Fr a Ange lico was a le ar ne d 15 t hce nt ur y Dominican f r iar , did t he Chr ist ian Chur ch aut hor it ie s honour Mar y Magdale ne and spe ak of t his act as a me mor ial of he r ? No; t he y did not . The y comple t e ly ignor e d J e sus' own dir e ct ive and de nounce d Mar y as a whor e . To t he e sot e r ic Chur ch and t he Knight s Te mplar s, howe ve r , Mar y Magdale ne was always r e gar de d as a saint . S he is st ill r e ve r e d as such by many t oday, but t he int e r e st ing par t about t his saint hood, whe n we t hink about Gr ail lor e , is t hat Mar y is list e d as t he pat r on saint of wine gr owe r s, t he guar dian of t he vine -t he guar dian of t he Holy Gr ail, t he guar dian of t he sacr e d bloodline . The r e is much in t he Gospe ls t hat we don' t pr e sume t o be t he r e be cause we ar e ne ve r e ncour age d t o look be yond t he supe r f icial le ve l. We ' ve be e n aide d gr e at ly in t his r e gar d in r e ce nt ye ar s by t he De ad S e a S cr olls and by t he e xt r aor dinar y r e se ar ch of Aust r alian t he ologian Dr Bar bar a Thie r ing.

The De ad S e a S cr olls have ope ne d up a whole ne w awar e ne ss of j ar gon; we have a whole ne w e nlight e nme nt he r e . The y se t down t he communit y of f ice s of t he Me ssiah of I sr ae l. The y t e ll us about t he council of t we lve de le gat e apost le s who we r e pe r mane nt ly appoint e d t o pr e side ove r spe cif ic aspe ct s of gove r nme nt and r it ual. This le ads t o a gr e at e r awar e ne ss of t he apost le s t he mse lve s. We now know not only what t he ir name s we r e -we always kne w t hat -but we can unde r st and who t he y we r e , who t he ir f amilie s we r e , what t he ir dut ie s and posit ions we r e . We now unde r st and f r om st udying t he Gospe ls t hat t he r e is an alle gor y wit hin t he m: t he use of wor ds t hat we don' t unde r st and t oday. We now know t hat bapt ismal pr ie st s we r e calle d "f ishe r s"; we know t hat t hose who aide d t he m by hauling t he bapt ismal candidat e s int o t he boat s in lar ge ne t s we r e calle d "f ishe r me n"; and we know t hat t he bapt ismal candidat e s t he mse lve s we r e calle d "f ishe s". The apost le s J ame s and J ohn we r e bot h or daine d "f ishe r s". The br ot he r s Pe t e r and Andr e w we r e lay "f ishe r me n", and J e sus pr omise d t he m pr ie st hood wit hin t he ne w minist r y, saying "I will make you t o be come f ishe r s of me n". We now know t he r e was a par t icular j ar gon of t he Gospe l e r a, a j ar gon t hat would have be e n r e adily unde r st ood by anybody r e ading t he Gospe ls in t he f ir st ce nt ur y and be yond. The se j ar gonist ic wor ds have be e n lost t o lat e r int e r pr e t at ion. Today, f or e xample , we call our t he at r e inve st or s "ange ls" and our t op e nt e r t aine r s "st ar s", but what would a r e ade r f r om some dist ant cult ur e in t wo t housand ye ar s' t ime make of "The ange l we nt t o t alk t o t he st ar s"? The Gospe ls ar e f ull of t he se j ar gonist ic wor ds. "The poor ", "t he le pe r s", "t he mult it ude ", "t he blind"-none of t he se was what we pr e sume it t o me an t oday. De f init ions such as "clouds", "she e p", "f ishe s", "loave s" and a var ie t y of ot he r s we r e all r e lat e d, j ust like "st ar s", t o pe ople . Whe n t he Gospe ls we r e wr it t e n in t he f ir st ce nt ur y t he y we r e issue d int o a Roman-cont r olle d e nvir onme nt . The ir cont e nt had t o be disguise d

against Roman scr ut iny. The inf or mat ion was of t e n polit ical; it was code d, ve ile d. Whe r e impor t ant se ct ions appe ar e d t he y we r e of t e n he r alde d by t he wor ds, "This is f or t hose wit h e ar s t o he ar "-f or t hose who unde r st and t he code . I t was no dif f e r e nt t o t he code d inf or mat ion passe d be t we e n me mbe r s of oppr e sse d gr oups t hr oughout hist or y. The r e was a code f ound in docume nt at ion passe d be t we e n t he lat e r J e ws in Ge r many in t he 19 3 0 s and 19 4 0 s. Thr ough our knowle dge of t his scr ibal cr ypt ology we can now de t e r mine dat e s and locat ions wit h ve r y gr e at accur acy. We can uncove r many of t he hidde n me anings in t he Gospe ls t o t he e xt e nt t hat t he mir acle s t he mse lve s t ake on a whole ne w cont e xt . I n doing so, t his doe s not in any way de cr y t he f act t hat a man like J e sus, and, in f act , spe cif ically J e sus, was obviously a ve r y spe cial pe r son wit h e nor mously spe cial powe r s, but t he Gospe ls laid down ce r t ain st or ie s which have since be come de scr ibe d as "mir acle s". The se we r e not put down be cause t he y we r e r e ally mir aculous supe r nat ur al e ve nt s; t he y we r e put down be cause in t he t he n-cur r e nt polit ical ar e na t he y we r e act ually quit e unpr e ce de nt e d act ions which succe ssf ully f lout e d t he law. We now know ot he r t hings. We now know why t he Gospe ls ar e of t e n not in agr e e me nt wit h e ach ot he r . For e xample , Mar k says t hat J e sus was cr ucif ie d at t he t hir d hour , whe r e as J ohn says he was cr ucif ie d at t he sixt h hour . This doe s not , on t he f ace of it , look t oo impor t ant , but , as we shall se e , t his t hr e e -hour t ime dif f e r e nce was cr ucial t o t he e ve nt s t hat f ollowe d. Le t ' s look at t he wat e r and wine at Cana, f ollowing t he st or y t hr ough what t he Bible act ually t e lls us, as against what we t hink we know. What was a ve r y st r aight f or war d e ve nt is now dubbe d wit h supe r nat ur al ove r t one s. The Cana we dding, out of f our Gospe ls, is de scr ibe d only in J ohn. I f it was so impor t ant t o t he Chur ch as a mir acle , why is it not in t he ot he r t hr e e Gospe ls? I t doe s not say (as is so of t e n said f r om pulpit s): "The y r an out of wine ." I t doe sn' t say t hat .

I t says: "Whe n t he y want e d wine , t he mot he r of J e sus said, ' The y have no wine .' " The Gospe l t e lls us t hat t he pe r son in char ge was t he r ule r of t he f e ast . This spe cif ically de f ine s it not as a we dding ce r e mony as such, but a pr e -we dding be t r ot hal f e ast . The wine t ake n at be t r ot hal f e ast s was only available t o pr ie st s and ce libat e J e ws, not t o mar r ie d me n, novice s or any ot he r s who we r e r e gar de d as be ing unsanct if ie d. The y we r e allowe d only wat e r -a pur if icat ion r it ual, as st at e d in J ohn. Whe n t he t ime came f or t his r it ual, Mar y, cle ar ly not happy about t he discr iminat ion and dir e ct ing J e sus' at t e nt ion t o t he unsanct if ie d gue st s, said: "The y have no wine ." Having not ye t be e n anoint e d t o Me ssiah st at us, J e sus r e sponde d: "Mine hour is not ye t come ." At t his, Mar y f or ce d t he issue and J e sus t he n f lout e d conve nt ion, abandoning wat e r alt oge t he r . Wine f or e ve r yone ! The r ule r of t he f e ast made no comme nt what soe ve r about any mir acle ; he simply e xpr e sse d his amaze me nt t hat t he wine had t ur ne d up at t hat st age of t he pr oce e dings. I t ' s be e n sugge st e d of t e n t hat t he we dding at Cana was J e sus' own we dding ce r e mony be cause he and his mot he r displaye d a r ight of command t hat would not be associat e d wit h or dinar y gue st s. Howe ve r , t his f e ast can be dat e d t o t he summe r of AD 3 0 , in t he mont h e quivale nt t o J une . Fir st we ddings we r e always he ld in t he mont h of At one me nt (S e pt e mbe r ), and be t r ot hal f e ast s we r e he ld t hr e e mont hs be f or e t hat . I n t his inst ance , we f ind t hat t he f ir st mar it al anoint ing of J e sus by Mar y Magdale ne was at t he At one me nt of AD 3 0 , t hr e e mont hs af t e r t he Cana ce r e mony which appe ar s t o have be e n t he ir own be t r ot hal f e ast . The Gospe ls t e ll a st or y t hat alt hough not always in agr e e me nt f r om Gospe l t o Gospe l is act ually f ollowable out side t he Bible . The account s of J e sus' act ivit ie s r ight up t o t he t ime of t he Cr ucif ixion can be

f ound in var ious r e cor ds of t he e r a. I n t he of f icial annals of I mpe r ial Rome , t he t r ial by Pilat e and t he Cr ucif ixion ar e me nt ione d. We can de t e r mine pr e cise ly f r om t his chr onological diar y of t he Roman gove r nor s t hat t he Cr ucif ixion t ook place at t he Mar ch Passove r of AD 3 3 . The Be t hany se cond mar r iage anoint ing was in t he we e k pr ior t o t hat . We know t hat at t hat st age Mar y Magdale ne had t o have be e n t hr e e mont hs pr e gnant , by law-which me ans she should have give n bir t h in S e pt e mbe r of AD 3 3 . That , we ' ll come back t o. I f t he Gospe ls ar e r e ad as t he y ar e wr it t e n, J e sus appe ar s as a libe r at ing dynast , e nde avour ing t o unit e t he pe ople of t he e r a against t he oppr e ssion of t he Roman Empir e . J udae a at t he t ime was j ust like Fr ance unde r Ge r man occupat ion in Wor ld War I I . The aut hor it ie s we r e cont r olle d by t he milit ar y occupat ional f or ce ; r e sist ance move me nt s we r e common. J e sus was await e d, e xpe ct e d, and by t he e nd of t he st or y had be come an anoint e d Me ssiah. I n t he f ir st ce nt ur y Ant iquit ie s of t he J e ws, J e sus is calle d "a wise man", "a t e ache r " and "t he King". The r e is not hing t he r e about divinit y. While t he De ad S e a S cr olls ide nt if y t he Me ssiah of I sr ae l as t he S upr e me Milit ar y Commande r of I sr ae l, it is no se cr e t t he apost le s we r e ar me d. Fr om t he t ime of r e cr uit me nt , J e sus che cke d t hat t he y all had swor ds. At t he ve r y e nd of t he st or y, Pe t e r dr e w his swor d against Malchus. J e sus said, "I come not t o se nd pe ace but a swor d." Many of t he high-r anking J e ws in J e r usale m we r e quit e cont e nt t o hold posit ions of powe r backe d by a f or e ign milit ar y r e gime . Apar t f r om t hat , t he He br e w gr oups t he mse lve s we r e se ct ar ian; t he y did not want t o shar e t he ir God J e hovah wit h anybody e lse , spe cif ically uncle an Ge nt ile s. To t he Phar ise e s and S adduce e s, t he J e ws we r e God' s chose n pe ople : He be longe d t o t he m, t he y be longe d t o Him. But t he r e we r e ot he r J e ws-t he r e we r e t he Nazar e ne s, t he r e we r e t he Esse ne s-who

we r e inf lue nce d by a mor e libe r al, we st e r n doct r ine . I n t he e ve nt , J e sus' mission f aile d; t he r if t was insur mount able . Ge nt ile s, in mode r nday language , ar e simply t he non-J e wish Ar ab r ace s-and t he r if t is st ill t he r e t oday. The se nt e ncing of J e sus was by t he Roman Gove r nor Pont ius Pilat e , but J e sus was act ually conde mne d and e xcommunicat e d pr ior t o t hat by t he S anhe dr in Council. I t was de cide d t o cont r ive a punishme nt , whe r e by J e sus would be se nt e nce d by t he Roman Gove r nor who was alr e ady t r ying ot he r pr isone r s f or le ading insur r e ct ions against himse lf . As conf ir me d by t he S upr e me J udge and At t or ne y-Ge ne r al of I sr ae l e ve n t oday, it was quit e ille gal f or t he S anhe dr in Council t o sit at night or t o sit and ope r at e dur ing t he Passove r , so t he t iming was pe r f e ct . The y had an ide al oppor t unit y, and a r e ason t o say: "S or r y, we can' t do t his our se lve s. You, t he Roman Gove r nor , have t o do t his." As f or J e sus' de at h on t he Cr oss, it is pe r f e ct ly plain t his was spir it ual de at h, not physical de at h, as de t e r mine d by t he t hr e e -day r ule t hat e ve r ybody in t he f ir st ce nt ur y r e ading t his would have unde r st ood. I n civil and le gal t e r ms, J e sus was alr e ady de ad whe n he was place d on t he Cr oss. He was de nounce d, scour ge d, pr e par e d f or de at h by de cr e e . Today, we call t his "e xcommunicat ion". For t hr e e days J e sus would have be e n nominally sick, wit h absolut e de at h coming on t he f our t h day. On t hat day he would be e nt ombe d, bur ie d alive ; but dur ing t he f ir st t hr e e days he could be r aise d or r e sur r e ct e d. I n f act , he pr e dict e d t hat he would. Raisings and r e sur r e ct ions (apar t f r om t he f act t hat J e sus once f lout e d t he r ule , and t hat was a mir acle !) could only be pe r f or me d by t he High Pr ie st or by t he Fat he r of t he Communit y. The High Pr ie st at t hat t ime was J ose ph Caiaphas, t he ve r y man who conde mne d J e sus; t he r e f or e t he r aising had t o be pe r f or me d by t he pat r iar chal Fat he r .

The r e ar e Gospe l account s of J e sus t alking t o t he Fat he r f r om t he Cr oss, culminat ing in "Fat he r , int o t hy hands I comme nd my spir it ", and at t hat t ime we know f r om t he list ings t hat t he appoint e d Fat he r was t he Magian apost le S imon Ze lot e s. We have be e n t aught t hat J e sus' physical de at h was pr ove d by t he blood and wat e r t hat f lowe d whe n he was pie r ce d by t he spe ar , but t his has be e n ve r y badly t r anslat e d. The or iginal wor d doe s not t r anslat e t o "pie r ce d"; it t r anslat e s t o "pr icke d" or t o "scr at che d". This in t ur n was mist r anslat e d int o t he Lat in ve r b "t o ope n", and int o t he English wor d "pie r ce d". The y we r e not pr imit ive t ime s. The y we r e t ime s whe n t he r e we r e doct or s, me dical me n; t he r e we r e e ve n f or ms of hospit al. And we can se e t hat , j ust like t oday, t he t e st f or r e f le x act ion was scr at ching, pr odding or pr icking t he skin wit h a shar p inst r ume nt . I have in my posse ssion a le t t e r f r om a sur ge on of t he Br it ish Me dical Council. I t says: "Me dically, t he out f low of wat e r is impossible t o e xplain. Blood f lowing f r om a st ab wound is e vide nce of lif e , not de at h. I t would t ake a lar ge , gaping lace r at ion f or any dr op of blood t o f low f r om a de ad body be cause t he r e is no vascular act ion." S o le t ' s look f ur t he r ; le t ' s look at what t he Gospe ls act ually said. J ose ph of Ar imat he a t ook down J e sus' body f r om t he Cr oss. I n f act , t he wor d t hat was t r anslat e d t o t he English wor d "body" was t he Gr e e k wor d soma, me aning "live body". The alt e r nat ive wor d de not ing "de ad body" or "cor pse " w ould have be e n pt oma. J e sus ve r y appar e nt ly sur vive d, and t his is e xplicit ly maint aine d in ot he r books. Eve n t he Kor an says t hat J e sus sur vive d t he Cr ucif ixion. Dur ing t hat Fr iday af t e r noon whe n J e sus was on t he Cr oss, t he r e was a t hr e e -hour -f or war d t ime change . Time was r e cor de d t he n by sundials and by pr ie st s who mar ke d t he hour s by a se que nce of me asur e d

pr aye r se ssions. I n e sse nce , t he r e we r e dayt ime hour s and t he r e we r e night -t ime hour s. Today we have a t we nt y-f our -hour day. I n J ohn, J e sus said: "Ar e t he r e not t we lve hour s in a day?" Ye s, t he r e we r e t we lve hour s in a day and t he r e we r e t we lve hour s in t he night , and dayt ime st ar t e d at sunr ise . Fr om t ime t o t ime t he be ginning of dayt ime change d; t hus t he be ginning of night -t ime change d. I n Mar ch, t he be ginning of dayt ime would have be e n some whe r e r ound about six o' clock in t he mor ning, as we know it . We know t hat J ose ph of Ar imat he a ne got iat e d wit h Pont ius Pilat e t o have J e sus r e move d f r om t he Cr oss af t e r a f e w hour s of hanging. The Gospe ls don' t act ually agr e e on t he se que nce of e ve nt s he r e : some use t he t ime be f or e t he t ime change ; some use t he t ime af t e r t he t ime change . But t hr e e hour s disappe ar e d f r om t he day, t o be r e place d wit h t hr e e night -t ime hour s. Daylight hour s we r e subst it ut e d by hour s of dar kne ss. The land f e ll int o dar kne ss f or t hr e e hour s, we ar e t old in t he Gospe ls. Today we would simply, in a split se cond, add t hr e e night t ime hour s t o t he day. But t he se t hr e e hour s we r e t he cr ux of e ve r y single e ve nt t hat f ollowe d, be cause t he He br e w lunar ist s made t he ir change dur ing t he dayt ime . The solar ist s, of which t he Esse ne s and t he Magi we r e f act ions, did not make t he ir change unt il midnight -which act ually me ans t hat accor ding t o t he Gospe l t hat r e lat e s t o He br e w t ime , J e sus was cr ucif ie d at t he t hir d hour ; but in t he ot he r , solar t ime he was cr ucif ie d at t he sixt h hour . On t hat e ve ning t he He br e ws be gan t he ir S abbat h at t he old nine o' clock, but t he Esse ne s and Magians st ill had t hr e e hour s t o go be f or e t he S abbat h. I t was t hose t hr e e hour s t hat e nable d t he m t o wor k wit h, on and f or J e sus, dur ing a pe r iod of t ime in which nobody e lse was allowe d t o unde r t ake any physical wor k what soe ve r . And so we come t o pr obably one of t he most misunde r st ood e ve nt s of the Bible

I

did not de cide t o wr it e t he book [Bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail]. The

book happe ne d by accide nt , not by de sign. I t happe ne d by vir t ue of t he f act t hat f or about t he last t e n ye ar s I have be e n t he appoint e d hist or ian and sove r e ign ge ne alogist t o t hir t y-t hr e e r oyal f amilie s. I t happe ne d be cause dur ing t hose e ar ly pe r iods I was docume nt ing e vide nce on t he hist or y of t hose r oyal f amilie s and t he ir noble of f shoot s, and t he chivalr ic ar chive s of t hose noble and sove r e ign f amilie s. What I was doing was put t ing t oge t he r wr it t e n chr onological account s of t hings t hat t he se f amilie s kne w t he subst ance of but did not ne ce ssar ily know t he de t ail of . I t is t he r e ason why in Br it ain and Eur ope I ne ce ssar ily spe nd f ar le ss t ime on t his biblical aspe ct , be cause t he r e ' s a lot of what we ' ll t alk about t onight t hat in Eur ope is t ake n as r e ad. I t was ne ve r any se cr e t whe n my book came out , f or t he maj or it y of t he se pe ople , t hat J e sus was mar r ie d and t hat J e sus had he ir s, be cause it was wr it t e n as such in ve r y many f amily ar chive s, not ne ce ssar ily j ust pr ivat e but in t he ope n domain. The publishe d pape r s of Mar y, Q ue e n of S cot s t alk about it at le ngt h. The pape r s of J ame s I I of England, who was wasn' t de pose d unt il 16 8 8 , t alk of it at le ngt h. I n put t ing t oge t he r t he de t ail, ge ne r at ion by ge ne r at ion, of t his st or y, we we r e act ually compiling some t hing f or post e r it y t hat , at t hat point in t ime whe n I be gan t he wor k, was locke d away in boxe s and cupboar ds, and I was act ually in a posit ion whe r e I was pr e se nt e d wit h t hings and said, "Look, t his says, ' Last ope ne d in 17 3 2 !". S o, some ve r y, ve r y old docume nt at ion, not only last ope ne d in se ve nt e e n-whe ne ve r , but act ually docume nt e d and wr it t e n down hundr e ds of ye ar s be f or e t hat . The book happe ne d by accide nt . Ove r a pe r iod of t ime -pr obably, looking back now, t e n or t we lve ye ar s ago-I be gan t his wor k wit h

se par at e commissions f r om se par at e f amilie s, doing wor k on t he se ge ne alogie s. What happe ne d was t he y be gan t o conve r ge . I t be came ve r y appar e nt -and it t ook a long t ime be cause ge ne alogie s have t o be done backwar ds, put t oge t he r backwar ds and const r uct e d backwar dsbut what was happe ning was t hat a t r iangle , f r om a lar ge t op base wit h nume r ous f amily line s, was pulling in t o a point . I sudde nly r e alise d what t his point was, and I said, "Wow, do you r e alise what I ' ve f ound he r e ?"; and t he y said, "Ah, you know t he f at he r of so and so?"; and I said, "No, no, no; I ' m act ually f inding t hat t his come s out of t he House of J udah in t he f ir st ce nt ur y"; and t he y said, "Oh, ye ah, we know all t hat ; what we want e d you t o do was f or you..."; and I said, "We ll, t he r e ar e millions of pe ople out t he r e who do not know about it , so le t ' s t ur n t his t r iangle upside down and t ur n it int o a book!". S o t hat ' s how t he book happe ne d. On t op of t hat , f or t he last six ye ar s I have be e n Br it ain' s Gr and Pr ior of t he S acr e d Kindr e d of S aint Columba, t he r oyal e ccle siast ical se at of t he Ce lt ic Chur ch. S o I had, also, acce ss t o Ce lt ic Chur ch r e cor ds dat ing back t o AD 3 7 . Be cause of my at t achme nt s t o t he f amilie s, t o t he knight ly or de r s, I also had acce ss t o Te mplar docume nt s, t o t he ve r y docume nt s t hat t he Knight s Te mplar br ought out in Eur ope in 112 8 and conf r ont e d t he Chur ch e st ablishme nt wit h, and f r ight e ne d t he lif e out of t he m wit h, be cause t he se we r e docume nt s t hat t alke d about bloodline and ge ne alogy, and we ' ll ge t on t o t hat . S o t onight we ' r e going t o e mbar k on a t ime -honour e d que st . S ome have calle d it t he ult imat e que st . The Chr ist ian Chur ch has conde mne d it as a he r e sy, and it is, of cour se , t he que st f or t he Holy Gr ail. A he r e sy is de scr ibe d in all dict ionar ie s as "an opinion which is cont r ar y t o t he or t hodox dogma of t he Chr ist ian bishops", and, in t his r e gar d, t hose ot he r que st s which compr ise much of t oday' s scie nt if ic and me dical r e se ar ch ar e e qually he r e t ical. The wor d "he r e sy" is, in

e sse nce , not hing mor e t han a de r ogat or y labe l, a t ag use d by a f e ar f ul Chur ch e st ablishme nt t hat has long sought t o maint ain cont r ol of socie t y t hr ough f e ar of t he unknown. A he r e sy can t he r e f or e de f ine t hose aspe ct s of philosophy, r e se ar ch, which que st int o t he r e alms of t he unknown, and which f r om t ime t o t ime pr ovide answe r s and solut ions t hat ar e quit e cont r ar y t o Chur ch doct r ine . Q ue st s ar e by t he ir ve r y nat ur e int r iguing; hist or y and hist or ical r e se ar ch ar e e nlight e ning; but t he f indings f r om ne it he r ar e of any use what soe ve r unle ss t he r e ar e pr e se nt -day applicat ions which, like scie nce and me dicine , can sow t he se e ds of a be t t e r f ut ur e . Hist or y is no mor e t han r e cor de d e xpe r ie nce -ge ne r ally, t he e xpe r ie nce of it s winne r s. I t make s common se nse t o le ar n f r om t he e xpe r ie nce of ye st e r day. I t ' s t hat ve r y e xpe r ie nce which holds t he mor al, cult ur al, polit ical, social ke ys of t omor r ow, and it ' s in t his cont e xt t hat t he Holy Gr ail suppor t s t hat which we call "t he Me ssianic Code ". This is t he code of social pr act ice inst it ut e d by J e sus whe n he washe d his apost le s' f e e t at t he Last S uppe r . I t pe r t ains t o t he obligat ions of giving and r e ce iving se r vice ; it de t e r mine s t hat t hose in posit ions of e le ct e d aut hor it y and inf lue nce should always be awar e of t he ir dut ie s as r e pr e se nt at ive s of socie t y, obligat e d t o se r ve socie t y, not t o pr e sume aut hor it y ove r socie t y. I t is t he e sse nt ial ke y t o de mocr at ic gove r nme nt . This is de f ine d as gove r nme nt by t he pe ople , f or t he pe ople . Wit hout t he imple me nt at ion of t he Gr ail Code , we e xpe r ie nce t he only-t oo-f amiliar gove r nme nt of t he pe ople . This is not de mocr at ic gove r nme nt . Now, in t he cour se of our j our ne y we ' ll be discussing many it e ms which ar e t hor oughly f amiliar , but we ' ll be looking at t he m f r om a dif f e r e nt pe r spe ct ive t o t hat nor mally conve ye d. I n t his r e gar d it will appe ar t hat we ar e of t e n t r e ading wholly ne w gr ound, but in f act it was only t he gr ound t hat e xist e d be f or e it was car pe t e d and conce ale d by t hose wit h ot he r wise ve st e d int e r e st s. Only by r olling back t his car pe t of

pur pose f ul conce alme nt can we succe e d in our que st f or t he Holy Gr ail. S o our que st will be gin in t he Holy Land of J udae a in t he t ime of J e sus and we ' ll spe nd a good while t he r e . I will not move f r om t hat e r a unt il we br e ak, be cause it will t ake t hat long t o se t t he e me r ge nt sce ne f or t he ne xt 2 ,0 0 0 ye ar s of hist or y. We ' ll be t r ave lling t hr ough t he Dar k Age s t he n, t o spe nd some t ime in me diae val Eur ope . The Gr ail myst e r y will t he n be f ollowe d int o King Ar t hur ' s Br it ain and, e ve nt ually, in t ime , t o t he Unit e d S t at e s of Ame r ica whe r e t he Ame r ican f at he r s we r e among t he gr e at e st e xpone nt s of t he Gr ail Code . Emine nt Ame r icans such as Ge or ge Washingt on, J ohn Adams, Be nj amin Fr anklin, Char le s Thompson, Thomas J e f f e r son we r e as much champions of t he Holy Gr ail as we r e King Ar t hur , S ir Lance lot and Galahad. Bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail, t he book, has be e n de scr ibe d as "t he book of me ssianic de sce nt ". I t was a r adio int e r vie we r who calle d it t hat ; and it ' s an apt de scr ipt ion be cause t he book car r ie s t he subt it le , The Hidde n Line age of J e sus Re ve ale d. This of cour se indicat e s t hat J e sus had childr e n and, by implicat ion t he r e f or e , t hat he was mar r ie d. S o was he mar r ie d? Did J e sus have childr e n? I f so, do we know what happe ne d t o t he m? Ar e t he r e de sce ndant s alive t oday? The answe r t o e ach of t he se que st ions is ye s. We shall be looking at t he e me r ge nt f amily in some de t ail. We will f ollow t he st or y, t he ir st or y, ce nt ur y by ce nt ur y; t he st or y of a r e solut e r oyal dynast y, t he de sce ndant he ir s of J e sus who st r uggle d against all odds t hr ough t he ce nt ur ie s t o pr e se r ve t he Me ssianic Royal Code down t o dat e . Tonight ' s st or y will be a conspir acy: usur pe d cr owns, pr ose cut ions, assassinat ions, and t he unwar r ant e d conce alme nt of inf or mat ion f r om t he pe ople of t he We st e r n wor ld. I t ' s an account of good gove r nme nt and bad gove r nme nt ; about how t he pat r iar chal kingship of pe ople was supplant e d by dogmat ic t yr anny and t he dict at or ial lor dship of lands.

I t ' s a compe lling j our ne y of discove r y, a vie w of past age s, but wit h it s e ye f ir mly se t on t he f ut ur e . This is hist or y as it was once wr it t e n but has ne ve r be e n t old. Le t ' s be gin wit h t he most obvious of all que st ions. What is t he Holy Gr ail? How is t he Holy Gr ail conne ct e d wit h t he de sce ndant he ir s of J e sus? The f act t hat J e sus had de sce ndant s might come as a sur pr ise t o some , but it was wide ly known in Br it ain and Eur ope unt il t he lat e Middle Age s, j ust a f e w hundr e d ye ar s ago. I n me diae val t ime s, t he line of me ssianic de sce nt was de f ine d by t he Fr e nch wor d S angr é al. This de r ive d f r om t he t wo wor ds, S ang Ré al, me aning "Blood Royal". This was t he Blood Royal of J udah, t he kingly line of David which pr ogr e sse d t hr ough J e sus and his he ir s. I n English t r anslat ion, t he de f init ion, S angr é al, be came "S an Gr é al", as in "S an" Fr ancisco. Whe n wr it t e n mor e f ully it was wr it t e n "S aint Gr ail", "S aint ", of cour se , r e lat ing t o "Holy"; and by a nat ur al linguist ic pr oce ss came t he mor e r omant ically f amiliar name , "Holy Gr ail". Fr om t he Middle Age s t he r e we r e a numbe r of chivalr ic and milit ar y or de r s spe cif ically at t ache d t o t he Me ssianic Blood Royal in Br it ain and Eur ope . The y include d t he Or de r of t he Re alm of S ion, t he Or de r of t he S acr e d S e pulchr e ; but t he most pr e st igious of all was t he S ove r e ign Or de r of t he S angr é al-t he Knight s of t he Holy Gr ail. This was a dynast ic Or de r of S cot land' s Royal House of S t e war t . I n symbolic t e r ms t he Gr ail is of t e n por t r aye d as a chalice t hat cont ains t he blood of J e sus; alt e r nat ive ly as a vine of gr ape s. The pr oduct of gr ape s is wine , and it is t he chalice and t he wine of Gr ail t r adit ion t hat sit at t he ve r y he ar t of t he Communion, t he Mass, t he Euchar ist ; and t his sacr ame nt , t he S acr e d Chalice , cont ains t he wine t hat r e pr e se nt s t he pe r pe t ual blood of J e sus. I t is quit e appar e nt t hat alt hough maint aining t he ancie nt Communion cust om, t he Chr ist ian Chur ch has conve nie nt ly ignor e d and e le ct e d not

t o t e ach t he t r ue me aning and or igin of t hat cust om. Fe w pe ople e ve n t hink t o e nquir e about t he ult imat e symbolism of t he chalice and wine sacr ame nt , be lie ving t hat it come s simply f r om some gospe l e nt r y r e lat ing t o t he Last S uppe r . We ll, it ' s t he signif icance of t he pe r pe t ual blood of J e sus. How is t he blood of J e sus, or anyone e lse f or t hat mat t e r , pe r pe t uat e d? I t is pe r pe t uat e d t hr ough f amily and line age . S o why was it t hat t he Chur ch aut hor it ie s e le ct e d t o ignor e t he bloodline signif icance of t he Gr ail sacr ame nt ? The y ke pt t he sacr ame nt . Why was it t he y we nt so f ar as t o de nounce Gr ail lor e and Gr ail symbolism as he r e t ical? The f act is t hat e ve r y gove r nme nt and e ve r y chur ch t e ache s t he f or m of hist or y or dogma most conducive t o it s own ve st e d int e r e st . I n t his r e gar d we ' r e all condit ione d t o r e ce iving a ve r y se le ct ive f or m of t e aching. We ar e t aught what we ' r e suppose d t o know, and we ar e t old what we ' r e suppose d t o be lie ve . But f or t he most par t we le ar n bot h polit ical and r e ligious hist or y by way of nat ional or cle r ical pr opaganda, and t his of t e n be come s absolut e dogma, t e achings which may not be challe nge d f or f e ar of r e pr isals. Wit h r e gar d t o t he Chur ch' s at t it ude wine , it is blat ant ly appar e nt t hat t he r e int e r pr e t e d by t he bishops be cause of f spr ing and t he r e f or e t hat he must

t owar ds t he chalice and t he or iginal symbolism had t o be it de not e d t hat J e sus had have unit e d wit h a woman.

But it was not only sacr ame nt s and cust omar y r it ual t hat we r e r e int e r pr e t e d be cause of t his: t he ve r y gospe ls t he mse lve s we r e cor r upt e d t o comply wit h t he male -only e st ablishme nt of t he Chur ch of Rome -much like a mode r n f ilm e dit or will adj ust and se le ct t he t ape s t o achie ve t he de sir e d r e sult , t he r e sult of t he ve st e d int e r e st of t he f ilm-make r . We ' r e all f amiliar wit h t he gospe ls of Mat t he w, Mar k, Luke and J ohn,

but what about t he ot he r gospe ls? What about t he Gospe l of Philip, of Thomas, of Mar y and of Mar y Magdale ne ? What of all t he nume r ous gospe ls and act s and e pist le s t hat we r e not appr ove d by t he Chur ch councils whe n t he Ne w Te st ame nt was collat e d? Why we r e t he y e xclude d whe n t he choice s we r e made ? The r e we r e act ually t wo main cr it e r ia f or se le ct ion of gospe ls f or t he Ne w Te st ame nt . The se we r e de t e r mine d at t he Council of Car t hage in t he ye ar 3 9 7 . The f ir st cr it e r ion was t hat t he Ne w Te st ame nt must be wr it t e n in t he name s of J e sus' own apost le s. Mar k was not an apost le of J e sus, as f ar as we know; nor was Luke . The y we r e colle ague s of t he lat e r S t Paul. Thomas, on t he ot he r hand, was one of t he or iginal t we lve , and ye t t he gospe l in his name was e xclude d. Not only t hat , but along wit h nume r ous ot he r gospe ls and t e xt s it was de st ine d and se nt e nce d t o be de st r oye d. And so t hr oughout t he me diae val wor ld, Thomas and nume r ous ot he r unappr ove d books we r e bur ie d and hidde n in t he f if t h ce nt ur y. Only in r e ce nt t ime s have some of t he se manuscr ipt s be e n une ar t he d, wit h t he gr e at e st f ind be ing at Nag Hammadi in Egypt in 19 4 5 , 1,5 0 0 ye ar s af t e r t he bur ial of t he se docume nt s. Alt hough t he se books we r e n' t r e discove r e d unt il t his pr e se nt ce nt ur y, t he y we r e use d ope nly by t he e ar ly Chr ist ians. Ce r t ain of t he m, including t he gospe ls me nt ione d, along wit h t he Gospe l of Tr ut h, t he Gospe l of t he Egypt ians and ot he r s, we r e act ually me nt ione d in wr it ings by e ar ly chur chme n. Cle me nt of Ale xandr ia, I r e nae us of Lyon, Or ige n of Ale xandr ia-t he y all me nt ion t he se ot he r gospe ls. S o why we r e t he gospe ls of Mar k and Luke se le ct e d if t he y we r e not J e sus' own apost le s? Be cause Mar k and Luke act ually we r e apost le s of J e sus, and t he e ar ly Chur ch f at he r s kne w t his. I n t hose days be f or e t he Ne w Te st ame nt was cor r upt e d, t he y kne w f ull we ll t hat J e sus sur vive d t he Cr ucif ixion. I n t he se e ar ly gospe ls t he r e was no st or y of

Re sur r e ct ion; t his was adde d lat e r . Why we r e ot he r apost olic gospe ls not se le ct e d? Be cause t he r e was a se cond, f ar mor e impor t ant cr it e r ion-t he cr it e r ion by which, in t r ut h, t he gospe l se le ct ion was r e ally made . And t his was a wholly se xist r e gulat ion. I t pr e clude d anyt hing t hat uphe ld t he st at us of wome n in Chur ch or communit y, socie t y. I nde e d, t he Chur ch' s own apost olic const it ut ions we r e compile d on t his basis. The y st at e , "We do not pe r mit our wome n t o t e ach in t he Chur ch, only t o pr ay and t o he ar t hose who t e ach. Our mast e r , whe n he se nt us t he t we lve , did nowhe r e se nd out a woman; f or t he he ad of t he woman is t he man, and is it not r e asonable t hat t he body should gove r n t he he ad?". This was r ubbish, but it was f or t his ve r y r e ason t hat doze ns of gospe ls we r e not se le ct e d-be cause t he y made it quit e cle ar t hat t he r e we r e ve r y many act ive wome n in t he minist r y of J e sus. Mar y Magdale ne , Mar t ha, He le na-S alome , Mar y J acob Cle ophas, J oanna. The se we r e not only minist r y disciple s; t he y' r e r e cor de d as pr ie st e sse s in t he ir own r ight , r unning e xe mplar y schools of wor ship in t he Nazar e ne t r adit ion. I n S t Paul' s Epist le t o t he Romans, Paul make s spe cif ic me nt ion of his own f e male he lpe r s: Phoe be , f or e xample , whom he calle d a sist e r of t he Chur ch; J ulia; Pr iscilla, who laid down he r ne t f or t he cause . The Ne w Te st ame nt is alive wit h wome n disciple s, but t he Chur ch ignor e d t he m all. Whe n t he Chur ch' s pr e ce pt s of e ccle siast ical discipline we r e dr awn up, t he y st at e d, "I t is not pe r mit t e d f or a woman t o spe ak in Chur ch, nor t o claim f or he r se lf any shar e in any masculine f unct ion". But t he Chur ch it se lf had de cide d t hat t his was a masculine f unct ion. The Chur ch was so f r ight e ne d of wome n t hat it inst it ut e d a r ule of ce libacy: a r ule f or it s pr ie st s, a r ule t hat be came a law in 113 8 ; a law t hat pe r sist s t oday. We ll, t his r ule has ne ve r be e n quit e what it

appe ar s on t he sur f ace , be cause , whe n one r e ads t he r ule , whe n one st udie s hist or y, one can se e t hat it was ne ve r , e ve r se xual act ivit y as such t hat bot he r e d t he Chur ch. The spe cif ic de f init ion t hat made t his r ule possible was pr ie st ly int imacy wit h wome n. Why? Be cause wome n be come wive s and love r s. The ve r y nat ur e of mot he r hood is a pe r pe t uat ion of bloodline s. I t was t his t hat bot he r e d t he Chur ch: a t aboo subj e ct -mot he r hood, bloodline s. This image had t o be se par at e d f r om t he ne ce ssar y image of J e sus. But it wasn' t as if t he Bible had said any such t hing. S t Paul had said in his Epist le t o Timot hy t hat a bishop should be mar r ie d t o one wif e and t hat he should have childr e n; t hat a man wit h e xpe r ie nce in his own f amily house hold is act ually f ar be t t e r qualif ie d t o t ake car e of t he Chur ch. Eve n t hough t he Roman Chur ch aut hor it ie s claime d t o uphold t he t e aching of S t Paul in par t icular , t he y chose comple t e ly t o disr e gar d t his e xplicit dir e ct ive t o suit t he ir own e nds, so t hat J e sus' own mar it al st at us could be st r at e gically ignor e d. But t he Chur ch' s ce libat e , unmar r ie d image of J e sus was f ully cont r adict e d in ot he r wr it ings of t he e r a. I t was ope nly cont r adict e d in t he public domain unt il t he pe r pe t uat ion of t he t r ut h was pr oclaime d a punishable he r e sy only 4 5 0 ye ar s ago in 15 4 7 , t he ye ar t hat He nr y VI I I die d in England. I t ' s not j ust t he Chr ist ian Ne w Te st ame nt t hat suf f e r s f r om t he se se xist r e st r ict ions. A similar e dit ing pr oce ss was applie d t o t he J e wishbase d Old Te st ame nt , and t his made it conve nie nt ly suit able t o be adde d t o t he Chr ist ian Bible . This is made par t icular ly appar e nt by a couple of e nt r ie s t hat bypasse d t he e dit or s' scr ut iny. The books of J oshua and 2 S amue l bot h r e f e r t o t he much mor e ancie nt Book of J ashe r . The y say it ' s ve r y impor t ant , t he Book of J ashe r . Whe r e is it ? Not in t he Bible . Like so many ot he r books, it was pur pose ly le f t out . But doe s it st ill e xist ? Ye s. The nine -f oot He br e w

scr oll of J ashe r st ill e xist s. I t has be e n hist or ically impor t ant f or a long, long t ime . I t was t he j e we l of t he cour t of Empe r or Char le magne , and t he t r anslat ion of t he Book of J ashe r was t he ve r y r e ason t hat t he Unive r sit y of Par is was f ounde d, in t he ye ar 8 0 0 . That was about a ce nt ur y be f or e t he Old Te st ame nt t hat we know was act ually put t oge t he r . J ashe r was t he st af f -be ar e r t o Mose s. His wr it ings ar e of e nor mous signif icance . The account s r e lat e t o t he st or y of t he I sr ae lit e s in Egypt , t o t he ir e xodus int o Canaan. But t he se st or ie s dif f e r conside r ably f r om t he way we know t he st or y t oday. The y e xplain t hat it was not Mose s who was t he spir it ual le ade r of t he t r ibe s who cr osse d t he Re d S e a t o Mount S inai. The spir it ual le ade r was Mir iam. At t hat t ime t he J e ws had ne ve r he ar d of J e hovah; t he y wor shippe d t he godde ss Ashe r ah. The ir spir it ual le ade r s we r e lar ge ly f e male . Mir iam pose d, accor ding t o t he Book of J ashe r , such a pr oble m f or Mose s in his at t e mpt t o cr e at e a ne w e nvir onme nt of male dominance t hat he impr isone d he r ; and t he J e wish nat ion r ose against Mose s wit h t he ir ar mie s t o se cur e Mir iam' s r e le ase . This is not in t he Bible . S o le t ' s move t o whe r e t he Chr ist ian st or y it se lf be gan. Le t ' s look at t he gospe ls t he mse lve s and, in doing t hat , le t ' s se e what t he y act ually t e ll us, against what we t hink t he y t e ll us, be cause we have all le ar ne d t o go along wit h what we ar e t aught about t he gospe ls in schoolr ooms and chur che s. But is t he t e aching cor r e ct ly r e lat e d always? Doe s it conf or m wit h t he wr it t e n scr ipt ur e s? I t ' s act ually sur pr ising how much we t hink we know, but we ' ve le ar ne d it j ust f r om pulpit s or f r om pict ur e books, not f r om ne ce ssar ily st udying t he t e xt s. The nat ivit y st or y it se lf pr ovide s a good e xample . I t ' s wide ly acce pt e d, and t he Chr ist mas car ds ke e p t e lling us t hat J e sus was bor n in a st able . The gospe ls don' t say t hat . The r e is no st able me nt ione d in any aut hor ise d gospe l. The nat ivit y is not me nt ione d at all in Mar k or J ohn,

and Mat t he w says quit e plainly t hat J e sus was bor n in a house . S o whe r e did t he st able come f r om? I t came f r om a misint e r pr e t at ion, r e ally, of t he Gospe l of Luke which r e lat e s t hat J e sus was laid in a mange r -not bor n, but laid-and a mange r was t he n, and st ill is, not hing mor e t han an animal f e e ding box. One only has t o st udy socie t y hist or y of t he t ime t o r e cognise t he f act t hat it was pe r f e ct ly common f or mange r s t o be use d as cr adle s, and t he y we r e of t e n br ought indoor s f or t hat ve r y pur pose . S o why has it be e n pr e sume d t hat t his par t icular mange r was in a st able ? Be cause t he English t r anslat ions of Luke t e ll us t hat t he r e was no r oom in t he inn. Must t he n have be e n in a st able ! But t he pr e -English t r anslat ions of Luke don' t t alk about any inn; t he manuscr ipt of Luke doe s not say t he r e was no r oom in t he inn. I n f act , t he r e we r e no inns in t he East in t hose days. The r e ar e ve r y f e w inns t he r e now; and if t he r e ar e , t he y' r e ille gal! Pe ople lodge d t he n in pr ivat e house s. I t was a common way of lif e . I t was calle d f amily hospit alit y. Home s we r e ope n f or t r ave lle r s. Come t o t hat , if we ' r e r e ally going t o be pr e cise about t his, t he r e we r e no st able s in t he r e gion, e it he r . I n f act , "st able " is a wholly English wor d and it spe cif ically de f ine s a place f or ke e ping hor se s; hor se s of a par t icular st able . Who on e ar t h r ode ar ound on hor se s in J udae a? Oxe n, came ls; t he odd Roman of f ice r might have had a hor se , but e ve n t he mule s and t he oxe n, if ke pt unde r cove r , would have be e n ke pt unde r some sor t of a she d or out -house , not in a st able . As f or t he myt hical inn, t he Gr e e k t e xt act ually doe s not say t he r e was no r oom at t he inn. By t he be st t r anslat ion it act ually st at e s t hat t he r e was no pr ovision in t he r oom. As me nt ione d in Mat t he w, J e sus was bor n in a house and, as cor r e ct ly t r anslat e d, Luke r e ve als t hat J e sus was laid in a mange r , an animal f e e ding box, be cause t he r e was no cr adle pr ovide d in t he r oom.

I f we ' r e on t he subj e ct of J e sus' bir t h, I t hink we ought t o look at t he chr onology he r e , be cause t his is impor t ant as we ll; be cause t he gospe ls, t he t wo gospe ls t hat de al wit h t he nat ivit y, act ually give us t wo comple t e ly dif f e r e nt dat e s f or t he e ve nt . Accor ding t o Mat t he w, J e sus was bor n in t he r e ign of King He r od, He r od t he Gr e at , who de bat e d t he e ve nt wit h t he Magi and or de r e d t he slaying of t he inf ant s. We ll, He r od die d in 4 BC, and we know f r om Mat t he w t hat J e sus was bor n be f or e t hat . And be cause of t hat , most st andar d concor dant Bible s and hist or y books imply t hat J e sus' dat e of bir t h was 5 BC, be cause t hat is be f or e 4 BC and He r od was st ill r e igning, so t hat ' s a good dat e . But in Luke , a comple t e ly dif f e r e nt dat e is give n. Luke doe sn' t t e ll us about King He r od or anyt hing like t hat . Luke says t hat J e sus was bor n while Cyr e nius was Gove r nor of S yr ia, t he same ye ar t hat t he Empe r or August us imple me nt e d t he nat ional ce nsus, t he ce nsus which J ose ph and Mar y we nt t o Be t hle he m t o be a par t of . The r e ar e r e le vant point s t o me nt ion he r e , and t he y ar e bot h r e cor de d in t he f ir st -ce nt ur y J e wish annals (such as The Ant iquit ie s of t he J e ws). Cyr e nius was appoint e d Gove r nor of S yr ia in AD 6 . This was t he ve r y ye ar r e cor de d of t he nat ional ce nsus, put int o ope r at ion by Cyr e nius and or de r e d by Empe r or August us. As Luke t e lls us, it was t he f ir st and only e ve r r e cor de d ce nsus f or t he r e gion. S o J e sus was bor n be f or e 4 BC and in AD 6 . I s t his a mist ake ? No, not ne ce ssar ily, be cause in t he way it was or iginally por t r aye d we ' r e act ually looking at t wo quit e spe cif ic bir t hs. Bot h gospe ls ar e cor r e ct . We ' r e looking at J e sus' physical bir t h, and we ' r e looking at J e sus' communit y bir t h. The se we r e de f ine d at t he t ime as t he f ir st and se cond bir t hs, and t he y applie d spe cif ically t o pe ople of par t icular gr oups and ce r t ainly t o dynast ic he ir s.

S e cond bir t hs f or boys we r e pe r f or me d by way of a r it ual of r e bir t h. I t was ve r y physical: t he y we r e wr appe d in swaddling clot he s and bor n again f r om t he ir mot he r ' s womb. I t was a physical ce r e mony. S e cond bir t hs f or boys t ook place at t he age of t we lve . S o we know t hat J e sus was t we lve in AD 6 . Unf or t unat e ly, t he lat t e r day t r anscr ibe r s of Luke comple t e ly misse d t he signif icance of t his, and it was t he ir e nde avour t o some how t ie in t his e ve nt about swaddling clot he s and be ing bor n t he n, t hat le d t o t his me nt ion of t he nonse nse about t he st able . S o if J e sus was t we lve in AD 6 , t his me ans t hat he was bor n in 7 BC, which t ie s in pe r f e ct ly we ll wit h t he Mat t he w account t hat he was bor n dur ing t he lat t e r r e ign of King He r od. But we now discove r what appe ar s t o be anot he r anomaly, be cause Luke says lat e r in t he gospe l t hat whe n J e sus was t we lve ye ar s old, his par e nt s, Mar y and J ose ph, t ook him t o J e r usale m f or t he day. The y t he n le f t t he cit y t o walk home f or a f ull day' s j our ne y wit h t he ir f r ie nds be f or e t he y r e alise d t hat J e sus was not in t he ir par t y. The y t he n r e t ur ne d t o J e r usale m t o f ind him at t he t e mple , discussing his f at he r ' s busine ss wit h t he doct or s. We ll, what sor t of par e nt s can wande r f or a whole day in t he de se r t , wit hout knowing t he ir t we lve ye ar -old son' s not t he r e ? The f act is t hat t he whole point of t he passage has be e n misse d. The r e was a we alt h of dif f e r e nce be t we e n a t we lve -ye ar -old son and a son in his t we lf t h ye ar . Whe n a son, on comple t ing his init ial t we lve ye ar st hat is t o say, whe n he was act ually on his t hir t e e nt h bir t hday-was init iat e d int o t he communit y at t he ce r e mony of his se cond bir t h, he was r e gar de d as comme ncing his f ir st ye ar . I t was t he or iginal r oot of t he mode r n bar mit zvah. His ne xt init iat ion, t he init iat ion of manhood in t he communit y, t ook place in his nint h ye ar , whe n he was t we nt y-one t he r oot of t he age -t we nt y-one pr ivile ge . Var ious de gr e e s f ollowe d,

and t he ne xt maj or t e st was in his t we lf t h ye ar -at t he e nd of his t we lf t h ye ar , at t he age of t we nt y-f our , on his t we nt y-f our t h bir t hday. Whe n J e sus r e maine d at t he t e mple in his t we lf t h ye ar , he was act ually t we nt y-f our . Not sur pr ising t hat t he y e xpe ct e d him not pe r haps t o be wande r ing ar ound t he de se r t wit h t he m! S o his discussion wit h t he doct or s r e lat e d t o his ne xt de gr e e . He would have discusse d t his at t he t ime wit h t he spir it ual f at he r , t he f at he r of t he communit y; and inde e d, he did. I t was t he f at he r ' s busine ss he discusse d; his f at he r ' s busine ss. The f at he r of t his e r a is r e cor de d. The spir it ual f at he r of t he communit y at t hat t ime was S ime on t he Esse ne , and if we look back a f e w ve r se s in Luke we se e t hat it was e xact ly t his man, t he j ust and de vout S ime on, who le git imat e d J e sus unde r t he law. S o can we t r ust t he gospe ls? We ll, as we can se e , t he answe r is, ye s, we can act ually t r ust t he gospe ls t o a point , but what we can' t t r ust is t he way t hat t he y' ve be e n convolut e d and dist or t e d, and t aught t o us by pe ople who don' t unde r st and what t he y act ually said in t he f ir st place . The pr e se nt English-language gospe ls dat e back e f f e ct ive ly t o t he Aut hor ize d Bible , compile d f or t he S t e war t King J ame s I of England in t he e ar ly 17 t h ce nt ur y. This was publishe d and se t int o pr int no mor e t han 16 5 ye ar s be f or e Ame r ica' s De clar at ion of I nde pe nde nce ; only a f e w ye ar s be f or e t he f ir st Pilgr im Fat he r s se t sail f r om England. The gospe ls of t he e ar ly Chur ch we r e or iginally wr it t e n in se cond and t hir d ce nt ur y Gr e e k. Along wit h t he Bible as a whole , t he y we r e t r anslat e d int o Lat in in t he f our t h ce nt ur y, but it was t he n t o be mor e t han a t housand ye ar s be f or e any English t r anslat ion was made . Bible t r anslat ion was r isky t he n, t hough. Four t e e nt h ce nt ur y r e f or me r J ohn Wyclif f e was de nounce d as a he r e t ic f or t r anslat ing t he Bible int o English. His books we r e bur ne d. I n t he e ar ly 16 t h ce nt ur y, William

Tyndale was st r angle d as a f or m of e xe cut ion, in Be lgium, and t he n bur ne d, j ust in case he wasn' t de ad, f or t r anslat ing t he Bible int o English. A lit t le lat e r , Mile s Cove r dale , a disciple of his, made anot he r t r anslat ion; and by t hat t ime t he Chur ch it se lf had split up quit e nice ly, so Cove r dale ' s ve r sion was acce pt e d by t he Pr ot e st ant Chur ch-but he was st ill a he r e t ic in t he e ye s of Rome . The pr oble m was t hat as long as t he pr int e d t e xt r e maine d obscur e (and it wasn' t j ust or dinar y Lat in; t his was an hor r e ndous f or m of Chur ch Lat in), as long as only t he bishops could unde r st and it , t he y could t e ach what e ve r on Ear t h t he y want e d. I f it we r e t r anslat e d int o t he language s t hat ot he r pe ople could unde r st and and maybe r e ad f or t he mse lve s, t his would pose a pr oble m be cause t he Chur ch could be calle d t o que st ion. (t o Par t 2 ) (t o Par t 3 ) About t he S pe ake r: S ir Laur e nce Gar dne r , Kt S t Gm, KCD, is an int e r nat ionally known sove r e ign and chivalr ic ge ne alogist . He holds t he posit ion of Gr and Pr ior of t he Ce lt ic Chur ch' s S acr e d Kindr e d of S aint Columba, and is dist inguishe d as t he Che valie r Labhr àn de S aint Ge r main. S ir Laur e nce is also Pr e side nt ial At t aché t o t he Eur ope an Council of Pr ince s, a const it ut ional advisor y body e st ablishe d in 19 4 6 . He is f or mally at t ache d t o t he Noble House hold Guar d of t he Royal House of S t e war t , f ounde d at S t Ge r main-e n-Laye in 16 9 2 , and is t he J acobit e Hist or iogr aphe r Royal. Edit ors' Not e s: ¥ Cor r e sponde nce should be addr e sse d t o Laur e nce Gar dne r , Post Of f ice Box 4 , Ot t e r y S t Mar y EX11 1YR, Unit e d Kingdom. Email: laur e nce 5 8 @bt ope nwor ld.com We bsit e : ht t p:/ / Gr aal.co.uk ¥ Laur e nce Gar dne r ' s book, Bloodline of t he Holy Gr ail: The Hidde n

Line age of J e sus Re ve ale d, was publishe d by Ele me nt Books in 19 9 6 (I S BN 1-8 5 2 3 0 -8 7 0 -2 h/ c), and is now available in pape r back, dist r ibut e d by Pe nguin Books (I S BN 1-8 6 2 0 4 -15 2 -0 ). I t was r e vie we d in NEXUS 4 / 0 1. ¥ Copie s of Laur e nce Gar dne r ' s vide o pr e se nt at ion can be obt aine d f r om NEXUS Of f ice in t he UK; and in t he US A, f r om Ramt ha' s S chool of Enlight e nme nt , PO Box 12 10 , Ye lm, WA 9 8 5 9 7 , ph +1 (3 6 0 ) 4 5 8 5 2 0 1, we bsit e , www.r amt ha.com. Or de r s f r om Aust r alia and NZ should be se nt t o t he US A: AUD$ 4 6 .0 0 inc. p&h, f or bot h t ape s (spe cif y PAL/ VHS ).

HOME PAGE | S UBS I NFO | BACK I S S UES | PRODUCTS LI S T | ORDER FORM