The Vatican Connection to England - A Continuation of Roman Conquest

Chapters#

Secular#

1. Letters from Pope Innocent III, to king John.
2. The Pope’s creation of the Knights Templars.
3. Betrayal of the knights by the Pope and the king’s they served.
4. Connection of our flag to the Pope, and the secret societies.
5. The bridge between the secular and the Biblical, the Knights Templar and Lawyers.

Biblical#

6. The Pope exposed, and the identity of Christ’s Church.
7. The Preparing of the Nation.
8. Copy of the Sonnini Manuscript (lost Chapter of Acts).
9. The Declaration of Arbroath 1320 AD.
10. The Lost House of Israel.

Forward#

This paper is a departure from the way I have laid out papers in the past, will be two sections, secular and biblical. It stands to reason the forward will be both. I know that there are many that read my book on The United States Is Still A British Colony, that will be very interested in this.

The secular section in this paper is additional information to the 1213 Charta, and other important information. I stated in “The United States Is Still A British Colony”, that the king gave his holdings to the Pope. Also, in the same book, in regards to the 1215 Magna Charta, I stated that this document was made null and void by the Pope, I have information that may surprise you on this subject I also have letters, correspondence between the Pope and king John, concerning these two charters. In chapter four there is information connecting our flag to Britain’s, through the colors, and direct connection to the Pope. I also have information connecting lawyers to the British Bar, and the Pope. Americans and the World have been handed many lies, and they have believed them.

I uncovered some of these lies and truths not told. A lie can also be withheld truth. I have dealt with both modes of deception in my book, the two charters mentioned above have much withheld truth. The quoted portions of the personal correspondence between the Pope and the king deal with claims I have made regarding them.

It’s not my purpose to tell you what, or how to think, but remove the barrier keeping you from thinking outside of the box in which you live, your mind. A box filled and shaped with information provided by those that wish you to think a certain way.

Before you read these letters and the other important information I will deal with in this paper, there is some hidden knowledge you need to understand, it deals with the human mind, what I’m going to tell you will help you understand not only this paper, but any information you read, or hear. This information is short and is contained in this brief forward. In this paper I’m going to challenge the very foundations for which you base your beliefs, concerning the Constitution and your freedom, and your religion no matter what it is. I call these subjects, “the building blocks of human understanding”, every human is programed with these building blocks, to a greater or lesser extent. A great deception is taking place, and the executers of the deception are three organizations most trusted by the public, government, media and religion. Only after you come to the realization that you have been deceived, will you be able to think outside of the box which has been provided through education and other mediums, for you. Through the government, media and religion you have been brainwashed with predetermined information, the building blocks of the human mind, your programming.

My purpose for sharing this information is “truth”. Keep in mind I was taught the same information as you, throughly indoctrinated by the public schools, the United States Marine Corps, television and any other medium of indoctrination that had formed my beliefs, including organized religion, which I left long ago, because of the conflicts I saw between their teaching and God’s Word. I would say I have had more to overcome than most people, as to the brainwashing I received, only through making God Almighty’s Word my foundation, not Man’s indoctrination, was I able to see beyond the box, the reality created for me.

I wish I could MAKE everyone understand how the human mind works, since I can’t do that, I will have to rely on my ability to reason one mind to another, a subject so simple, it is difficult to understand and explain.

As I said above this deals with brainwashing, through indoctrination and programming. I know this is a subversive term and automatically triggers disbelief and suspicion, I ask you to bear with me. Whatever your programming has been, it is the reason, the cause, for the way you view and disseminate information. This is the reason there are so many different religions, types of governments and social experiments. The people under these different systems, will go to their grave thinking they are right, simply because of their programming.

Have you never wondered how a Muslim could strap a bomb to his body and kill himself and many others? It is due to his programming, that began at birth. The Muslims believe they have 70 virgins waiting on them after they blow themselves up, among other things, and that they are doing the will of god and will go to be with him and be rewarded for their sacrifice. Only religion promising a reward greater than the suffering here on earth, makes it possible for a human to be programed in such a way, willing to kill him or herself, along with many innocent people. I am sure there are those in the Muslim religion, amazed how we could believe the Christian religion and do the things we do.

The Pope promised the crusaders that if they would fight him against the Muslims, that he, the Pope would pray their souls out of hell and that they would go to heaven. Do you see any difference between this and the belief of the suicide bombers? Christian’s were foolish and ignorant enough to believe the Pope. How was it possible? Through the twisting of God’s Word by a man claiming to be the equal of Jesus Christ, the Vicar of Christ. Deception can only take place because of a lack of knowledge. To prove brainwashing is not restricted to foreign governments and other religions, as an example I’ll use the USMC (U.S. government). In just thirteen weeks, the time spent in USMC boot camp, an average man that is self centered, concerned only with his own life is transformed into a man that is willing to charge a machine gun nest without hesitation, or kill without discretion, or give up his life retrieving a dead Marine. Brainwashing is necessary in a war setting, but should not be used on the public. To prove this, I heard with my own ears in a Congressional hearing several years ago, a Marine Corps General being questioned, and he offered up this information, that the USMC uses brainwashing to get Marines to charge into a deadly situation, when told to do so, to follow orders without question. Why do you think, being a United States Marine was the only qualification for years, needed to be a police officer? They obey orders without question. Now, there is stigma against being a Marine that wants to be a police officer, in certain areas of the Country. Marines are said to be too aggressive, not suited to be peace officers. Well gee I wonder why? I’m not arguing right or wrong, my point is, any mind can be brainwashed.

If the above can be done in such a short time, think of what years of public school have done to you, not to mention television, without your knowledge. I laugh out loud every time I hear someone in government talk about the extremist in other countries, or even in this country, about their being brainwashed. Strictly because they disagree or oppose the public policy in this country, or their beliefs are contrary to Judao Christian beliefs. For the average American to get a full picture of what it means to be brainwashed, they need to look in a mirror, examine their own thoughts and beliefs, and how they came by them. In this county, it is only others that can be brainwashed, this is what makes me laugh.

The same situation exists in this County, brainwashing and programming, have been used in the public school system from the outset of this country. Example, the religion of humanism; JFK said it himself, is the official religion of America. Due to this, you now have people that think totally different due to this programming, from a social and religious stand point, as compared to just a 100 years ago. Their provided programming, is truth to them, thereby the only reality to them, anyone else that believes different is a fool. Example, a 100 years ago, abortion and homosexuality were taboo, today they are accepted by those indoctrinated into humanism, that God is in them, everything is ok as long as you don’t hurt someone else. Humanism has been taught for so long, their programming is complete, they have been indoctrinated in humanism, brainwashed, no different than a Muslim being indoctrinated into their religion, or a Christian into his, if his belief is based on man’s indoctrination. As a part of humanism the American people have been taught they evolved from an ape, that their just another animal, contradicting several thousand years of Mans acceptance that Man is a created being, by God Almighty “El-o-heem”. Science has proven evolution did not occur, but still people believe it, because of their programming, and because their programming is now an important and integral part of the government’s public policy. Has an ape ever given birth to a human, or an apple bore an orange? Humanism and evolution are a ridiculous belief, but they believe it, and will go to their grave believing it. What changed in just 100 years, that a Nation, founded on Judao Christian beliefs, could now believe such nonsense?

The indoctrination sponsored by government through the public schools, and the Social engineering by government, to create a Country of mind numb robots, that function as the renewable resources they are legally defined to be.

No one wants to think they could be so easily manipulated, but you have been, just as I was. Why is the public manipulated in such a way? Because they make better slaves. Just as it serves those that orchestrate this maniacal system, to cause strife between the races and religions, the blacks to hate whites, or vise versa, the poor to hate the rich, or vise versa, the Protestants to hate the Catholics, or both religions to hate all other religions, and vise versa. They keep everyone distracted with a multitude of issues, so busy earning a living, they have no time to educate themselves. Just as Thomas Jefferson warned, we would be satisfied with the crumbs from our masters table.

You can take any child, I don’t care what nationality, keep that child from the teachings that are indigenous to his people teach him the contrary and that child that grows into an adult will reject the beliefs that are indigenous to his people, in preference to his indoctrination. Take a Anglo Saxon, Catholic or Protestant that has no knowledge of the Muslim faith, indoctrinate that child in the Muslim faith, and that child will be a Muslim till death and take up arms against a Christian nation.

This is THE truth, I don’t care what religion you are, or what ethnicity you are, nor does it matter the level of your intelligence. Whatever was programed into as a child, into the human mind, God, god, or lack of a God or god, country or religion. Brainwashing subjugates that persons beliefs the rest of his or her life, and will determine how they disseminate all information that comes to them later in life, either accepting it or rejecting it, based on whether or not it agrees with their programming as a child. Only through deprogramming and reprogramming can this be changed. As an adult you can be reprogrammed, if certain procedures are used, as I pointed out above, describing the USMC. How much more susceptible is a child? A child’s mind is as an empty hard disk, it will accept whatever operating system you install on it.

I wrote the following analogy several years ago, I think it may help, more now, since more people understand the function of a computer.

If you have some knowledge of computers, you know that the operating system; I’ll use DOS as an example, is at the lowest level on the hard drive, it is the foundation on which the rest of the data is built and disseminated. The human mind is no different, your operating system is your core beliefs, God, parents teaching, school; with many in this country you can substitute government for God.

Before your mind accepts any information, it is first disseminated by your core beliefs and rejected if the information coming in is in conflict with your core beliefs. Just as with a hard drive, that is programmed with say DOS 5, all programs installed on the hard drive, have to be accepted by DOS 5 as compatible and not harmful to the operating system. If DOS 5 finds the program your trying to install is in conflict with the operating system, it will be rejected. Likewise, if you input certain information into the human mind during the programming years, you will have predictable behavior by that person, just as with the computer, from birth all the way to the grave.

The only way to change or modify the core beliefs of a human, is to override the existing information with new or modified information, that has to come from such a reliable source, the human mind will allow itself to be reprogrammed, causing the belief structure to be changed. Just as the computer will not allow DOS 5 to be upgraded to DOS 6, unless it recognizes it as coming from its creator, Microsoft. The most reliable and reputable source as far as the computer is concerned. With a human mind, it depends how far down you are going into the program, and what is the predominant core belief. The core beliefs in place will determine the level of reliability as well as the source of the information needed, before the information will be accepted. It’s sometimes necessary to deprogram the human mind, just as you would format a hard drive, to remove faulty data or software. This is very similar to what takes place with the human mind that is ‘deprogramed’, you then reinstall the program you want, reprogram the mind. Just as you would install new software on a hard drive, after you format the drive.

Let me give you another example as to how this works. I know through understanding this principle, through self-examination of my beliefs, and the information that created them, that the Bible and Jesus are THE and ONLY reality, and that Satan is the orchestrator, the manipulator of the governments, thereby responsible for the World in which we live today, but allowed by God Almighty for the fulfillment of His Son’s Word, and the operation of Jesus' Kingdom, in which he rules the World and controls the governments of the World with a Rod of Iron.

Now, examine how the statement above effected you, how did you react, but more importantly, why? I know you reacted, in an instant of time, without any effort or forethought on your part, and with no awareness the process was taking place. You formed an opinion, the information was either accepted or rejected. WHY? You had no idea while reading the above paragraph, that your thought process was being manipulated, causing you to react a particular way. Folks, this happens to everyone daily, your response is predictable based on how you were programed as a child by your parents, and later by the schools and church you attend. I want you to be able to recognize this, this is the only way you can be truly free. Be honest with yourself here, no one knows but you, what sets you apart is your reaction, say as a Christian, from a Muslim’s, or a Baptist’s from a Catholic’s, etc. How do you know your reaction is correct, and that the information you learned years before is correct. You just used your programming to disseminate the statement I made above. Are you correct? Have you checked it out, do you have proof? Did you not react to the information you have been programed with? Would not your reaction have been different if you were raised as a Muslim verses a Christian, or an Atheist? Be honest, think about your immediate reaction to what I said, compare that reaction to what you could easily imagine coming from yourself if you were programed another way. All humans are the same in regards to their creation, the body of a Muslim works the same as a Christian. So why are there different reactions to what I said above? Programming, brainwashing to be blunt. The example I gave deals with religion, but replace religion with any subject, any reaction you have is based on your prior programming. Until you understand this you will never be free and be able to think outside of the box. To go against the way your programmers want you to think.

Why did God Almighty create Man, including Woman with this feature? To protect Man from error, which would bring about Man’s separation from God Almighty, and cause Man’s death. The circumvention of God’s creation is what happened in the garden of Eden, “reprogramming”. Satan understood this, and used it against Man, by enticing Man to see with the flesh instead of his spirit and programming provided by God Almighty, by asking Man, “hath God Said”, just enough doubt to question God Almighty, to get Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge. What else did Satan say? “You’ll be as God, knowing good and evil” from that point, the programming and the built in protection given God Almighty’s creation, was perverted and used against God’s creation, Man. What is the relevance? The same mind created by God Almighty, will believe anything it is programed with, truth or a lie, good or evil. Without God’s Word and Spirit, Jesus as your foundation, any programming is possible. As I said above you can take any child, and create anything from a Jeffery Dommer, to George Washington, of course I’m speaking of morals and core beliefs, not intellect. The human flesh is capable of any evil or atrocity, we have many historical examples of this. Many have been perpetrated by the different religions, and for sure governments. Only through understanding the human mind and how it works, and that there are forces in the World using this understanding of the mind against you, will you be able to think outside the box, only with the correct building blocks, the foundational programming provide by God’s Word and His Son Jesus Christ can you disseminate the information being pumped into you, no matter what medium it comes at you, through government controlled schools, through the media or through religion. There are many different mediums of indoctrination. I hope through self examination you will be able to determine the beliefs you hold. Beliefs that have been provided for you, which you have accepted as truth without confirming the information. Beliefs you have accepted solely because of supposed reliability of the source, in the belief the source would never lie to you, or that the source has your best interest at heart.

James

My comments are in red text.

Chapter 1#

Letters from Pope Innocent III, to king John#

America, for that matter the whole World, the documents below will conflict with what you have been taught by government sponsored schools and the government sponsored churches. I wrote about the information contained in the below letters, in my book called The United States Is Still A British Colony. I pointed out that in the 1213 Charta, the king gave all of England and Ireland to Pope Innocent III. Many people still find this hard to believe, or apply basic understanding to what they have read in this Charter. To do so challenges what they have accepted as truth for years. Some wonder if true, what is the relevance? I made it clear what the relevance is, not just the obvious, that the Pope was now a legal party, as of 1213, in regards to the affairs of England, Ireland and the United States, by way of the charters creating the United States, and that our supposed freedom is bogus, for yet another reason, added to those stated in my book.

Since Britain’s rejection of the Catholic Church in 1689, when they cast off the Pope’s claim and bulls, for the Protestant religion, the Pope has used any means to regain control, there is much more to this story. It needs to be understood by every person in the World, for knowledge is freedom and will change our World.

The documents that frame our country, including the Fairfax Resolves, Declaration of Independence, etc., are said to be tied to the 1215 Magna Charta, a document declared null and void by the Pope. I explained this was made possible by what happened in the 1213 Charta. When the king became a tenant and trustee of the Pope, again proof of this is the fact that a rent was paid by the king to the Pope. The Pope was now a legal party to whatever transpired in England, concerning his new possessions, with an exception that I’ll get into later. I stated that the Magna Charta was illegal for two reasons, and was declared so by the Pope, when he declared the document and actions of the Barons were null and void. I made these statements based on the common law, property law that the courts would have to uphold. Since the 1689 Bill of Rights, the appearance is that these documents have no relevance, because they are not adhered to and have long since been forgotten, but this is not true. For sure between the years of 1213 and 1689, the Pope’s power and bulls changed the World, and to this day is effected by them, but as you will see controlled by other means.

The letters below go beyond what I reported the Charters to say. Here you have the actual communication between the Pope and the king, not my opinion, that prove I was correct in my assessment.

The 1213 Charta was written May 15, 1213, the first letter below was two months later, in which the Pope accepts the king’s offer. This would be a good time to cover again the legal construction of a contract; offer, acceptance, and consideration. If you are not aware of it, a contract between parties overrules any civil or common law right. It does not matter how absurd a contract is, it just has to meet the above legal definition, when it does all courts will defend it. Example, if you are a freeman, you can contract your freedom away and become any lessor status. The king offered his kingdom to the Pope as reparation for his supposed sins against the Pope, the Pope accepted the king’s offer, the consideration was the king’s payment of 1000 marks. The king as sovereign transferred his status and property to the Pope, and here is the exception, through a lie perpetrated by the Pope, made possible by the king’s ignorance of God’s Word. The king was lead to believe he would, for a lack of a better way to put it, go to hell, unless he made agreement with the Pope. One thing that would have gone to the king’s favor is if he had proven the fraud on the part of the Pope, in mis representing who he was. I’ll go more into this later. Below are quotes from the four letters.

Letter from Pope Innocent III, to king John, July 6, 1213#

“To Him, who from evil is able to bring forth good, we render thanks for having mercifully inspired you to make fitting reparation for the losses and wrongs inflicted upon the Church: for you have both accepted the form of reparation which had been prepared after much consideration, and you have also put your person and territory under apostolic suzerainty by right of lordship making over in perpetuity to the Holy Roman Church your kingdoms of England and Ireland, to be held through the church and of the Church, subject to an annual payment of 700 marks for England and 300 marks for Ireland, as is more fully and explicitly contained in your legally framed charter.”

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. page 149

“You now hold your kingdoms by a more exalted and surer title than before, for the kingdom is become a royal priesthood and the priesthood a kingdom of priests as stated by Peter in the Epistle and Moses in the Law. Come, then, exalted prince, fulfil the promises given and confirm the concessions offered, so that God Almighty may ever fulfil any righteous desire of yours and confirm any honorable purpose enabling you so to walk amid temporal blessings as not to fail of winning the eternal.”

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. page 149-150

“The aforesaid legate, having full knowledge of our mind, will instruct and reassure you as to our good pleasure.”

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. Page 151

Below is a Quote from the second letter from the Pope, echoing the transfer of the king’s property, to the Pope.

Letter from Pope Innocent III, to king John, November 4, 1213#

“….and manifestly grateful, in that, to make full amends for your sins, you have offered yourself and your property to God and the Church.”

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. Page 168

The third letter below, is the legal closing of the contract, payment of the 1000 marks to the Pope, the signing of the document with the signing of the witness, sealed with the king’s golden seal. This document declares that the contract between the king and the Pope was legal and binding on all parties, heirs and successors, forever. You will notice if you study closely the likeness in the legalese of these letters and the later Charters written by the king’s barristers, regarding the incorporation of America.

Letter from Pope Innocent III, to king John, April 24, 1214#

This is the heading to this letter:

“INNOCENT, BISHOP, SERVANT OF THE SERVANTS OF GOD, TO HIS WELL- BELOVED SON IN CHRIST, JOHN ILLUSTRIOUS KING OF THE ENGLISH, AND TO HIS LEGITIMATE FREE-BORN HEIRS FOR EVER."

“The King of kings and Lord of lords, Jesus Christ, a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech, has so established in the Church His kingdom and His priesthood that the one is a kingdom of priests and the other a royal priesthood, as is testified by Moses in the Law and by Peter in his Epistle; and over all He has set one whom He has appointed as His Vicar on earth, so that, as every knee is bowed to Jesus, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, so all men should obey His Vicar and strive that there may be one fold and one shepherd.”

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. Page 177

“….so that those provinces which from of old have had the Holy Roman Church as their proper teacher in spiritual matters should now in temporal things also have her as their peculiar sovereign. You, whom God has chosen as a suitable minister to effect this, by a devout and spontaneous act of will and on the general advice of your barons have offered and yield, in the form of an annual payment of a thousand marks, yourself and your kingdoms of England and Ireland, with all their rights and appurtenances, the Holy Roman Church and to us and our successors, to be our right and our property as is stated in your official letter attested by a golden seal, the literal tenor of which is as follows:

‘John, by the grace of God king of England, lord of Ireland, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, count of Anjou, to all the faithful of Christ who may see this charter, greeting in the Lord.

‘By this charter attested by our golden seal we wish it to be known to you all that, having in many things offended God and Holy Church our mother and being therefore in the utmost need of divine mercy and possessing nothing but ourselves and our kingdoms that we can worthily offer as due amends to God and the Church, we desire to humble ourselves for the sake of Him who for us humbled Himself even unto death; and inspired by the grace of the Holy Spirit not induced by force nor compelled by fear, but of our own good and spontaneous will and on the general advice of our barons we offer and freely yield to God, and to SS Peter and Paul His apostles, and to the Holy Roman Church our mother, and to our lord Pope Innocent III and his catholic successors, the whole kingdom of England and the whole kingdom of Ireland with all their rights and appurtenances for the remission of our sins and the sins of our whole family, both the living and the dead. And now, receiving back these kingdoms from God and the Roman Church and holding them a feudatory vassal, in the presence of our venerable father, lord Nicholas, bishop of Tusculum, legate of the Apostolic See, and of Pandulf, subdeacon and member of household fealty henceforth to our lord aforesaid, Pope Innocent, and to his catholic successors, and to the Roman Church, in the terms hereinunder stated; and we have publicly paid liege homage for the said kingdoms to God, and to the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and to the Roman Church, and to our lord aforesaid, Pope Innocent III, at the hands of the said legate who accepts our homage in place and instead of our said lord, the Pope; and we bind in perpetuity our successors and legitimate heirs that without question they must similarly render fealty and acknowledge homage to the Supreme Pontiff holding office at the time and to the Roman church. As a token of this our perpetual offering and concession we will and decree that out of the proper and special revenues of our said kingdoms, in lieu of all service and payment which we should render for them, the Roman church is to receive annually, without prejudice to the payment of Peter’s pence, one thousand marks sterling five hundred at the feast of Michael and five hundred at Easter that is, seven hundred for the kingdom of England and tree hundred for the kingdom of Ireland, subject to the maintenance for us and our heirs of our jurisdiction, privileges, and regalities. Desiring all these terms, exactly as stated, to be forever ratified and valid, we bind ourselves and our successors not to contravene them; and if we or any of our successors shall presume to contravene them, then, no matter who he be, unless on due warning he come to his senses, let him lose the title to the kingdom, and let this document of offer and concession remain ever valid.

‘I, John, by grace of God king of England and lord of Ireland, will from this hour henceforward be faithful to God and Saint Peter and the Roman Church and my lord Pope Innocent III and his catholic successors. I will not take part in deed, word, agreement, or plan whereby they should lose life or limb or be treacherously taken prisoners; any injury to them, if aware of it, I will prevent and will check if I can; and otherwise, I will notify them as soon as possible, or inform a person whom I can trust without fail to tell them; any counsel they have entrusted to me either personally or by envoys or by letter I will keep secret, nor will I wittingly divulge it to anyone to their disadvantage. I will help in maintaining and defending, to the utmost of my power, against all men, the patrimony of Saint Peter, and particularly the kingdom of England and the kingdom of Ireland. So help me God and the Holy Gospels of God whereon I swear.

‘To prevent any questioning of these terms at any time in the future, and for the greater surety of our offer and concession, we have caused this charter to be made and to be sealed with our golden seal; and as tribute for this the first year we pay a thousand marks sterling to the Roman Church by the hand of the said legate.

(The witness were listed here),
signed October 3, 1213

‘This offer and concession so piously and wisely made we regard as acceptable and valid, and we take under the protection of Saint Peter and of ourselves your person and the persons of your heirs together with the said kingdoms and their appurtenances and all other goods which are now reasonably held or may in future be so held: to you and to your heirs, according to the terms set out above and by the general advice of our brethren, we grant the said kingdoms in fief and confirm them by this privilege, on condition that any of your heirs on receiving the crown will publicly acknowledge this as a fief held of the Supreme Pontiff and of the Roman Church, and will take an oath of fealty to them. Let no man, therefore, have power to infringe this document of our concession and confirmation, or presume to oppose it. If any man dare to do so, let him know that he will incur the anger of Almighty God and of SS Peter and Paul, His apostles. Amen, amen, Amen.

(Rota) I, Innocent, bishop of the Catholic Church, have signed. Farewell.
(The other signers were listed below)

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. Page 178-183

The last letter is from Pope Innocent III, to the king, with record of the king’s appeals to the Pope, the Pope puts the rebellious barons on notice, also the world, of his legal claims. In this letter, the Pope declares the Magna Charta was to be ignored, and reports that the king informed the barons he had no legal authority to sign the Magna Charta. The Pope declared the Magna Charta null and void.

Letter from Pope Innocent III, to king John, August 24, 1215#

“….such complete amends that he not only paid compensation for losses and restored property wrongfully seized, but also conferred full liberty on the English church; and further, on the relaxation of the two sentences, he yielded his kingdom of England and of Ireland to St Peter and the Roman Church, and received it from us Again as fief under an annual payment of one thousand marks, having sworn an oath of fealty to us, as is clearly stated in his privilege furnished with a golden seal;….”

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. Page 212

“For we in our letters, and we equally through the archbishop and bishops, have asked and advised the king, enjoining it on him as he hopes to have his sins remitted, to treat these magnates and nobles kindly and to hear their just petitions graciously, so that they too might recognize with gladness how by divine grace he had had a change of heart, and that thereby they and their heirs should serve him and his heirs readily and loyally; and we also asked him to grant them full safe conduct for the outward and homeward journey and the time between, so that if they could not arrive at agreement the dispute might be decided in his court by their peers ACCORDING TO THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS OF THE KINGDOM. But before the envoys bearing this wise and just mandate and reached England, the barons threw over their oath of fealty; and through, even if the king had wrongfully oppressed them, they should not have proceeded against him by constituting themselves both judges and executors of the judgement in their own suit, yet, openly conspiring as vassals against their lord and as knights against their king, they leagued themselves with his acknowledged enemies as well as with others, and dared to make war on him, occupying and devastating his territory and even seizing the city of London, the capital of the kingdom, which had been treacherously surrendered to them. Meantime the aforesaid envoys returned to England and the king offered, in accordance with the terms of our mandate, to grant the barons full justice. This they altogether rejected and began to stretch forth their hands to deeds still worse. So the king, appealing to our tribunal, offered to grant them justice before us to whom the decision of this suit belonged by reason of our lordship: but this they utterly rejected. Then he offered that four discreet men chosen by him and four more chosen by themselves should, together with us, end the dispute, and he promised that, first in his reforms, he would repeal all abuses introduced into England in his reign: but this also they contemptuously refused. Finally, THE KING DECLARED TO THEM THAT, SINCE THE LORDSHIP OF THE KINGDOM BELONGED TO THE ROMAN CHURCH, HE NEITHER COULD NOR SHOULD, WITHOUT OUR SPECIAL MANDATE, MAKE ANY CHANGE IN IT TO OUR PREJUDICE: and so he again appealed to our tribunal, placing under apostolic protection both himself and his kingdom with all his honour and rights. But making no progress by any method, he asked the archbishop and the bishops to execute our mandate, to defend the rights of the Roman Church, and to protect himself in accordance with the form of the privilege granted to Crusaders. When the archbishop and bishops would not take any action, seeing himself bereft of almost all counsel and help, he did not dare to refuse what the barons had dared to demand. And so by such violence and fear as might affect the most courageous of men he was forced to demeaning but also illegal and unjust, thereby lessening unduly and impairing his royal rights and dignity….we refuse to ignore such shameless presumption, for thereby the Apostolic See would be dishonoured, the king’s rights injured, the English nation shamed, and the whole plan for a Crusade seriously endangered; and as this danger would be imminent if concessions, thus extorted from a great prince who has taken the cross, were not cancelled by our authority, even though he himself should prefer them to be upheld, on behalf of Almighty God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by the authority of SS Peter and Paul His Apostles, and by our own authority, acting on the general advice of our brethren, we utterly reject and condemn this settlement, and under threat of excommunication we order that the king should not dare to observe it and that the barons and their associates should not require it to be observed: the charter, with all undertakings and guarantees whether confirming it or resulting from it, we declare to be null, and void of all validity for ever. Wherefore, let no man deem it lawful to infringe this document of our annulment and prohibition, or presume to oppose it. If anyone should presume to do so, let him know that he will incur the anger of Almighty God and of SS Peter and Paul His.”

Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III, concerning England (1198-1216), Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1956. Page 214-216

“barons until the Sunday after Easter on the pretext that their demands were too complex for immediate decision. The Pope’s reply to the king’s message was a suggestion of delay by the device of “arbitration.” On May 9, 1215, the king proposed to the barons “arbitration” before a court consisting of representatives of himself, of the barons and of the Pope, after the barons had besieged the royal castle at Northampton. This proposal was rejected by the barons. And they answered on May 17, 1215, by capturing London. The king’s negotiators, who included Archbishop Langton, finally effected an agreement with the barons, about June 10, 1215, at a conference at Runnymede, that was signed and sealed by King John on or about the date that the Magna Carta bears, June 15, 1215.

After he had been forced to sign the Magna Carta by threat of defeat by the barons, King John sent word of it, by envoy, to the Pope. The envoys returned several months later, bearing Papal bulls, dated August 24 and 25. Pope Innocent III declared the Magna Carta to be:

“…unlawful and unjust as it is base and shameful…whereby the Apostolic See is brought into contempt, the Royal Prerogative diminished, the English outraged, and the whole Enterprise of the Crusade greatly imperiled.” (211:14)

On these grounds and on the ground that “the king had been compelled to enter upon it by force and fear” (211:14), and On the implied ground that it violated the basic tenets of Christianity in its denial of dictatorial rights to him and his henchmen, POPE INNOCENT III DENIED ON BEHALF OF THE CHURCH THE DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AS EMBODIED IN THE MAGNA CARTA, BECAUSE POSSESSION OF RIGHTS BY ANYONE VIOLATES THE TENETS OF THE CHURCH.

The Papal bulls were greeted by the barons with a resumption of the civil war in England. The Pope was so enraged at the failure of Archbishop of Canterbury Langton to destroy the rebellious barons and carry out the orders incorporated in his bull, that he suspended him from his office when he visited Rome at the end of September 1215, to attend the Fourth Lateran Council. Undoubtedly with the consent, and probably at the direction of the Vatican, the French invaded England under Prince Louis and joined forces in a treacherous alliance with the barons, as pretender to the throne of King John.

The sudden death of King John, in October 1216, brought to the throne his nine-year-old son, as King Henry III. His supporters revived the Magna Carta to appease the barons and gain their support against the pretender who was badly routed. These circumstances barred any further effective opposition to the Magna Carta by the Pope, without risking loss of the 666 pounds tribute.”

Chapter 2#

The Pope’s creation of the Knights Templars#

In the below quotes You’ll see that the Knights Templars were a creation of the Pope. Their special grant of nobility came from the Pope, not to mention the grants they received from the king of England… including their being the first tax collectors on income. They were arguably the first international bankers. You’ll see that the Knights Templars were agents of the Pope, fiduciaries of the king. The Knights Templars transferred the king’s payment to the Pope, for the kings agreement of 1213, transferring his holdings to the Pope, and receiving them back as fief, paying yearly as valuable consideration of their agreement, making the agreement perfectly legal. The Knights Templars were the military arm of the Pope, and they answered only to him, they were bound to no civil law, no authority on earth could subject them to their law or jurisdiction.

“As they had no fixed place of abode, Baldwin II, King of Jerusalem, gave them a residence within the precincts of his own place on Mount Moriah near the church known as the Temple of Solomon, while the clergy of the Temple, inspired by his example, added ground for the erection of necessary offices, and other benefactors supplied the means of maintaining the Knights in food and clothing. From their sacrifice of all worldly advantage, and this the first place of their settlement, they became known as the poor fellow-soldiers of Christ and the Temple of Solomon (Pauperes Commilitones Christi et Templi Salomonis). Thus was founded in 1118 the famous Brotherhood of Soldier Monks the Knights of the Temple.

At first their progress was slow; few joined them in their seemingly inglorious toil. At the end of nine years they had obtained seven recruits. Then, however, the saintly Bernard of Clairvaux lent them the aid of his powerful advocacy, and drew up for their guidance rules of conduct soon embodied and drew up their guidance rules of conduct soon embodied in the more elaborate code which receive the sanction of the Council of Troyes (1128). By Pope Honorius II they were given a distinctive habit in a white mantile, symbolical of purity and innocence; to which, twenty years later, Pope Engenius III added the red cross seal and badge of martydom thus proclaiming by the sign they bore the dedication of their lives to the defence of pilgrims and the Holy Land.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 5-6

“By the famous Bull Omne datum optimum, first published in 1162 and a second time ten years later, Pope Alexander III raised the Order to a position of extraordinary privilege, and rendered them immune from all jurisdiction, lay or ecclesiastical, other than that of the Holy See….

….Thus the Templars became independent of all control save that of the Supreme Pontiff, and as proceedings of their chapters were secret, virtually a sealed book to the rest of the Catholic Church. The admission of priests, however, did not place them on a footing of equality with the lay brethren, to whom were reserved all the powers of government. Further, only a knight who had taken the vows of the Order could hold the office of Grand Master, and to the vows of the Order could hold the office of Grand Master, and to the Grand Master all the members were bound by their vows to render implicit obedience. In the Church at large authority lay with the priest, only he could bind and loose, could pronounce the dread sentence of excommunication, and grant deliverance from it by absolution. This was the power by which, in the Middle Ages, the Church was able to lay a restaining hand on the most licentious Rulers and even to shake the thrones of Kings.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 6, 12, 13

“The estates of the Order were managed in the interests of the common object, the defense of Christianity in the East, and the revenues they yielded devoted to that purpose. They formed a network over Christendom, and the means of communication this elaborate organization afforded led to the Templars becoming the financial agents of the Crusaders and later the Bankers of Kings and Princes.

From the first the Knights in England were closely associated with the royal Court, and the prestige this connection gave the Order no doubt often induced them to undertake duties not contemplated by their pious Founders. As laymen, yet invested with ecclesiastical sanctity and a power within the kingdom though not of it, their counsel was frequently sought by embarrassed Rulers often at issue with rebellious subjects in the rude age in which they flourished. Thus the New Temple became a recognized center of meeting and conference in great affairs of Church and State. Bound to the Popes by a peculiar allegiance, the hospitality of the Templars was often extended to foreign Prelates and other officers of the mediaeval Church who visited England on the business of the Holy see. The Master of the Temple ranked as one of the Magnates of the Realm, and successive Kings made use of his services as envoy in the conduct of negotiations with other Princes.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 16, 17

“….These relate chiefly to the King’s business, but there can be no doubt that in multitudes of other private cases of which there is now no record the same thing was going on. Moreover, from a very early date the Crown made use of the services of Templars as royal agents in the collection of monies payable under subsidies granted the King by the Magnates lay and ecclesiastical. Thus in 1188 Henry II appointed Gilbert de Ogrestan, a Brother of the Temple, with others to collect the tenth known as the Saladin Tithe, believed to be the first tax levied upon personal property in England….

….It is manifest also that the Knights carried on a regular business of foreign exchange and constantly undertook, in consideration of money paid to them at the New Temple, to discharge abroad debts owing to foreign creditors by persons resident in England. Further, the New Temple is frequently named as the place where money borrowed or a debt otherwise arising is to be paid or discharged….

….By the second and third, dated respectively January 1st and 4th, 1214, a sum of 6000 marks was ordered to be paid from the Temple Treasury to Pandulph the Papal Legate, and another sum of 1000 marks to the same person, together with Thomas de Erdington and Almeric de Sacy. In the following year John paid to the Master of the Temple 1100 marks, which he had borrowed from the Order to enable him to bring troops to England from Ponthieu.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 30, 31

“Further gifts still continued to be showered on the Order. As late as April, 1303 license was granted the Templars to hold lands in mortmain, received from six different grantees.” The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, page 43 footnote

Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem#

“The most important of all the military orders, both for the extent of its area and for its duration. It is said to have existed before the Crusades and is not extinct at the present time. During this long career it has not always borne the same name. Known as Hospitallers of Jerusalem until 1309, the members were called Knights of Rhodes from 1309 till 1522, and have been called Knights of Malta since 1530.”

Catholic Encyclopedia

Present State of the Order#

“The secularization of the property of the order in Protestant countries was extended by the French Revolution to the greater number of Catholic countries. On the other hand, Czar Paul of Russia assigned them considerable property in his domains (1797), and in return was elected grand master, but his election was not recognized by the pope. From that time forward the pope has named the grand master of the bailiff who takes his place. From 1805 to 1879 there was no grand master, but Leo XIII re-established the dignity, bestowing it on an Austrian, Geschi di Sancta Croce. It is now (1910) held by Galeazzo von Thun Hohenstein. The actual conditions for admission to the order are: nobility of sixteen quarterings, the Catholic Faith, attainment of full legal age, integrity of character, and corresponding social position. There are now in existence only four great priories, one in Bohemia, and three in Italy. There are still commanders and several classes of knights, with different insignia, but all wear the same eight-pointed Maltese cross (see DECORATIONS, PONTIFICAL).”

Catholic Encyclopedia

Military Orders
England#

“In England, Edward III, in memory of the legendary Knights of the Round Table, established in 1349 brotherhood of twenty-five knights, exclusive of princes of the blood and foreign princes, with St. George as its patron and with its chapel in Windsor Castle for the holding of chapters. This, the Order of the Garter, takes its name from the characteristic badge, won on the left knee. The choice of this badge has given rise to various anecdotes of doubtful authenticity. Nothing is now known of the original object of the Order of the Bath, the creation of which dates from the coronation of Henry IV (1399). A third order, Scottish by origin, is that of the Order of the Thistle, dating from the reign of James V of Scotland (1534). These orders still exist, though they have been protestantized.”

Catholic Encyclopedia

Religious State#

“The knights of the great orders were regarded in the Church as analogous to monks whose three vows they professed and whose immunities they shared. They were answerable to the pope alone; they had their chapels, their clerics, and their cemeteries, all exempted from the jurisdiction of the secular clergy. Their landed property was free from tithes. They were not subject to the interdicts which the bishops in those days employed so freely. They did not all follow the same monastic rule. The Templars and orders derived from them followed the Cistercian Reform. The Hospitallers followed the Rule of St. Augustine. Nevertheless, in consequence of the relaxation which manifested itself among them after the period of the crusades, the Holy See introduced mitigations in favour of the non-clerical brethren. For these it was difficult to maintain the rule of celibacy in all its rigour; they were permitted, in certain orders, to marry once, and that only with a maiden. Even where second marriages were tolerated, they had to vow conjugal fidelity, so that if they violated this obligation of the natural law they sinned doubly against the law and against their vow. Besides the three vows, the rule bound the brethren to the exercises of the monastic life such as the recitation of the Hours, for which, in the case of illiterates, a fixed number of Paters was substituted. It also prescribed their dress and their food, and their feast, abstinence, and fast days. Lastly, the rule imposed detailed obligations in regard to the election of dignitaries and the admission of members to the two ranks of combatants – knights and men-at-arms – and the two of non-combatants – chaplains, to whom all sacerdotal functions were reserved, and casaliers, or tenants, who were charged with the management of temporal affairs.”

Catholic Encyclopedia

Military Organizations#

“The military organization of the orders was uniform, explained by that law of war which compels the belligerent to maintain his military apparatus on a level with those of his adversary, on pain of defeat. The strength of an army was in its cavalry, and to this type the armament, mounting, and tactics of the military orders conformed. The knights-brethren were the heavy cavalry; the men-at-arms-brethren, the light cavalry. The former were entitled to three horses a piece; the latter had to be content with one. Among the former, only knights of tried prowess were admitted, or, in default of this qualification, sons of knights, because in such families the warlike spirit and military training were hereditary. The consequence was that the knights, properly so-called, were never very numerous; they formed a corps d’ lite which carried the great mass of the crusaders. Gathered in convents which were also barracks, combining with the passive obedience of the soldier, the spontaneous submission of the religious, living shoulder to shoulder in brotherly union, commander and subordinate, these orders surpassed, in that cohesiveness which is the ideal of every military organization, the most famous bodies of picked soldiery known to history, from the Macedonian phalanx to the Ottoman Janissaries.”

Economic Oganization#

“The importance acquired by the military orders during the course of the Middle Ages may be measured by the extent of their territorial possessions, scattered throughout Europe. In the thirteenth century nine thousand manors formed the portion of the Templars; thirteen thousand that of the Hospitallers. These temporalities were an integral part of the ecclesiastical domain, and as such had a sacred character which placed them beyond liability to profane uses or to secular imposts. They differed from the temporalities of other monastic institutions only in the centralized system of their administration. While within each of the other religious institutes every abbey was autonomous, all the houses of a military order were bound to contribute their revenues, after deducting expenses, to a central treasury. As a result of this enormous circulation of capital controlled by the orders, their wealth could be applied to financial operations which made them veritable credit and deposit banks. Their perfect good faith earned for them the implicit confidence of the Church and of temporal rulers. The papacy employed them to collect contributions for the crusades; princes did not hesitate to entrust to them their personal property. In this respect, again, the military orders were model institutions.”

Catholic Encyclopedia

Chapter 3#

Betrayal of the knights by the Pope and the king’s they served#

“The Temple Church was built by the Knights Templars in the twelfth century. It is the third oldest church in London and in it the Knights Templars were accused of performing some very strange Pagan rites. In the Great Fire of 1666 the Temple Church barely escaped.”

Rambles in Old London, George W. Jacobs and Company, page 88

“At this time the occupant of the Papal throne was bertrand de Got, formerly Archbishop of Bordeaux and now known as Pope Clement V. He had moved the Papacy to Avigonon, and was a puppet in the hands of the French King, to whose influnce he owed his elevation to the Pontificate. Philip IV, surnamed le Bel, now ruled France: a Prince whose handsome exterior veiled a nature essentially false and cruel. With revenues depleted by his Flemish Wars, he turned a greedy eye on the wealth of the Templars. Exactly when and how the plot between Philip and his subservent Pope was first hatched has not been disclosed, but it is certain that while still professing publicly the most frendly feelings towards the Order he was secretly planning their destruction.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 44, 45

“….Upon allegations secretly made, charges were drawn up imputing to the Templars infidelity, idolatry, heresy, and the most detestable vice. Proof presented no difficulties, for France was at this time under the Inquisition, and, heresy being charged, the expert hands of the Inquisitors could be relied on to force by torture confessions sufficient to establish guilt. Moreover, the Chief Inquisitor was Philip’s private Confessor, so that in the seclusion of the royal palace all the plans could be secretly matured for bringing to the State. The events which followed have been truly called “the great crime of the Middle Ages.”

Mysterious rumours were first set in circulation defaming the Order. Some of these reached the ears of the Grand Master, who at an interview with Pope Clement denounced them as false and asked for a public inquiry. No inquiry was granted, but Molay seems to have been satisfied that the rumours found no credence from the Holy Father. Philip treated him with a like duplicity, for it was essential the secret of his plot should be carefully guarded till the time was ripe for action. Three years before, in conferring fresh privileges on the Order, he had proclaimed the esteem in which he held them, eulogizing their works of piety and charity, and their magnificent liberality in all times and places, and his outward demeanour gave no indication of the deadly intentions he harboured towards them. Thus no steps were taken by the unsuspecting victims to meet the impending blow. On October 12th, 1307, the Grand Master was honoured with the place of pall bearer beside the King at the obsequies in Paris of the Comtesse de Valois. The very next day the storm burst. Pursuant to royal orders secretly issued a month before, Molay and all the officers and members of the Order who could be found in France were seized and imprisoned, and all their property taken into the King’s hand. Thus the empty coffers of Philip were at once replenished with the immense treasure stored in the Temple at Paris. On the 14th the arrests were followed by a proclamation which set forth the alleged crimes of the Templars, charging the whole Order with idolatry, denying Christ, and spitting on the Cross at initiation, and habitual immorality of the vilest description; while further instruction in their depravity was imparted to the populace assembled for the purpose in the gardens of the royal palace.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 46, 47

“….Further, ignorant of the Pope’s complicity, King Edward also wrote to Clement on behalf of the accused, expressing his amazement and horror at the terrible nature of the charges inspired, as he suggested, by envious and evil disposed persons who turned the good deeds of the Order to works of perversity, and which he was unable to credit because the Master and Brethren of the Temple, constant in the purity of the Catholic Faith, were greatly esteemed by him and all his kingdom in living as well as morals.

Meanwhile, however, Clement had decided to intervene himself in England, and, on November 22nd, had addressed to Edward from Poitiers, where he appears to have been in conference with the French King, one of those mendacious Bulls with which he now sought to poison the mind of Christendom. In this document (Pro Capcione Templariorum), after reciting the crimes of the Templars, their arrests in France, and the seizure of their property by Philip, which he alleged had been done for its safe custody and the benefit of the Holy Land, he proceeded to state that the Master of the Order had since publicly and spontaneously confessed that the denial of Christ at the instigation of Satan had been made part of their ceremony of initiation, and that many other Brethren of the Temple in different parts of France had also confessed the wickedness charged against them, doing unfeigned penance therefor. Further, he alleged that he himself had examined a Knight of the Order of high birth and authority, who had spontaneously and fully confessed the crime of denying Jesus Christ on admission, and had been present at a Chapter in the Kingdom of Cyprus when a certain nobleman at his initiation by the Master’s command committed this very wickedness in the presence of two hundred members of the Order, of whom about one hundred were Knights. His Holiness accordingly exhorted King Edward with caution and secrecy in one day to arrest all the Templars in his Kingdom and take their property into safe custody.

Although it is clear there was no belief in the charges at the English Court, on receiving this further communication, Edward yielded. Perhaps in that age even it strong Ruler, if a professed son of the Church, could hardly have done otherwise, for, as has been aptly said, " When the Vicar of Christ himself entered the witness box scepticism was silenced.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 48, 49

“In August, 1808, carne another Papal Bull (Faciens Miscericordiam), repeating much that had been alleged in Clement’s former missive to the King but addressed to Winchelsea, Archbishop of Canterbury, and his suffragans. In this Bull the Pope declared that at the very commencement of his Pontificate reports had confidentially reached him that the Grand Master, Preceptors, and Brethren of the Order of the Temple had lapsed into the unspeakable sin of apostasy, the detestable vice of idolatry, the execrable crime of sodomy, and many heresies that his dearest son in Christ, Philip, the illustrious King of the French, had also heard these things, and that the guilt of the Templars had been proved by many confessions, attestations, and depositions of the said Grand Master and many Preceptors and Brethren of the Order in France. That before three Cardinals deputed by himself to inquire and ascertain the truth, the Grand Master and many Preceptors being sworn had deposed and confessed freely and spontaneously without compulsion or fear that on reception into the Order they had denied Christ, spitting upon the Cross; that some had also admitted that with the same denial and spitting they had received others; that certain Brethren had confessed other things horrible and indecent regarding which shame kept him silent; and that on beaded knees, with clasped hands, humbly and earnestly and with many tears, they had begged for absolution. He accordingly directed the Archbishop and Bishops to institute inquiries in England through the Provincial Councils, and in particular to examine the Templars there upon certain articles of accusation transmitted with the Bull, and named two Inquisitors, Deodatus, Abbot of Lagny, and Sicarde de Vaur, Canon of Narbonne, whom he was sending to conduct the examinations, and whom he required the English Bishops to assist. Clement had no doubt heard of the letters King Edward had dispatched to Portugal, Castile, Sicily, and Aragon, for in this Bull he further alleged that King Philip had not acted against the Templars from avarice, not intending to take any of their property for himself, and having wholly removed his hand from it, but following in the illustrious footsteps of his progenitors, from zeal for the orthodox Faith.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 51, 52

“The articles of accusation sent by the Pope numbered eighty seven. They dealt (i.a.) with the alleged denial of Christ and spitting on the Cross at initiation; alleged acts of indecency between the Preceptors and novitiates; the wearing of cords or belts consecrated to idolatry; alleged acts of immorality; the worshipping of idols (including cats) in their Chapters; disbelief in the Sacraments of the altar and absolution from sin by the Master and Preceptors, being laymen only….

….No evidence was obtained, however, in proof of the Papal allegations. All the members, Knights, Priests, and Serving Brothers, alike denied the charges and protested their innocence.

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, page 53

“Meanwhile, under the merciless direction of King Philip and his Inquisitors, the tragedy had been pursuing its cruel course in France. There, those Brethren who did not confess were condemned to perpetual imprisonment, while those who admitted the charges and did not afterwards withdraw their admissions were for the most part absolved and set at liberty. Others who, ashamed of their weakness under torture, subsequently retracted their confessions of guilt and claimed to defend the Order, were seized by Philip’s command and burnt as relapsed heretics. Fifty four so suffered at Paris in one day. Their firmness in adhering to their retractations notwithstanding the terrible consequences and the intrepidity with which they endured a cruel death, astonished all beholders, and point with overwhelming force to the falsity of the charges laid against them.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 63, 64

“….The fate of James de Molay, the Grand Master of the Temple and some of his superior officers still remained undecided….With Molay, Geoffrey de Charnis, Preceptor of Normandy, and two other Knights of high position, Hugh de Peraud, Visitor of France, and Godfrey de Gonnville, Preceptor of Aquitaine, were arraigned before this tribunal. The two latter abode by their former confessions, and were sentenced to perpetual imprisonment. But the Grand Master and Geoffrey de Charnis, to the astonishment of their Judges, seized the opportunity to publicly declare that they were innocent of the charges laid against them, that the confessions they had made to save their own lives were false and that the Order was pure and holy. Unprepared for such an emergency and at a loss what course to pursue, the Commissioners adjourned without pronouncing any judgement. Subject only to ecclesiastical law the Knights were not amenable to any lay jurisdiction till sentenced by a spiritual Court, but, contemptuously indifferent to Papal sanction, King Philip did not wait. Calling his Counsellors together he forthwith passed sentence of death, and at dusk of the same day, March 18th, 1313, the Grand Master and his undaunted companion were taken by royal officers to an island in the Seine and, protesting their innocence to the last, slowly burnt to death.

It is said that in his final agony Molay summoned Pope and King to meet him within a year before that tribunal where judgment does not err. The story may be an ex post facto invention to be explained rather by a popular belief in the innocence of the victims than by any circumstance which actually occurred. But, be that as it may, in the events which followed many believed they beheld the retribution of divine wrath. In little more than a month the venal Pontiff, glutted with ill gotten gain wealth, was smitten by a foul disease and passed to his account; while on the 29th of the following November King Philip, still in middle life, was called from the enjoyment of his plunder to answer for the wrongs he had committed. He expired at Fontainbleau, the victim of a mysterious malady which baffled all medical skill.”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 65, 66

“The severance from Rome and the confiscation of the Monastic estates in England which were carried out by Henery VIII, were accompanied by one change which intimately concerned the two legal Societies of the Temple. The heavy hand of that masterful monarch fell with crushing force upon the Order of St. John of Jerusalem. During two hundred years in the Island of Rhodes, the Knights, against the Moslem Power, had valiantly upheld the cause of the Cross, but at last, in 1525, they were forced to capitulate to the conquering Turk. In their extremity their great services to Christendom were forgotten. Henry coveted their possessions, and in 1540 his subservient Parliament passed an Act confiscating the property of t he Order in England. To give some colour of justification to the robbery this statute recited that the Knights of the Hospital of St. John had unnaturally, and contrary to the duty of their allegiances, sustained and maintained the usurped power and authority of the Bishop of Rome, the common enemy to the King and his realm; and that the Island of Rhodes, being lost, it was better that possessions of the Order should be employed and spent within the realm for the defence and surety thereof than used by such unnatural subjects who daily did privily and craftily attempt to subvert good and godly policy. Accordingly, it proceeded to make the wearing by the members of the Order upon their bodies of any sign, mark, or token, heretofore used or accustomed for the knowledge of the said religion, an offence against the Statute of Praomunire (16 R. II, c. 5); vested all the property of the Order real and personal in England and Ireland in the King and his successors, to use and employ at his own free will and pleasure under survey of the Court of Augmentations, and pronounced void and of none effect all privileges of sanctuary hitherto belonging to, used, or claimed in the mansion houses and other places commonly called St. John’s hold. Pensions were provided under the Act for various officers of the Order, “being the King’s true and faithfull subjectis,….”

The History Of The Temple, London, J. Bruce Williamson, pages 143, 144

“The turning of the tide for Robert the Bruce, Scotland and the Knights Templar was the famous Battle of Bannockburn which took place on June 24, 1324…. On June 24 of 1324, Robert the Bruce of Scotland with approximately 6,000 Scots miraculously defeated 20,000 English soldiers. Exactly what took place has never really been recorded. It is believed by some that Bruce did it with the help of a special force of Knights Templar. After all, June 24 was also a special day to the Knights Templar; it was St. John’s Day….after a day of combat which had left both English and Scottish armies exhausted… Panic swept the English ranks. King Edward, together with 500 of his knights, abruptly fled the field. Demoralized, the English foot-soldiers promptly followed suit, and the withdrawal deteriorated quickly into a full-scale rout, the entire English army abandoning their supplies, their baggage, their money, their gold and silver plate, their arms, armour and equipment.”

http://www.netspace.net.au/~newdawn/41b.htm

“…the great King Robert the Bruce supported by the Knights Templar led by Sir William Sinclair with an army of only 9,000, defeated 38,000 Englishmen, the Scots facing heavy calvary, archers and wave upon wave of staunch and brave Englishmen.

On that day, it was the crushing charge of the Knights Templar across rocky and almost impassable ground that turned the tide of victory. That far off day, almost seven hundred years ago, they won for Scotland her independence….Sir Robert Keith commanded the light cavalry whilst the Knights Templar were led by Sir William Sinclair. "

http://sinclair.quarterman.org/history/med/battleofbannockburn.html

Chapter 4#

Connection of our flag to the Pope, and the secret societies#

The below quotes are self explanatory, I’ve already dealt with the military nature of our flag in an earlier chapter. I would just point out Britain used their uniforms as representations of their flag, we retained the British colors in our flag, the colors of Britain and the Pope.

“The first Templar to be initiated in the United States was William Davis who was given the degrees of Excellent, Super Excellent, Royal Arch, and Knight Templar by the St. Andrew’s Royal Arch Lodge on August 28th, 1769. Davis owned an apothecary business in Boston, but is perhaps most noted for his efforts at the Battle of Bunker Hill. Here it was Davis who suggested the “Barrel Defense” in which Barrels full of earth and stone were rolled down on the attacking units.

Of course other Revolutionary War notables would be invested with the honor of being Knights Templar, among them Paul Revere who was initiated on December 11th, 1769. Latterly, on May 14th 1770, Joseph Warren another Revolutionary War hero would add his name to the roster of early American Templars.”

http://www.templarhistory.com/masonic.html

“All Knights Templar are members of the world’s oldest fraternal organization known as “The Ancient Free And Accepted Masons” or more commonly known as “masons”. However, not all masons are Templars. Templary is but a part of the Masonic structure known as the “York Rite Of Freemasonry”.”

http://www.knightstemplar.org/

“….that of the Templars was purely military form the beginning, and on this point it can claim priority, despite the contrary assertions of the Hospitallers. The Templars followed a different monastic rule and wore a different habit – the white habit of the Cistercians, whose rule they followed, with a red cross, while the Hospitallers had the black mantle with a white cross. In war the knightly brothers wore above their armour a red surcoat with the white cross. Mutually emulous from the outset, they soon became rivals, and this rivalry had much to do with the rapid decline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. In other respects the two orders held the same rank in Church and State, both being recognized as regular orders and endowed by the papacy with most extensive privileges, absolute independence of all spiritual and temporal authority save that of Rome, exemptions from tithes, with the right to have their own chapels, clergy and cemeteries….The name knights then prevailed over that of hospitallers. This character was accentuated by the fusion of the Hospitallers with the remaining Knights Templars subsequent to the suppression of the latter (1312). This fusion at the same time increased the wealth of the order, to which the pope assigned the property of the Templars in every country except Aragon and Portugal.”

Catholic Encyclopedia

“All of the flags used in the colonies were military flags:

The flags used by the Colonies, before the Revolution, were chiefly those of the mother country, and though there were many other designs, they were nearly always combined with some feature of the British colors. Fallows p. 3.

Prior to the Declaration of Independence the different colonies retained the standards of the mother country, the ancient national flag of England, a white banner with the red cross of St. George, or the union flag of King James, a combination of the crosses of St. George and St. Andrew, designated as the King’s colors. California Constitution p. 5.

“For nearly seventy years before the Revolutionary War broke out, the red ensign of Great Britain was generally adopted by the American colonies. It was called the Union flag, because in the upper corner next to the staff, which is called the canton, were the red cross of St. George, representing England; and the white cross, representing Scotland. The combination of these crosses which indicated a union character, was prescribed in 1707. While the colonists were not lacking in devotion to the British ensign in pre-revolutionary times, they nevertheless took occasion to place some particular device upon it applicable to the individual colony to which it belonged.” Smith p. 10.

From 1707 on the Union Flag and the red ensign, or Meteor Flag, were borne by both merchant marine and the royal navy. On land they floated over the forts and followed the marching armies. They waved, too, over remote wilderness posts, and over the forest-threading brigades of the fur trader.

Thus the flag of Britain was the colonists flag, endeared to them by ancient association and by the endurance of common hazards and triumphs in uncounted campaigns and battles. Quaife p. 35.”

A Treatise On the Jurisdictional Significance of the American Ensign

“One of the most famous events involving the flag in colonial times was the case of John Endicott, who removed the cross from the flag because he believed it to be a symbol of popery, a sentiment felt by many in the colonies:

In November, 1634, complaint was recorded that John [P.15] Endicott had defaced the English ensign at Salem by cutting out with his sword a part of the red cross in the flag that hung before the governor s gate, declaring that it savored of popery, and he would have none of it. He was a member of the court assistants, but for this insult to the king’s colors he was reprimanded, removed from his office, and disqualified to hold any public office for the space of one year.

In this sentiment, that his violent act indicated, Endicott was not without sympathizers; and soon after some of the militia refused to march under the symbol that was to them idolatrous. After a grave controversy, which was not concluded until some time in December, 1635, when the military commissioners appointed colors for every company, leaving out the red cross in all of them, it was agreed that the king s colors should fly from ships and be displayed over Castle Island, Boston, because the castle belonged to the king, and this flag continued in use there until the establishment of the commonwealth under Cromwell.

In 1651, when the English Parliament revived and adopted the old standard of the cross of St. George as the colors of England, the General Court of Massachusetts adopted this order: As the Court conceive the old English colors, now used by the Parliament, to be a necessary badge of distinction betwixt the English and other nations, in all places of the world, till the state of England alter the same, which we very much desire, we, being of the same nation, have therefore ordered that the captain of the Castle shall advance the aforesaid colors of England upon all necessary occasions.” Harrison p. 14, 15.

A Treatise On the Jurisdictional Significance of the American Ensign

Chapter 5#

The bridge between the secular and the Biblical, the Knights Templar and Lawyers#

“The Temple has close historical associations with the American Republic. Five of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were members of the Middle Temple: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Hayward, Thomas McKean, Thomas Lynch and Arthur Middleton. Besides these, George Rutledge, William Livingstone, John Dickinson of Pennsylvania and Arthur Lee of Virginia and Payton Randolph, President of the Continental Congress of Philadelphia, were all members of the Inn.

….It all began with the Knights Templars who in the days of their power and pride formed a highly privileged order. They governed within their territory according to their own laws without interference from any outside authority. When the lawyers took over the property they inherited or assumed the like privilege and independence, a position that they have stoutly and resolutely and successfully maintained until the present day.”

Rambles in Old London, George W. Jacobs and Company, pages 89-90

“The attack upon the order which became general on the Continent was not shared in England, but when the dissolution was pronounced by the Council of Bienna in 1312, the properties passed to the Knights Hospitallers. In London however that Order did not take full possession of the Temple when the Knights Templars were disbanded. The three parts of the properties lying contiguous to each other were called the Inner, the Middle and the Outer Temple, according to the relation of each to the City. The Knights Hospitallers were allowed to occupy the Inner, which included the more sacred parts. The Outer was granted by the King to the Bishop of Exeter and was eventually acquired by Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, and with Essex House became the seat of that illfated nobleman. There he surrendered to the officers of Elizabeth and thence he proceeded to his trial and execution. The properties continued in private hands and so the Outer extending from the Strand to the River along both sides of Essex street. Within a few years of their occupation of the Inner Temple the Knights Hospitallers were in possession of the Middle as well and we find them renting parts of the Inner to a certain company of lawyers, and the Middle to another company of lawyers, the rent paid in each instance being ten pounds annually. It was therefore early in the fourteenth century that the lawyers got their first footing in the temple and from the first they appear to have formed two distinct societies, on in the Inner Temple and the other in the Middle Temple.”

Rambles in Old London, George W. Jacobs and Company, pages 78-79

“The Temple has not been spared the calamities that have been visited upon London. One occurred during the peasants’ revolt in 1381 under Wat Tyler. The peasants who regarded the lawyers with special aversion, moved in a mob to the Temple with the avowed purpose of hanging its inhabitants. The lawyers having got wind of the plan, had business elsewhere on that day. The rebels however plundered the houses, some of which they destroyed, and made a bonfire of all books and records.

Till the dissolution, the Knights Hospitallers remained the owners of the Temple, receiving rents from the two societies of lawyers. That Order was dissolved by Henry VIII, who confiscated the property and allowed the lawyers to remain as tenants of the Crown at an annual rental of ten pounds a year for each of the two societies. It seems that Henry had a scheme for turning out the lawyers and converting the Temple into some use of his own devising, but it also seems that the lawyers were too smart even for Henry and managed somehow to retain the properties at the same rent that they had been paying for over two hundred years, the only difference being that the Crown became their landlord. In 1608 James the First made an effort to deprive the lawyers of the premises by effecting a sale. Again they scored, this time by presenting the King with a gold cup weighing two hundred ounces filled with gold pieces in exchange for a charter granting them the Temple FOREVER at the old annual rental of ten pounds a year for each Society. In 1673 however the two Societies together purchased these rents from Charles II and became the absolute owners forever, the one of the Inner Temple and the other of the Middle Temple.

Thus the Temple premises, the heritage of an ancient order of chivalry identified with the Crusades, became the permanent property of the lawyers who have been in continuous occupation since 1412, and whose present title is base on the rental of 10 pounds which each of the two societies paid at that time for its share as tenant. In no instance does the persistence of custom in the City of London show to better advantage, with deeper meaning or with greater honour than in this Temple of Law where students come from all over the British Empire to gain admission to the Bar….

Always there have been four Inns of Court: the Middle Temple, the Inner Temple, Lincoln’s Inn and Gray’s Inn, the last two lying outside the Temple precincts in Holborn….They are the only power in England that can admit to the Bar.”

Rambles in Old London, George W. Jacobs and Company, pages 80-82

“I know of no event that presaged the founding of the Empire overseas like the arrival of the Golden Hinde at London. It was the most colossal and most daring propaganda that ever encompassed the earth.

From that time on the Londoners developed and fostered the colonizing spirit and from the time that Englishmen got a foothold in America the plantations were nourished and powerfully supported by London merchants. Virginia was founded by the City of London and the City Companies together….Among the leaders in the New World were men learned in the law who had lived at the Inns of Court and sat with the Benchers in the Temple. Not the law alone but the customs, the traditions, the faiths of London penetrated the Thirteen Colonies.

….Whatever difference of opinion there might have been in the coloneies about the policies of the government there was none in London. Right or wrong these policies were opposed by Londoners from the beginning. The Lord Mayor and Aldermen, as spokesmen for the City, sent on remonstrance after another to the King on the throne till, incensed at their persistence, he informed their representative in Parliament that he would receive on the throne no more communications from the Lord Mayor. This was a denial of one of London’s ancient rights. The Lord Mayor promptly reminded him that London’s right of making representations to the King on the throne had never been challenged. The King acknowledged the right. The Lord Mayor and Aldermen continued to send their remonstranceds against the colonial policy of government. They were no perfunctory warnings that the City sent to the Throne.”

Rambles in Old London, George W. Jacobs and Company, pages 94-96

“….The Royal Palace and the seat of the Carmelite Brothers lay therefore between Ludgate and the Temple, and between Fleet Street and the Thames. Lying outside the wall but inside the City, they had Temple Bar as an outer protection. Temple Bar is al least as old as the Temple whence it derived the name by which it has been known to history.”

Rambles in Old London*, George W. Jacobs and Company, page 101

Chapter 6#

The Pope Exposed, and the Identity of Christ’s Church#

“We now approach a subject of great difficulty, namely, the story of the founding of the Church of Rome. The Church of Rome, we know, claims it to have been founded by St. Peter, and that he was him self for twenty five years its bishop. The whole subject has been so ably and convincingly discussed in Rev. Charles Elliott’s “The Delineation of Roman Catholicism” and other standard works that we shall not attempt to cover the same ground. Suffice it to say that his twenty five years’ episcopate is only a late tradition of the fourth century, and is totally at variance with the known Biblical facts as recorded in the Acts and Epistles. In the whole New Testament there is not a single statement that can be truly regarded as evidence that he was ever in Rome. Acts 15 and Gal. 2 prove conclusively that he could not possibly have been there at any rate before A.D. 50, although there may be reason to think that he visited the city later. He writes his Epistles from Babylon, and the whole circumstantial evidence seems against regarding this as a pseudonym for Rome. That he was ever Bishop of Rome is also directly contrary to the earliest historians, for both lrenaeus and Eusebius definitely tell us that the first bishop was Linus, the second Cletus or Anacletus, and the third Clement.

In A.D. 58 St. Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans, and implies he had not then visited the city (Rom. 15: 22). In A.D. 60 or 61 he comes as a prisoner to Rome. He then writes from Rome the Epistles to Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians, and Philippians. During his second imprisonment in A.D. 67 he wrote the second Epistle to Timothy. In not one of these six epistles is there any reference to Peter, nor any hint of his being in the city. Among the large number of Christians at Rome whom he enumerates by name it is unbelievable that he would have omitted the name of Peter had he been in Rome, or actively engaged in founding the Church there, or acting as its first bishop. If Peter was ever at Rome, as the Roman Catholics assert, it can only have been during the last years of Nero, when his martyrdom is said to have taken place in 68, at least thirty years after Christianity had become established there, and we admit he may have been there then. How, then, and when did Christianity reach Rome?”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 47-48

“Joseph of Admathaea, with his son Josephes, Lazarus, Martha, Mary, and others escaped to Caesarea, whence they sailed, landing near Marseilles. While some of the party remained as missionaries in Gaul, Joseph with eleven companions made their way through Gaul to Brittany, and from thence sailed across to Cornwall. From Cornwall they made their way to Avalon or Glastonbury, where under the patronage of the Loyal Duke of Cornwall they settled, and eventually erected the first Christian church that was ever built, of mud and wicker or wattles.”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 20

“The question of priority of churches was discussed in the four great general councils of the Church at Pisa (1409), Constance (1417), Bale (1434), and Sienna (1424), all of which, after sifting the evidence, gave precedence to the Church in Britain as having been the first to receive the faith, and that at the hands of Joseph of Arimathaea, “immediately after the passion of our Lord.” ‘Statim post passionem Christi’ It is difficult to reject such evidence as this.”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 21

“For the departure of these we have the direct evidence of the Acts of the Apostles, which states (8:1) that all except the apostles were scattered abroad. Details of their departure are given by several authorities. William of Malmesburv (circa, 1125) gives a long detailed account, and Archbishop Ussher (1639) collected records from all available sources of the time, and gives them at length in the second chapter of his " Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates.” He quotes early records of Freculpus, the Chronicle of Pseudo Dexter, and a fragment of Heleca. Cardinal Baronius in his Ecclesiastical Annals, which took him thirty years to compile, quotes a Vatican MS., “Ad Annum, 35,” telling the story of the departure of Joseph and his band.

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 22

Cressy, the Benedictine, monk and historian, tells us that Joseph. of Arimathaea died at Glastonbury on July 27, A.D. 82.

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 27

Under Roman law, even if someone were executed by the state, the body remained the property of the family, also under Jewish law it was the duty and responsibility of the family to dispose of a body, regardless of how he or she died.

“The wattle church as built by Joseph was 60ft. in length and 26ft. in breadth. The greatest efforts were made in after times to preserve it intact. We hear of it being encased in boards covered with lead, as if every bit of mud or wattle were sacred. Then we read of a stone church being built over it, the old church being thus permanently preserved intact inside. Then St. David, who died in A.D. 546, erected a large church, but carefully added this to the east end by way of a chancel, placing a column to mark for ever the limit of the ancient wattle church, which pillar was actually discovered in 1921 during excavations. The pillar had a brass tablet fixed upon it recording the whole story of the wattle church as built by Joseph of Arimathaea, and giving its exact dimensions.”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 36

“Even in Roman imperial times it was regarded as almost beyond reach, for it is on record that When the Roman commander Aulus Plautius assembled his army for the invasion of Britain his soldiers mutinied, saying they would follow him anywhere in the world, but not out of it.”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 11

“Therefore say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given unto a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (Matt. 21: 43).

“Among the many works that have been written on this subect special mention should be made of the recently scholarly work by Prof. Waddell of Oxford on “The Phoenician origin of the British Race” He finds evidence in the East of a race known as the ‘Brits’.”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 11 footnote

“In Julius Caesar’s time we find Britain a thickly populated country, so much so as to occasion him great surprise.” Hominum infinita multitudo " is his remark, and Diodorus Siculus also calls Britain a well-populated country. Just prior to Caesar’s invasion in 54 B.C. an army of 50,000 Britons, known as the “Silver Host” in the Welsh Triads, had gone to the help of the Gauls against the Romans. The various tribes of the Britons were in those times for the most part federated under one royal family, members of which were ruling in different parts of the country. During the Claudian invasion the king of the Britons was Guiderius, whose younger brother, Arviragus, was royal duke of Cornwall and Devon. His cousin, Caractacus, was king of Siluria, or Gwent, or South Wales, and the Queen of the Brigantes of Yorkshire was another branch of the family. This royal family were the ancestors of the Tudors, and, therefore, of our present Royal Family. In his defence before the Emperor in A.D. 51 Caractacus spoke proudly of his ancient royal race of illustrious kings. His royal pedigree is preserved in the Pantliwydd Manuscripts of Llansannor, and gives thirty five generations. Allowing thirty years for a generation, this pedigree carries us back to more than 1000 B.C. No race was ever more careful to preserve the records of its ancestry than the ancient Druids. We thus have, so far back as 1000 years before Christ, a country of pleasant climate, isolated from the mainland in such a way as to be secure from interference, and inhabited by a race of people ruled over by an unbroken royal line of kings.

This race was known as the Britons or Brits. Their land was known as Briton, and the Brits inhabiting it came to be called the British. It will be shown later that their faith, known as Druidism, bore remarkable resemblance to the old Mosaic Law, so much so as to suggest a common origin, and without discussing the many suggestions which historians have put forward to account for the name, it may be mentioned as a fact that one of the commonest words in the Hebrew language is " Brith,” which means a covenant, while " ish " is the ordinary word for man. If Prof, Waddell is right in tracing the origin of the British race to Phoenicia, then we have an explanation of the origin of the name.

We thus appear to have a carefully selected country inhabited by a race that bore the Hebrew name Covenant man race, ruled over by a royal family, which has reigned for nearly 3,000 years, and of which our King is the present representative. All this is exactly what we should expect, if Britain to day is the race our Lord referred to.”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 12-13

“In the middle of the eighth century we find the Eastern Empire in the process of complete collapse at the band of these Mohammedan or Saracen hordes. Italy was dominated by the bombards, and other parts of the Western Empire were equally threatened by the Saracens who had subdued Spain and crossed the Pyrenees into France. The Papacy was in grave danger of experiencing the same fate as that of the Eastern Church.

In this emergency there arose a usurper in France in the person of Charles Martel, in 132, who drove back the Saracens. His son Pepin realized he needed the support of the Pope to secure himself in the throne. He therefore marched across the Alps and defeated the Lombards, thus freeing Italy. He then entered Rome and laid the keys of the conquered towns at the feet of the Pope, thus publicly acknowledging the Pope as the bestower of crowns. He was crowned by the Pope. His son and more famous successor, Charlemagne, further extended his conquests and was created king of Rome by the Pope, a title granted subsequently to Emperors of the Holy Roman Empire. A few years later he finally found himself master of the whole ancient Empire of the West, and was publicly crowned as such by the Pope in Rome.

Thus was Imperial Rome resurrected but it was at the hands of the papal throne, which it recognized as supreme. Henceforth it existed at the discretion of the Pope, and to support and maintain his own dignity. The reconstructed empire was not as yet known as the Holy Roman Empire. It took form as such at a later date, when. the Pope found it necessary to reorganize the whole forces of Western Christendom to resist the encroachment of the Mohammedans. The Holy Roman Einpire may be regarded as having begun at the coronation by the Pope of Otto in Germany in 962.

It was now that to Germany was transferred the sovereignty of the West; and sit of her princes were constituted “Electors” of the future. The Holy Roman Empire, thus constituted to defend Christendom against Mohammedanism from the East, became the great instrument in the hands of the Popes to suppress the Reformation, a struggle which is said to have cost 16,000,000 lives and. hundreds of thousands of martyrdoms. The massacres, tortures, and the cruelties of the Inquisition have had no equal in the whole history of mankind. Even the pagan persecutions of the first three centuries are not to be compared to them.

The Holy Roman Empire was finally ended in 1509 by Napoleon Buonaparte. It is impossible adequately to describe the depths of depravity into which Christendom fell under the sovereign Popes of Rome. The Bible was a forbidden book, and actually unknown to some of the clergy. It is on no less an authority than Arnana that we read that an Archbishop of Mainz, lighting upon a Bible and looking into it expressed himself thus: " Of a truth I do not know what book this is, but I perceive everything in it is against us."* Worship was conducted in an unknown tongue. Individual Popes were known to have been guilty of the most heinous crimes known to hurnanity. Of 297 Popes, 24 were antipopes, 31 were declared usurpers and heretics, 64 died violent deaths. One Pope, for instance, Constantine by name, was deposed after a year, his eyes were put out, and he was confined in a Convent because he dared to oppose the worship of images; 13 were poisoned and 4 strangled; 26 were deposed, expelled and banished; 6 in spite of their vows had children. Such is the tale of the so-called Vicars of Christ who claimed to hold their offices as representatives of Christ at the hands of God Himself. At their doors must be placed the responsibility of endless wars and bloodshed which darkened more than a thousand years of the Christian era.

The light of truth was almost entirely lost; monasteries and nunneries were cesspools of vice; men were terrorized by the threats of the horrors of purgatory from which escape could only be obtained at the hands of the Pope and priesthood; agents of the Pope traversed Europe selling these indulgences for money with which to erect St. Peter’s at Rome.

But a new era was to dawn upon the world to dispel the darkness. If God had a Nation of Witness we may expect to see Him find in that nation His instrument. That instrument was found in the person of John Wycliffe, born in Yorkshire in A.D. 1324. In 1360 we find him master of Balliol, Oxford. England at this time was in the throes of one of its struggles against the papal aggression. One hundred years previously King John had attempted to rebel against papal usurpation. The country had been placed under an interdict and after two years’ suffering King John had completely surrendered, laying his crown at the feet of the papal legate who kicked it contemptuously before replacing it upon his head. John had further bound himself to pay 1,000 marks annually. The result of this shameful surrender had been Magna Charta in which England declared herself free. Notwithstanding this the 1,000 marks appear for some time to have been paid, and the country filled. with appointees of the Pope by which the nation was drained of its wealth. Every appointment had to be paid for.” Images, purgatory, riches, pilgrimages, indulgences, jubilees, canonizations, miracles, masses,” says the historian, Wylie, “were but taxes under another name.” Walter Greg, Archbishop of York, had to pay 10,000 (equal to 100,000 in modern money) for his pall, and every office had to be paid for proportionately. The feelings of resentment took expression in the Acts of Parliament, such as those of the Statutes of Provisors and Praemunire.

Pope Urban V, failing to read the signs of the times, suddenly demanded of Edward III the payment of ‘the 1,000 marks with 35 years of arrears which had been promised by King John, and summoned him to appear before him in Rome should he fail to do so. The demand was in effect for a new submission similar to that of King John. Parliament unhesitatingly refused the demand. Wycliffe was present on this occasion, and there is little doubt but that his teaching at Oxford had stimulated the spirit of resistance and his presence strengthened the decision, for he was at once singled out for the papal vindictiveness.

Wycliffe’s next great work was to attack the mendicant friars and the traffic in the sale of papal indulgencies. In this famous " Objects to Friars,” he enumerated " Fifty heresies and errors and many more if men will seek them well out.”

Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 96-99

Chapter 7#

The following quote also is from Britain’s Place In History, it’s just another piece of evidence that we are decedents of the House of Israel. Keep in mind, the House of Israel left Israel, because of worshiping other gods. So it is no surprise their decedents would be practicing a false religion combined with elements of the religion practiced by their ancestors.

The Preparing of the Nation#

ONE would expect to find the nation whom God intended to use ultimately as His instrument carefully prepared beforehand for its future service.

We have seen a “Covenant man " race planted in an apparently selected country at least a thousand years before Christ, i.e., before the Jew was to cease to be God’s instrument, when the new race would begin to function in its place. Was there anything; We ask, during this thousand years to suggest they were being prepared for the future?

We find this race to have been possessed of a remarkable religion, which we shall hope to show was a distinct preparation for the truth revealed in Jesus Christ. This religion bore the name of Druidism. The widespread influence which Druidism exerted in ancient times has been evidenced by a host of writers, and it is an undoubted fact that much of the subsequent Roman and Greek mythology was influenced by Druid ideas. In the times of which we speak Druidism was the great religion of the Western world, embracing Spain, Gaul, Rhenish frontiers, portions of Germany, and Scandinavia; but its headquarters and seats of learning were fixed in Britain, Caesar expressly tells us that Druidism originated in Britain, from whence it was carried over to Gaul and other parts, and many Gauls were wont to cross over to Britain to study it.

While Druidism exercised an influence over Greek and Roman cults it is equally certain that the latter in their turn in later times exerted a corruptive influence over primitive Druidism, but in parts outside Britain. For many reasons, mainly its inaccessibility and freedom from foreign invasion, Druidism in Britain preserved its primitive purity. The characteristics of Druidism have to a large extent been extracted from Roman writers, who in reality describe late corrupted Gaulish Druidism, and present a very incorrect impression compared to the ancient British and Welsh records, and Druidism has been incorrectly judged accordingly.

Druidism first and foremost proclaimed the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. In the time of St. Paul it had been established for over a thousand years, and the heroic struggle between Britain and Imperial Rome was in reality a clash between two great rival religious cults. No purer religion existed in ancient times, and a dispassionate examination of its teaching reveals it to have been a highly moral, elevating, and beneficent faith. Through it the laws governing the whole country were administered. The beauty and purity of the Druid faith is testified to as early as the sixth century B.C. by Hecataeus of Miletus, who speaks of a people living in the Hyperborean islands, who worshipped their God (not gods) in a beautiful temple, and whose minstrels hymned with their golden harps the praise of Him they adored and whose priesthood was a regular descent from father to son. Festus Avienus, who quotes from the writings of Himilco, of the third century B.C., says that in these Hyperborean lands dwell the hardy race of the Britons, who, from their two islands, send out their boats for commerce, ploughing the sea crested waves. Sir Edward Creasy in his “History of England” (page 18) speaks of the ancient commerce between Britain, and Tyre, and Sidon, and states that the tin mines of Cornwall supplied beautiful adornment for Solomon’s Temple. The order of Druids was recruited only from the nobility of the land, and was practically a royal priesthood. Every candidate for admission had to find twelve heads [my note: notice the twelve heads, the same number of the tribes in of Israel] of families as surety for his moral character and adequate maintenance. It was only after three years’ study and successful examination at one of the Druid Universities that he was admitted to the order. The Rev. R. W. Morgan in his “St. Paul in Britain” states, although he does not give his authority, " there were in Britain, south of the Clyde and Forth, forty Druid Universities, which were the capitals of the forty tribes, and originals of our modern counties, which preserve for the most part their ancient tribal limits.” Of these he gives a list of those still surviving, which include Caer Llyndain (London), Caer Evroc (York), Caerlleon (Caerleon), Caer Caint (Canterbury), Caer Wyn (Wincliester), etc. The students at these Universities, he states, at times numbered 60,000, and branches of study included philosophy, astronomy, arithmetic, geometry, jurisprudence, medicine, poetry, and oratory. The Druid order centralized and radiated the whole civil and ecclesiastical knowledge of the realm.

The Druids were its statesmen, legislators, priests, physicians, lawyers, teachers, poets. They constituted the country’s courts of justice, colleges of physicians., magistrates, and clergy. Its membership was carefully guarded, and none could gain admission unless he could trace back his descent from nine successive generations of forefathers.

It is, however, with its tenets rather than with its organization that we are concerned, for here we find in Druidism an unmistakable reflection of the old Mosaic Law, which, as mentioned above, certainly suggests a common origin, and was certainly a remarkable preparation for the Christian faith to which it subsequently voluntarily surrendered.

We find Druidism, like Judaism, controlled by two orders corresponding to prophets and priests. The Bards were its prophets, and the Druids its priests. Its theology was set forth in the so called Triads, which were all composed in triplets, and were committed to memory. The Triad was probably adopted to harmonize with their belief in the Trinity. An examination of these Triads reveals a constant reminiscence of the teaching of the Mosaic Law, and among them we have an almost exact reproduction of the Ten Commandments."

The Druid belief was centered in a Supreme Being, and a life to come. His Supreme Being was a Trinity a Creator as to the past, Beli; a God of Providence as to the present, Taran; and a Saviour or Re Creator as to the future, whom, strange to record, he actually knew of prophetically by the name “Yesu” or “Hesus.” It is almost certainly this latter fact which ultimately led to the voluntary acceptance of Christianity, for the Druid came to recognize in Christ the “Yesu” their fathers had taught them to expect. The mistletoe was the sacred plant of the Druid as illustrating his belief in the Trinity, the parent oak being the Godhead, and the three pure white berries representing the Three Persons of the Trinity. It was known as the “all heal,” and was more especially associated with the Third Person of the Trinity.

The Druid foreshadowed the Atonement, as may be gathered from Caesar’s words: " The Druids teach that by no other way than the ransoming of man’s life by the life of man is reconciliation with the divine justice of immortal gods possible " (Comment, Lib. V). Its similarity to the Mosaic ritual was most marked. The Arch-Druid’s robes were the counterpart of those of the Mosaic high-priest. In a barrow near Stonehenge the remains of a Druid were found completely clothed in his official robes. The Arch-Druid " was clothed in a stole of virgin-white, over a closer robe of the same, fastened by a girdle on which appeared the crystal of augury, cased in gold. Round his neck was the breastplate of judgment; below the breastplate was suspended the Glain-Neidr, or serpent’s jewel. On his head he had a tiara, of gold: on each of two fingers of his right hand he wore a ring; one plain, and the other the chain ring of divination " (Nash, “Taliesin Bards and Druids of Britain,” p. 15).

We find the same similarity with the Mosaic Law in the sacrificial rites, and the observances of seasons and festivals. In the sacrifices especially is this similarity to be seen. The victim, a bullock, a sheep, or a goat, carefully selected without blemish, was solemnly led into the Druid “Temple” of stones unhewn by any iron instrument (no sound of hammer was heard by divine command in the erection of Solomon’s Temple) such as Stonehenge or Avebury, by a white-robed priest. Here the priest would lay his hand upon its head and solemnly confess the sins of the people, thus placing them as it were upon the head of the victim. The victim was then offered in sacrifice. The stone in the centre of the Druid circles was known as “the stone of the Covenant.”

We have given sufficient information about Druidism to indicate its character. By its belief in a Trinity, and a Saviour to come named Yesu or Hesus, by its belief in the Atonement, and its sacrificial rites and ceremonies, we may see in it the clearest preparations for the coming of the truth of Christ. We do not desire to probe into the difficult question as to how the ancient Britons obtained this faith. Its similarity to the Mosaic Law is too apparent to be seriously questioned. The Mosaic Law was a " Schoolmaster to bring men to Christ," and Druidism was a schoolmaster to bring the ancient Briton to Christ.

One thing is particularly noteworthy. Writers who have spoken of Druidism as idolatry and Beli, Taran and Hesus as the gods of the Druids, have no evidence for such statements. Idolatry never defiled British soil. No idol remains are anywhere to be found. It was not until the Romans invaded the land that idolatry ever found place: here, and the “Pudens stone” at Chichester informs us that a Temple to Neptune and Minerva was erected there on a site given by Pudens. This, however, was only for Roman worship. God not only planted the true faith in these land’s, in prepreation of the Gospel, but guarded the inhabitants from idolatrous worship, and when at length Christianity arrived, the first missionaries found the soil well prepared for the new seed.

Popular descriptions of Druidism not only seek to degrade it into a polytheistic form of idolatry, but declare that human sacrifices were practised. Such accounts are almost entirely taken from Julius Caesar’s description of Druidism. He declares that prisoners of war, criminals, and even innocent persons were immolated, sometimes large wicker cages being used, in which the victims were burnt alive. Caesar expressly tells us that he is describing Gaulissh Druidism, and at a period when it had come under the influence of Roman cults. We do not find evidence of such human sacrifices in British sources of information, and we much doubt whether such human sacrifices were ever practised in Britain. All information, as far as we know, leads us to infer the contrary. It is further noteworthy that Caesar omits all reference to some of the essentially British Druid customs, such as the veneration paid to the oak, and the ceremonial cutting of the mistletoe so fully, described by Pliny. From this fact it is even questionable whether he is describing a form of Druidism at all as practised by this Gaulish tribe. He assumes it to be Druidism, and as he tells us that all Druidism originated in Britain, he further assumes that all British Druidism must be similar. Even were it the case that human sacrifices were practised in Britain, it is more than probable that it would be a late development and departure from the primitive purity of this religion. Again, it would in no sense affect our argument that Druidism was a schoolmaster to bring Britain to Christ. The Israelites under the Mosaic Law frequently lapsed into idolatrous practices, including even human sacrifices, but such never formed part of the Mosaic ritual, and in no way affected the Mosaic Law as a schoolmaster to bring Israel to Christ. Druidism was thus an ancient pure religion, practised in Britain for certainly a thousand years before Christ, closely allied to the Mosaic Law, having its prophets and priests, known as Bards and Druids, emphasizing as the Triads show a firm belief in the Trinity, the Third Person of which under the name of Jesus was a Saviour to come, who would be the " All healer." It had three main centres, Caer Evroc (York), Caer Troia or Caer Lud (Ludgate Hill, London),and Caer Leon(St. Davids). From these centres it sent forth its missionaries far and wide, establishing seats at such places as “Troy and Crete, and even in Italy we find a Druid school founded by Pythagoras, himself a celebrated Druid. Its belief in a coming Saviour under the name of Hesus undoubtedly led to its favourable reception of the Christians, who brought their wonderful story of a risen Jesus, and ultimately to its wholesale acceptance of the Christian faith as the fulfilment of its own traditions. Britain’s Place In History, 1936, pg. 13-19

Chapter 8#

For those unaware of Sonnini Manuscript, I include it because of the relevance, the fact that it is declared to be the lost last chapter of Acts, written by Paul. Scholars disagree as to its authenticity.

Copy of the Sonnini Manuscript#

Verse 1.#

And Paul, full of the blessings of Christ, and abounding in the spirit, departed out of Rome, determining to go into Spain, for he had a long time proposed to journey thitherward, and was minded also to go from thence to Britain.

Verse 2.#

For he had heard in Phoenicia that certain of the children of Israel, about the time of the Assyrian captivity, had escaped by sea to “The Isles afar off” as spoken by the Prophet [Esdra], and called by the Romans - Britain.

Verse 3.#

And the Lord commanded the gospel to be preached far hence to the Gentiles [nations], and to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Verse 4.#

And no man hindered Paul; for he testified boldly of Jesus before the tribunes and among the people; and he took with him certain of the brethren which abode with him at Rome, and they took shipping at Ostrium and having the winds fair, were brought safely into a haven of Spain.

Verse 5.#

And much people were gathered together from the towns and villages, and the hill country; for they had heard of the conversion of the Apostles, and the many miracles which he had wrought.

Verse 6.#

And Paul preached mightily in Spain, and great multitudes believed and were converted, for they perceived he was an apostle sent from God.

Verse 7.#

And they departed out of Spain, and Paul and his company finding a ship in Armorica sailing unto Britain, they were therein, and passing along the South Coast, they reached a port called Raphinus.

Verse 8.#

Now when it was voiced abroad that the Apostle had landed on their coast, great multitudes of the inhabitants met him, and they treated Paul courteously and he entered in at the east gate of their city, and lodged in the house of an Hebrew and one of his own nation.

Verse 9.#

And on the morrow he came and stood upon. Mount Lud and the people thronged at the gate, and assembled in the Broadway, and he preached Christ unto them, and they believed the Word and the testimony of Jesus.

Verse 10.#

And at even the Holy Ghost fell upon Paul, and he prophesied, saying, Behold in the last days the God of Peace shall dwell in the cities, and the inhabitants thereof shall be numbered: and in the seventh numbering of the people, their eyes shall be opened, and the glory inheritance of their shine forth before them. The nations shall come up to worship on the mount that testifieth of the patience and long suffering of a servant of the Lord.

Verse 11.#

And in the latter days new tidings of the Gospel shall issue forth out of Jerusalem, and the hearts of the people shall rejoice, and behold, fountains shall be opened, and there shall be no more plague.

Verse 12.#

In those days there shall be wars and rumours of war; and a king shall rise up, and his sword, shall be for the healing of the nations, and his peacemaking shall abide, and the glory of his kingdom a wonder among princes.

Verse 13.#

And it came to pass that certain of the Druids came unto Paul privately, and showed by their rites and ceremonies they were descended from the Jews [Judahites] which escaped from bondage in, the land of Egypt, and the Apostle believed these things, and he gave them the kiss of peace.

Verse 14.#

And Paul abode in his lodgings three months confirming in the faith and preaching Christ Continually.

Verse 15.#

And after these things Paul and his brethren departed from Raphinus and sailed unto Atium in Gaul.

Verse 16.#

Arid Paul preached in the Roman garrison and among the people, exhorting all Men to repent and confess their sins.

Verse 17.#

And there came to him certain of the Belgae to enquire of him of the new doctrine, and of the man. Jesus; and Paul opened his heart unto them and told them all things that had befallen him, howbeit, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; and they departed pondering among themselves upon the things which they had heard.

Verse 18.#

And after much preaching and toil, Paul and his fellow labourers passed into Helvetia, and came to Mount Pontius Pilate, where he who condemned the Lord Jesus dashed himself down headlong, and so miserably perished.

Verse 19.#

And immediately a torrent gushed out of the mountain and washed his body, broken in pieces, into a lake.

Verse 20.#

And Paul stretched forth his hands upon. the water, and prayed unto the Lord, saying 0 Lord God, give a sign unto all nations that here Pontius Pilate which condemned thine only-begotten Son, plunged down headlong into the pit.

Verse 21.#

And while Paul was yet speaking, behold, there came a great earthquake, and the face of the waters was changed, and the form of the lake like unto the Son of Man hanging in an agony upon the Cross.

Verse 22.#

And a voice came out of heaven saying, Even Pilate hath escaped the wrath to come for He washed His hands before the multitude at the blood-shedding of the Lord Jesus.

Verse 23.#

When, therefore, Paul and those that were with him, saw the earthquake, and heard the voice of the angel, they glorified God, and were mightily strengthened in the spirit.

Verse 24.#

And they journeyed and came to Mount Julius where stood two pillars, one on the right hand and one on the left hand, erected by Caesar Augustus.

Verse 25.#

And Paul, filled with the Holy Ghost, stood up between the two pillars, saying, Men and brethren these stones which ye see this day shall testify of my journey hence; and verily I say, they shall remain until the outpouring of the spirit upon all nations, neither shall the way be hindered throughout all generations.

Verse 26.#

And they went forth and came unto Illtricum., intending to go by Macedonia into Asia, and grace was found in all the churches, and they prospered and had peace. Amen!

Chapter 9#

This is the Scottish declaration of independence, in the second paragraph they allude to their descending from Israel. However, they had also been coned “brainwashed” by the Pope. Keep in mind this was also made possible by the Bible being withheld from the Christians, by the Catholic Church, the Pope declaring all scripture had to come by and through the Pope.

The Declaration of Arbroath 1320 (English Translation)#

To the most Holy Father and Lord in Christ, the Lord John, by divine providence Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman and Universal Church, his humble and devout sons Duncan, Earl of Fife, Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray, Lord of Man and of Annandale, Patrick Dunbar, Earl of March, Malise, Earl of Strathearn, Malcolm, Earl of Lennox, William, Earl of Ross, Magnus, Earl of Caithness and Orkney, and William, Earl of Sutherland; Walter, Steward of Scotland, William Soules, Butler of Scotland, James, Lord of Douglas, Roger Mowbray, David, Lord of Brechin, David Graham, Ingram Umfraville, John Menteith, guardian of the earldom of Menteith, Alexander Fraser, Gilbert Hay, Constable of Scotland, Robert Keith, Marischal of Scotland, Henry St Clair, John Graham, David Lindsay, William Oliphant, Patrick Graham, John Fenton, William Abernethy, David Wemyss, William Mushet, Fergus of Ardrossan, Eustace Maxwell, William Ramsay, William Mowat, Alan Murray, Donald Campbell, John Cameron, Reginald Cheyne, Alexander Seton, Andrew Leslie, and Alexander Straiton, and the other barons and freeholders and the whole community of the realm of Scotland send all manner of filial reverence, with devout kisses of his blessed feet.

Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner. The high qualities and deserts of these people, were they not otherwise manifest, gain glory enough from this: that the King of kings and Lord of lords, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His Passion and Resurrection, called them, even though settled in the uttermost parts of the earth, almost the first to His most holy faith. Nor would He have them confirmed in that faith by merely anyone but by the first of His Apostles by calling, though second or third in rank the most gentle Saint Andrew, the Blessed Peter’s brother, and desired him to keep them under his protection as their patron forever.

The Most Holy Fathers your predecessors gave careful heed to these things and bestowed many favours and numerous privileges on this same kingdom and people, as being the special charge of the Blessed Peter’s brother. Thus our nation under their protection did indeed live in freedom and peace up to the time when that mighty prince the King of the English, Edward, the father of the one who reigns today, when our kingdom had no head and our people harboured no malice or treachery and were then unused to wars or invasions, came in the guise of a friend and ally to harass them as an enemy. The deeds of cruelty, massacre, violence, pillage, arson, imprisoning prelates, burning down monasteries, robbing and killing monks and nuns, and yet other outrages without number which he committed against our people, sparing neither age nor sex, religion nor rank, no one could describe nor fully imagine unless he had seen them with his own eyes.

But from these countless evils we have been set free, by the help of Him Who though He afflicts yet heals and restores, by our most tireless Prince, King and Lord, the Lord Robert. He, that his people and his heritage might be delivered out of the hands of our enemies, met toil and fatigue, hunger and peril, like another Macabaeus or Joshua and bore them cheerfully. Him, too, divine providence, his right of succession according to or laws and customs which we shall maintain to the death, and the due consent and assent of us all have made our Prince and King. To him, as to the man by whom salvation has been wrought unto our people, we are bound both by law and by his merits that our freedom may be still maintained, and by him, come what may, we mean to stand. Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself. Therefore it is, Reverend Father and Lord, that we beseech your Holiness with our most earnest prayers and suppliant hearts, inasmuch as you will in your sincerity and goodness consider all this, that, since with Him Whose vice-gerent on earth you are there is neither weighing nor distinction of Jew and Greek, Scotsman or Englishman, you will look with the eyes of a father on the troubles and privation brought by the English upon us and upon the Church of God. May it please you to admonish and exhort the King of the English, who ought to be satisfied with what belongs to him since England used once to be enough for seven kings or more, to leave us Scots in peace, who live in this poor little Scotland, beyond which there is no dwelling-place at all, and covet nothing but our own. We are sincerely willing to do anything for him, having regard to our condition, that we can, to win peace for ourselves. This truly concerns you, Holy Father, since you see the savagery of the heathen raging against the Christians, as the sins of Christians have indeed deserved, and the frontiers of Christendom being pressed inward every day; and how much it will tarnish your Holiness’s memory if (which God forbid) the Church suffers eclipse or scandal in any branch of it during your time, you must perceive. Then rouse the Christian princes who for false reasons pretend that they cannot go to help of the Holy Land because of wars they have on hand with their neighbours. The real reason that prevents them is that in making war on their smaller neighbours they find quicker profit and weaker resistance. But how cheerfully our Lord the King and we too would go there if the King of the English would leave us in peace, He from Whom nothing is hidden well knows; and we profess and declare it to you as the Vicar of Christ and to all Christendom. But if your Holiness puts too much faith in the tales the English tell and will not give sincere belief to all this, nor refrain from favouring them to our prejudice, then the slaughter of bodies, the perdition of souls, and all the other misfortunes that will follow, inflicted by them on us and by us on them, will, we believe, be surely laid by the Most High to your charge.

To conclude, we are and shall ever be, as far as duty calls us, ready to do your will in all things, as obedient sons to you as His Vicar; and to Him as the Supreme King and Judge we commit the maintenance of our cause, casting our cares upon Him and firmly trusting that He will inspire us with courage and bring our enemies to nought. May the Most High preserve you to his Holy Church in holiness and health and grant you length of days. Given at the monastery of Arbroath in Scotland on the sixth day of the month of April in the year of grace thirteen hundred and twenty and the fifteenth year of the reign of our King aforesaid. Endorsed: Letter directed to our Lord the Supreme Pontiff by the community of Scotland.

Chapter 10#

The Lost House of Israel#

Below are the scripture that inform us of the separation of the twelve tribes. After the below quote are many verses regarding the House of Israel. This is only a small number of verses concerning the House of Israel. The Old Testament is predominantly about the separation and judgement, then regathering, of Israel. The reason I include this is because the tribes Ephraim and Mannaseh dominate through prophesy most of World history. By hind sight, through history and historical record we see Jesus Christ Word proven yet again, by the decedents of the House of Israel, the Nations of Britain and America.

The Separation of Israel#

1 Kings 11:30-36#

{30} And Ahijah caught the new garment that was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces:

{31} And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee:

{32} But he shall have one tribe for my servant David’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel:

{33} Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in mine eyes, and to keep my statutes and my judgments, as did David his father.

{34} Howbeit I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand: but I will make him prince all the days of his life for David my servant’s sake, whom I chose, because he kept my commandments and my statutes:

{35} But I will take the kingdom out of his son’s hand, and will give it unto thee, even ten tribes.

{36} And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there.

1 Kings 12:20-21#

{20} And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.

{21} And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, he assembled all the house of Judah, with the tribe of Benjamin, an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against the house of Israel, to bring the kingdom again to Rehoboam the son of Solomon.

Jeremiah 3:8
Amos 9:8-9
THE RE-JOINING OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND JUDIA AND BENJERMIN
Ezekiel 37:16-22
THE VINEYARD AND THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL ARE ONE
Isaiah 5:7
Matthew 20:1-8
THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND THE ROD OF IRON
Jeremiah 10:16
Jeremiah 51:19-20
Psalms 2:8-9
Revelation 2:27
Revelation 12:5
Revelation 19:15
GOD ALMIGHTY’S JUDGEMENT OF THE SHEPERDS OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL
Ezekiel 13:1-9
Ezekiel 33:1-7
Isaiah 56:10-11
Ezekiel 34:1-30
THE TRUTH ABOUT WHO WILL RULE AND SERVE DURING JESUS CHRIST’S KINGDOM
Revelation 20:4-15
THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL IN THE LATER DAYS
Jeremiah 3
Jeremiah 4
Jeremiah 5