Johannites and Horus the Savior

Johannites and Horus the Savior

The similarities between Jesus and Horus are striking. Why would
Jesus, or Christian writers, want to conceal this? The worship of
Horus was surely sanctioned in Rome by the worship of Harpocrates
and Isis. The only answer can be that Rome changed its mind when
there was a change of leadership, and now Horus/Harpocrates was seen
as a great threat that needed to be eradicated. How could you do
this if you could not hunt down of the followers of Lord Horus who
would go underground? One way would to create a facsimile Horus, a
double, then ordain a priesthood that would come in like a wave,
giving an altered teaching that would turn the original Horus into a
turncoat that was favorable to the new Roman rulers. Not only does
Paul of Tarsus fit the bill for a turncoat, but his fictionalized
Jesus is a Judas unto his people, his people in Egypt, Jerusalem,
Britain, Gaul, and Rome.

Jon Presco

"The result was that she gave birth to a son who received the very
ordinary Jewish name of Joshua, or Jesus in the Graeco-Aramaic
dialect. This child was adopted by a Rabbi named Joseph, who carried
him into Egypt, where he was initiated into the occult sciences, and
the priests of Osiris, regarding him as the long-promised
incarnation of Horus, expected by the Adepts, finally consecrated
him Sovereign Pontiff of the universal religion."

http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/scripts/johannite.html

http://www.mystae.com/restricted/reflections/messiah/way.html

http://www.darkstar1.co.uk/ds11.html

http://www.goroadachi.com/etemenanki/endgame-3.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

Excerpts From
The Christ Conspiracy:
The Greatest Story Ever Sold
by Acharya S

>From the very beginning of our quest to unravel the Christ
conspiracy, we encounter suspicious territory, as we look back in
time and discover that the real foundation of Christianity appears
nothing like the image provided by the clergy and mainstream
authorities. Indeed, far more rosy and cheerful than the reality is
the picture painted by the vested interests as to the origins of the
Christian religion: To wit, a miracle-making founder and pious,
inspired apostles who faithfully and infallibly recorded his words
and deeds shortly after his advent, and then went about promulgating
the faith with great gusto and success in "saving souls." Contrary
to this popular delusion, the reality is that, in addition to the
enormous amount of bloodshed which accompanies its foundation,
Christianity's history is rife with forgery and fraud. So rampant is
this treachery and chicanery that any serious researcher must
immediately begin to wonder about the story itself. In truth, the
Christian tale has always been as difficult to swallow as the myths
and fables of other cultures; yet countless people have been able to
overlook the rational mind and to willingly believe it, even though
they may equally as easily dismiss the nearly identical stories of
these other cultures....

We have seen that there is no evidence for the historicity of the
Christian founder, that the earliest Christian proponents were as a
whole either utterly credulous or astoundingly deceitful, and that
said "defenders of the faith" were compelled under incessant charges
of fraud to admit tthat Christianity was a rehash of older
religions. It has also been demonstrated that the world into which
Christianity was born was filled with assorted gods and goddesses,
as opposed to a monotheistic vacuum. In fact, in their fabulous
exploits and wondrous powers many of these gods and goddesses are
virtually the same as the Christ character, as attested to by the
Christian apologists themselves. In further inspecting this issue we
discover that "Jesus Christ" is in fact a compilation of these
various gods, who were worshipped and whose dramas were regularly
played out by ancient people long before the Christian era....
Horus of Egypt

"Egypt, the primeval seat of learning, was the high seat of Sun
adoration. The Sphinx, with the face to the east, represents
Harmmachus, young Horus, or the rising Sun. The orb is Osiris, the
ruling god of day. In its descent it is the dying deity, going below
to the land of Shades; but only to be resurrected as the victorious
Horus, piercing the head of the dragon of darkness."
James Bonwick, Irish Druids & Old Irish Religions, 190.

The Egyptian sun god Horus, who predated the Christ character by
thousands of years, shares the following in common with Jesus:
? Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Meri on December 25th in a
cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and
attended by three wise men.
? His earthly father was named "Seb" ("Joseph"). Seb is also
known as "Geb": "As Horus the Elder he..was believed to be the son
of Geb and Nut." Lewis Spence, Ancient Egyptian Myths and Legends,
84.
? He was of royal descent.
? At age 12, he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30,
he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years.
? Horus was baptized in the river Eridanus or Iarutana
(Jordan) by "Anup the Baptizer" ("John the Baptist"), who was
decapitated.
? He had 12 disciples, two of whom were his "witnesses" and
were named "Anup" and "Aan" (the two "Johns").
? He performed miracles, exorcised demons and raised El-Azarus
("El-Osiris"), from the dead.
? Horus walked on water.
? His personal epithet was "Iusa," the "ever-becoming son"
of "Ptah," the "Father." He was thus called "Holy Child."
? He delivered a "Sermon on the Mount" and his followers
recounted the "Sayings of Iusa."
? Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
? He was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days
in a tomb, and resurrected.
? He was also the "Way, the Truth, the
Light," "Messiah," "God's Anointed Son," the "Son of Man," the "Good
Shepherd," the "Lamb of God," the "Word made flesh," the "Word of
Truth," etc.
? He was "the Fisher" and was associated with the Fish
("Ichthys"), Lamb and Lion.
? He came to fulfill the Law.
? Horus was called "the KRST," or "Anointed One."
? Like Jesus, "Horus was supposed to reign one thousand
years."
Furthermore, inscribed about 3,500 years ago on the walls of the
Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate
Conception, Birth and Adoration of Horus, with Thoth announcing to
the Virgin Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kneph, the "Holy
Ghost," impregnating the virgin; and with the infant being attended
by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts. In addition, in the
catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the
virgin mother Isis?the original "Madonna and Child."


http://www.gnostique.net/ecclesia/EG_II.htm


________________________________________
1839 l'Oeuvre de la Miséricorde / Church of Carmel
Pierre-Eugène-Michel Vintras (1807-1875) claimed a great vision in
which the archangel Michael appeared as well as the Holy Ghost,
St.Joseph, and the Virgin Mary. In this vision (or "visions") the
coming of the Paraclete was formally declared. Vintras also stated
he was informed that he was the reincarnated prophet Elijah who
would establish a new religious order to proclaim the coming of the
Paraclete / the age of the holy ghost. It is also interesting to
know that Vintras stated that he was told that Charles Naundorf was
the ' true king of France'. It is generally known that several of
the well-known French and Belgian occultists of the first half of
the 20th century were "Naundorfists"


It appears that Vintras believed that his form of ministry was a
renewal of the Catholic Tradition. Vintras' publications, as for
instance his book "Evangeli Éternel", are written in the tradition
of the Roman-Catholic Church. Most of the members of Vintras' cult
considered themselves as "faithful Christians". His Holy Mass was
identical to the Roman Catholic one, the controversy about Vintras
concerned his "gifts". The "bleeding hosts", the seances with the
Saints and the Holy Virgin etc. led to the opposition against
Vintras' cult, including the Pope's ban. Vintras' circle also
incorporated the aspect of the 'Black Madonna' into their
doctrines.The 'Naundorf-aspect' could be another reason for the
opposition against Vintras. Vintras also apparently attracted other
small movements which later merged with the Church of Carmel . One
of these groups were "the Brothers of the Christian Doctrine",
established in 1838 by the three brothers Baillard, all Priests. The
brothers set up two 'religious houses' , 1) at St.Odile in Alsace,
2) at Sion-Vaudemont in Lorraine. Their doctrines were similar to
those of Vintras, including the emphasis on the coming of the Holy
Spirit. "The Brothers of the Christian Doctrine" attracted great
support, and it is said that this support included that of
the 'House of Habsburg' (source unknown).
Another controversial character of the movement is the priest Joseph-
Antoine Boullan (1824-1893), who is probably better known as the
Abbé de Boullan. Boullan became 'active' in the 1850's when he
founded the "Society for the Reparation of Souls" together with a
former nun, Adele Chevalier. It is stated by the general sources
that Boullan 'specialized' in "excorcising demons by unconvential
means". After his conviction for fraud and serving his time in jail,
at which he was suspended from his priestly duties, Boullan
voluntarily presented himself at the Holy Office (i.e. the
Inquisition) in Rome, which reversed its former decision. Boullan's
doctrines were written in Rome at the time, and this notebook became
known as the "Cahier Rose", which was later found by the novelist
Joris Karl Huysmans after Boullan's death in 1893. The "Cahier Rose"
apparently was locked away in the Vatican Library, after being
described as a "shocking document". There are sources that claim
that Boullan was 'protected by the Church' and infiltrated Vintras'
cultus "with the sole object of bringing it down".
Boullan apparently met Vintras shortly before the latter's death in
1875. At the time Boullan claimed to be the reincarnated St.John the
Baptist (but this proclamation was done after Vintras death,
obviously). Boullan joined Vintras' "Church of Carmel" and became
its leader when Vintras died. Shortly thereafter a schism ensued,
because most of the members refused to accept Boullan's supremacy. A
few followed Boullan's splintergroup which remained active until
Boullan's death in 1893. Around 1889 Boullan's group
was 'infiltrated' by Stanislas de Guaita and Oswald Wirth. De Guaita
published an exposé, titled "Le Temple de Satan". This work belonged
to De Guaita's "Essais de sciences maudites", which consisted of
four publications, published between 1886 and 1897 ( see "1888
OKR+C"). It is generally assumed that Boullan's sect used a rite
derived from a 18th century printing of "Cult des Goules". Boullan
is portrayed in J.K.Huysman's "La Bas" as Dr.Johannes ( the
novel "La Bas" can be found at: http://www.huysmans.org.uk/ ), "The
French occultist would probably have remained, virtually unknown to
the world at large if it wasn't for the work of J.K. Huymans "
The "Church of Carmel" was probably not a formal church, it appears
that there was no strict hierarchy nor leadership. Vintras was no
Patriarch nor Bishop of the 'Church'. Vintras did appointed several
so-called "Pontifs Divins", with each 'Pontif' leading a group or
community. According to Terje Dahl Bergerson (e-mail on the "Eglise
Vintrasienne", July, 2000) men like the Abbé Boullan, Abbé Roca and
Louis Van Haeckel were ordained Pontifs Divins in the "Elie
Carmel ". After Vintras' death these men, and probably others,
established their own communities on the model of the Carmelite
Order. Several of these groups developed their own theology. "Some
of those who followed Van Haeckel developed a rather darker view of
things and apparently associated themselves with certain occultists
who believed in the efficacy and correctness of Black Magic - they
also developed a Luciferian Theology". Bergerson corrects "his"
vision in a later email-correspondence by stating that the
information (on Boullan, Roca en Van Haeckel) is probably unreliable
by stating : "Luciferian Theology sounds omnious as well. In view of
both the "heterodox" spirit of the specifically Gnostic esoteric
orientation(s) (my view, not necessarely shared by any other
contemporary Gnostic) and our modern ideals of Humanism, certain
interpretations of the *myth* of Lucifer, or at least the biblical
occurance (2 places??? Isaiah and Revelation?) of Lucifer and
consequent speculation - wouldn´t be so "dark" by far. I now rather
think that Haeckel and Boullean, like Huysmans and Levi on the
outside, only contributed to the history of the order(s) in the
capacity of stirring up public awareness towards the *existence* of
these for posterity.
Furthermore Bergerson also mentions another descendent of
Vintras' "Work of Mercy", John Kowalski (+1941), who continued
Vintras' work in the "Order Maria Vitae". The Order caused as much
controversy as Vintras had done before Kowalski, by introducing
certain ideas as the abolition of celibacy among the Clergy, nuns
and monks etc. The Maria Vitae Order has its own church, "Eglise
Vielle Catholique Maria Vitae". The "Carmel Elie" affiliation
descends from Feliksa Magdalen Kozlowskaya (+1912), who
apparently 'initiated' Kowalski into the ideals and workings of
the "Carmel Elie", which had its "headquarters" at the beginning of
the 20th century in Warsaw, Poland, thus Terje Dahl Bergerson.
Finally Bergerson mentions another interesting Polish "Gnostic"
mystic, Maria Naglowska (+ early 1900's). Naglowska apparently knew
Pascal Beverly Randolph, with whom she had some 'working
relationship' of some kind. She was a charismatic mystic
('channeling' or 'attunement" with the Virgin) who had
some "connection to an underground dissenting church, in the company
of a 19th century Magus" . I can add to Bergerson's information that
In 1931 she eventually published Randolph's "Magia Sexualis". She is
also mentioned in the history of the Ordo Templi Orientis Antiqua,
where she allegedly studied Voodoo with some of Jean-Maine's
disciples from 1921 until 1930.






1828. l'Église Johannites des Crétiens Primitif
Seal for Palaprat's Neo Templar Order
? "The Templars, whose order was suppressed and the members
thereof executed on account of their sorceries, were clearly a
Society of Gnostic heretics, active propagandists, closely connected
with the Bogomiles and the Mandeans or Johaninites".
Page 26 / 27 *Fabre Palaprat. Recherches Historiques sur les
Templiers. Paris 1835
In 1804, Ledru, de Chevillon, de Saintot and Raymond Fabré-
Palaprat, "restored" an Order of the Temple, based on the Larmenius'
Charter of Transmission from 1324, the Manuscript statutes of 1705,
and 'a journal of proceedings of the Order of the Temple'. These
documents were presented by Ledru, a physician. Ledru had purchased
these documents through the sale of the properties of the deceased
Duke du Cosse-Brissac, a former Grand Master of the Societé d'Aloya
which was established in Paris in 1789. The society claimed to be
(or is said to be) a continuation of the medieval Templar Order.
According to these documents, the Order was reestablished in 1705 by
the Duke of Orleans, using the Charter of John Mark Larmenius, the
alleged successor of Jacques De Molay ( the Charter has been
examined by experts at the British Museum who say the inks used are
not in accord with the alleged dates, the implication being that
part of the document could be a forgery ). The whole history of the
foundation of Fabré-Palaprats' "Ordre du Temple" can be found in
numerous books written on the subject and all over the Internet, the
main focus of this Chapter is the "Johannite Church" which became
connected to the French neo-Templars. Also of interest are the
masonic rites which were behind the formation of Fabré-Palaprat's
Templar Order (of which the founders were masons).
The Masonic Rites behind the "Ordre du Temple"
The masonic scholar R.F.Gould in his "History of Freemasonry" (1902
edit.) suggests a possible connection between Fabré-Palaprat's
Templar Order and several Johannite Lodges. Gould refers i.a. to "La
Petite Resurrection des Templiers" ("Little Resurrection of
Templars"), a licentious society established in 1682, and to a
French masonic lodge named "Les Chevaliers de la Croix" which
existed around the time of the foundation of the "Ordre du Temple"
in 1804.
The connection to "La Petite Resurrection des Templiers" was made by
several masonic scholars at the time who asserted that
the "statutes" of 1705 were a forgery. According to these sources,
these statues had been forged by the Jesuit Father Bonani and
was "actually the resuscitation of a 1681 Society entitled
the "Little Resurrection of Templars" and that it had as one of its
members the learned Fenelon who converted Ramsay to orthodoxy", thus
John Yarker in his book "Arcane Schools". Yarker continues stating
that "in any case, if of 1705, the Charter proves the existence of a
branch of Scottish Templars". Papus stated that "Templarism" always
had existed as a "revolutionary force" in France. Since the mid-
1750's the Templar Order had changed its activities and started to
infiltrate masonry by creating the Higher Degrees, their influence
within the masonic Lodges created an atmosphere which
eventually 'fueled' the French Revolution, thus Papus :
"Victorious rebels thus founded the Grand Orient of France. So a
contemporary Mason is able to write : " It is not excessive to say
that the masonic revolution of 1773 was the prelude and the
precursor of the Revolution of 1789." What must be well observed is
the secret action of the Brothers of the Templar Rite. It is they
who are the real fomentors of revolution, the others are only docile
agents". ( source : "Martines de Pasqually", par Papus, président du
Suprême Conseil de l'Ordre Martiniste, p. 144 ,1895 )
According to CESNUR's Massimo Introvigne at the end of the 18th
century, at the time of the French Revolution, there was a
controversy within the French masonic lodges concerning the
subordination of 'Templarism' towards Freemasonry. There was a trend
among masons to subordinate freemasonry towards Templarism.
According to Introvigne the first "disagreement" originated in the
Lodge of the "Chevaliers de la Croix" ("Knights of the Cross").
Introvigne also mentions the involvement of the "Chevaliers de la
Croix" in the "discovery" of the Larmenius charter.
The earlier mentioned "Societé d'Aloya" is also mentioned by the
Baron De Tschoudy in 1766. He refers to them as the "Freres de
Aloya", a nickname for these French Knights of the "Fraternity of
Jerusalem" . In the earlier statement on the Societé d'Aloya it is
asserted that the society was established in 1789, which is in
contradiction with the reference made by De Tschoudy. The archives
of De Tschoudy were donated after his death to the Council of
the "Chevaliers d'Orient", of which he had been an active member.
The "Chevaliers d'Orient" or "Knights of the East" were probably
founded around 1756. De Tschoudy is said to have been involved in
the development of this rite. The rite experienced some troubles
around 1762, which resulted in the establishment of the "Sovereign
Council of the Knights of the East", which apparently united with
its own offspring, the "Sovereign Council of Princes of the Royal
Secret " in the same year. But it appears that the "Council of the
Knights of the East" existed independantly from the "Emperors of the
East and West" after 1762, as we'll see later. The constitutions of
this system ("rite of Perfection" or "Heredom" or "Emperors of the
East and West") are still recognized today as the groundwork of the
Scottish Rite (15th Degree, Chevalier d'Orient ou de l'Epée 17th
Degree, Chevalier d'Orient et d'Occident ). De Tschoudy also worked
his own system in France during the 1760's, which was known as
the "Adoniramite Masonry". In 1766 he published his most important
work, "L'Etoile Flamboyante, ou la Societé des Franc-Maçons
considerée sous tous les Aspects; i.e., "The Blazing Star, or the
Society of Freemasons considered under Every Point of View". What is
of interest here is that De Tschoudy's "Etoile Flamboyante" is the
source of the story concerning the "Qadosh Fathers" or "the Knights
of the Morning Star", otherwise known as the "Thebaid Solitaries",
names for Gnostic sects that were connected to the Templars of the
First crusades. It appears that De Tschoudy and his movement,
through his writings and his influence on the development of certain
Masonic rites, such as the 17th degree of Scottish Masonry which can
be looked upon as an "esoteric Christian degree" with its use of the
allegory of the Seven Seals, was one of the "invisible forces"
behind the foundation of the "Ordre du Temple" .
In Peter Partner's book "Murdered Magicians : The Templars and Their
Myths" , the writer also suggests a connection between the masonic
Lodge "Chevaliers de la Croix" ("Knights of the Cross") and the new
Templarism of Fabré-Palaprat. In 1806, one of its original members,
Antoine Guillaume Chéreau publishes a book called "Explication de la
Croix Philosophique, suivi de Explication de la Pierre Cubique" on
the origins and significance of the (French) Rose-Croix. Chéreau was
a member of the "Order of the Orient" and the "Chevaliers de la
Croix". The Grade structure of the "Order of the Orient" (J.M.
Ragon, a member of the Templar Order and famous French Masonic
scholar, refers to to the "Order of the Orient" as "Rite d'Orient-
Templier") apparently suggests that the neophytes came from the 18th
Degree of the Scottish rite of the Grand Orient. Many members of
this Lodge belonged to the highest French nobility.These rites were
related, and maybe behind the formation of rites such as Fabré-
Palaprat's Templar Order. Various sources (scholars, masonic
historians etc.) claim that these rites were the "invisible" moving
forces behind the more visible Templar Order, including
its "Primitive Christian Church".
The "Order of the Temple" apparently officially announced their
independency from any masonic organization in- or around 1811,
including their disconnection from the Grand Orient of France. But
it is asserted that their connection to the "Chevaliers de La Croix"
remained, and the 'official ' break with masonry is doubted by many.


The Evangelicon / Levitikon
The "Evangelicon" is a version of the Fourth Gospel, which is
preceded by an introduction and a commentary which carries the
name "Levitikon", said to have been written by a Greek monk of
Athens, Nicephorus. Fabré-Palaprat's "Primitive Christian Church" is
grounded on this (spurious?) Gospel of St.John. The story goes that
Fabré-Palaprat purchased the vellum manuscript in a second-hand
bookstall in Paris in 1814. Fabré-Palaprat adopted the contents of
the manuscript as the future doctrine of the Templar Order. The
manuscript consists of two parts :
? the religious doctrines including the rituals of the nine
grades of the Templar Order; a description of the Templars' "Church
of John" and explanation of the name "Johannites".
? The "Gospel of St.John" , the last two Chapters (20-21) are
missing. "It also eliminates all hint of the miraculous from the
stories of the turning of the water into wine, the loaves and
fishes, and the raising of Lazarus. and certain references to St.
Peter are edited out, including the story of Jesus saying 'Upon this
rock I will build my church' " ("the Templar Revelation", p.144
Picknett, Prince ).
In short ; the "Levitikon", a gnostic version of the Book of John ,
which also claimed that "Our Lord was an initiate of the Mysteries
of Osiris". The writings of the Neo-Templar Order have a close
resemblance to the "Sepher Toledoth Yeshu", a Jewish text from
around 1100 BC, which talks about Jesus as an initiate of the
Kabbalah.
In (probably) 1811 the Order published the "Manuel des Chevaliers de
l'Ordre du Temple ", which was printed for private circulation
amongst the members of the Templar Order. Fabré-Palaprat's desire to
be recognized by the Grand Master of the Portuguese "Order of
Christ" as the successor of De Molay was denied. Both publications
("Manuel des Chevaliers?" and "Levitikon" ) relate that the Templar
Order never ceased to exist since the days of Jacques De Molay.
Fabré-Palaprat composed from the manuscripts the Johannite Legend of
the Templars. According to J.M.Ragon the Templars "learnt from the "
initiates of the East " a certain Judaic doctrine which was
attributed to St. John the Apostle ; therefore " they renounced the
religion of St. Peter and became Johannites" ("Cours Philosophique
et Interprétatif des Initiations anciennes et modernes", Ragon
1842).
Patrick Brunout, in his afterword to A.Guillaume
Chéreau's "Explanation of the Philosophical Cross?.", defines Fabré-
Palaprat's doctrine of his "Primitive Christian Church" as a
composition based on Palaprat's "revelation" of the secret Johannite
Religion, combined with the "claimed Masonic tradition on Egyptian
origins of the Secret Societies with the sconian thesis, the fable
of the Disciplina Arcani, and the inherited anticleralism of the
encyclopedists" .
Fabré-Palaprat claimed to be the heir to the Apostolic Succession of
John the Divine on which he finally founded in 1828 the "Église
Johannites des Crétiens Primitif" ("Johannite Church of Primitive
Christians"), although other sources claim a later date, 1930, after
the so-called July Revolution (the foundation of the "Monarchy de
Juillet", 1830-1848).


l'Église Johannites des Crétiens Primitif
The Neo-Templar Johannite Church had its premises in the Cour des
Miracles, a former bottle shop near de Porte St.-Denis in Paris. The
premise was used to locate their publications. The documents were
dated from Magistropolis, according to a calendar which commenced
with the foundation of the Templar order in 1118, the consigner
being "the Apostolic Court of the Temple" . The "Johannite Church of
Primitive Christians" was in fact a reorganization of Fabré-
Palaprat's doctrine of the Levitikon and was also known as the "High
Initiation". Fabré-Palaprat claimed he had received a legate from
the East, and these unknown contacts apparently were associated with
the Knights Templar and , through the Knights, with the "Johannites"
of Judea.
It is said that the Église Johannites des Crétiens Primitif was co-
founded by Palaprat with Mr.Mauviel, an ecclesiastic who had been
consecrated in 1800 at Paris as Constitutional Bishop of Cayes in
Haiti. Fabré-Palaprat had also been ordained a Priest by the Bishop
of Lot (and also later by Mauviel). The Primate of the Johannite
Church was Mgr.Machault. It was Machault who consecrated Mr.Chatel
in the Johannite Church in 1831. According to Tau C.Harmonius in his
article "a Historical brief of the G.C.E. pt.1" "Mgr. Chatel was
later to receive the title "Bishop of the Gauls", creating the
prominent but somewhat short-lived "Eglise Catholique Franchise,
with Diocese in Paris, Brussels, and Nantes."
Ferdinand Chatel was a clergymen whose " Eglise Catholique
Franchise" proclaimed freedom from Papal authority with a liturgy
spoken in French. Other sources claim that Chatel's E.C.F. was
founded by Chatel before his involvement with the Johannite-
Church. "Chatel was seeking an authority to consecrate him as Bishop
of this new Church, and he found it in the doctrines of Fabré-
Palaprat's Levitikon and in the Neo-Templar chief's willingness to
consecrate him 'Primate of the Gauls.' " The same source on Fabré-
Palaprat :" He (Palaprat) needed, however, a 'Primate' of some kind,
and found him in the advanced radical clergyman, Ferdinand Chatel",
(source"Timeline of the Authentic Trad."at
http://www.geocities.com/antiqillum/TLSix-012.htm )
According to this source Chatel's French Catholic Church was
established in "some former shop premises" at Montmartre in 1831. It
is also stated that the relationship between Fabré-Palaprat and
Chatel did not last long. As a matter of fact, it appears that
Chatel was even expelled from the Neo-Templar Church, "The alliance
between Chatel and Fabré-Palaprat did not last long. Chatel soon
tired of his Masonic friends, was expelled with ignominy from the
Neo-Templar or Johannite flock, and was 'tried' for heresy in a
synod in which, in true Masonic fashion, the guilty heretic was
represented by a rag-doll. This was not the end of the troubles of
the new religion".
(" Timeline of the Authentic Tradition" ) After 1831 the name of
Jean-Marie Ragon turns up as Count Jean-Marie de Venise, Primatial
Vicar of the French Catholic Church.
Again, two sources in contradiction with each other ?.
According to the masonic scholar Albert G.Mackey in his
book "Lexicon of Freemasonry" (1871) the "Johannite doctrine" as
propagated by Fabré-Palaprat caused a schism in the Templar Order.
The Neo-Templar Order apparently started as a "perfectly orthodox"
Order and when Fabré-Palaprat introduced the Johannite doctrine many
members opposed to the "new religion". Fabré-Palaprat proclaimed
himself the Sovereign Pontiff and Patriarch of the Johannite church
and demanded all the Templars to accept the "new" faith.
"The consequence of this change of religious views was a schism in
the Order. The orthodox party, however, appears to have been the
stronger; and after the others had for a short time exhibited
themselves as soi-disant priests in a Johannite church which they
erected, and in which they publicly chanted the liturgy which they
had composed, the church and the liturgy were given up, and they
retired once more into the secrecy of the Order." ("Lexicon of
Freemasonry", 773).
Apparently the Johannite church faced many difficulties and it seems
that after Fabré-Palaprat's death in 1838, both his "Order of the
Temple" and the Johannite church declined. But it is stated that
although the orthodox Templar Order died out, the Johannite
Church "continued its activities in secret". The small circle of
French and Belgian noblemen that directed the order's activities
continued the "Primitive Christian Church" in small selected groups.
There are indications that out of these circles a group evolved in
Belgium which would finally establish a lodge called "KVMRIS".
Lodge KVMRIS was Brussels' first and main Martinist Lodge,
originally established in 1892. A possible lead which provides a
connection between the remnants of Fabré-Palaprat's Templar Order
and its Johannite Church and Lodge "KVMRIS" is a document published
in 1840 by the "Ordre du Temple" in Brussels, Belgium. The document
represented the "original" statutes of the Templar Convention which
was held in Versailles in 1705 at which Philippe, Duc d'Orleans was
appointed as Grand-Maitre of the "Ordre du Temple" ( Philippus, Dux
Aurelianensis ).
These statutes were published by the "Imprimerie de l'Ordre du
Temple" in Brussels, Belgium. The document can be found in the
publication "Ordre des Chevaliers du Temple' Bruxelles - Imprimerie
de L'Ordre du Temple 1840, pg 58 - 60 ( Art.2 Charte de
transmission ). The 'Charte de transmission' mentions Fabré-Palaprat
as the 46th GM of the Templar Order:
? Bernard-Raymond Fabré-Palaprat de Spolette, né à Cordes (
Tarn ) ( Bernardus-Raymondus Fabré, Cordo-Albiensis )- November 4,
1804
As mentioned earlier on, the Templar Order experienced a schism
after Fabré-Palaprat's death, dividing advocates and opponents of
the Johannite-Church. Introvigne states that the Johannite Church
was led by Ferdinand-Francois Chatel after Fabré-Palaprat's death
( Introvigne contradicts the information on Chatel's expulsion from
the Johannite Church given by "Timeline of the Authentic
Tradition" ). It seems that the two branches, led by Count Jules de
Moreton de Chabrillan (advocate of the Johannite-Church) and Admiral
William Sydney Smith, reconciled in 1841 under Jean-Marie Raoul.
The book "Ordre des Chevaliers du Temple" also has a list of the
successors of Fabré-Palaprat in which Raoul is mentioned as ' Grand
Maitre' from 1840 untill 1850. A certain Vernois, who was appointed
GM of the "Ordre du Temple", disbanded the Order. In 1892 Joséphin
Péladan (1859-1918) receives the "regency" of the Neo-Templar Order,
which was given to him by some surviving members. And here a
connection is made with i.a. Lodge "KVMRIS". Péladan had founded in
1891 his own order, "Ordre de la Rose-Croix Catholique et Esthetique
du Temple et du Graal " ( see the Chapters on the "R+C de Toulouse"
and the "OKR+C", as well as the forthcoming Chapter on Péladan's
Rosicrucian Order). Several Belgian Martinists were also member of
Péladan's "Ordre de la Rose-Croix et Catholique", among such men as
Francis Vurgey, Nicolas Brossel, and Clement de Saint-Marcq. Brossel
and Vurgey were directing Lodge "KVMRIS", the former being its
President ( see "Manifestations of the M.O - the M.O Abroad" ). As
mentioned in the chapter "the M.O. Abroad", "the Gnostic elements
which influenced the works of such lodge-members as Clement de Saint-
Marcq were part of the doctrine of the Johannite church". It is
stated that Clement de Saint-Marcq was also a member of Jules
Doinel's Gnostic Church.
There's not much information on Péladan's activities as 'Grand
Maitre' of the "Ordre du Temple" and it seems that Péladan was much
more interested in the activities of his own "Rosicrucian Order"
then in the development of the Neo-Templar Order. The book "Ordre
des Chevaliers du Temple" reports an international Templar Congress
held in Brussels in 1894. With the exception of the English branch
of the Templars all other European Templar Orders were represented
on the Convention of Brussels. It was decided to establish
an "International Secretariat" under the direction of the leaders of
Lodge "KVMRIS", Brossel and Vurgey. They were later succeeded by
Selliers de Moranville, Georges le Clément de Saint-Marcq, Georges
le Roy van Daems, Oscar Jamar, Arthur van Hecke, Carlos Mosias and
Joseph Daems. The next date which is given in the book is the date
of the foundation of the "Ordre souverain et militaire du Temple de
Jérusalem" ( OSMTJ ) or `Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of
Jerusalem' ( SMOTJ ) or `Ordo Supremus Militaris Templi
Hierosolymitani ' in 1932 ?
As reported before, Bricaud's succession of the Johannite Templar
Gnostic Church was received from B.Clément, who was a member of
Bricaud's Universal Gnostic Church. I could find no information on
Clément's affiliation with the Neo-Templar Johannite Church. But it
appears that various (older) members of the French mystic and occult
arcane orders (Martinist movement, Memphis-Misraim, Péladan's R+C
etc.) were connected to the various 'underground churches' existing
in France at the time. The Templar lineage is confirmed by several
sources, Koenig states i.a. that Papus' G.I.D.E.E. ( French and
Belgian branch )also carried a line of succession of Fabré-
Palaprat's "Ordre du Temple". According to Bishop Bertil Persson of
the St.Ephraim Institute the lineage of the Johannite Church in
which Fabré-Palaprat was ordained can be traced back to 1726. Bishop
Persson keeps the world's largest and most accurate record of
independent bishops. The following "line of succession" represents
the lineage of the Franco-Haitian Gnostic Church;
? Benedictus PP XIII (1726) - De Polignac (1735) - De Grammont
II (1744) - Von Baldenstein (1759) - De Montenach (1772) - Gobel
(1791) - Lamourette (1791) - Royer (1800) - Fabré-Palaprat (1810) -
Mauviel (1810) - Machault (1831) - Chatel (1836) - D'Adhemar (1857) -
De Brion (1860) - De Marraga (1899) - L-F Jean Maine (1953) - H-F
Jean Maine (1966) - Bertiaux (1979)
According to Emanuele Coltro / Tau Sebastos of the "Ecclesia
Gnostica Latina", who produced the 'Line of Succession', the dates
are not all correct. This could be the case with the date of
Mauviel's ordination (1810). Tau C.Harmonius mentions 1800 as the
year in which Mauviel was consecrated. "It seems also that with De
Brion the Templar Church was also linked to the Memphis-Misraim Rite
and an Albigensian Church prior to the Church of Doinel", thus
Coltro.

http://www.antiqillum.com/texts/bg/Qadosh/qadosh083.htm


________________________________________
ORMUS AND THE GRAIL CHALICE.
MARK AND THE YOUNG MAN IN THE TOMB.
________________________________________
1. MARK AND THE YOUNG MAN IN THE TOMB.

A OVERVIEW
Ormus and six of his disciples are said to have been converted to
Christianity in the year 46 of the Common Era, by Saint Mark. From
this came an amalgamation of the Ancient Mystery Tradition with
Christianity, and thus was born the Rose+Croix. We have no proof of
the existence of ORMUS, or whether he and his disciples ever met
Saint Mark. What is important is the Legend.
We have given our recommendations in the previous segment as to the
interpretation of the story, with plenty of reasons, and documentary
supports for our "conjecture."
To say that this event took place, not in 46, but in the early 4th
Century C. E., is not really that unfounded. Pachomius himself was
converted by Christians in the obedience of the See of Alexandria,
whose first Bishop was Saint Mark. That is much like those under the
obedience of the See of Rome could say they were converted by Saint
Peter.
ORMUS was a Serapic Priest, (in one case, a Seraphic Priest); while
Pachomius was a Serapic Monk. Is this a mere coincidence? From the
information we have, Pachomius did exactly what ORMUS was said to
have done. What's more, wherever we find the Monophysite version of
Christianity, we also find the perfect environment for esoteric
traditions to exist within. This includes Egypt, Syria, Assyria,
Armenia, even Constantinople.
For the present segment, we shall survey some of the items we have
collected relating to Saint Mark, including the letter discovered
and translated by Morton Smith.
MARK
In 46 C. E. John Mark was travelling through Judaea with Barnabas
and Paul. Later in his life, he was in Alexandria:
"It was too as an evangelist that he became a subject of later
interest, and of speculative legends due to this; e.g., as one of
the SEVENTY (first found in Adamantius in the 4th century), the
founder of the Alexandrine Church (a tradition in Eusebius II. 16)
and its first Bishop (ibid., II.24) and even author of the local
type of Liturgy (cf. The Acts of Mark, clvii).
"As to his last days and death nothing is really known. It is just
possible that Alexandria was his final sphere of work, as the
earliest tradition on the point implies?" (EB 14:909b-c. 14th
Edition, 1958.)
"One of the SEVENTY" suggests the Qadosh Fathers, as described in
Part One of this Book Two. Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History tells us
a thing or two pertaining to Mark. In Chapter 24 of Book
II, 'Amnianus was appointed as the first bishop of Alexandria after
Mark?'
"Nero was now in the eighth year of his reign, when Amnianus
succeeded the Apostle and evangelist in the administration of the
Church at Alexandria."
Nero reigned from 54 to 68 c.e. The eighth year would be 62 c.e. It
is unlikely that Mark lived after that date, because, like the case
with the early Scottish Rite, early OTO and other groups, the
Bishopric was an Ad Vitam, for life, position, like popes. So, then,
some date between 46 and 62 c.e. seems likely.
In chapter 16, telling of how Mark first proclaimed Christianity to
the inhabitants of Egypt, Eusebius states that Mark proclaimed his
gospel, and established churches at Alexandria, and that a "great
multitude of believers were collected." He goes on to say "that in
consequence of their extreme philosophical discipline and austerity,
PHILO has considered their pursuits, their assemblies, and
entertainments, and in short their whole manner of life as deserving
a place in his descriptions."
This would be none other than the Therapeutae, the Essene-like
community that existed near Alexandria, at Lake Moeris in the Fayyum
region. Philo is said to have written his essay, "On The
Contemplative Life:" (q.v.) circa 41-54 c.e. The "Essenes and other
Jews" who "founded a School of Solomonic Wisdom, to which the
disciples of ORMUS attached themselves," was this group of
Therapeutae, or may have been.
It is likely, then, that in addition to the conjecture we have made,
regarding ORMUS / PACHOMIUS; the following scenario might also be
true:
The Qadosh Fathers who split up and went to Palestine, at the time
of the building of the first Temple, had a residence in the vicinity
of the area that became known as Alexandria. The Therapeuts may be a
survival of this group, and a more authentic original version. It is
too early for the Qadosh Fathers in Palestine to split up, and go
their way: to Syria and the Thebaid. The Thebaid being upper Egypt,
referring to the communities of ascetic monks who were organized by
Pachomius into a monastic system.
The Therapeuts, then, may have been a community of Jews who wanted
to get away from Jerusalem and its environs. It may have been the
place where the exiled Essenes / Qadosh Fathers would go, at the
time of the split.
Then: when the dissimulation occurs, and the Jewish messianic
tradition has to be concealed, it becomes concealed in a form of
Alchemical school / Healing school, modelled after the Monks of
Serapis, to some degree, and surviving fairly intact until the time
of Pachomius, who reformed the whole structure, and even provided a
community for women who were interested in the Mysteries.
It is also quite possible that the Buddhist influence on Egypt was
more profound than it was on Syria and Palestine. True, the Emperor
Asoka's missionaries did not linger long in the Near East, but
archaeological finds show that some cities of Egypt had long term
residents from India present.
What we have in the Therapeutae is, for us, an example of the kind
of Group suggested to us in the Masonic legends of the Qadosh
Fathers. Perhaps they weren't the wild Hell-fire Club Thelemites
that the Borborites were, but they had their own peculiar rites and
customs, as can be seen in some of those interesting texts revealed
by Eisenmann and Wise in The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered.
This subject brings us to a bridge to the next portion of this
segment. Remember the ideas set forth above pertaining to the
Qadoshim, Kadeshim, and so forth. Now we extend the ancient
practices forward to the formation of the Gnostic Sects. The
practices described in the chapter on Qadosh are ancient, and have
been instituted forever as the Supreme Means whereby Divine/Human
Communion can be most efficaciously achieved. The problem is that
the perverted minds of the majority of the humans choose for
themselves to view these practices as filthy rather than regard them
as the Supreme Ritual, which they are.
If ORMUS suggests HORUS, and HORUS MEZDAU, which we have found to be
similar to HERU - PEH or PEHU, it is also possible to extend the
chain, and suggest HERU - PA - KHART, HOOR-PAAR-KRAAT, Harpocrates.
In spelling and in pronunciation, Harpocrates is hinted at in the
name Carpocrates. It suggests that perhaps Carpocrates was one of
the second-century Disciples of ORMUS, who adopted a specifically
Tantrik practice, in that he taught that in order to transcend the
passions, sensual desires, and so forth, one must over-indulge them
until one became satisfied or fulfilled, and had no further need to
so indulge. This is recognized as sound teaching by Tantriks. Even
though considered low-brow by today's crop of trendite Tibbies, the
Tantrik materials presented by Evans-Wentz in the Oxford Tibetan
Series IS TOP QUALITY MATERIAL. Perhaps the fact that some of this
material is easier to grasp than the obscure language games present
in most translations of Tibetan literature, makes those who are
chained to their exiled gurus jealous of the rest of us who have
gotten it by ourselves. Oh well, the show must go on.

http://www.antiqillum.com/texts/bg/Qadosh/qadosh007.htm


________________________________________
The Johannite Legend of the Templars -- Part One.

"A young virgin of Nazareth, named Miriam, who had been betrothed to
a youth of her tribe named Jochanan, was one day surprised and
outraged by a certain man, Pandira, or Panther, who introduced
himself into her chamber in the garments, and under the name, of
Jochanan, the latter being made acquainted with the misfortune
quitted her without compromising her, she being in fact innocent.
The result was that she gave birth to a son who received the very
ordinary Jewish name of Joshua, or Jesus in the Graeco-Aramaic
dialect. This child was adopted by a Rabbi named Joseph, who carried
him into Egypt, where he was initiated into the occult sciences, and
the priests of Osiris, regarding him as the long-promised
incarnation of Horus, expected by the Adepts, finally consecrated
him Sovereign Pontiff of the universal religion."

(7) http://www.darkstar1.co.uk/ds11.html

http://www.goroadachi.com/etemenanki/endgame-3.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm
________________________________________
"Certain writers have suggested that the Templars were infected with
the Johannite or Mandaean heresy ~~ which denounced Jesus as
a 'false prophet' and acknowledged John [the Baptist] as the true
Messiah. In the course of their activities in the Middle East the
Templars undoubtedly established contact with Johannite
sects...."(1)





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/54wwlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Templar-de-Rosemont/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Templar-de-Rosemont-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/