| 
			 
			  
			
			  
			
			  
			
			  
			
				
					
						| 
						 
						   | 
						
						 
			Dragon Society 
						
			Real History, Dragon Philosophy and 
			 
						
			The Importance of Royal Bloodlines 
						
			from
			
			TheDragonSociety Website 
						
			recovered though
			
			WayBackMachine Website 
						 | 
					 
				 
			 
			
			  
			
				
					
						
							
								
								Contents 
							 
							
						 
					 
				 
			 
			
			
			
			
				
					
						  
					 
				 
			 
			
			  
			
			  
			
			  
			
			  
			
			  
			
			  
			
			 
			
			  
			
			  
			
			The Dragon Society 
			
			Real History, Dragon Philosophy and 
			The Importance of Royal Bloodlines 
			
			
			
			Real 
			History
			 
			
			 
			If you were bad at history when you were at school, do not despair! 
			Much of what your teachers tried to teach you was wrong!  
			 
			A lot has been written, over the last decade or so, about recent 
			startling discoveries in European history, particularly in 
			connection with Christianity. We intend to present some of this 
			material in a simple, logical way. The section is called "Real 
			History" as although we may not be able to prove the conclusion 
			categorically, the one that is reached must be more accurate than 
			the one that we have been given for the last 2000 years.  
			 
			There is also overwhelming evidence that information from a certain 
			organization can provide the conclusive proof that the theory 
			requires. The other reason for calling it "Real" (from the French) 
			is that it is essentially "Royal" history as the articles in this 
			section reveal.  
			 
			Back to Top 
			
			 
			  
			
			  
			
			
			 
  
			
			The Dragon Society 
			
			Real History, Dragon Philosophy and 
			The Importance of Royal Bloodlines 
			
			
			
			Monarchy
			 
			by 
			Tracy R. Twyman 
			
			2003 
			
			
			  
			
			James VI of Scotland 
			James I of England 
			
			  
			
			When the Stewart King James VI of 
			Scotland ascended the throne of England to become King James I of 
			Great Britain, he made a speech that shocked and appalled the nobles 
			sitting in Parliament. They had been waxing increasingly bold over 
			the last few years, attempting to limit the powers of the crown to 
			strengthen their own. What shocked them was that James used his 
			coronation speech to remind them of the ancient, traditional belief 
			that a monarch is chosen by God to be His emissary and 
			representative on Earth, and ought therefore to be responsible to no 
			one but God. In other words, James was asserting what has become 
			known to history as ‘The Divine Right of Kings’, and they didn’t 
			like it one bit.  
			
			  
			
			Quotes from the speech show how inflammatory his 
			words actually were: 
			
				
				"The state of monarchy is the most 
				supreme thing upon earth, for kings are not only God’s 
				lieutenants upon earth, and sit upon God’s throne, but even by
				God himself are called gods... In the Scriptures, kings are 
				called gods, and so their power after a certain relation 
				compared to divine power. Kings are also compared to fathers of 
				families: for a king is truly Parens Patriae, the politique 
				father of his people... Kings are justly called gods, for that 
				they exercise a manner of resemblance of divine power upon 
				earth: for if you will consider the attributes to God, you shall 
				see how they agree in the person of a king." 
			 
			
			The nobles were aghast. This fat, 
			bloated pustule telling everyone to worship him as a god! It seemed 
			patently ridiculous. Even more offensive, James finished up his 
			speech by putting Parliament in its place basically telling them 
			that, since he ruled by the grace of God, any act or word spoken in 
			contradiction of him was an act against God himself. James 
			continued: 
			
				
				"I conclude then this point, 
				touching the power of kings with this axiom of divinity: that as 
				to dispute what God may do is blasphemy... so is it sedition in 
				subjects to dispute what a king may do in the height of his 
				power. I would not have you meddle with such ancient rights of 
				mine as I have received from my predecessors... All novelties 
				are dangerous as well in a politic as in a natural body, and 
				therefore I would loathe to be quarreled in my ancient rights 
				and possessions, for that were to judge me unworthy of that 
				which my predecessors had and left me." 
			 
			
			Although it was James I that made the 
			concept famous, he certainly did not invent the idea of Divine 
			Right. The concept is, as we shall show, as old as civilization 
			itself. 
			 
			As harsh and dictatorial as it may seem, such a system actually 
			protected the rights of individual citizens from even larger and 
			more powerful bullies such as the Parliament and the Pope. When 
			power rests ultimately in the hands of a single individual such as a 
			king, beholden to nobody except God, who need not appease anyone for 
			either money or votes, injustices are more likely to be righted 
			after a direct appeal to him. Furthermore, past monarchs who held 
			their claims to power doggedly in the face of increasing opposition 
			from the Catholic Church managed, as long as they held their power, 
			to save their subjects from the forced religious indoctrination and 
			social servitude that comes with a Catholic theocracy. Author 
			Stephen Coston wrote in 1972’s Sources of English Constitutional 
			History that: 
			
				
				"Without the doctrine of the Divine 
				Right, Roman Catholicism would have dominated history well 
				beyond its current employment in the Dark Ages. Furthermore, Divine Right made it possible for the Protestant Reformation in 
				England to take place, mature and spread to the rest of the 
				world." 
			 
			
			The Divine Right practiced by European 
			monarchs was actually based on a more ancient doctrine practiced by 
			the monarchs of Judah and Israel in the Old Testament. Many European 
			royal families considered them to be their ancestors, tracing their 
			royal European lineage back to the Jewish King David, sometimes 
			through the descendants of Jesus Christ. Such a line of descent was 
			(and is) known as the "Grail Bloodline."  
			
			  
			
			One of Europe’s most famous 
			monarchs, Charlemagne the Great, was often called "David" in 
			reference to his famous ancestor, and Habsburg King Otto was called 
			"the son of David." In fact, the European tradition of anointing 
			kings comes from that practiced in the Old Testament. Author George Athas describes how the ceremony symbolized the 
			
			
			Lord Yahweh adopting 
			the new king as his own son: 
			
				
				"Firstly, the king was the 
				‘Anointed’ of Yahweh - the mesiach, from which we derive the 
				term ‘Messiah.’ At his anointing (or his coronation), the Spirit 
				of Yahweh entered the king, giving him superhuman qualities and 
				allowing him to carry out the dictates of the deity. The 
				psalmist of Psalm 45 describes the king as ‘fairer than the sons 
				of men’, and continued to praise his majestic characteristics. 
				This king also had eternal life granted to him by Yahweh. The 
				deity is portrayed as saying to him, ‘You are my son - today I 
				have sired you.’ The king was Yahweh’s Firstborn - the bekhor - 
				who was the heir to his father’s estate. He was ‘the highest of 
				the kings of the earth.’ Thus, the king was adopted by Yahweh at 
				his coronation and, as such, was in closer communion with the 
				deity than the rest of the people. On many occasions, Yahweh was 
				called the king’s god.  
				  
				
				The king was distinguished far above 
				the ordinary mortal, rendering him holy and his person sacred. 
				It was regarded as a grievous offence to lay a hand on him. 
				Thus, to overthrow the king was rebellion of the most heinous 
				sort and an affront to the deity who had appointed the king... 
				We can note that the King of Judah and Israel is described in 
				divine terms. He is, for example, seen as sitting at Yahweh’s 
				right hand, and his adopted son. We find similar motifs of 
				Pharaohs seated to the right of a deity of Egypt. Psalm 45:7 
				calls the king an ‘elohim’ - a god. Psalm 45:7also says ‘Your 
				throne is like God’s throne.’" 
			 
			
			Here we see the basis for King James’ 
			claim that the scriptures likened human kings to gods. As such, 
			kings were strongly associated with the priesthood as well, and in 
			some cases took on priestly functions. However, traditionally, the 
			Jewish priesthood was dominated by the Cohens of the Tribe of Levi, 
			which was biologically related but functionally separate from the 
			royal line of David - that is, until Jesus came along, heir to both 
			the kingly and priestly titles through his lineage back to both 
			tribes.  
			
			  
			
			However, in other more ancient cultures, such as the 
			Egyptians, the royal and priestly functions were inseparable. In 
			addition to regarding their Pharaohs as the literal offspring of 
			deities, and in fact, deities themselves, the Egyptians believed 
			that the gods had given them the institution of kingship itself. 
			Their first king had been one of their main gods: Osiris, whom all 
			human kings were expected to emulate. Richard Cassaro, in his book, 
			A Deeper Truth, elaborates: 
			
				
				"... during the First Time [The 
				Golden Age when the gods ruled directly on Earth] a human yet 
				eternal king named Osiris initiated a monarchial government in 
				Egypt and imparted a wise law and spiritual wisdom to the 
				people. At the end of his ministry, Osiris left his throne to 
				the people. It was, thereafter, the duty of every king to rule 
				over Egypt in the same manner Osiris had ruled. 
			 
			
			This concept that kingship began with a 
			single divine ruler of whom all subsequent human kings are 
			descendants can be traced back to the oldest civilization 
			acknowledged by history, Sumeria, and the other Mesopotamian 
			cultures that followed, such as the Assyrians and the Babylonians. 
			To quote Henri Frankfort: 
			
				
				"In Mesopotamia, the king was 
				regarded as taking on godhood at his coronation, and at every 
				subsequent New Year festival. However, he was often seen as 
				having been predestined to the divine throne by the gods at his 
				birth, or even at the beginning of time. Through a sacred 
				marriage, he had a metaphysical union with the mother goddess, 
				who filled him with life, fertility, and blessing, which he 
				passed onto his people." 
			 
			
			The Encyclopedia Britannica has 
			identified three different types of sacred kingship that were 
			recognized in the ancient world. The king was seen as, 
			
				
					
						
						(1) the receptacle of 
						supernatural or divine power 
						
						(2) the divine or 
						semi-divine ruler 
						
						(3) the agent or 
						mediator of the sacred 
					 
				 
			 
			
			However, this author believes it is safe 
			to say that all of these concepts stem from the almost universal 
			belief that kingship descended from Heaven with a single divine 
			being who was literally thought of as the ancestor of all those who 
			followed. This king, was known to the ancients as Kronos, the 
			Forgotten Father, and this is another name for the deity/planet, 
			Saturn. He was the ‘brightest star in the heavens", who fell to 
			Earth and intermarried with the wives of men to breed a race of 
			human kings (the Grail Bloodline). After that he was imprisoned in 
			the Underworld by his father, Zeus, the Most High God, for 
			disobeying a social taboo against interbreeding with humans, and 
			sharing secret knowledge with them.  
			
			  
			
			Some might think this contradicts the 
			traditional association of ancient kings with the Sun-God, but in 
			fact, Saturn himself was a sun god of a sort. In ancient times 
			Saturn was the dominant figure in the night sky and as such became 
			known as ‘the midnight sun’ (a term later used by occultists to 
			refer to the Grail). From its position in the sky it appeared to 
			stand still, as the rest of the night sky revolved around it. It was 
			therefore also called ‘The Central Sun.’ 
			 
			Interestingly, although this theory of mine has long been in the 
			works, I’ve recently stumbled across an author named David Talbott 
			who shares this hypothesis on the origin of kingship. From a piece 
			on 
			his website, entitled "Saturn as a Stationary Sun 
			and Universal Monarch’, we read: 
			
				
				"A global tradition recalls an 
				exemplary king ruling in the sky before kings ever ruled on 
				earth. 
				 
				This mythical figure appears as the first in the line of kings, 
				the father of kings, the model of the good king. But this same 
				figure is commonly remembered as the central luminary of the 
				sky, often a central sun, unmoving sun, or superior sun ruling 
				before the present sun. 
				 
				And most curiously, with the rise of astronomy this celestial 
				‘king’ was identified as the planet Saturn." 
			 
			
			One can see traces of this ancient 
			progenitor of kings just in the word ‘monarchy’ itself. The syllable 
			"mon" means "one" in Indo-European language systems, as in "The One 
			King Who Rules Over All." But in Egypt, "Mon" was one of the names 
			of the sun god, (also called Amun-Re) in its occluded state, at 
			night, when the sun, as they saw it, passed beneath the Earth. The 
			word meant literally for them, "The Hidden One", because he ruled 
			the world (and the Underworld) from his secret subterranean prison. 
			The syllable "ark" comes from the Greek "arche", meaning "original", 
			or "originator." As the first "monarch", Kronos was the originator 
			of kings, the Forgotten Father of all royal bloodlines. Many of our 
			commonly associated symbols of kingship date back to the time when
			Kronos first introduced it, and are directly derived from him.
			 
			
			  
			
			For instance, the crown symbolizes the 
			(central) sun, the "Godhead" descending upon the brow of the wise 
			king. The Sumerian kings adorned their crowns with horns, just like
			Kronos was believed to have done. The throne was Kronos’ seat on his 
			celestial boat in heaven, and has also been passed down to us. 
			Kronos and his descendants were known as Shepherd Kings, an 
			appellation used by royalty throughout history, and this is the 
			origin of the king’s scepter, which was once a shepherd’s staff. The 
			coronation stone and the orb surmounted by a cross are also Saturnian/solar symbols, and the Egyptian word for the sun, Re, may 
			be the source of the French word for king, Roi. 
			 
			Kronos, and the god-kings who followed him, were known by the title 
			"Lord of the Four Corners of the World." This has given birth to the 
			universal, recurring archetype of "Le Roi du Monde", a concept that 
			was brilliantly explored in a book by René Guenon of the same name. 
			In a surprising number of cultures throughout the world and 
			throughout history, there exists this concept of "The Lord of the 
			Earth", an omnipresent and eternal monarch who reigns from within 
			the very center of the Earth itself, directing events on the surface 
			with his superhuman psyche. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, "The 
			Lord of the Earth" is a term applied to Satan, or Lucifer, who, like 
			Saturn, was the brightest star in Heaven, but was cast down by 
			God. 
			Like Saturn, he was imprisoned inside the bowels of the Earth, in a 
			realm called Hell.  
			
			  
			
			In fact, it is quite clear that the 
			figure of Satan comes from Saturn, the "Fish-Goat-Man", and 
			obviously the two words are etymologically related. Perhaps this is 
			why the "Grail Bloodline", the divine lineage from which all 
			European kings have come, is traced by many back to Lucifer. The 
			medieval Christian heretics known as 
			the Cathars took this concept 
			to its logical conclusion. They insisted that, since Satan is the 
			‘King of the World’ ("Rex Mundi’, as they called him), and 
			
			Jehovah 
			was, in the Bible, the one who created the world, Jehovah and 
			Satan must be one and the same. For preaching this they were massacred 
			unto extinction by the Papacy.  
			 
			However, in the Eastern tradition, "the Lord of the Earth" 
			represents the ultimate incarnate manifestation of Godhood. They too 
			see him as ruling his kingdom from the center of the Earth, in a 
			subterranean city called either
			
			Shamballah or Agartha. And in this 
			tradition, the Lord of the Earth is also a super-spiritual being 
			capable of incarnating on the surface of the Earth in a series of 
			‘Avatars’, or human kings who rule various eras of existence. 
			 
			
			  
			
			According to New Age author
			
			Alice Bailey: 
			
				
				"Shamballa is the seat of the ‘Lord 
				of the World’, who has made the sacrifice (analogous to the 
				Bodhisattva’s vow) of remaining to watch over the evolution of 
				men and devas until all have been ‘saved’ or enlightened." 
			 
			
			One of the names that the Hindus use for 
			"The Lord of the Earth" is Manu, who, writes 
			Guenon, is, 
			
				
				"a cosmic 
			intelligence that reflects pure spiritual light and formulates the 
			law (Dharma) appropriate to the conditions of our world and our 
			cycle of existence."  
			 
			
			Author Ferdinand Ossendowski adds: 
			
				
				"The Lord of the World is in touch 
				with the thoughts of all those who direct the destiny of 
				mankind... He knows their intentions and their ideas. If they 
				are pleasing to God, the Lord of the World favours them with his 
				invisible aid. But if they are displeasing to God, he puts a 
				check on their activities."  
			 
			
			These are obviously activities that 
			human kings, as incarnations of the Lord of the Earth, are expected 
			to replicate in their own kingdoms to the best of their ability. In 
			fact, a number of human kings throughout history have been viewed by 
			their subjects as incarnations of the "Lord of the Earth", embodying 
			the concepts that he represents. These include Charlemagne, 
			Alexander the Great (who was believed to have horns literally 
			growing from his head, just like Saturn), and Melchizedek, a 
			mysterious priest-king mentioned repeatedly in the Old Testament and 
			imbued with an inexplicable importance. He was called the "Prince of 
			Salem" (as in Jeru-Salem), and is said to have shared bread and wine 
			with Abraham on Mt. Moriah. Some believe that the cup which they 
			used is the artifact that later became known as the Holy Grail.
			 
			
			  
			
			Some have also identified him with 
			another king of Jerusalem, Adonizedek, and with Shem, Noah’s son. 
			Nobody knows what his ancestry is, who his descendants might have 
			been, or why, thousands of years later, Jesus Christ was referred to 
			in the scriptures as, "A priest according to the Order of 
			Melchizedek."  
			
			  
			
			Of Melchizedek’s significance, René Guenon writes: 
			
				
				"Melchizedek, or more precisely, 
				Melki-Tsedeq, is none other than the title used by 
				Judeo-Christian tradition to denote the function of ‘The Lord of 
				the World’...  
				 
				Melki-Tsedeq is thus both king and priest. His name means ‘King 
				of Justice’, and he is also king of Salem, that is, of ‘Peace’, 
				so again we find ‘Justice’ and "Peace’, the fundamental 
				attributes pertaining to the ‘Lord of the World.’" 
			 
			
			Even more pertinent information is 
			provided by René Guenon’s good friend Julius Evola, who in his book 
			The Mystery of the Grail wrote: 
			
				
				"In some Syriac texts, mention is 
				made of a stone that is the foundation, or center of the world, 
				hidden in the ‘primordial depths, near God’s temple. It is put 
				in relation with the body of the primordial man (Adam) and, 
				interestingly enough, with an inaccessible mountain place, the 
				access to which must not be revealed to other people; here 
				Melchizedek, ‘in divine and eternal service’, watches over 
				Adam’s body. In Melchizedek we find again the representation of 
				the supreme function of the Universal Ruler, which is 
				simultaneously regal and priestly; here this representation is 
				associated with some kind of guardian of Adam’s body who 
				originally possessed the Grail and who, after losing it, no 
				longer lives. This is found together with the motifs of a 
				mysterious stone and an inaccessible seat." 
			 
			
			Clearly, that foundation stone of the 
			world is the same as the Black, or Hidden Sun in the center of the 
			Earth, or the ‘Grail Stone’ which is said to be hidden in that 
			location. The Grail Romances provide us with much insight into the 
			‘King of the World’ concept. He is represented in the story by one 
			of the supporting characters, Prester John, a king who is mentioned 
			in passing as ruling over a spiritual domain in the faraway East, 
			and who, quite fittingly, is said to come from Davidic descent.  
			
			  
			
			Evola continues: 
			
				
				"The Tractatus pulcherrimus referred 
				to him as ‘king of kings’ rex regnum. He combined spiritual 
				authority with regal power... Yet essentially, ‘Prester John’ is 
				only a title and a name, which designates not a given individual 
				but rather a function. Thus in Wolfram von Eschenbach and in 
				the Titurel we find ‘Prester John’ as a title; the Grail, as we will 
				see, indicates from time to time the person who must become 
				Prester John. Moreover, in the legend, ‘Prester John’ designates 
				one who keeps in check the people of Gog and Magog, who 
				exercises a visible and invisible dominion , figuratively, 
				dominion over both natural and invisible beings, and who defends 
				the access of his kingdom with ‘lions’ and ‘giants.’ In this 
				kingdom is also found the ‘fountain of youth.’" 
				  
				
				"The dignity of a sacred king is 
				often accompanied by biblical reminiscences, by presenting 
				Prester John as the son or nephew of King David, and sometimes 
				as King David himself... ‘David, King of the Hindus, who is 
				called by the people ‘Prester John’ - the King (Prester John) 
				descends from the son of King David." 
			 
			
			The "Lord of the Earth", or 
			the figures that represent him, are often symbolized by a victory 
			stone, or a foundation stone which is emblematic of their authority. 
			For instance, British kings are crowned on the "Stone of Destiny", 
			believed to have been used as a pillow by Jacob in the Old 
			Testament. Such a stone is often referred to in mythology as having 
			fallen from Heaven, like the Grail Stone, which fell out of 
			Lucifer’s crown during his war with God, and became the foundation 
			stone for the Grail kingdom, having the power, as it is written, to 
			‘make kings.’ Because it fell from Heaven, the Grail is also often 
			associated with a falling star, like that which Lucifer represents. 
			Of course the Black Sun in the center of the Earth also represents 
			Rex Mundi‘s victory stone. It is interesting, then, that in the 
			Babylonian tongue, the word "tsar" means "rock", and is not only an 
			anagram of "star", but a word that in the Russian language refers to 
			an imperial monarch.  
			
			  
			
			Sometimes the monarchial foundation 
			stone is represented as a mountain, especially the World or 
			Primordial Mountain that in mythology provides the Earth with its 
			central axis. The Sumerians referred to this as Mt. Mashu. Its twin 
			peaks were said to reach up to Heaven, while the tunnels and caves 
			within it reached down to the depths of Hell. 
			
			Jehovah in the Bible, 
			sometimes called El Shaddai ("The Lord of the Mountain") had Mt. 
			Zion for a foundation stone, and was believed to actually live 
			inside of the mountain. Later, the kingdom of Jesus Christ was said 
			to be "founded upon the Rock of Sion". 
			 
			The stone that fell from Heaven, the royal victory stone, is also 
			sometimes depicted under the symbolic form of a castrated phallus, 
			such as that of Kronos, whose disembodied penis was hurled into the 
			ocean, and there spawned the Lady Venus. This story is a 
			recapitulation of the Osiris story, as well as the inspiration for 
			the Grail legends, in which the Fisher King is wounded in the 
			genitals, causing the entire kingdom to fall under a spell of 
			perpetual malaise. The only thing that can heal the king, and 
			therefore the kingdom is the Grail. This is a recurring theme in 
			world mythology. The king and/or the kingdom that temporarily falls 
			asleep or falls under a magic spell which renders it/him ineffectual 
			for a time, until the stars are right, or the proper conditions are 
			met. This causes the king and his kingdom to reawaken, to rise from 
			the ashes, from the tomb, or often, to rise out of the sea.  
			
			  
			
			The cycle recurs in the tales of the 
			Lord of the Earth, who alternates between periods of death-like 
			sleep within his tomb in the center of the Earth, and rebirth, in 
			which he once again returns to watch over his kingdom, to restore 
			righteousness and justice to the land. He then presides over a new, 
			revitalized "Golden Age".  
			
			  
			
			Julius Evola writes of the archetype: 
			
				
				"It is a theme that dates back to 
				the most ancient times and that bears a certain relation to the 
				doctrine of the ‘cyclical manifestations’ or avatars, namely, 
				the manifestation, occurring at special times and in various 
				forms, of a single principle, which during intermediate periods 
				exists in an unmanifested state. Thus every time a king 
				displayed the traits of an incarnation of such a principle, the 
				idea arose in the legend that he has not died but has withdrawn 
				into an inaccessible seat whence once day he will manifest, or 
				that he is asleep and will awaken one day... The image of a 
				regality in a state of sleep or apparent death, however, is akin 
				to that of an altered, wounded, paralyzed regality, in regard 
				not to its intangible principle but to its external and 
				historical representatives.  
				  
				
				Hence the theme of the wounded, 
				mutilated or weakened king who continues to live in an 
				inaccessible center, in which time and death are suspended.... 
				In the Hindu tradition we encounter the theme of Mahaksyapa, who 
				sleeps in a mountain but will awaken at the sound of shells at 
				the time of the new manifestation of the principle that 
				previously manifested itself in the form of Buddha. Such a 
				period is also that of the coming of a Universal Ruler (cakravartin) 
				by the name of Samkha. Since samkha means ‘shells’, this verbal 
				assimilation expresses the idea of the awakening from sleep of 
				the new manifestation of the King of the World and of the same 
				primordial tradition that the above-mentioned legend conceives 
				to be enclosed (during the intermediate period of crisis) in a 
				shell. When the right time comes, in conformity with the 
				cyclical laws, a new manifestation from above will occur (Kalki-avatara) 
				in the form of a sacred king who will triumph over the Dark Age.
				 
				
					
					"...many people thought that the 
					Roman world, in its imperial and pagan phase, signified the 
					beginning of a new Golden Age, the king of which, Kronos, 
					was believed to be living in a state of slumber in the 
					Hyperborean region. During Augustus’ reign, the Sibylline 
					prophecies announced the advent of a ‘solar’ king, a rex a 
					coelo, or ex sole missus, to which Horace seems to refer 
					when he invokes the advent of Apollo, the Hyperborean god of 
					the Golden Age. " 
				 
			 
			
			Rene Guenon, Evola’s good friend, 
			believed in this concept, and that the periods of slumber for the 
			Lord of the Earth have been cyclically brought to a close by 
			apocalypses. After this, Le Roi du Monde would return to clean up 
			the wreckage and once more look after his faithful flock. In the 
			Revelation of St. John the Divine, three kings actually return from 
			periods of slumber, death, or prolonged absence: Jesus, Satan, and 
			Jehovah, and naturally, the governmental entity that God chooses for 
			this utopian world is the one which has always been associated with 
			holiness and righteousness: monarchy. 
			 
			Monarchy was the first form of government observed by man, and it 
			was, according to almost every culture, created by God himself. It 
			is the primordial, archetypal form of government, the most natural, 
			that which all other forms of government vainly try to mimic, while 
			at the same time violating its most basic tenets. Monarchy was, for 
			thousands of years, all that man knew. The idea of not having a 
			monarch, a father figure to watch over them, to maintain the 
			community’s relationship with the divine, represented to them, not 
			freedom, but chaos, uncertainty, and within a short time, death. The 
			common people did not jealously vie for positions of power, nor did 
			they desire to have any say in the decision of who would be king. In 
			fact, most of them preferred that there be no decision to make at 
			all: most monarchies functioned on the principle of primogeniture, 
			passing the scepter and crown down from father to son, or in some 
			cases, through the matrilineal line. The decision was up to nature 
			or God, so therefore just and righteous in itself.  
			
			  
			
			Furthermore, they knew they could count 
			on their king or queen to watch over them as they would their own 
			children, to be fair and honest, to protect them from invasion, to 
			maintain the proper relationship between God and the kingdom. They 
			desired to make their kingdom on Earth reflect the order and 
			perfection that existed in God’s kingdom in Heaven.  
			
			  
			
			And for 
			thousands of years before the modern era, when 90% of the population 
			was not intellectually capable of participating in government or 
			making electoral decisions, monarchy stood as a bulwark against the 
			disintegration of the societal unit, providing a stability that 
			otherwise could not be achieved. If monarchy had not been invented, 
			human history could never have happened.  
			
			  
			
			Richard Cassino, in A 
			Deeper Truth, said it best: 
			
				
				"Since the obligation of every 
				king... is to maintain law, order, morality, spirituality, and 
				religion within his kingdom, then the very design of a monarchy 
				itself was probably conceived by the superior intelligence 
				called God so as to endow mankind with a sound system of 
				government. In other words, the concept of kingship was designed 
				for, and delivered to, the peoples of earth by God to teach 
				mankind to live in a humanized social environment... Human 
				history, with its past and present kingdoms and kings - Egypt, 
				Assyria, Persia, Babylon, Sumer, Aztec, Inca, Jordan, Saudi 
				Arabia, Great Britain, to name a few - stands as a testimony to 
				the fact that the monarchial form of government has been the 
				basis for almost every civilization." 
			 
			
			If monarchy is the most perfect form of 
			government, and if it has been responsible for providing us with at 
			least 6000 years of human history, why now does it seem to be only 
			an ancient pretension? Why is the concept of having a monarchy 
			actually function in government considered to be a quaint but 
			laughable thing of the past? Have we really moved beyond monarchy? 
			 
			Hardly. If you were to graph the entire 6000 years of known human 
			history and isolate the period in which civilized nations have been 
			without monarchs, it would be merely a blip on the spectrum. In 
			fact, of the civilized Western nations, few do not have a monarch 
			reigning either de jure or de facto (although they continue to elect 
			Presidents from royal European lineage.) Most nations that maintain 
			representational government still have a monarch either recognized 
			by the government, or by the people at large. Although essentially 
			powerless, these monarchs maintain a symbolic link between a nation 
			and its heritage, its most sacred, most ancient traditions.  
			
			  
			
			They also constitute a 
			government-in-waiting, should the thin veneer of illusory ‘freedom’ 
			and ‘equality’ that maintains democracy break down. The modern 
			system of Republican government is based not so much on the freedom 
			of the individual, but on the free flow of money, on debt, usury, 
			and inflation, on a monetary house of cards known as "Fractional 
			Reserve Lending." It would only take a major and slightly prolonged 
			collapse of the monetary system to eliminate this governmental 
			system. At that point, civilized man will have essentially two 
			choices: anarchy or monarchy, and if people have any sense at all 
			they will choose the latter, rather than subjecting themselves to a 
			chaotic succession of despots interspersed with periods of violence 
			and rioting, and the poverty that comes with the lack of a stable 
			state.  
			
			  
			
			It would be the most natural thing in 
			the world for the royal families of Earth, as well as the monarchial 
			system which they have maintained, and which has maintained us for 
			thousands of years, to just slide right into place. The kingdom of 
			the gods, who once ruled during man’s Golden Age, would awaken from 
			their slumber and heed the call to duty, like Kronos, their 
			Forgotten Father, and monarch of all, who soundly sleeps within his 
			tomb in the primordial mountain, waiting for his chance to once 
			again hold dominion over the Earth. 
			
			  
			
			
			Back to Top  
			
			  
			
			
			
			Back to The Black Nobility 
			
			 
  
			
			  
			
			 
  
			
			The Dragon Society 
			
			Real History, Dragon Philosophy and 
			The Importance of Royal Bloodlines 
			
			
			
			The Code 
			of a Revolution
			 
			 
			The Background 
			 
			Many Christians in Europe and North America today feel that the 
			stories in the New Testament should not perhaps be taken as 
			literally as they were a few generations ago. Of course Darwin’s 
			theory of evolution has contributed much towards this. Also, in 
			industrial societies, we do not feel such a need to pray to God for 
			harvests, even though we may appeal to him for good weather for our 
			holidays as a kind of insurance policy. There are, of course, those 
			who take every word in the New Testament literally, and their 
			beliefs have to be respected. 
			 
			However, we have to bear in mind that Palestine at the time of
			Jesus 
			Christ was a country in chaos. Three thousand Jewish rebels were 
			crucified under the occupying power of the Romans after they had 
			assumed direct rule of the Jews in 6AD. Pontius Pilate was a cruel 
			and corrupt ruler who compounded the atrocities committed by his 
			predecessors. It is therefore surprising that there were no openly 
			anti-Roman writings in the Bible to relate these circumstances. Not 
			even such incidents as the burning of Rome by Nero were mentioned.
			 
			
			  
			
			Beit She’an Roman Theatre, Israel 
  
			
			There was a bewildering array of active 
			Jewish sects and sub-sects at the time. Jesus Christ was a Jew, and 
			there is evidence that his sympathies were with the Jewish uprisings 
			organized by such groups. According to The Dead Sea Scrolls 
			Deception, Jesus Christ seemed to have connections with most of 
			them. It is difficult to differentiate among the various groups. 
			There were the Pharisees who, despite what is said in the Bible, 
			were anti-Roman, although rather more passively so than other sects. 
			The original Greek version of the Bible refers to 
			
			Jesus Christ as a 
			Nazarene. This was later wrongly interpreted to mean that he 
			came 
			from Nazareth. It is believed that the town of Nazareth did not 
			exist at the time of Christ’s birth as there is no contemporary 
			mention of it.  
			
			  
			
			The sect, the Nazarines or Nazarites, 
			were certainly in existence at the time of Christ, and Christ’s 
			brother, James, and John the Baptist were both Nazarites. The modern 
			Arabic word Nasrini means Christian, and derives from the Hebrew
			Nazrim, a plural noun that comes from the term Nazrie-ha-Brit which 
			means ‘Keeper of the Covenant’, a rank of the Essenes Community at 
			Qumran on the Dead Sea. The Nazorites were associated with the 
			Community of the Essenes in the time of the Gospels. The Essenes 
			were an austere mystical sect whose influence at the time is 
			underestimated. The Nazarites were an important sub-sect of the 
			Essenes.  
			
			 
			It is highly probable that if Christ did not actually belong to the 
			community known as the Essenes, he was well-versed in their beliefs 
			and sympathized with them. The Essenes believed strongly in the 
			coming of the Messiah, descended from the line of David. 
			 
			There was also a group called the Zealots. They were not an 
			independent sect, rather a group whose members originated from other 
			sects, and constituted the ‘strong-arm’ of the movement against the 
			Romans. Their activities would today be termed ‘terrorist’ and the 
			uprising of the whole of Judea against the Romans in 66 AD was the 
			result of their activities. Although the Jews were massacred by the 
			Romans after this revolt, the activities of the Zealots continued 
			unabated for another century after Jesus Christ’s death.  
			
			  
			
			The Church of Ecce 
			Homo where Pilate allegedly judged Jesus 
  
			
			Even if Jesus Christ had not been a 
			Zealot himself, he was crucified as one. The two men who were 
			crucified with him certainly were Zealots. Jesus Christ embarrasses 
			the church by being reported as saying that he has come not to 
			"bring peace but a sword". He asks his disciples to purchase swords 
			[Luke 22:36], and checks that they have swords after the Passover 
			meal [Luke 22:38]. According to the fourth Gospel, Simon Peter is 
			carrying a sword when Jesus is arrested. In the context of the day, 
			these are surely the descriptions of a leader who is prepared for 
			and willing to take part in violence. Certainly Christ was executed 
			by the Romans in the way that they reserved for revolutionaries. 
			 
			Jesus Christ had no intention of forming a new religion. The idea 
			that the Messiah was regarded as divine would have been preposterous 
			to the Jews. The Greek word for Messiah is ‘Christ’ or ‘Christos’, 
			and means anointed one, or king. When David became king, he was also 
			a ‘Messiah’ or ‘Christ’. When Jesus was born, he was also seen as 
			being the Messiah because of his Davidic pedigree. The Jews felt that 
			this new-born king would be the one who would deliver them from the 
			Romans. 
			
			  
			
			Herod’s Northern 
			Palace with 2000 year old frescoes 
  
			
			It is evident that the stories in the 
			New Testament are told in an allegorical way; in a code that would 
			be understood by some of the Jews and not by their Roman rulers. 
			Words that are used seem strangely unrelated to their actual 
			meanings, until, perhaps, we consider how certain terms have come 
			into the English language. We can say, for example, "He used to be 
			on the board, but now he is in the Cabinet." This, of course, does 
			not mean, "He used to be on a piece of wood, but now he is in the 
			cupboard." 
			 
			These words and phrases (in Hebrew pershar in the singular, 
			persharim in the plural) had the same meaning each time they were 
			used. Additionally each time the meaning was required, the persharim 
			were used.  
			 
			Before looking at some of the more familiar stories from the Bible, 
			here are some of the words used in the New Testament and the 
			explanation of what they really mean. The following explanations are 
			taken from the Persharim, the Manual of Discipline, the 
			Community 
			Rule and the Angelic Liturgy as quoted in 
			
			The Bloodline of the Holy 
			Grail. 
			
				
					
						
						for those with ears to hear 
						this was the signal that a statement that there would 
						follow a message that could be interpreted by those who 
						knew the code  
						 
						Babylon 
						Rome 
						 
						the word of God, the word 
						Jesus Christ 
						
						 
						the lion 
						the Roman Emperor  
						 
						the poor 
						those who had been initiated into the higher ranks of 
						the Community and had therefore had to give up their 
						worldly wealth  
						 
						the many 
						the head of the celibate Community  
						 
						the crowd 
						a designation of the regional Tetrarch (governor)  
						 
						the multitude 
						the governing council  
						 
						the children 
						the novices within the community  
						 
						the Way 
						the doctrine of the Community 
						 
						the Children of Light 
						those who followed the doctrines of "the Way" 
						 
						leper 
						a person who has not yet been initiated into the higher 
						Community 
						 
						the blind 
						those who did not follow the doctrine of "the Way"  
						 
						the Power, the Kingdom, the Glory 
						the Priest, King and Prophet of the Community 
					 
				 
			 
			
			  
			
			The Loaves and the Fishes 
			The story of the loaves and fishes is an example of a parable. As an 
			example of how the coding was used to inform "those with ears to 
			hear" let’s look at one of the more familiar stories from the Bible, 
			and see how the code was used. 
			 
			Gentiles who wanted to be baptized in the Judaic tradition were 
			referred to as "fishes". They were hauled out of the water into 
			boats by "fishermen" to be blessed by the "fishers" who were the 
			priests. Similarly, the Levite officials of the Sanctuary were known 
			as "loaves". In the ordination rite, the Levite priests would serve 
			seven loaves of bread to the priests and five loaves and two fishes 
			to the celibates. The Gentiles were allowed to receive baptism only 
			as "fishes" whereas only Jews could become "loaves".  
			 
			At these ceremonies the "fishermen" would take their boats out into 
			the water, and the Gentile fishes, who were to be baptized, would 
			walk out into the water. When this had taken place, the priest 
			"fishers" would walk out into the water along jetties, and thus 
			"walking on water" to the boats. As Jesus had been born into the 
			house of Judah, and was therefore not a Levite, he was not entitled 
			to act as a baptismal priest, but he chose to disregard this 
			convention, and "walked on the sea" to the disciples’ boats. 
			 
			One of the main aims of Jesus Christ’s philosophy was to bring the 
			"unclean" Gentiles together with the Jews, and furthermore to let 
			them take part in what had been reserved for the Jewish priesthood. 
			There was a group of uncircumcised Gentiles known as the "Five 
			Thousand", and Jesus granted the "multitude" (in other words, their 
			governing body) the serving of five loaves and two fishes that were 
			otherwise the reserve of the Jewish priesthood candidates. 
			 
			None of this detracts from any skills Jesus Christ may have had as a 
			healer. However, it was not a healer that was predicted to arrive as 
			the Messiah. What differentiated Jesus from the others was that, 
			despite the feelings of such groups as the Pharisees, he extended 
			his medical expertise to the "unworthy" and "unclean" Gentiles, thus 
			illustrating his ideal of a united people against the authority of 
			the Romans. 
			 
			 
			Bibliography 
			
				
			 
			
			
			Back to Top 
			 
  
  
			
			  
			
			  
			
			The Dragon Society 
			
			Real History, Dragon Philosophy and 
			The Importance of Royal Bloodlines 
			
			
			
			The Greatest Fraud 
			
			by Nicholas de Vere  
			
			2003 
			 
			The 
			Donation of Constantine first 
			appeared during the 8th century and was a document which purported 
			to recognize the Roman popes as Christ’s representatives on Earth 
			and to donate to Pope Sylvester and the Roman Church all those 
			Imperial powers formerly invested in the Throne of Byzantium. 
			 
			The ’Donation’, the Church claimed, was written in the 4th century 
			at the insistence of the emperor Constantine. The Church said that 
			he was so grateful for having been cured of leprosy by Pope 
			Sylvester, that he gave into the Church’s hand the entire power and 
			wealth of the unified Roman Empire, including the right to crown and 
			dethrone kings. Now that is what you call expensive medical 
			insurance. 
			 
			Supposedly written before 337 AD - the year of Constantine’s death - 
			the Donation of Constantine actually didn’t make an appearance on 
			the stage of European history until four hundred years later. So 
			far-reaching are the powers bestowed upon the Church by this 
			document, one would have thought that it would have been made public 
			at the time of its bestowal. Not centuries later. 
			 
			The provisions of the Donation were enforced in 751 AD following 
			which 
			the Merovingians were deposed 
			by the Church and replaced by their sycophants, the Mayors of the 
			Palace who later became known as the Carolingians. The Church had 
			made a pact with the Mayors and offered to ’recognize’ their 
			legitimacy as rulers if they would dispense with the true Dragon 
			Kings. The deal was done and the Carolingians were made the puppet 
			rulers under the Roman Church.  
			 
			The Donation, because it was made by a Dragon King, Constantine, 
			legitimized the Church’s right to take this action. To all intents 
			and purposes they had the authority of Dragon Kingship given up to 
			them by this Charter. No doubt the Merovingians knew this to be a 
			fraud, which is why they refused to recognize the authority of the 
			Church to meddle in affairs of state. What do we learn from this? 
			 
			We can see from the Church’s choice of ’benefactor’ that the Church 
			was well aware that universally, only those of the Dragon Blood 
			would be recognized as true kings. Therefore they chose Constantine 
			as he was known to have been descended from both the Britannic PenDragon House and the 
			Dragon House of David. Furthermore he was a 
			member of the Desposyni - the heirs of the Lord - the blood 
			descendants and legitimate representatives of Jesus Christ. In the 
			Donation, it appeared as if Constantine had relinquished his 
			hereditary spiritual position as a Messiah and invested it in the 
			Papacy. 
			 
			By suggesting they were the representatives of Christ, the popes 
			were claiming Dragon descent for themselves. It was well known that 
			Jesus
			
			had descendants and that they were part of the only Eurasian 
			dynasty which was authorized to be kings - the Elven Overlords or 
			Dragons. It would have appeared to the public then, that in the 
			displacement of the Merovingians, one Dragon dynasty was being 
			replaced by another, albeit a paper one. This reduced any danger of 
			mass unrest. As time passed however, it became uncomfortably clear 
			that the function of kingship under the Merovingians had been 
			entirely different to that under the Carolingians. Whilst the
			Merovingians had formerly assumed the role of overseers, sages and 
			wise counsellors, the Carolingians and their successors, prompted by 
			the Church, became deliberately poorly educated, ignorant, 
			insensitive tyrants and territorial tradesmen. 
			 
			Dragon Kingship and the Grail Code had died to be replaced by a 
			corrupted form of feudal totalitarianism and brutal, economic 
			slavery as the Church carefully and strategically replaced the old 
			dynasties with its own merchant-class client families who, from that 
			day on, became 
			vassals of the Vatican. 
			 
			Lastly we learn that from 751 AD the true Dark Age began in earnest. 
			The Elven Holocaust was initiated and would run its course for 
			another thousand years until, in England at least, the witchcraft 
			laws were repealed in 1736. North of the border in Scotland, 
			however, the persecution of witches in the 1700’s was at its 
			fiercest until the end of the century.  
			 
			During this time, history has witnessed the rise of the Church of 
			Rome and its successful struggle for power. In time, no dynasty 
			ruled in Europe or remained in power unless the Church sanctioned 
			their reign. The Church chose the royal families, it crowned kings 
			and it deposed its detractors. In short, the Church, under the 
			auspices of the Donation of Constantine was the sole and supreme 
			temporal power in Europe and the known world. Without this purported 
			imperial benefice however, the Church would have remained a 
			marginalized Mediterranean cult contesting for patronage along with 
			a host of other gnostic Christian denominations.  
			 
			The royal dynasties, sponsored by the Church and crowned by its 
			Divine Right, instituted their courts and parliaments, passed laws 
			and employed agents to act on their behalf. To all intents and 
			purposes it seemed as if the Church had the absolute right of 
			Dragons and wielded power by the very sanction of Jesus Christ and 
			God.  
			 
			No monarch reigning today and no government under the monarch or 
			instituted in their name would enjoy their position if the Church, 
			empowered by the Donation, had not given them permission to rule in 
			the first place. Without the 
			Donation of Constantine, European 
			history today would be totally different and none of the dynasties 
			past or present would have had the right to have reigned. Nor would 
			they reign now and none of their governments or agencies would have 
			exercised power. 
			 
			One slight problem, though. The Donation of Constantine is a 
			complete and utter fraud and the Church was never given any temporal 
			powers at all, let alone the right to found dynasties, crown kings 
			or institute governments. The whole document was a lie from 
			beginning to end and has been known to be a fake since Lorenzo Valla 
			applied the methods of historical criticism to it during the 
			Renaissance.  
			 
			How do we know Valla was correct? The New Testament references 
			incorporated into the wording of the Donation were taken from the 
			Latin Vulgate version of the Bible. The Vulgate Bible was 
			compiled 
			by St. Jerome who was born more than two decades after Constantine 
			was supposed to have signed the Donation. The actual Vulgate Bible 
			wording that appears in the Donation didn’t exist until St Jerome 
			invented it, fifty years after the document had supposedly been 
			dated and signed by the Emperor. By this time Constantine had been 
			dead for decades and couldn’t have signed the Dragons’ rights away 
			anyway. 
			 
			The language of the Donation is eighth century clerical or dog 
			Latin, whilst the Latin used in the 4th century Empire was late 
			classical Roman. The Imperial and Papal ceremonials described in the 
			Donation didn’t exist in Constantine’s time but were developed some 
			centuries later.  
			 
			Several documentary instances of the Church’s use of the Donation to 
			assert their authority in the medieval period still exist, including 
			the letter of Pope Gregory IX entitled ’Si Memoriam Beneficiorum’ 
			dated October 23rd 1236 and addressed to the Emperor Frederick II. 
			Pope Gregory writes, 
			
				
				".......that as the Vicar of the 
				Prince of Apostles (the Roman Pope) governed the empire of 
				priesthood and of souls in the whole world, so he should also 
				reign over things and bodies throughout the whole world; and 
				considering that, he should rule over earthly matters by the 
				reins of justice to whom - as it is known - God had committed on 
				earth the charge over spiritual things. The Emperor Constantine 
				humbled himself by his own vow and handed over the empire to the 
				perpetual care of the Roman Pontiff with the Imperial Insignia 
				and sceptres and the City and Duchy of Rome........". 
			 
			
			People in the medieval and Renaissance 
			period, confronted with this document, did not generally criticize 
			the Donation on the grounds of its veracity. They just exclaimed 
			aghast that they could not believe that Constantine would have been 
			stupid enough to have given the Roman Church everything.  
			 
			From the Donation we understand that Constantine offered the 
			Pope 
			all the robes and Crowns of office but the Pope, being such a humble 
			man, gave them back to the Emperor. This lets the Church off the 
			hook should some malcontent turn up and ask for sartorial evidence. 
			If the readers read the Donation for themselves they will be 
			appalled at the pretentious egotism, the arrogance and the sheer 
			material greed of the Church, as authors of the document. 
			 
			The fraudulent imperial power of the Vatican to create kings by 
			’coronation’ - derived from this faked 8th century ’Donation of 
			Constantine’ - was later adopted by the Archbishops of the Church of 
			England with the complicity of the Tudors, who were Catholics 
			themselves.  
			 
			When he split with Rome, Henry VIII still retained and later 
			ratified and re-established in the Anglo-Catholic Church of England 
			the fraudulent right of the Church’s clergy to create by coronation, 
			a succession of British monarchs. This was an illegal act. The ’Donation of Constantine’ was proved to be a completely fake 
			document. Therefore no Royal Elven House that knew its origins and 
			cared about social justice could possibly bring itself to recognize 
			a Christian British monarchy or any of their Church sponsored, 
			Church crowned predecessors or any of their regnant or formerly 
			regnant, European cousin Houses. 
			 
			Because the Donation was a fraud and no subsequent priest of any 
			Catholic derived denomination ever had the right to crown kings, 
			Britain has had no legally reigning monarch for 900 years. As a 
			consequence of this, all the laws passed by these monarchs were and 
			are illegal and worthless and all the governmental agencies set up 
			by or derived from these monarchs or their laws are also illegal and 
			worthless up to the present day.  
			 
			When considering this, the reader might like to consider the fact 
			that all the arrests ever made by the police in Britain and Europe 
			are acts of kidnap and habeas corpus. Equally, any man who 
			has taken up arms for the Crown and killed for his country is 
			unprotected by law and guilty therefore of murder. 
			 
			However, paradoxically, as the entire British legal system is 
			illegal, there are no laws, and so the crimes of habeas corpus 
			and murder as we define them today, simply do not exist. 
			Subconsciously people know that their politicians and monarchs have 
			no legitimate authority to rule over them. They manifest this 
			knowledge in an increasing disrespect for these optional, arbitrary 
			and illusory social conventions, which is yet another reason why 
			social order is breaking down.  
			 
			If the UN is right, we may face chaos in the near future; and all 
			because of a stupid fraud, perpetrated by a group of myopically 
			greedy, maniacal peddlers of false religion who are now long dead. 
			 
			Again, for asserting this kind of view the Fairies are implicitly 
			guilty of Treason, even though all British laws are constitutionally 
			illegal and the act of treason itself is a non sequitur. Think of 
			the implications of this. 
			 
			It applies to any nation state in the Christian world today which is 
			still a monarchy or which has evolved as part of a successive, 
			developing political process originating from a monarchy, by virtue 
			of its continuing sanction from, or sponsorship by, the Church of 
			whatever denomination. It is unauthorized by any temporal or divine 
			power to coerce anyone to obey any law originating at any stage of 
			that government’s evolution. 
			 
			In effect, Britain, Europe and America are ruled by the sword, and 
			that sword is being wielded by people who are no more than short 
			sighted, self seeking robber barons. They have no constitutional 
			right to rule even in America, where in the 19th century, the 
			libertarian commentator, Lysander Spooner, demonstrated that the 
			consensual nature of the original document, upon which the 
			subsequent, consecutive clauses are founded, was being flouted, 
			thereby making the entire Constitution illegal. Pierre Proud’hon 
			called them all "Tyrants and Usurpers". Next time you are tempted to 
			eulogize Western Democracy, bite your tongue and let your brain 
			select first gear before you open your mouth. Flawed or otherwise, 
			the idea that the English speaking world has any democracy at all is 
			a joke. 
			 
			At the beginning of this work the author stated that the people have 
			been conned enough. He now hopes that the readers might appreciate 
			for themselves the precise extent to which the people have actually 
			been deceived. They have accepted a state of affairs where they and 
			their ancestors have been enslaved by a chameleon-like corporate 
			body that has destroyed their creativity and robbed them of their 
			psychological liberty and their freedom of conscience for over a 
			thousand years.  
			 
			The entire moral basis of our society is founded upon a massive 
			historical lie which has twisted the minds of generations of 
			individuals until they have become terrified of the natural drives 
			of their own bodies and souls. 
			 
			The resultant taboos that have been created have been used to divide 
			the minds of the people and make them dependant on the Church-State 
			for solutions to the problems of resisting Satan and fighting 
			temptation and sin, when these contrived, nonsensical whimsies never 
			existed in the first place. 
			 
			As a result, western Christian society was turned into an open air 
			lunatic asylum packed full of lost souls who weren’t lost at all and 
			had no need of a cure for diseases of the soul they weren’t actually 
			suffering from in the first place. 
			 
			The Church created the confusion and the division and then offered 
			the solution. In fear the population invested its trust in the 
			perfidious Church and in return for their confidence the Church 
			turned the people into slaves and an entire civilization into a 
			manufacturing plant to service their own greed for luxury and power. 
			 
			For a thousand years the Fairies have remained silent about their 
			identities - formerly for fear of their lives - latterly for fear of 
			becoming social outcasts and objects of mirth and derision. Still 
			however, a shadow of menace lies over the ancient families. Greed 
			will go to any length to ensure the continuity of its satisfaction 
			and the same motives that prompted the Church to murder and lie in 
			the past, still prompt their merchant-class puppets to kill and 
			deceive today.  
			 
			Back to Top 
			 
  
			
			  
			
			 
  
			
			The Dragon Society 
			
			Real History, Dragon Philosophy and 
			The Importance of Royal Bloodlines 
			
			
			
			The Discovery
			 
			 
			
			Rennes-le-Château is a village situated on a mountain peak 25 miles 
			from Carcassonne in southern France. A few miles away there is 
			another mountain called Bézu on which there stand the ruins of a 
			former centre of the Knights Templar. About a mile east from Rennes-le-Château 
			are the ruins of the castle of the Blanchefort family, and the home 
			of Bertrand Blanchefort, the fourth grandmaster of the Knights 
			Templar.  
			
			  
			
			
			The Knights Templar are the so-called Warrior Monks who 
			were proclaimed by Pope Innocent II in a Papal Bull in 1139 to owe 
			allegiance only to the Pope, and were therefore under no obligation 
			to kings and princes. Effectively they constituted an autonomous 
			international empire. 
			
			  
			
			The church at Rennes-le-Château 
  
			
			Bérengere Saunière, the priest of 
			Rennes-le-Château, 
			decided to partly renovate the church the village church in 1891. It 
			had been consecrated to Mary Magdelene in 1059, and was built on the 
			site of a Visigoth church that dated back to the sixth century. When 
			the altar stone was removed, Saunière found that one of the pillars 
			that it stood on was hollow. Inside this column were four parchments 
			kept in two sealed wooden tubes. Two of them were apparently 
			genealogies. One dated from 1244, and the other from 1644. The two 
			others had been written in Latin by one of Saunière´s predecessors, 
			Abbé Antoin Bigou, who had been personal priest to the Blanchefort 
			family – important landowners in the area.  
			
			  
			
			These parchments dated from the 1780s, 
			and seemed to be written excerpts from the New Testament in Latin. 
			However, in one of the parchments, the words were written without 
			spaces and extra, at first sight, unnecessary letters had been 
			added. In the second parchment, some letters had been raised above 
			the others. The following decipherment has appeared in French 
			documents written about Rennes-le-Château, and the book 
			
			The Holy 
			Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and 
			Henry 
			Lincoln, and the BBC films that they made on the subject. 
			
				
				BERGERE PAS DE TENTATION QUE POUSSIN 
				TENIERS GARDENT LA CLEF PAX DCLXXXI PAR LA CROIX ET CE CHEVAL DE 
				DIEU J’ACHEVE CE DAEMON DE GARDIEN A MIDI POMMES BLEUES 
			 
			
			which translates as: 
			
				
				SHEPHERDESS, NO TEMPTATION THAT 
				POUSSIN, TENIERS, HOLD THE KEY; PEACE 681, BY THE CROSS AND THIS 
				HORSE OF GOD I COMPLETE - or DESTROY - THIS DAEMON OF THE 
				GUARDIAN AT NOON, BLUE APPLES 
			 
			
			Rather more obvious in the second 
			parchment is the following, spelled out in raised letters: 
			
				
				A DAGOBERT II ROI ET A SION EST CE 
				TRESOR ET IL EST LA MORT 
			 
			
			which translates as: 
			
				
				TO DAGOBERT II, KING, AND TO SION 
				BELONGS THIS TREASURE AND HE IS THERE DEAD 
			 
			
			Saunière realized that he had stumbled 
			upon something important, and therefore took the parchments to the 
			Bishop of Carcassonne. He was immediately ordered to go to Paris, at 
			the Bishop’s expense, where he met various important ecclesiastic 
			authorities. During the three weeks that he spent there, Saunière 
			was accepted into the circle of Émile Hoffet, the nephew of the 
			Director General of the Seminary of Saint Sulpice. Hoffet was 
			training for the priesthood, and was a well-respected scholar of 
			linguistics, cryptography and palaeography. He was also involved in 
			esoteric, occult groups, which included the writers Stéphane 
			Mallarmé and Maurice Maeterlink, as well as the composer 
			Claude Debussy. The famous opera singer, Emma Calvé, also mixed in these 
			circles, and is reputed to have had an affair with Saunière, or at 
			least a very close friendship with him. While there, Saunière bought 
			reproductions of three paintings from the Louvre, one of which was 
			Les Bergeres de Arcadie - The Shepherds of Arcadia by Nicolas Poussin. 
			 
			When he returned to Rennes-le-Château, he continued renovations on 
			the church, and he discovered a burial chamber in the church that, 
			it is said, contained skeletons. He also turned his attention to the 
			sepulchre of Marie, Marquise d’Hautpol de Blanchefort. This had been 
			designed by Abbé Antoin Bigou, and the rearranged letters on the 
			inscription formed an anagram of the code above referring to 
			Dagobert II. Saunière, for no explained reason, obliterated the 
			inscription, but did not realize that it had been copied elsewhere. 
			He developed the habit of wandering around the countryside with his 
			housekeeper, Marie Denarnaud, collecting stones and rocks. He was 
			also in correspondence with people all over the world, and spending 
			a large amount of money on postage alone. Needless to say, this was 
			abnormal behaviour for a humble priest in the French countryside. 
			 
			He was extravagant in many other ways too. A road was built leading 
			up to the village, and the Tower of Magdala was built. A new house 
			was built – Villa Bethania - which Saunière never occupied. The 
			church was decorated in an opulently bizarre way. Over the porch was 
			put the inscription: 
			
				
				  
				
				TERRIBILIS EST LOCUS ISTE 
			 
			
			which translates as:  
			
				
				THIS PLACE IS TERRIBLE 
				 
			 
			
			  
			
			
						  
			
			The church door  
			at Rennes-le-Château 
  
			
			
			
			Tracy Twyman points out in Dagobert’s 
			Revenge, 
			
				
				"this is a quote from Genesis, where Jacob falls asleep on a 
			stone and has a vision of a ladder leading up to heaven, with angels 
			ascending and descending. This, of course, is the same Stone of 
			Destiny brought to Scotland by Joseph of Arimathea, and became the 
			stone upon which British monarchy are crowned, even today. What’s 
				noteworthy is that beneath the words ’This Place is Terrible’ 
				seems to be completed by the words in Latin ’but this is the House of God 
			and the Gateway to Heaven’, making it not a curse, but a statement 
			upon the dual nature of divinity." 
			 
			
			Immediately inside the entrance to the church, 
			Sauniere placed a 
			statue of the demon Asmodeus - the demon in charge of secrets, 
			guardian of hidden treasure and, according to Judaic tradition, the 
			builder of the Temple of Solomon. He was also known as "the 
			Destroyer", as well as "Rex Mundi", the "Lord of the Earth." Inside 
			the church garishly painted Stations of the Cross were painted, and 
			in some there are inconsistencies. For example: 
			
				
					- 
					
					in Station VIII there 
			is a picture of a child dressed in Scottish tartan.  
					
					
							  
					 
					- 
					
					Station XIV 
			depicts Jesus’ body being carried at night under a full moon in the 
			vicinity of a tomb. It could mean that his body was being carried to 
			the tomb at night, several hours after the Bible would have us 
			believe. Or perhaps the body is being carried out of the tomb... 
					
					
							  
					 
				 
			 
			
			There are statues of five saints whose initials spell out 
			G.R.A.A.L. 
			(as in Holy Grail): 
			
				
					- 
					
					Saint Germain  
					- 
					
					St Roch  
					- 
					
					St Anthony de Padoue 
					 
					- 
					
					St Anthony the Hermit 
					  
					- 
					
					St Luke  
				 
			 
			
			In the shape of an "M". This "M" 
			has been supposed, for reasons that will later become apparent, to 
			stand for "Magdelene". 
			 
			Reference is also made for the first time by Tracy Twyman in 
			Dagobert’s Revenge that, 
			
				
				"the church wall featured the 
				telltale marking, a yellow stripe embedded in the foundation, 
				which was used in those days to indicate that as early as the 
				8th century someone of royal blood was buried inside the 
				church."  
			 
			
			And Saunière continued to spend. He had 
			a magnificent library installed in the Magdela Tower that he had 
			constructed, he built an orangery and a zoological garden and 
			accumulated valuable collections of china, fabrics and antiques. His 
			parishioners were treated to huge banquets and received visits from 
			various well-connected figures.  
			
			  
			
			The most noteworthy of his visitors 
			was Archduke Johann von Hapsburg, a cousin of Franz-Josef, emperor 
			of Austria. According to banking records, the Archduke paid 
			considerable amounts of money over to Saunière. 
			
			  
			
			The Tower of Magdela 
  
			
			Although the church turned a blind eye 
			to these goings-on, it reached a point when the bishop of Carcassonne had to act, and he summoned 
			Saunière to make an account 
			of himself and his dealings. He accused Saunière of simony, that is, 
			the selling of masses. Saunière flatly refused to reveal anything, 
			and the Bishop therefore suspended him. However, Saunière appealed 
			to the Vatican, and he was re-instated.  
			 
			Then on January 17th, 1917, at the age of 65, Saunière had a sudden 
			stroke. The date is of interest. It is the same date as the death of
			Marie, Marquise d’Hautpol de Blanchefort, whose tomb inscription 
			Saunière had obliterated. It is also the feast day of Saint Sulpice 
			who crops up again and again in this account. 
			 
			Of particular significance, however, is that five days before his 
			death, on January 12th, Saunière appeared to his parishioners to be 
			in good health. But this was the day that his housekeeper, Marie Denarnaud, ordered his coffin. The priest who heard Saunière’s 
			deathbed confession, according to some, "never smiled again" and he 
			refused to give Saunière the last traditional Roman Catholic rites 
			of extreme unction. 
			 
			Saunière died on January 22nd. His body was sat upright in an 
			armchair on the terrace of the Tour Magdala. He was dressed in an 
			ornate robe with scarlet tassels attached. One by one unidentified 
			mourners filed past his body, and some took a tassel off the robe. 
			Nobody has ever been able to explain this odd procedure. 
			 
			To the astonishment of everyone, when the will was read, Saunière 
			was discovered to have died penniless. Shortly before his death, he 
			had transferred all his money to his housekeeper. It is possible 
			that she had been in charge of the money all along. 
			 
			After the Second World War, the French government introduced a new 
			currency, and all citizens were obliged to exchange their old francs 
			for the new ones. Large amounts of money had to be accounted for in 
			order to trace "black" money saved by collaborators, tax-evaders and 
			the like. Marie Denarnaud would not reveal the source of her money, 
			and was to be seen later burning large amounts of cash in the garden 
			of the Villa Bethania. She eventually sold the house to Monsieur 
			Noël Corbu, and told him that before she died she would tell him a 
			great secret, which would make him not only very rich but also very 
			powerful. Unfortunately, much to the chagrin of Monsieur Corbu, on 
			January 29th, 1953, she, like Saunière, suffered a sudden stroke, 
			and was rendered speechless and prostate on her deathbed. 
			 
			 
			Where the money could have come from 
			The obvious question that springs to mind is where did Saunière’s 
			money come from? The village and the surrounding area had been the 
			centre of considerable activity from the time that the Celts 
			designated it to be a sacred site to the time when the Cathars were 
			persecuted in the 11th century.  
			
			  
			
			There had been tales of hidden 
			treasure throughout this time, and the Cathars especially were 
			suspected of being the possessors of the "Holy Grail". The 
			Knights 
			Templar also were thought to have hidden treasure in the area, and 
			Bertrand de Blanchefort organized excavations there. The Merovingian 
			kings ruled much of modern France from the 5th to the 8th centuries, 
			and Dagobert II, who was one of them, married a Visigoth princess.
			Rennes-le-Château was, at that time, one of the major centres of 
			the 
			Visigoths. The Visigoths themselves had considerable treasure 
			accumulated from their pillaging of Europe, and in particular most 
			of the wealth of Rome in 410 A.D..  
			 
			Saunière could have discovered any of this, but the nature of the 
			treasure appears to one’s instincts to be more that of a secret. 
			Otherwise certain factors, such as the introduction he received to 
			the Parisian intelligentsia from Hoffet, and the intense interest 
			that the church took in the matter. It also doesn’t explain why the 
			priest refused to give Saunière the sacrament of extreme unction, 
			and why he was visited by, for example, the Archduke Johann Salvator 
			von Habsburg.   
			
			  
			
			The Archduke renounced rights to his 
			titles in 1889, and was banished from the Austrian Empire. Treasure 
			of "mere" monetary worth would also not explain the codes in the 
			parchments and on the tomb of Marie, Marquise d’Hautpol de 
			Blanchefort. Also Marie Denarnaud said that the secret she took with 
			her to the grave involved not only money, but power. The money that 
			Johnann Salvator von Habsburg paid over to Saunière came perhaps 
			from another source. The Vatican treated Saunière very carefully in 
			the latter years of his life. Could it be that the money came from 
			the Vatican in order to silence him? 
			 
			 
			The Mystery Deepens 
			When The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail first came out, the authors 
			received a letter form a retired Anglican priest who claimed that he 
			had "incontrovertible truth" Jesus Christ
			
			did not die on the cross 
			and could have lived to as late a date as 45 A.D..  
			
			  
			
			On being 
			interviewed, he claimed that he had been told the information by 
			another Anglican priest, Canon Alfred Leslie Lilley. Throughout his 
			life, Lilley had maintained contact with the Catholic Modernist 
			Movement that was based at Saint Sulpice in Paris, and he had known 
			Émile Hoffet. The authors felt that this connection added 
			authenticity to his claim. 
			 
			The French painter, Nicolas Poussin, also appears to play a rôle in 
			this account. He was visited in Rome by Abbé Louis Fouquet, the 
			brother of Nicholas Fouquet, the Financial Superintendent to Louis 
			XIV of France, in 1656. After the meeting the Abbé wrote to his 
			brother. Part of the letter reads: 
			
				
				"He and I discussed certain things, 
				which I shall with ease be able to explain to you in detail - 
				things that will give you, through Monsieur Poussin, advantages 
				which even kings would have great pains to draw from him, and 
				which, according to him, it is possible that nobody else will 
				ever be able to rediscover in the centuries to come. And, what 
				is more, these are things so difficult to discover that nothing 
				now on this earth can prove of better fortune nor be their 
				equal." 
			 
			
			Nobody has been able to explain the 
			rather cryptic message in this letter, but the fact is that shortly 
			after receiving this letter, Nicholas Fouquet was imprisoned for 
			life in solitary confinement. It has been suggested that he was the 
			model for The Man in the Iron Mask. All his correspondence was 
			confiscated, and handed over to Louis XIV who read it only in 
			private. Louis XIV went to great lengths to buy Poussin’s painting, 
			Les Bergers d’Arcadie which he had hidden away in his private 
			apartments at Versailles.  
			
			  
			
			You will recall that it is a copy of this 
			painting that Berenger Saunière buys at the Louvre during his visit 
			to Paris.  
			
					
					  
			
			The painting depicts a large ancient tomb with three shepherds and a 
			shepherdess in the foreground. The setting is of a rugged landscape 
			that is typical of Poussin. The inscription on the tomb reads: 
			
				
				ET IN ARCARDIA EGO 
			 
			
			The landscape had always been assumed to 
			be a product of the artist’s mind. However, in the 1970s, an actual 
			tomb was located which was identical in shape, dimensions, 
			vegetation, background and setting. There is even rocky outcrop that 
			is identical to that one which one of the shepherds rests his foot. 
			If you stand just in front of the tomb, you will see that the view 
			is exactly the same as the one in Poussin’s painting. The 
			corresponding peak in the background is that of Rennes-le-Château.
			 
			
			 
			The tomb is located just outside a village called Arques, 6 miles 
			from Rennes-le-Château and 3 miles from the château of the 
			Blanchefort family. There is no indication of the age of the tomb. 
			The village records state that the land surrounding the tomb 
			belonged to an American who opened the sepulchre in the 1920s and 
			found it to be empty. He died in the 1950s and was later buried in 
			it with his wife. 
			 
			Which brings us back to the inscription on the tomb in Poussin’s 
			painting. It appears to not make much sense, as it lacks a verb: 
			
				
				And in Arcadia I… 
			 
			
			However, an anagram of the inscription 
			reads 
			
				
				I TEGO ARCANA DEI 
			 
			
			which means: 
			
				
				BEGONE! I BEHOLD THE SECRETS OF 
				GOD 
			 
			
			Perhaps the mayor of Rennes-le-Château 
			was correct when he said to Tracy Twyman last year, "This place is 
			the centre point of the world." 
			 
			Now go to The Conclusion to read some of the conclusions that have 
			been reached.  
			 
			Of course, a subject of this magnitude cannot be covered adequately 
			in an article of this length. We therefore recommend you to read The 
			Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and 
			Henry Lincoln from which we researched much of the information given 
			here. 
			 
			Back to Top 
			 
  
  
			
			  
			
			  
			
			The Dragon Society 
			
			Real History, Dragon Philosophy and 
			The Importance of Royal Bloodlines 
			
			
			
			The Conclusion
			 
			 
			After painstaking research, the authors of 
			
			The Holy Blood and the 
			Holy Grail, Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and 
			Henry Lincoln, reach 
			some fascinating conclusions about the Christian faith and western 
			history in particular. They do not attempt to maintain that these 
			conclusions are 100% accurate, but the evidence that they produce is 
			very compelling.  
			
			  
			
			
			It is impossible in an article of this length to do 
			justice to their findings, but in short, they conclude: 
			
				
					- 
					
					Jesus and his wife, Mary Magdelene, had several children who were 
			brought upon a Jewish community in southern France. In the 5th 
			century it seems that the descendants of these children married into 
			the royal line of the Franks, bringing about 
					
					the Merovingian 
			dynasty.     
					- 
					
					The Roman Catholic Church made a pact with
					Clovis, one of the 
			Merovingian kings, in 496 AD, in which it pledged itself for all 
			time to the Merovingian bloodline. This was presumably because they 
			recognized the true identity of the bloodline. Clovis was offered 
			the title of Holy Roman emperor, and therefore did not become king.
					    
					- 
					
					The Church played a part in the assassination of
					Dagobert II, and 
			was never able to forgive itself for this. It resulted in the 
			betrayal of the Merovingians, and it was vital to the Church that 
			this knowledge was not widely known, as it would have played 
			straight into the hands of Rome’s enemies.    
					- 
					
					The bloodline continued. To a great extent this was aided by the 
			fact that the Carolingian royal family (the family of Emperor 
					Charlemagne) married Merovingian princesses in order to legitimize 
			themselves. Dagobert’s son, Sigisbert, was the ancestor of Guillem 
			de Gellone, ruler of the Jewish kingdom of Septimania in southern 
			France, and later Godfroi de Bouillon, who later captured Jerusalem. 
			Thereby it restored the bloodline of Jesus Christ, the Davidic line, 
			back to the origin that had been rightfully its own since the time 
			of the Old Testament.    
					- 
					
					Rome was unable to suppress the truth completely, and it is probable 
			that the truth of the matter was revealed through such literature as 
			the romances of the Holy Grail.  
				 
			 
			
			The theory goes on to conclude that the 
			Holy Grail had two 
			simultaneous identities.  
			
			  
			
			First was that of the "Sang Real", the 
			"Real" or "Royal" blood of which the Knights Templar were guardians. 
			Secondly, it would have meant the vessel or receptacle of Jesus’ 
			blood (or rather semen), that is the womb of Mary Magdelene. Thus 
			many of the churches that are supposedly dedicated to the "Virgin" 
			Mary had in fact been dedicated to the Magdelene. It can be proved 
			that this is the case with many of the "Black 
			Virgins" or "Black Madonnas" 
			of the Middle Ages.
  Another identity of the Holy Grail may also have been the treasure 
			that had been plundered in 70 AD when the emperor Titus plundered 
			the temple of Jerusalem. This vast wealth eventually found its way 
			to the Pyrenees, and is today reputed to be in the hands of an 
			organization called the 
			
			Prieuré de Sion. As well as this treasure, 
			the Temple of Solomon is likely to have contained birth 
			certificates, marriage certificates and other documents relating to 
			the royal line of Israel. It would no doubt also give evidence of 
			Jesus Christ’s claim to be King of the Jews. It could also have 
			contained his actual body once it had been removed from its tomb as 
			reported in the Gospels.
  Although there is no evidence that 
			Titus or his soldiers found such 
			documentation, logic would lead us to believe that the soldiers 
			would have been happy with the copious amounts of gold and jewels 
			that they were to carry away, thus leaving the way clear for other 
			more sensitive documentation to be sequestered.
  By the year 1100 AD the descendants of 
			Jesus Christ had reached 
			prominence in Europe and also through Godfroi de Bouillon in 
			Palestine. Even though they may have been well aware of their 
			ancestry, they may not have been able to prove it without the 
			documentary or other proof that remained at the Temple of Solomon. 
			This would explain the excavations that the Knights Templar made 
			around the area of the Temple at that time.  
			
			  
			
			There is good evidence, 
			not only that the Knights Templar were sent to Jerusalem to find 
			something, but that they did, in fact, succeed, and returned it to 
			England. It is unclear what happened to it then, but it seems clear 
			that the fourth Grand Master of the Order of the Temple, Bertrand de Blanchefort, concealed something near
			Rennes-le-Chateau.  
			
			  
			
			It was here that German miners were 
			brought to construct a hiding place. There is speculation over what 
			this may have been ranging from Jesus’ marriage license and/or birth 
			certificates of his children to his mummified body. Any of this may 
			have been passed to 
			the Cathars in the area of Languedoc near Rennes-le-Château, 
			who were massacred mercilessly by the 30,000 of the Pope’s soldiers. 
			One soldier had asked how they should know who to kill.  
			
			  
			
			The reply 
			was "Kill them all. God will recognize his own." Treasure was hidden 
			at the Cathar stronghold of Montségur (below) which was under siege for ten 
			months until March 1244. 
			
			  
			
			There was a royal tradition through Godfroi and 
			Boudouin de Bouillon 
			that is based upon the "Rock of Sion" and that in status equalled 
			the foremost European dynasties. Both the New Testament and, later, 
			Freemasonry, maintain that the "Rock of Sion " is the same as 
			Jesus. 
			 
			Once the Merovingians had re-established themselves in Jerusalem, 
			they could better afford to make the facts known. This explains why 
			the Grail romances, which were associated so closely with the 
			Knights Templar, started appearing at this time. In time, no doubt, 
			the full truth of the Merovingian kings would have come out, and 
			they would have ruled extensively over Europe, replacing the Pope, 
			and making Jerusalem the capital of the Christian world.  
			
			  
			
			If Jesus 
			had been accepted as a mortal prophet, a priest-king and the 
			descendant of the Davidic line, he would also have been accepted by 
			the Moslems and Jews. That would obviously have changed Middle East 
			history significantly. 
			 
			However, this was not the course of history, and the Frankish 
			kingdom of Jerusalem did not succeed. With the loss of the Holy Land 
			in 1291, to the Muslims, the Merovingians were sidelined, and the 
			Knights Templar rendered redundant.  
			
			  
			
			Since that time, the Roman 
			Catholic Church has continued to strengthen at the expense of the 
			truth. 
			
			 
			Back to Top 
			
			  
			 |