Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Templar
    Post count: 130
    • 48
    #1506 |

    Here is a very interesting Templar Discussion, re-posted here to preserve some Modern Templar views after a website crash almost erased it before. This is the comments section originally posted from this site:
    These views are the opinions of the authors of these posts. The OSMTJ and this website does not necessarily endorse any opinions posted below and we can not confirm their historical accuracy. We simply present them for you to judge.

    A bit of background, in 1961, when Fernando de Sousa Fontes was the Regent (Caretaker) of the OSMTH Order of Knights Templar, he appointed Anton Leuprecht of Switzerland to the office of, “Chef Mondial of the Order” (Knight Templar World Leader) to organize the autonomous Priories like the one in the United States. This was not meant to be a position above Fontes’s own position as “Regent.” Fontes was Catholic and he was having difficulties keeping Protestants from leaving. So to pacify the Protestants and to organize the autonomous priories, he created this position under him called the “Chef Mondial” and awarded it to Protestant Anton Leuprecht. Much of the below discussion centers around who is the “Chef Mondial” today.

    Gordon MacGregor said: July 1, 2008 at 12:24 pm
    I am very interested in many aspects of the above chronology especially those parts touching upon the office of Chef Mondial and the autonomous Grand Priories.

    In the charter of “re-establishment” of the autonomous Grand Priory of Scotland it states that Anton Leuprecht had been confirmed in the office of Chef Mondial on 16th March, 1965, by the Prince Regent in “Oporto,” therefore, the Prince Regent “in Oporto” in question was then, and continues to be Fernando Fontes. That Leuprecht included such a clause within a document he himself executed is a clear admission of whom he held this particular office of and with whom the jurisdiction resided. I have viewed and have copies of other documents from the 1970s and 80s (when the office was held by Francis Sherry, Grand Prior of Scotland) which reiterate this.

    This brings up various questions, when and why (if at all) did Fontes cease to have jurisdiction over the office of Chef Mondial? and, how could Leuprecht have any right to “nominate” a successor given that he himself confirmed that his office was held under the Prince Regent “in Oporto”? The best he could do would be to “recommend” a successor to his superior.

    Without wishing to appear contentious, trying to get a straight dialogue with someone keen to stick to the facts as opposed to continually taking the convenient tangents of myths and heresay is proving difficult. I am keen to hear from anyone who has something credible, as well as proveable, to say.

    By the way, your date of 1971 for the re-establishment of the Grand Priory of Scotland is incorrect, the original charter states 1st January, 1972.

    Miguel Garcia said: August 20, 2008 at 7:45 pm
    Lets not forget the important historical event of the creation of the amazing Templar headquarters Castle in Tomar, Portugal, in 1160, that created a new geo-strategic approach against the moorish invasions, because of Tomar’s centered location in the middle of Portugal.

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: February 27, 2009 at 11:07 am
    This is to update my last post on this site on 1st July, 08, concerning the office of Chef Mondial.

    With a few of the senior officers of the Grand Priory of Scotland now returning to the fold, several have brought with them papers entrusted to them in strict privacy by the late Grand Prior of Scotland, Chef Mondial and 1st President of the IFA, Francis Sherry, which are now in our safe-keeping. I have read these papers extensively and they contain many by Anton Leuprecht dating back to 1961. Leuprecht’s original promulgation and bequeathal (i.e. hi Will) of the office of Chef Mondial to Francis Sherry in 1981 are also within our archive and with regard to these, let me say this – contrary to claims by some here in Scotland, this document does not state that this office was “Willed in perpetuity to the Grand Priory of Scotland,” infact it does not mention anything concerning it’s future destination at all, therefore, all claims to that particular office based upon this assumption are wrong.

    Please also note the following amendments and additions to the timeline given above:

    The autonomous Grand Priory of England was established in 1961.

    The Preceptory of Scotland was established in early 1972 (we have the original document in our possession).

    The Preceptory of Scotland was raised to an autonomous Grand Priory of Scotland in late 1972 (we also have this document in our archive).

    The autonomous Grand Priory of Australia was established in 1977, (we have a signed and sealed copy of this document in our archive as well as correspondence between Anton Leuprecht and Francis Sherry with regard to its formation. We also have the correspondence between the first Grand Prior of Australia, Ted Rigby, and Francis Sherry in which they discuss it’s formation).

    Although we will not reproduce any of these historical documents, anyone, whether you are a member of our Grand Priory of not, may view them by appointment. Please contact me for further details.

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: March 20, 2009 at 7:32 pm
    Notwithstanding the personal comments against me which, as a matter of record and for anyone who can be bothered enough to care a jot, have been explained and re-explained to Mr Russell and his associates on far too many occasions but which he and they have conveniently chosen to ignore for the sake of carrying on their mischief, I wonder if we can bring this Forum back to its proper and more dignified intended use which is to discuss matters relating specifically to the Knights Templar.

    I come back to my earlier point concerning present day claims to the office of Chef Mondial and ask Mr Russell who now styles himself as both “Chef Mondial” and “Grand Prior General” to clarify and produce the evidence to support the basis of his claim given that the original Promulgations of this office from Anton Leuprecht to Francis Sherry have been located and do not contain the “willed in perpetuity to the Grand Priory of Scotland” clause some, Mr Russell included, have based their right of succession upon?

    I am sure all interested parties look forward to a cogent and reasoned response.

    H.S.E.Chev Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ said: March 20, 2009 at 11:39 pm
    Having been elected as Chef Mondial and Grand Prior of the SKT-SMOTJ i hold a more just position than either Mr Fontes or his Father ever held within any Templar organisation. This being the person that mr comrie now wishes to be subordinate to in his OSMTH Order.

    As Mr Comrie has stated on his own websites he confirmed as did so many for many years that James P McGrath was elected as the rightful successor to H.S.E Frank Sherry as Chef Mondial of the SMOTJ.

    That having been said i do not condone the comments made by mr Ross about mr comrie and confirm that these comments (…) [moderated – cut out] (…) are not for this webpage or should really be raised again in the future. I do state for the record however that i am not interested in Mr Comries “Version of the truth” or the comments made by mr ross.

    Our members of the SMOTJ who outdate any of the CMOTJ Fraction and the re-establishment of the SMOTJ and were only ever associate members of the Fontes Order in Scotland have confirmed my position as Chef Mondial.

    Mr Comrie without predjudice from myself is free to be a member of the Order (…) [moderated – cut out] (…) without malice from my organisation.

    I will now make no further comment on this issue, but state that edited versions of written word do not determine the truth nor do they warrant adjusting history to determine the suitable end for individuals. The Templar world has suffered far too long at the hands of individuals “on the make” (…) [moderated – cut out] (…).

    i will now make no further comment on any of these issues, i swore an oath to protect this Order and as i once stated to Mr Comrie “I have been enlightened” to which Mr Comrie never took heed (…) [moderated – cut out] (…). The templar world is far greater than any individual and those who know the truth will understand why i now will remain silent until such times as i must once again protect this Order.

    [Comment from Editor: Let us hope you do…]

    NOte: this comment was edited

    Luis Matos responded: March 21, 2009 at 3:46 pm
    I would like to remind Mr. Ross and Chev. Russell that these pages are not to be used to accuse anyone (Templar or no Templar) of anything that could (or rather should) be prosecuted in court. Any allegations against anyone whom allegedly have a less than lawful conduct have to be brought to the proper authorities with supported evidence and never – I repeat: NEVER – waved in the air as innuendo or unsupported personal opinion by using media that I – or my branch of the Order – run.

    I hope that is clear.

    And I hope that you understand that your conduct on this matter is judge by our readers as rigorously as you hopped your unsubstantiated accusations were.

    Now, if you look carefully, there is nothing that ties the OSMTHU to Fr. Gordon MacGregor. Our branch does not have a Priory in Scotland and we must be one of the tiniest, less intrusive branches around at the moment. We are in the process of electing a new Master and Magisterial Council for the next five years, so your squabbles with anyone you pick to squabble with are not of our immediate concern.

    However, the historical theme of the succession after Fr. Luprecht is very interesting to anyone involved with the Order these days. The research being conducted by Fr. Gordon (and others) is quite important and should be encouraged, since it is supported by actual DOCUMENTS instead of the usual unsupported claims we are so tired of seeing. And in that regard the Templar Globe and I personally will support that research as we will support any other made with the same sense of truth and search for documented evidence.

    So, unless you have documents that the Globe can print to substantiate future claims, I would appreciate that your group – or any other for that matter – that has any axe to grind with anyone else inside or outside the Order, should create their own Blog with over half a million visitors as their soap box to climb on. In the meantime let us do our quite and humble work on these pages and keep showing our LOVE for the Order of the Temple by publishing our posts and helping honest researchers to get access to whatever small part of the Templar history we may hold.

    Luis de Matos
    Interin Master

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: March 21, 2009 at 6:13 pm
    Mr Russell,

    You say: “edited versions of written word do not determine the truth nor do they warrant adjusting history to determine the suitable end for individuals. The Templar world has suffered far too long at the hands of individuals “on the make” and I more than wholeheartedly agree, therefore, in the interests of making some positive inroads towards establishing the truth let us be transparent and open ;

    According to you the CMOTJ was a faction of the SMOTJ Grand Priory of Scotland. It is my considered opinion that this is incorrect. I say this on account of having viewed significant amounts of original paperwork as well as heard personal testimony of many then involved which clearly demonstrates that the incontravertible facts are thus: after several years of discussion the SMOTJ Grand Priory of Scotland altered its name to the CMOTJ (Chivalric Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem) in 1989. At the point in time when this occured all members of the Grand Priory of Scotland including Francis Sherry as Grand Prior remained exactly as they were, not one member was reshuffled in rank or office, and not one member of the Chivalry voiced any concerns or dissented and left. A faction is a division from a main body, but in this case there was absolutely no division instead the entire main body remained intact with the only alteration being in the name from “Sovereign” to “Chivalric,” everything else including the membership remained exactly as it was. In respect of this, I ask that you clarify what you mean by the CMOTJ being a “faction”?

    You do not dispute that Francis Sherry held the office of Chef Mondial by virtue of written and valid transmission to him by Anton Leuprecht. In confirming Leuprecht’s right to convey this office to a successor then you cannot deny these same rights to Francis Sherry to convey this same office to his own chosen successor, whoever that may be, and regardless of whether that individual may have been the popular choice among the rest of the Chivalry or not. In this regard it is a fact that Francis Sherry transfered his offices of Chef Mondial and Grand Prior of Scotland to Kenneth Shirra by legal instrument in 1993 and that Kenneth Shirra has yet to demit either of these offices. This transferal was publicly proclaimed by Francis Sherry at an annual formal social gathering of the Grand Priory as well as in Grand Priory literature sent out to all members and this was universally acknowledged. Not only that but it was well known internationally.

    In the case of James McGrath, however, he based his presumption to the office of Chef Mondial upon the belief that Anton Leuprecht “willed it to Grand Priory of Scotland in perpetuity” but the legal Promulgations from Leuprecht to Sherry do not stipulate any such entail or provision and so this invalidates Mr McGrath’s claim, as does the fact that at the time of Mr McGrath making his claim, Kenneth Shirra had been the incumbent of the office of Chef Mondial for over two years. On both these counts, Mr Russell, the truth is that Mr McGrath, your immediate predecessor in office’s presumptions of succession are, thereby, rendered null and void as are yours for these very same reasons, irrespective of how many people may or may not have voted for you or of how long-standing their membership of the SMOTJ may or may not be; in plain and simple terms the office just was not open to succession. You will note I do not allude to any right the Prince Regent may have over succession which, incidentaly, is established in his 1961 agreement and 1965 confirmation in office in favour of Leuprecht. That, however, is an interesting point which can be discussed seperately should anyone wish. The evidence cited in this particular paragraph can be produced if requested. Can I ask you on your part to clarify in what way Mr McGrath was able to competently succeed Kenneth Shirra in this office because, as the paperwork currently rests, Kenneth Shirra remains Chef Mondial whether he wishes to partake in wider Order business or not, as the case may be.

    The benefit of being receptive and willing to accept new evidence and reliable testimony is that when presented it allows you the opportunity to amend and alter your impressions and understanding of events and to more solidly cast those proven facts even more deeply in stone. You are correct, based upon the limited evidence then at hand, I did consider James McGrath to have been Francis Sherry’s successor; for one thing I accepted in good faith a number of statements made by Mr McGrath including that Kenneth Shirra had resigned completely from office which later upon closer inquiry transpired to be incorrect. As matters progressed I became increasingly unsettled and concerned at the heavily contradictory evidence being supplied by Mr McGrath to the point at which I had little option but to discount it for being too unreliable. This is not a subjective personal opinion but is as a consequence of the evidence supplied to me by Mr McGrath, himself, which, again, can be viewed by interested parties.

    Since then I have searched out facts from a number of sources and have amassed a considerable amount of information which gives a valuable insight into the recent history of the Knights Templar here in Scotland and their relations with international bodies. When further information came to hand, I informed Mr McGrath that I ceased to consider him to be the legal successor to Francis Sherry, I amend that to the following: I believe Mr McGrath to have been legal successor to Francis Sherry only so far as his being recognised as Grand Prior of Scotland by Fernando Fontes was concerned, not in any other way, but this recognition was withdrawn by Fontes some time ago. With all this in mind, as well as recent changes, I am currently amending and updating our literature to reflect these many new findings.

    Mr Russell, in summary, my only concern is in establishing the truth of these matters so that the facts only can once and for all be separated from the hearsay and myth thus allowing all of us in the wider Templar community to move forward on a more solid footing; and as the facts currently stand, original evidence showing the transmission of the office of Chef Mondial up to the present day is extant but this does not confirm your own claim or that of your immediate predecessor Mr McGrath; in point of fact it declares them to be without substance. Believe me when I say that I am sorry if this is annoys or frustrates you, that is not my intention, these are merely the unadultered facts which can be properly and adequately substantiated and in the interests of being open, I now offer colour images, and/or notarised copies of these original documents to the owners of this website should they wish to upload them for all interested parties to view?

    Moving on from this, I would very much like to hear from anyone else who has information relating directly to the Grand Priory of Scotland and Anton Leuprecht.


    Gordon MacGregor C.

    H.S.E.Chev Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ said: March 22, 2009 at 9:51 am
    Mr Comrie,

    I having been elected by members of the SMOTJ who were there at the time of the establishment of the CMOTJ do not need to defend my position as Chef Mondial of this Order.

    [edited out the rest]

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: March 22, 2009 at 11:29 am
    Mr Russell,

    A number of those involved in what you term as the pre-CMOTJ period of the Grand Priory of Scotland – some of whom were very senior and long-standing officers – know nothing at all about you or your election.

    So far as your not having to “defend” your position is concerned, I am afraid you do, specifically because you claim to be one of, if not the most senior of Knights Templar in the entire world and that directly affects the rest of us, no matter which Order we happen to belong to.

    I note for the record that the basis of your previous claim to this office, being that “it was willed to the Grand Priory of Scotland in perpetuity” by Anton Leuprecht has now been altered to that you have been elected. Mr Russell, this raises a very interesting and valid question, namely: why should those eligible to vote in any such election be strictly limited to the Grand Priory of Scotland when Scotland was only one of many member Grand Priories of the SMOTJ? Please also note that the remit of the office of Chef Mondial was international. In this regard why weren’t all Chivalry of the SMOTJ consulted, especially those within other autonomous Grand Priories founded by the previous Chef Mondials Leuprecht and Sherry?

    As for my “ramblings,” I am merely responding to your claims and statements in an objective and explanatory manner citing information gleaned from corroborative evidence.

    Gordon MacGregor C.

    H.S.E.Chev Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ said: March 22, 2009 at 4:22 pm
    Mr Comrie again your ramblings are not of interest to me and i refer you to my previous comments.

    For the record i have only ever made the claim to this office through having been elected. The Grand Priories of the SKT-SMOTJ all know very well who i am and for that matter who you are!

    Sven said: March 22, 2009 at 5:01 pm
    The issue of Chef Mondial is most interesting

    Could anyone post supporting documents to prove the facts:
    Mr Russell, can you provide any proof in support of rightful succession to the position
    Mr McGregor, can you do likewise for your point of view

    Then the matter can be laid to rest once and for all

    Sven said: March 22, 2009 at 5:21 pm
    I also see that on your website, Mr Russell, you say the Grand Master of the OSMTH has resigned?

    Can any outside body confirm this as I have not seen any reference to this elsewhere?

    H.S.E.Chev Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ said: March 22, 2009 at 5:40 pm
    for now the best option is to visit the site of the former chef mondial H.S.E james mcgrath i will have the current prince regent in portugal post on this site this coming week.

    Sven said: March 22, 2009 at 5:47 pm
    yes, but is james mcgrath not of the same order as yourself?

    I was wondering if anyone from outside the OSMTH can confirm this, as all the OSMTH Regency sites have no mention of such an event

    Also on james mcgrath’s site, is there any documentation viewable concerning the title of Chef Mondial?

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: March 22, 2009 at 6:11 pm
    Mr Russell,

    Which of your previous comments do you refer me to specifically? Even if the office of Chef Mondial were open to succession, which the evidence shows it is not, then in confirmation of your mandate following a ballot we interested parties look forward to your producing the evidence so that it can be corroborated.


    Yes, original evidence can and has been released into the public domain to show the transferal of the office of Chef Mondial from Anton Leuprecht to Francis Sherry in 1981 and from Francis Sherry to Kenneth Shirra in 1993. Colour images of the Promulgation of the office of Chef Mondial by Leuprecht to Sherry have been sent to a number of parties, the owner of this particular website included who may wish to confirm this fact. Further to this anyone wishing to view and/or obtained notarised copies of the originals may do so simply by contacting me.

    With regard to your query regarding the resignation of Grand Master Fontes, in actual fact Mr Russell claims that the Grand Master was removed from office due to his being “old and senile” and unfit for office but concerning which he has yet to bring forward any supportive documentation. This statement only appears on Mr Russell’s and his colleague Mr McGrath’s websites, not those of any of the numerous OSMTH Priories who, as you will notice from their websites, remain loyal to the Grand Master. In point of fact the Grand Master is currently, this very weekend, attending a commemoration in Paris along with representatives of over 20 member countries.

    Gordon MacGregor C.

    H.S.E.Chev Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ said: March 22, 2009 at 6:55 pm
    mr comrie,

    in your statement you declare that you have a document showing the transferal of the office of chef mondial to ken shirra! is this not now contrary to what you have previously stated? i put it to you that you are in gross error and will use any statement at any time to suit your own aims! your claims not only are hollow but speculative.

    i will shortly produce evidence signed by members of the SMOTJ in Scotland that will confirm that Ken shirra was never accepted as Grand prior let alone Chef Mondial of the SMOTJ.

    Again Mr Comrie you are rambling ludicrous statements that contradict every thing you have stated over the last two years. Why do you feel the need to justify your position? i urge you for your own sanity to seek medical help.

    sven, email me and i will forward documentation for your perusal.


    Luis Matos responded: March 22, 2009 at 7:01 pm
    Chev. Gordon MacGregor said:

    “Yes, original evidence can and has been released into the public domain to show the transferal of the office of Chef Mondial from Anton Leuprecht to Francis Sherry in 1981.”

    I have had access to the document cited by Chev. MacGregor and can attest to its veracity and content. I, however, cannot release a copy of it without express authorisation of those who facilitated a copy to me. It’s very likely that the said document will see the light of day soon, along many others of the utmost interest for the history of the Order and its several branches in the last 50 years or so. In any case, I invite anyone interested on the document quoted by Chev. MacGregor to do as he says and contact him for further clarification.

    Luis de Matos

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: March 22, 2009 at 7:10 pm
    Mr Russell,

    I am lost, exactly what position am I trying to justify? I am duly chartered by Grand Master Fernando Fontes, that is my only position and I have proper documentation to support it. Anyone who may doubt this is welcome to contact any in my Order for clarification, including the current Grand Master himself.

    In terms of your other statements, I am sure we all look forward to viewing it and comparing it with other evidence at hand as well as running it by those others who were involved at the time of Kenneth Shirra’ succession. On a side-note, I fail to see why you have to get so personal about it all when producing your evidence should be a very straighforward and painless matter

    H.S.E.Chev Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ said: March 22, 2009 at 7:12 pm
    Chev matos,

    Mr Comrie may hold some documentation and told you what it implies we also hold original documentation along with long standing SMOTJ members who will testify that they were never members of ken shirras CMOTJ.

    when making your decision remeber that in 1995 at the templar forum held in London H.S.E James Mcgrath represented Scotland not Ken Shirra.

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: March 22, 2009 at 8:00 pm
    Mr Russell,

    So, let us appoint an independent arbiter to preside over the veracity and content of original documents to be produced by you and I at a meeting which is mutually convenient to all of us. I would be happy to nominate the owner of this forum and a Knight-Templar of good-standing, Fr. Luis de Matos.

    If I may return to one of my original and most important of points which you seem to have overlooked to comment upon, being that of the right of succession of James McGrath to the office of Chef Mondial; given that Mr McGrath based his right upon the presumption that the said office had been “willed to the Grand Priory of Scotland in perpetuity” but this has proven not to have been the case, then can you please clarify upon what credible grounds he did succeed? I am sure you will agree that this has a significant bearing on this matter.

    Can you also explain to those who may be unaware of the Templar Forum what its actual purpose was? Can you also inform us when Mr McGrath ceased attending these meetings?

    Thank you.

    Gordon MacGregor C.

    Sven said: March 22, 2009 at 9:35 pm
    Mr Russell, I have sent you an email as suggested and await your reply

    H.S.E.Chev Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ said: March 22, 2009 at 11:50 pm
    mr comrie,

    As you have stated on your website Mr. mcgrath was elected as Chef Mondial and did not assume this position as you now claim, unlike Mr Fonte’s father of the OSMTH which i can confirm you are correct in your former postings through contact with our SMOTJ members.

    I as chef mondial am not responsible for my predecessors, including frank sherry . however anton leuprecht passed on information to frank that is a key. that key passed to james mcgrath since frank had known james since 1958 in london and trusted him. As only the princes of the order of the SMOTJ as stated and are in position of this order know this key must be held above any question.

    This will be my final statement!

    anton leuprecht passed on to frank sherry a secret. this secret is in the hands of the 5 princes of the order which not even the grand priors of the SMOTJ or the OSMTH hold. The grand priors of both Orders do not know who these five princes are, this is how our order has survived.

    In the 1960′s the grand priory of the SMOTJ decided to go public, since then through the 70′s and 80′s it grew in strength. when the 90′s arrived and frank was in control, things went sour. However the key was passed on.

    I as Chef Mondial hold that key. the Knowledge that i was enlightened to, has the power to maintain or destroy every templar order existing today. As i have sworn to protect this order i will not destroy it. Even your OSMTH of dubious origin! If however the general chivalry of this order choose to persist in their undisciplined corruption of this order, i will reverse the choice of this order to go public in the 1960′s and revert back to being a secret society, without public Knowledge f it existing.

    i will have no problem watching your Unvalidated order grow as a public entity and assume in the public eyes as the order of the temple, but you will never hold what we have.

    I will ensure through time that the truth will conquer, i have the key, as do the 5 princes of the order.

    i state now. and for all time ask for a hint and i shall give you a coded message where if you are worthy you shall find a path that may lead you to the truth. I swear, with my life under the watchful eye of our Lord Almighty, if you decode the message and speak the truth to me i will comfim. If your truth is false i will tel you. that truth i offer my life for. that is how dear i hold this Order and my Oath.

    H.S.E Graham Flockhart Russell Chef Mondial SKT-SMOTJ

    Sven said: March 23, 2009 at 7:24 am
    Mr McGregor, Thank you for sending the documentation that you have refered to in ealier posts

    Mr Russell, I am interested in seeing the documentation you refer to, and must say I am intrigued by this key that you mention, would it be ou of place if I request this coded message?

    Gordon MacGregor C. said: March 23, 2009 at 11:56 am
    Mr Russell,

    Can we please stick to the core point of this thread please, namely claims and actual evidence relative to the office of Chef Mondial?

    Given what you say about not being responsible for your predecessors in office, what is your stance on the basis of claim of James McGrath to be Chef Mondial now that his presumption has been shown to have been flawed?

    So far as your own evidence is concerned, I look forward to its production.

    In passing I can tell you that I am aware of Anton Leuprecht’s “other” activities and the fact that he was head of another organisation which ran parrallel but behind the scenes to his involvement in the more open SMOTJ one. I also know of Francis Sherry’s involvement in this and, indeed, we have many items of original correspondence and appointments relating to this within our archive which neither you nor Mr McGrath have ever viewed.

    So far as your code is concerned, what is a Templar Order without a hidden secret of some considerable importance? I would advise that you need to objectively view this particular aspect within the wider context of the entire Templar movement in Switzerland at the time of Leuprecht. Many were competing with one another to be pre-eminent in their claims to possess the true esoteric of the Knights Templar. One of these whom Leuprecht had real “issues” with was F. A. Zapelli who is better known for being the “leak” from the Priory of Sion and we all know how that has ended up. Mr Russell, has the door opened to let the sun shine on the rosey cross?

    As for the remainder of your statements, I will refrain from comment as I, for one, believe they speak for themselves especially when considered alongside the fact that both you and your associate Mr McGrath have thus far failed to produce one shred of anything credible to back up even the most basic and straighforward of your many claims. Notwithstanding, I look forward to your abiding by your previous statements and now doing so.

    Post Fata Resurgo
    Gordon MacGregor C.

    Sven said: March 24, 2009 at 11:11 am
    Mr Russell, I was wondering when you will send the documents that you refer to?

    Another point that has puzzled myself, on your suggestion i visited your previous Chef Mondials website

    You say the Grandmaster is the 51st, but you don’t follow the line of succession via Larnimus, so who are the previous Grandmasters?

    Another point, on the same website, it is said that the rightful Grandmaster can only be the rightful heir to the Scottish throne, so do you believe your Grandmaster to be the rightful heir?

    sam ross said: April 2, 2009 at 1:24 pm
    i have seen the documents and i have seen the true story.

    Chef Mondial has also now posted a copy of a Portugese magazine on his website which shows Luis Roseira amongst some of the other members of the Portugese Grand Priory.

    H.H. S.A.E. Luis Roseira M.M. is clearly named as the Grand Master.

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 1:30 pm
    I am sure the 40 odd OSMTH-Porto Priories would disagree

    sam ross said: April 2, 2009 at 3:16 pm
    The 40 odd OSMTH Priories have no option but to agree as it was his grand priory and magisterial council that replaced him, (note that being a grand prior does not automatically make you a member of the magisterial council as most people think! the council is appointed under the statutes and in place for such an event) or are these 40? all mutineers?

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 3:26 pm
    So who comprises this magisterial council?

    sam ross said: April 2, 2009 at 3:35 pm
    read the statutes mr Fontes did! HIS appointed members replaced him.

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 3:37 pm
    I am sorry, i do not have access to these statutes you speak of

    Judging by that, I assume you belong to this Order, can I ask what Priory?

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 3:38 pm
    But who composes this council you speak off?

    And why do no other Priories mention a change of Grandmaster?

    Isn’t the Magisterial Council composed of representatives of the different Priories?

    With that being the case, Portugal represents but one of the Priories, where a majority vote would be required to carry through any action as important as electing a new Grand Master

    sam ross said: April 2, 2009 at 3:50 pm
    yes you are correct and there were more than Portugal present. In fact, they were from other continents.

    sam ross said: April 2, 2009 at 3:53 pm
    not every priory needs to be represented (as it says in the statutes)! only the magisterial council need vote.

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 3:54 pm
    Who was there, as no other Priory website mentions this, infact, it seems Mr Fontes was on official business a week or two ago in France according to their website

    The only websites that mention this seem to be connected with a previous poster, Mr Russell, who before hand was not under Grand Master Fontes

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 3:55 pm
    And who makes up this Magisterial Council as previously asked

    sam ross said: April 2, 2009 at 3:59 pm
    it was made by mr fontes as previously answered. each of these council members as per the statutes have equal standing rights and privileges and imunities as mr fontes.

    sam ross said: April 2, 2009 at 4:00 pm
    i am saying nothing else now. read the statutes.

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 4:01 pm
    I didn’t ask who made this council, I asked who does it compose off and again as I am not an osmth member, I do not have the statutes hence my question

    Sven said: April 2, 2009 at 4:04 pm
    It does seem you can not give a straight and direct answer, apart from read the statutes, which is not possible on my part and given that no other OSMTH Regency Priories seem to back up this change of Grand Master story, I think, IMO, that this is an attempt to invent some sort of legitimacy

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 10:17 am
    time will reveal all!

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 1:49 pm
    Mr Ross, I have now acquired copies of the statutes to which you refer, so, could you point out which article refers to the removal of the Grandmaster as there doesn’t seem to be any reference to this in the 1932, 1947 or 1990 statutes or are you working of different ones?

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 2:21 pm
    exactly time will reveal all!

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 2:31 pm
    Sorry, but that does not answer the question of where the article is, as it was you who said to read the statutes, so where is the article in question?

    Now, to backtrack to the Office of Chef Mondial, your ex “Chef Mondial” claims the office was willed to Scotland in perpiturity, so I am sure everyone would be interested for you to produce the documentation to support this, if you can?

    And perhaps you can answer a previous question I had in reference to your “Grandmaster” being the 51st, which Mr Russell never answered, seeing as you both seem to be claiming the same? If you do not follow the Charter of Transmission and your Grandmaster can only be of the Royal House of Scotland as claimed on your websites, who are the previous Grandmasters in your lineage and do you claim yours to be the rightful heir to the Royal House of Scotland?

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 2:54 pm
    the answers to these questions are already in the public domain, look and you will find them.

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 2:56 pm
    the documentation you request is also already in the public domain.

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 2:58 pm
    Yes, but none of it supports your claims! Rather than side stepping the questions how about you actually answer them, with actual documental proof?

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 2:59 pm
    i joined an order and was shown where to find it. i know the truth, if you want to know the truth join the order and you will find out!

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 3:00 pm
    wouldn’t life be great if politicians answered without side stepping too?

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 3:05 pm
    and finally as i said the documentation is already in the public domain, just because you don’t know where to find it, that dosn’t constitute it not backing up what has been stated. find the documentation we are under no obligation to point you to it!

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 3:09 pm
    Why should I have to join an Order so to confirm what they claim is factual? Surely, if the Order is legitimat, they would allow public access to their documentation in some capacity, especially as they come on to a public forum, that belongs to another Order and makes claims and says they shall PROVIDE PROOF in the way of documentation which has never appeared

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 3:18 pm
    yes you are correct this is a public forum and as a member of public involved in an order i am engaging in a public conversation and that is all it is, a public conversation, i would like the queen of england to show me proof that prince harry is the son of prince charles. remember however that a birth certificate only states what has been said by the registering person not the truth! do you think she has an obligation to release this information? or do you think it would do more harm if the truth were broadcast openly?

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 3:23 pm
    Well, I was promised documentation from Mr Russell and still waiting so if you perhaps you can send it

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 3:23 pm
    By the way, what is your position on the Order?

    sam ross said: April 3, 2009 at 3:31 pm
    at the moment i am sitting down! if that helps!!!! lol, seriously though, chef mondial told me he was prepared to release documents until his comments were edited again, even on this forum. i can’t comment on what was said to you but he told me he couldn’t trust your email address and name of sven ericson!

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 3:49 pm
    It is quite a common name in my home country of Sweden, but I now live in the UK, and if I wished for my full name to be on an open forum I would have placed it there myself!

    So do you hold any office of authority in your Order?

    Going back again, you have still not answered any of the questions placed to you:

    What is the lineage of your Grandmaster if you do not follow the Charter of Transmission?

    If Chef Mondial was willed to Scotland in perpeturity, can/will you provide proof HERE

    Why should I need to join your Order to see proof of claims etc

    You say proof is in the public domain, the proof that I have seen does not support your claims, including numerous decrees etc. If it is in the public domain as you say, what is the issue you have in providing information on where it can be found?

    In all, your Order is quite entitled to elect a Grandmaster, but it seems, how to say, not quite right, when you claim another Grandmaster has been removed from office, when the Priories under him say otherwise.

    Are you saying that all these people are lying or wrong and you are correct and truthfull in saying that the OSMTH Regency has a new Grandmaster?

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 3:52 pm
    Surely, once you provide the evidence and it is proven, with out a doubt, to be factual, all speculation would end?

    Sven said: April 3, 2009 at 3:53 pm
    Or is it a case of rather you not being willing to provide it, it is more that you can not provide it?

    Álvaro SHF said: May 14, 2009 at 4:27 pm
    I’m going to put on line the statue made in the XVIII century, and there you could see if the Grand Master could or not be changed.

    Álvaro SHF said: May 14, 2009 at 4:30 pm
    Do you know that Mr. Fontes is against all Templar web presence?

    Luis Matos responded: May 15, 2009 at 12:40 pm
    This site is not associated with Mr. Fontes in any way whatsoever. We respect his opinion (as we respect the opinion of all visitors), but clearly disagree.

    Chev James Reese, KGCTJ said: May 30, 2009 at 10:02 am
    As the former SKT Grand Prior of the United States, I fully support Chev. Gordon MacGregor Comrie, as the rightful leader of the Scottish Templars in the United Kingdom and in the world. Further, there have never been five “unknown princes” in the order, at least within the last century. And I would have known.

    I salute and commend my fellow knight, Chev. MacGregor C., as the knight who saved the order in Scotland, and who has been making the order into what it was originally intended to be.

    Chev James R. Weber KGCTJ Prior said: July 5, 2009 at 4:49 pm
    As the duly appointed (in perpetuity) Prior of NATO(autonomous) installed by McGrath Promoted to Knight Grand Cross by McGrath and Knighted by Chev Reese, I also recognize Gordon MacGregor Comrie as the one true leader, not only being duly elected and installed by McGrath but by his actions of leadership he is bringing the Scottish Knights Templar into integrity and continues to forward Chivalry, and Scottish Templarism, not only in Scotland but Worldwide.

    Chev Hon. James R. Weber KGCTJ KOT Prior Seneschal

    Dr Anthony said: July 21, 2009 at 1:03 pm
    Chev. Gordon Mac Gregor Comrie, is the Right full Grand master of SKt as he reveled a lot of things to members Like us. As I am aware that the Knights Templar Order was Under the Pope and its also Under St benedictine of Clarivaux a Benedictine Monk. I think if any one to claim they are Knight Templar should be the Benedictine Monks & Benedictine Oblate as the Follow strictly the Rule oF ST Benedict. I as a Benedictine oblate ( Knight Templar)I fully Support Bro Gordon

    Luis Matos responded: July 25, 2009 at 5:36 pm
    In fact, you mistake Benedict for Bernard and Benedictines for Cisterciens. Saint Bernard of Clairvaux was a Cistercien and the Templar Rule – aproved in Troyes – was purely Templar, at the most influenced by Cisterciens, but not Bededictine at all.

    sam ross said: September 10, 2009 at 9:11 am
    Notification of Current Legal Position following a recent court case.

    Scottish Knight Templars Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem(R)TM. SKT-SMOTJ(c)

    The above Patented Trade mark was applied for under the Trademarks Act 1974.

    The application was to register and protect the usage of our Orders continuing name, Scottish Knight Templars Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem®TM. The Patent Registration was granted by the Intellectual Property Office on the 17th of August 2007.

    On 21st of September 2007 Mr Paul McGowan lodged an Invalidity Claim against the registered Trademark. He claiming and citing he was acting on behalf of several Websites. These are as follows:

    A/ Our own Website of SKT-SMOTJ.

    B/ Mr McGowans; Grand Priory of the Knights Templar in Scotland.

    C/ He also cited the Ordo Supremus Templi Hiersolymitani OSMTH INC USA under Admiral Carey, he using its EEC Registered Patent name as his evidence. Mr McGowan was proven to the Court to be falsely claiming that the OSMTH USA is a Sovereign Military Order, and recognised as such by the UN. He also claimed that Supremus in Latin means Sovereign. No, it does not, and evidence submitted by us proved otherwise beyond any doubt. The evidence submitted confirmed their registration is in their USA corporate name, and uses Inc at end; its Sovereign name is not legally applicable outwith USA. They have no links to this Order since they left it in 1964 to join Fontes OSMTH. The OSMTH Schism in 1995 as they were the Majority who left Fontes, they are now the only current legal OSMTH and hold Swiss and EEC Patents to prove this.

    D/ Commandery of Jacque De Molay 1314 OSMTH. We proved no links to this Order.

    E/ The Gnostic Templars website. No links

    F/ Poor Knights of Christ Temple of Solomon in Scotland under Mr Vince Zubras USA. No Links.

    G/ Militi Temple Scotia. Proven to Court they have No links to this continuing Order, or its history.

    H/ Former OSMTH (Regency) Orders under Mr Fontes. Submitted Evidence of Schism in 1995, and Papers ref September 18th in Porto 2008 proved that there is legally now no OSMTH Regency.

    These named website’s along with numerous other written evidence in the form of Documentation, formed Mr McGowan’s opposition of Invalidity. He also citing numerous breaches, passing off, in areas of the Trade Marks Act 1974 also submitted by Mr McGowan.

    The Case was submitted to the Court Examiner for his Final decision.

    The conclusion of the Case 16/7/2009 found in favour of James McGrath on all legal matters, and other counts.

    All the grounds and submitted evidence for Invalidity etc, made by Mr McGowan failed in its total entirety.

    The Rights of the Patent Trade mark continue now in its Registered Format.

    Mr McGowan was given twenty eight days leave to Appeal the Courts decision to the Court of Session in Scotland. The Deadline was 13/8/2009, No appeal was lodged.

    The Court Decision of 16/7/2009 was implemented by the High Court. He was also ordered by the Court to pay a lump sum of £900 to Mr McGrath within Seven Days by 20/8/2009. Despite McGowan knowing this since July 2009 No payment has been received.

    This is a breach of compliance of a Court Order; it will be legally pursued by us.

    Criminal Act. Any other Organisations, or Website/s cited by Mr McGowan in this case must with immediate effect cease and desist from using our Registered Trademarks, or its format, false claims of any connection to us, our History etc. It is a serious criminal offence, and any further breaches will lead to prosecution.


    sam ross said: September 10, 2009 at 9:19 am
    These are all the UK Domestic Trade Mark Applications or Registrations in the name of Paul McGowan
    TM Number Mark Text Type Date Status Classes
    2445476 ORDO SUPREMUS MILITARIS TEMPLI HIEROSOL+ WO 02.02.2007 Refused 09 16 36 41
    2470672 ORDO SUPREMUS MILITARIS TEMPLI HIEROSOL+ WO 26.10.2007 Withdrawn 09 16 36 41

    Luis Matos responded: September 10, 2009 at 6:28 pm
    Dear Sam:

    You are, off course, aware of the fact that, even if Mr. McGoan’s request of invalidity might have been refused by the court, Mr. James McGrath has no real “trade mark” rights over the designation “Scottish Knight Templars Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem”, namely because it has fallen on the public domain quite a few centuries ago…

    As you may know – but if you don’t, here is a great opportunity to learn a bit more – you can claim trade mark on anything, even the Mediterranean Sea, or the Sea of Galilee. Another thing is to enforce it. Designations such as “Scottish Knight Templars” and others are not protected under the law of any country (and Scotland in not an exception, having ratified international treaties on this subject under the United Kingdom), because anyone can come to court and, instead of pointing out existing websites (which will not overthrow Mr. McGarth’s 1974 claim for obvious reasons), can prove beyond any doubt that the designation you so much fight for was indeed in existence since the 12th century and with very few variations since 1805 (Parlaprat), being now public domain. I, myself, own a few original documents from the 19th century where the said “trade mark” is used. So, such registration is valid until otherwise proven. And most such cases as the one you describe, have a bitter end when the court finds that the registration was, after all, snatched from a “public domain” source (which is yours and all your fellow citizen’s protected property).

    Maybe Mr. McGowan was not well advised in his pursue of justice. Since I also think that the idea of legally protecting our Order under a “trade mark” is so absolutely pointless and absurd – a contradiction in terms, since we don’t “trade” under that or any other name… – and that the mere arrogant assumption of anyone to be the sole owner and proprietor of such an old legacy is in my view preposterous, do you think I should try my own case against the “trade mark” you so proudly use by requesting the court to deem it a few centuries older than the 1974 registration (thus public domain)? Do you think I would stand a better chance than Mr. McGowan?

    I await your reply with interest.

    Luis de Matos

    Chev James R. Weber KGCTJ Prior said: September 15, 2009 at 7:19 pm
    The court case can be found at

    IN CLASSES 36 & 41
    UNDER NO 83030

    In the matter of registration no 2448418
    by James JP McGrath JP FAS Scot
    for a trade mark in classes 36 & 41
    An application for a declaration of invalidity
    Under no 83030
    By Paul McGowan
    1. Mr McGrath applied for his trade mark on 18 February 2007. It was published for
    opposition purposes on 4 May 2007 and it was subsequently registered on 17
    August 2007. The mark, together with the services for which it is registered, is set
    out below:
    Class 36: Provision of charitable fundraising services.
    Class 41: Charitable services, namely educational, training, counselling
    and cultural services.
    2. On 21 September 2007, Mr McGowan applied for a declaration of invalidity in
    respect of the above registration. I will return to the application, and Mr McGowan’s
    grounds for making it, shortly. It is sufficient to record that Mr McGrath denies the
    grounds on which the application is made.
    3. Both Mr McGowan and Mr McGrath filed evidence, this is summarised below.
    Neither party requested a hearing and neither party filed written submissions.
    The pleaded case
    4. In his statement of case, Mr McGowan refers to a number of sections of the
    Trade Marks Act 1994 (“The Act”) which, he says, were breeched by the registration
    of the mark. He refers to sections 3(6), 3(1)(d), 5(1) and/or 5(2)(a) and/or 5(2)(b)
    and/or 5(3) and/or 5(4(a). The claims are made on the basis that:
    Section 3(6)
    • Mr McGrath’s intention was to register marks that are in use legally by
    other organisations in an attempt to block their freedom of action.
    • Mr McGrath is trying to intimidate others by breaking down his
    registered mark into phrases that have been in common use for some

    • Mr McGrath is trying to confuse and/or intimidate others with his list of
    so-called registered marks when his own full registered mark is hardly
    ever mentioned in the correct format.
    Section 3(1)(d)
    • It can be proved that the phrase “Scottish Knight(s) Templar” registered
    and in use by Mr McGrath is in fact a common phrase and should not
    have been registered in this fashion.
    • Reference is made to six different Scottish Knights Templar
    organisations that have used the term “Scottish Knight(s) Templar”,
    four of which use the term SMOTJ to represent either “The Sovereign
    Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem” or “The Supreme Military
    Order of the Temple of Jerusalem”
    The section 5 grounds
    • Reliance is placed on Community Trade Mark (“CTM”) 2758308 for the
    section 5 grounds. Against this earlier mark it is claimed Mr McGrath’s
    mark would, a) cause confusion, b) would harm the reputation of CTM
    2758308 (and any other Scottish Knight Templar organisation) and, c)
    that Mr McGrath is passing-off as CTM 2758308.
    Mr McGowan’s evidence
    5. Mr McGowan states that he is a “properly inducted modern Chivalric Knight
    Templar” and has been for 13 years. He states that the term SCOTTISH KNIGHT(S)
    TEMPLAR(S) has been known to him since 1995 representing a number of Chivalric
    Groups within Scotland.
    6. He refers to what he describes as the International Order of Knights Templar,
    namely, Ordo Supremus Militaris Templi Hierosolymitani (I will refer to these words
    as “OSMTH”). He states that this international Order is also commonly known as
    “Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem”. He adds that the international
    Order have applied for and gained approval for a collective mark, namely CTM
    2758303. He states that OSMTH is an NGO (a non-governmental organisation)
    registered in Switzerland and evidence is provided (exhibit SKT004) to show that it is
    recognised by the United Nations as an “NGO in Special Consultative Status with the
    Economic and Social Council of the United Nations”. In the letter from the United
    Nations shown in SKT004, the organisation is referred to as “Sovereign Military
    Order of the Temple of Jerusalem (OSMTH)”.
    7. Reference is made to exhibit SKT001. Mr McGowan describes this as a
    membership form signed by Mr McGrath (in 2004 not 2005 as Mr McGowan states)
    and he believes that this demonstrates that Mr McGrath has passed his organisation
    off as OSMTH. The document in question uses the words ORDO SUPREMUS
    MILITARIS TEMPLI HIEROSOLYMITANI at the top of the document. The text of the
    document is in Latin. It is signed by somebody called James.

    8. Mr McGowan provides in evidence (SKT002) three exchanges of email between
    people associated with Mr McGrath’s Order. The exchanges state:
    “Dear Troops, Something comes to mind in OSMTH history claims by Dr.
    Kovarik and Carey’s potted version, it states clearly that the Order Anton
    joined under Vanderberg was in Belgium and they actually recorded the name
    of SMOTJ as theirs under Belgium Law? So, as we are Anton’s continuing
    Order so does it now belong to us due to creation of EEC etc what is legal
    position?? James”

    Ok, let me explain that one. If Vandenburg did register it in Belgium, that
    would specifically be in Belgium. For the record, so we all understand the
    same sheet of music, I checked the UK patent/trademark for
    SMOTH / OSMTH, and as of last year it was still open, although we would
    need to get an in depth research to make sure. That is what cost is for with an
    attorney to file it.

    And James, unfortunately nothing on the rights of the name legally belong to
    anyone unless it is filed. See, although we are the legitimate Order, if we can
    do things like this, we could have already sent a letter to cease and desist
    using our name to MTS and other frauds, and they could not even wear our
    crosses. Look at it the same way that we cannot wear an SMOM outfit and
    call ourselves SKT, it would still be SMOM, and they HAVE filed this with
    patent/trademark laws. I know, I checked.

    “Dear Will, Gordon, Got it but what do we do to register our own name/s of
    SKT-SMOTJ. And IFA-OCMTH How much and do we need a Lawyer in UK
    for it to be done?
    By the way the stuff I have sent today has lots on this McGowan person
    always threatening everyone with the Law and thinks if he uses Copyright on
    a website item or Regalia it is his? He tried to do this to the Copy Bureau who
    did my site they used a shaded Cross in Green, he claimed he had copyright?
    They are all noted Liars and he also used name of Tom Scotland read it and
    its rantings, as you will both agree he is best shunned James.”

    9. Mr McGowan considers that the above emails discuss methods of removing
    access to marks from other established bodies and that it shows very clearly, res
    ipsa loquitar, that Mr McGrath’s reason for registering his mark was in breach of
    section 3(6) of the Act. Mr McGowan notes in SKT002 the comment that he (Mr
    McGrath) was part of an original Order but notes that Mr McGrath does not know
    where or how it was registered.

    10. Reference is made to exhibit SKT003 which consists of an extract from what
    appears to be Mr McGrath’s website. Mr McGowan states that although Mr McGrath
    has implemented corrections to his website1 he remains adamant that certain trade
    marks remain and in doing so are in breach of section 5(2)(b) as there would be
    confusion on the part of the public. For the record, the following text appears as part
    of this website:
    “Our Registered Scottish Charity Number SCO037940 Military Order Knights
    of Christ OCMTH (RTM).”
    “Scottish Knight Templars Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem (R)TM
    The SKT-SMOTJ”
    “They are not recognised by us the; SCOTTISH KNIGHT TEMPLARS
    “Or any others referring to the Order of the Temple, nor under the Magisterial
    Grand Prior of the continuing SKT-SMOTH,OR THE IFA-OCMTH(R)TM.”
    Mr McGrath’s evidence

    11. Mr McGrath states that he has been a member of “this” Order (presumably the
    Scottish Knight Templars Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem) since the
    early 1960s and also a senior member of OSMTH based in Portugal from 1982
    onwards. He states that usages of the names Scottish Knight Templar, and
    Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem, have been in use by them (presumably,
    the Order) since he became a member.

    12. Mr McGrath provides emails between himself and other member of his Order.
    The sense of these emails is of members discussing (similar to those in SK002 of Mr
    McGowan’s evidence) how to legally register “our name”. Mr McGrath states that
    there is nothing in these emails that show any attempt to block the use of marks by

    13. Reference is made to exhibit A002 which is an extract from Mr McGowan’s
    website of “The Grand Priory of the Knights Templar in Scotland” which describes
    itself as being affiliated to the Grand Priory of France (GPFT), OSMTH International.
    The website states:
    “The name of the International Order is known as “The Supreme Military
    Order of the Temple of Jerusalem” (SMOTJ) or in Latin as “Ordo Supremus
    Miltaris Templi Hiersolymitani” (OSMTH). It is more commonly referred to as
    the “Knights of the Temple” or “The Knights Templar”.”1
    Since the filing of the application of invalidation.

    14. Mr McGrath states that the above confirms Mr McGowan’s non-usage of the
    sovereign name given the reference to the Supreme rather than the Sovereign
    Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem.

    15. Mr McGrath highlights that he does not use SKT-SMOTH with an indication that
    it is registered (although they have used this designation since the 1960s) as it is
    separated by full stops from other designations (see the first example in paragraph
    10 above). He also notes that these proceedings relate to the trade mark at issue
    here and not about any other designations. He observes that the registered name is
    clearly shown on his website in no other format.

    16. Mr McGrath states that there are only two Orders in Scotland known to him who
    are using either Scottish Knight Templars or Scottish Knights Templar and both are
    separate organisations in their own right. He makes reference to his own use and
    that of Mr McGowan and his “OSMTH, USA 1995 self created Order”. He states that
    Mr McGowan’s Order is a Commandery under the Grand Priory of France.

    17. Reference is then made to Mr McGowan’s SKT001. He states that this is not a
    membership form (as claimed by Mr McGowan) but is a “Brevet of a Knight
    Commander”. He notes that this has been altered from its original form by deletion of
    names etc. He states that the seals shown on this document are his own Order’s
    seal and, also, in relation to the seal at the top of the page, is the coat of arms of
    Prince Regent Grand Master Fontes who was elected Grand Master of OSMTH in
    1946 and, he states, has nothing to do with the 1995 self created USA OSMTH
    Order. It becomes apparent from this part of Mr McGrath’s evidence (and later
    evidence) that in 1995 some form of split of OSMTH took place whereby Grand
    Master Fontes was removed from power, leaving, on the one hand, a faction of
    OSMTH still loyal to Fontes (this is what Mr McGrath refers to as OSMTH Portugal
    which is also sometimes referred to as OSMTH Regency) and, on the other hand, an
    organisation representing the post Fontes Order which appears to be the OSMTH
    International Order referred to by Mr McGowan.

    18. Mr McGrath also states that members of his Order held/hold dual membership
    with OSMTH Portugal. He refers to an email exchange (from 2008) with a Mr Colin
    Campbell where they discuss this dual membership with Grand Master Fontes’
    OSMTH following an agreement in 1982. Also provided are two Brevets one, Mr
    McGrath states, relates to being a member of his own sovereign Order (the Brevet is
    headed “Ordre Souverain et Militaire du Temple de Jerusalem”) and the other is a
    Brevet as an OSMTH (Portugal) member (it uses OSMTH in a similar way to the
    document shown in Mr McGowan’s SKT001). Mr McGrath also states that he holds
    the position of Guardian and Protector of the OSMTH Magisterial Grand Priory under
    Grand Master Fontes (certificate shown in A004). He is also a holder of the OSMTH
    Silver Medal of Merit and he was appointed in June 2008 as the head, in the UK, of
    OSMTH Portugal (email from Mr Rosseira also shown in A004).

    19. Referring to the difference between the Sovereign Order names and the
    Supreme Order name, he states that Fontes’ OSMTH have Supreme Order
    members and that any Sovereign status was lost in 1970 when their use of the royal
    authority died with the death of King Peter II. He refers to a Sovereign Order name
    registered as a corporate name in the US but that this does not give any sovereign

    20. He refers to exhibit A004A which are further email exchanges including one
    between Mr McGowan and Mr McGrath in 2002. In this email Mr McGrath makes Mr
    McGowan aware of his loyalty to Grand Master Fontes. At this point in time, Mr
    McGowan’s Order is called Militi Templi Scotia (MTS) which is linked to OSMTH
    (International). References are also made to the Grand Priory of the USA SMOTJ
    which, from other evidence, is a Grand Priory of OSMTH (International) which calls
    itself the Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem (this is the US
    corporate name referred to by Mr McGrath in the previous paragraph).

    21. Exhibit A005 consists of various documents from the OSMTH website (Mr
    McGrath calls this OSMTH USA, it is the organisation I have referred to as OSMTH
    International). It shows that OSMTH members failed to attend a UN meeting (the
    invitation stemming from its recognition as an NGO), it shows that Mr McGowan is its
    webmaster, and that Mr McGowan’s Oder in Scotland is not a Grand Priory but is,
    instead, an associate member via OSMTH (France Grand Priory).

    22. Exhibit A006 contains further information from the OSMTH website
    (international) one lists other templar organisations including a reference to those
    loyal to Grand Master Fontes, who consider themselves the only legitimate OSMTH.
    Other documents (from 2001, 2005 & 2007) state:
    “4. OSMTH: Supremus, in Latin, means highest, or sublime. The translation
    “sovereign” although very common, is incorrect. Even more so is any claim to
    be a “Sovereign Chivalric Order” under international law, which is tantamount
    to pure fantasy.”

    23. The exhibit also provides a list of web-links from another Order’s website (Priory
    of St King Charles The Martyr, Washington DC). This shows a list of OSMTH country
    organisations which fall under OSMTH (International) and a separate list for
    Sovereign Military Oder of the Temple of Jerusalem, whose main body is the US
    organisation referred to in paragraph 20 and who have a number of sub-priories in
    the US.

    24. Exhibit A006 is the homepage of OSMTH (International) which states that
    OSMTH is translated as “Sovereign Military Order….”. This, Mr McGrath states, is a
    false statement, as the translation should be “Supreme Military Order…..” which he
    believes to be proven by his earlier evidence.

    25. Exhibit A007 is a copy of a “Knights Manual” for members of the US Sovereign
    Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem Inc that was published briefly in 1996 on
    various websites but was withdrawn very quickly because, Mr McGowan explains, it
    was realised that their claims of being recognised as a real and true sovereign
    military order would become a problem with the US Attorney General (as illegally
    operating for a foreign government). Mr McGrath makes reference to the history of
    the US Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem. He states, and provides
    documents to support, that the order was created in 1962 founded under his (Mr
    McGrath’s) Order.
    The section 3(1)(d) ground of invalidation
    26. Section 3(1)(d) states that the following shall not be registered:
    “trade marks which consist exclusively of signs or indications which have
    become customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established
    practices of the trade”.
    27. Case-law exists to guide the tribunal on the application of the law. For example,
    in Merz & Krell GmbH & Co. (Case C-517/99) the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”)
    31. It follows that Article 3(1)(d) of the Directive must be interpreted as only
    precluding registration of a trade mark where the signs or indications of which
    the mark is exclusively composed have become customary in the current
    language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade to
    designate the goods or services in respect of which registration of that mark is
    28. Also, in the decision of Professor Annand (sitting as the Appointed Person) in
    Stash (BL O–281-04) it was stated:
    “In the event, I do not believe this issue of the interpretation of section 3(1)(d)
    is central to the outcome of the appeal. “Customary” is defined in the Oxford
    English Reference Dictionary, 1995 as: “usual; in accordance with custom”. In
    my judgment, the Opponent has failed on the evidence to prove that at the
    relevant date STASH contravened section 3(1)(d) as consisting exclusively of
    signs or indications which have become customary either in the current
    language or in trade practices for the goods concerned.”
    29. Taking the above case-law into account, I must be satisfied that the mark
    JERUSALEM” is composed of indications that are used, customarily, to designate the
    relevant services, be it in current language or in the bona fide and established
    practices of the trade.

    30. I repeat my summary of Mr McGowan’s claim, namely:
    Section 3(1)(d)
    • It can be proved that the phrase “Scottish Knight(s) Templar” registered
    and in use by Mr McGrath is in fact a common phrase and should not
    have been registered in this fashion.
    • Reference is made to six different Scottish Knights Templar
    organisations that have use the term “Scottish Knight(s) Templar”, four
    of which use the term SMOTJ to represent either “The Sovereign
    Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem” or “The Supreme Military
    Order of the Temple of Jerusalem”

    31. Taking all of the above into account, the fact that there may be other
    organisations using “Scottish Knight(s) Templar” does not assist Mr McGowan’s
    case unless SOVEREIGN MILITARY ORDER TEMPLE JERUSALEM is also used (be it
    together with Scottish Knight Templar or independently) . As stated in Merz & Krell, it
    is “signs or indications of which the mark is exclusively composed” with which I must
    be concerned. It is, however, worth detailing the six organisations to which Mr
    McGowan refers. These are listed in Appendices A-F of his statement of case
    (although, not filed in evidence):
    Appendix A – This is the website for Mr McGrath’s Order – it clearly uses the
    Appendix B – This is the website of Mr McGowan’s Grand Priory of the
    Knights Templar in Scotland, Scottish Knights Templars. It makes reference
    to the International Order OSMTH which is known as The Supreme Military
    Order of the Temple of Jerusalem.
    Appendix C – This is the website of The Scottish Knights Templar –
    Commandery of Jacques De Molay. It makes no mention of the Temple of
    Jerusalem be it Supreme or Sovereign.
    Appendix D – This is the website of The Scottish Knight Templars – Gnostic
    Templars. I can see no reference to the temple of Jerusalem.
    Appendix E – This relates to The Poor Knights of Christ and the Temple of
    Soloman – Scottish Knight Templar. This refers to the fact that they previously
    comprised the Grand Priory of Scotland of the Sovereign Military Order of the
    Temple of Jerusalem but are now wholly autonomous.
    Appendix F – This is the website of the Militi Templi Scotia – Scottish Knights
    Templar. The website states that the Order incorporates Militi Templi Scotia;
    The Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem; Ordo Supremus
    Militaris Templi Hierosolymitani.
    32. In relation to the above, Appendix B, C, D & E refer to SCOTTISH KNIGHTS
    JERUSALEM (appendix E refers to Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of
    Jerusalem only as a reference for historical purposes with the organisation
    indentified, The Poor Knights of Christ and the Temple of Soloman – Scottish Knight
    Templar, now being autonomous). That leaves only A (which relates to McGrath’s
    Order) and C which, although not using the designation in conjunction, it does at
    least consider itself to be Scottish Knight Templar and part of its Order is said to
    include the Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem. However, the
    fundamental problem is that other than Mr McGrath’s own use, there is only one
    document which can potentially be seen as relating to the “Sovereign Military Order
    of the Temple of Jerusalem”. Therefore, notwithstanding some use of “Scottish
    Knight Templars” the designation as a whole does not consist of indications that are
    in customary usage. In view of this, the ground of invalidation under section
    3(1)(d) of the Act must fail.
    The section 3(6) ground of invalidation
    33. Section 3(6) of the Act reads:
    “(6) A trade mark shall not be registered if or to the extent that the application
    is made in bad faith.”
    34. The standard underpinning bad faith was set out in Gromax Plasticulture Ltd v
    Don & Low Nonwovens Ltd [1999] R.P.C. 367. It includes dishonesty but also
    includes dealings which fall short of the standards of acceptable commercial
    behaviour observed by reasonable and experienced men in the particular area being
    examined. However, whether Mr McGrath’s behaviour in making his application fell
    below this standard can only be assessed on the basis of his state of knowledge at
    the relevant time. A useful summary of all this was given by Ms. Anna Carboni
    (sitting as the Appointed Person) in OTO, BL O/157/08 when she stated:
    “120. To summarise the guidance given by the English courts and United
    Kingdom Appointed Persons, one must ask what the Applicant knew when it
    applied to register the Marks (the subjective element) and whether, in the light
    of that knowledge, its decision to apply for registration would be regarded as
    in bad faith by persons adopting proper standards (the objective element).
    The applicable standard for the objective element of the test is acceptable
    commercial behaviour in the eyes of a reasonable and experienced person
    standing in the shoes of the Applicant. My job is to try to be that person.”

    35. Again, I repeat my summary of the ground relied on:
    Section 3(6)
    • Mr McGrath’s intention was to register marks that are in use legally by
    other organisations in an attempt to block their freedom of action.
    • Mr McGrath is trying to intimidate others by breaking down his
    registered mark into phrases that have been in common use for some
    • Mr McGrath is trying to confuse and/or intimidate others with his list of
    so-called registered marks when his own full registered mark is hardly
    ever mentioned in the correct format.
    36. In relation to the intent of Mr McGrath, there is evidence in the proceedings
    relating to the prospective application for registration. The evidence is in the form of
    emails between Mr McGrath and various members of his Order and has been filed
    by Mr McGowan (exhibit SKT002). Mr McGrath also filed similar email exchanges in
    his evidence (exhibit A001). It is clear from these emails that one of the intentions of
    the application was to enable Mr McGrath’s Order to prevent the use of their name
    by others (they call them frauds). One of the names referred to in the emails being
    SKT-SMOTJ (which must mean Scottish Knight Templar Sovereign Military Order
    Temple of Jerusalem).

    37. An intent to prevent others from using a mark is not, in itself, an act of bad faith.
    This is because one, if not the, primary purposes of applying to register a trade mark
    is to avail oneself of the exclusive right to prevent the use of the sign by other
    parties. However, if the intent is to merely prevent others from using a sign which
    they are legitimately entitled to use and, therefore, the application is made merely to
    frustrate or hamper other parties then this is a different matter. In Case C-529/07,
    Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG, v Franz Hauswirth GmbH, the ECJ dealt
    with the issue of bad faith and stated:
    “41. Consequently, in order to determine whether there was bad faith,
    consideration must also be given to the applicant’s intention at the time
    when he files the application for registration.
    42. It must be observed in that regard that, as the Advocate General
    states in point 58 of her Opinion, the applicant’s intention at the relevant
    time is a subjective factor which must be determined by reference to the
    objective circumstances of the particular case.
    43. Accordingly, the intention to prevent a third party from marketing a
    product may, in certain circumstances, be an element of bad faith on the
    part of applicant.
    44. That is in particular the case when it becomes apparent, subsequently,
    that the applicant applied for registration of a sign as a Community trade
    mark without intending to use it, his sole objective being to prevent a third
    party from entering the market.
    45. In such a case the mark does not fulfil its essential function, namely
    that of ensuring that the consumer or end user can identify the origin of
    the product or service concerned by allowing him to distinguish that
    product or service from those of different origin, without any confusion
    (see, inter alia, Joined Cases C-456/01 P and C-457/01 P Henkel v OHIM
    [2004] ECR I-5089, paragraph 48).
    46. Equally, the fact a third party has long used a sign for an identical or
    similar product capable of being confused with the mark applied for and
    that that sign enjoys some degree of legal protection is one of the factors
    relevant to the determination of whether the applicant was acting in bad
    47. In such a case, the applicant’s sole aim in taking advantage of the
    rights conferred by the Community trade mark might be to compete
    unfairly with a competitor who is using a sign which, because of
    characteristics of its own, has by that time obtained some degree of legal
    48. That said, it cannot however be excluded that even in such
    circumstances, and in particular when several producers were using, on
    the market, identical or similar signs for identical or similar products
    capable of being confused with the sign for which registration is sought,
    the applicant’s registration of the sign may be in pursuit of a legitimate
    49. That may in particular be the case, as stated by the Advocate General
    in point 67 of her Opinion, where the applicant knows, when filing the
    application for registration, that a third party, who is a newcomer in the
    market, is trying to take advantage of that sign by copying its presentation,
    and the applicant seeks to register the sign with a view to preventing use
    of that presentation.
    50. Moreover, as the Advocate General states in point 66 of her Opinion,
    the nature of the mark applied for may also be relevant to determining
    whether the applicant is acting in bad faith. In a case where the sign for
    which registration is sought consists of the entire shape and presentation
    of a product, the fact that the applicant is acting in bad faith might more
    readily be established where the competitors’ freedom to choose the
    shape of a product and its presentation is restricted by technical or
    commercial factors, so that the trade mark proprietor is able to prevent his
    competitors not merely from using an identical or similar sign, but also
    from marketing comparable products.”

    38. From the emails provided in evidence, reference is made to “our name”,
    reference is made to other parties as being “frauds”, reference is made to Mr
    McGrath’s Order being the successors of a previous Order (and thus entitled to carry
    on that name), reference is made to searches of the Intellectual Property Office’s
    website to check that the name was free. None of this indicates to me that the intent
    was to frustrate others legitimate use, indeed, it seems to me that Mr McGrath was
    merely trying to protect the name of his Order by way of trade mark registration.
    This, on the face of it, would not be regarded as falling below the standard of
    commercial behaviour, on the contrary, it reflects what I would regard as normal
    commercial behaviour. I therefore have difficulty in finding that the application was
    filed with the sole objective of preventing a third party from entering (or indeed,
    staying) on the market.

    39. I must, of course, consider the evidence filed by Mr McGowan attempting to
    show that Mr McGrath is trying to intimidate/confuse others with his list (on his
    website) of so called registered marks and by breaking down his registered mark into
    phrases. The difficulty here, though, is that the evidence shows Mr McGrath’s activity
    post registration whereas the question to be answered relates to bad faith when
    making the application for registration. However, although the evidences relates to
    matters that took place after registration, there is a potential for it to inform the
    tribunal as to intent where reasonable inferences can be drawn. The website in
    Appendix A of Mr McGowan’s statement of case shows Mr McGrath’s website before
    the application for a declaration of invalidity was made. It indicates a registered trade
    mark status for various designations including:
    40. Reference is also made at this time to:
    “All these self created Orders, within the UK must now cease with immediate
    effect from 11/9/20076. This from illegally using our registered patented
    names in any format of SKT, SMOTJ, Scottish Knight Templars, Sovereign
    Military Order Temple Jerusalem, all are (RTM)…”
    41. However, in Mr McGowan’s evidence, the website now (or at least when the
    evidence was compiled) carries the following relevant designations:
    Our Registered Scottish Charity Number SCO037940 Military Order Knights
    of Christ OCMTH (RTM).
    Scottish Knight Templars Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem (R)TM
    They are not recognised by us the; SCOTTISH KNIGHT TEMPLARS
    Or any others referring to the Order of the Temple, nor under the Magisterial
    Grand Prior of the continuing SKT-SMOTH,OR THE IFA-OCMTH(R)TM.
    42. The second set of website documentation represents a cleaned up version. Mr
    McGrath’s explanation for this is set out in his counterstatement thus:
    “The use of RTM on initials on two pages of my website. I do formally
    apologise for any offence caused to anyone. It was an error on my part this
    based on incorrect information on Copyright Law. I had removed them within
    a day and did apologise on my site to anyone affected as well…..”

    43. I agree that the version of the website filed with Mr McGowan’s statement of
    case is misleading in terms of indicating that certain designations are registered
    trade marks. This could, arguably, indicate bad faith. However, this must be
    balanced against the emails mentioned above which do not seem to me to be
    indicative of the type of activity with which Mr McGowan is concerned. Whilst bad
    faith in making an application cannot be cured by later corrective activity (such as
    cleaning up the website) the corrective explanation leads me to conclude, taking all
    factors into account, that Mr McGrath’s intention was to protect his Order’s name,
    and that the post registration action of making misleading designations was more a
    case of an overzealous proprietor utilising a mis-informed appreciation of trade mark

    44. Giving further consideration to the other factors indicative of bad faith set out by
    the ECJ in the above case, there is no indication in any of the evidence that the,”I note that IFA-OCMTH is a registered trade mark in its own right (the proprietor being Mr McGrath)under UK registration 2458264,”
    objective of the application was to compete unfairly with a sign that is capable of
    being confused with the application. Whether confusion with any earlier mark or right
    actually results will, however, be dealt with later. Furthermore, in contrast to the
    above ECJ case, this is not a shape mark which could potentially prevent the
    marketing of comparable goods and services. Taking into account all the relevant
    circumstances, I do not consider that Mr McGrath, in making his application,
    has acted in bad faith. The ground of invalidation under section 3(6) of the Act
    must fail.

    45. I should add for the benefit of both parties that the role of this tribunal is simply
    to adjudicate on the disputes that are in issue (the pleaded grounds). Any other
    issues that have been referred to (such as both parties asking that I instruct the other
    to cease various courses of action) are not within the remit of the tribunal.
    The section 5 grounds of invalidation
    46. This ground is based on an earlier collective CTM. The respective trade marks
    are detailed below:
    mark The earlier mark3

    Mr McGrath’s trade
    Class 36: Provision of charitable
    fundraising services.
    Class 41: Charitable services, namely
    educational, training, counselling and
    cultural services.
    Class 09: Informational and/or educational electronic
    publications and data collections, such as electronically,
    magnetically or optically recorded data, audio and/or
    video, on topics of tolerance, peace, human rights,
    religious and political history, and religious and political
    Class 16: Informational and/or educational printed
    matter, such as manuals, brochures, pamphlets,
    magazines, books, periodicals, leaflets, newspapers,
    photographs and other publications, including
    publications distributed by facsimile, on the topics of
    tolerance, peace, human rights, religious and political
    history, and religious and political freedom.
    Class 36: Charitable fund raising for humanitarian
    The earlier mark stands in the name of
    Class 41:Workshops and lectures and film, audio,
    video and television production on topics of tolerance,
    peace, human rights, religious and political history, and
    religious and political freedom.
    47. Again, I repeat my summary of the ground relied on:
    The section 5 grounds
    • Reliance is placed on Community Trade Mark (“CTM”) 2758308 for the
    section 5 grounds. Against his earlier mark it is claimed Mr McGrath’s
    mark would, a) cause confusion, b) would harm the reputation of CTM
    2758308 (and any other Scottish Knight Templar organisation and c)
    that Mr McGrath is passing-off as CTM 2758308.
    48. In relation to the grounds relating to “confusion”, sections 5(1), 5(2)(a) and
    5(2)(b) have been mentioned. I do not intend to say a great deal about sections 5(1)
    & 5(2)(a) of the Act, this is because it is a prerequisite of those sections that the
    respective trade marks are identical. They are clearly not. In relation to section
    5(2)(b) of the Act, this reads:
    “5.-(2) A trade mark shall not be registered if because –
    (a) ……
    (b) it is similar to an earlier trade mark and is to be registered for goods or
    services identical with or similar to those for which the earlier trade mark is
    there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public, which includes
    the likelihood of association with the earlier trade mark.”
    49. In relation to case-law, I bear in mind the guidance provided by the ECJ in a
    number of judgments germane to this issue, notably: Sabel BV v. Puma AG [1998]
    R.P.C. 199, Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer [1999] R.P.C. 117,
    Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer & Co. GmbH v. Klijsen Handel B.V [2000] F.S.R. 77, Marca
    Mode CV v. Adidas AG + Adidas Benelux BV [2000] E.T.M.R. 723, Medion AG V
    Thomson multimedia Sales Germany & Austria GmbH (Case C-120/04) and Shaker
    di L. Laudato & Co. Sas (C-334/05). The above judgments set out the primary
    principles to be applied, but to summarise the question though, it is a matter of
    determining whether the similarities between the respective marks and the
    respective goods and services combine to create a likelihood of confusion on the
    part of the average consumer.
    50. I will firstly comment on the similarity between the marks. I must do so with
    reference to the visual, aural and conceptual similarities between them bearing in
    mind their distinctive and dominant components (Sabel BV v. Puma AG, paragraph
    23). Visually, Mr McGrath’s mark is made up of English words whereas the earlier
    mark is made up of Latin. The earlier mark also has a prominent cross device
    although it is not so prominent that the words lose all impact. There is a small degree
    of similarity between some of the individual words that make up the respective
    English/Latin phrases (e.g. Ordo/Order, Templi/Temple, Militaris/Military) but other
    individual words have no similarity (e.g. supremus/sovereign,
    hiersolymanti/Jerusalem). Mr McGrath’s mark also has the additional element
    SCOTTISH KNIGHT TEMPLARS. These same observations flow through to the
    aural comparison and how the marks will be pronounced. I am left with the view that
    the differences between the Latin phrase and the English phrase are so strong that I
    cannot hold, comparing the marks as presented, that there is visual or aural similarity
    between them.
    51. Different considerations apply to conceptual similarity. This is because Mr
    McGowan views OSMTH to be commonly known as The Sovereign Military Order of
    the Temple of Jerusalem. If this is the case then, arguably, there could be a finding
    of conceptual similarity. However, the first problem with this line of argument is that
    all these matters must be judged through the eyes of the average consumer (Sabel
    BV v. Puma AG) and I must guard against assuming to readily the degree of
    knowledge that the average consumer may or may not possess4. In this case, whilst
    the relevant public who could potentially encounter the respective marks in relation
    to the respective goods and services may include those who have a particular
    interest in the Knights Templar, this, in my view, would only represent a very small
    subset of the relevant public. The average or notional consumer cannot, therefore,
    be regarded as such a person because the services (for example, fundraising and
    charitable services) are aimed at the public at large. Given this, the average
    consumer, who is unlikely to have any specific knowledge of templar history and its
    relevant organisations, would not create any form of conceptual link between the
    above marks. In view of this, there is no conceptual similarity.
    52. A ground under section 5(2)(b) can only succeed if the respective marks are
    similar. I have found that there is no visual, aural or conceptual similarity. Without
    similarity the ground of opposition must fail. The ground of invalidation raised
    under section 5(2) of the Act must, therefore, be rejected.
    53. Mr McGowan also claims that Mr McGrath is passing himself off (or at least his
    Order is) as the above CTM. Although not expressly claimed as such, I take this to
    mean that the use of Mr McGrath’s registration would cause the public (or a
    substantial number of the public5) to believe that Mr McGraph’s services are actually
    being offered or provided by the International OSMTH.
    In the Cherokee case (BL O-048-08), Ms Carboni (sitting as the Appointed Person) stated:
    “ The next three criticisms all relate to the Hearing Officer’s assessment of conceptual
    similarity between the mark applied for and the earlier trade marks. While the Applicant
    contended in its Counterstatement that the earlier marks would be recognised to refer to the
    Cherokee tribe and that the tribe was well known to the general public, no evidence was
    submitted to support this. By accepting this as fact, without evidence, the Hearing Officer was
    effectively taking judicial notice of the position. Judicial notice may be taken of facts that are
    too notorious to be the subject of serious dispute. But care has to be taken not to assume that
    one’s own personal experience, knowledge and assumptions are more widespread than they
    See Neutrogena Corporation and Ant. v. Golden Limited and Anr. [1996] R.P.C. 473
    54. Section 5(4)(a) (on which a passing-off case is founded) of the Act reads:
    “A trade mark shall not be registered if, or to the extent that, its use in the
    United Kingdom is liable to be prevented –
    (a) by virtue of any rule of law (in particular, the law of passing
    off) protecting an unregistered trade mark or other sign used in
    the course of trade, or
    (b) ……………………
    A person thus entitled to prevent the use of a trade mark is referred to in this
    Act as the proprietor of an “earlier right” in relation to the trade mark.”

    55. The elements of the classic trinity of passing off can be summarised as: 1)
    goodwill, 2) misrepresentation and 3) damage. In Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v
    Borden Inc [1990] R.P.C.341, Lord Oliver summarised the position quite succinctly
    when he stated:
    “The law of passing off can be summarised in one short general proposition–
    no man may pass off his goods as those of another. More specifically, it may
    be expressed in terms of the elements which the plaintiff in such an action has
    to prove in order to succeed. These are three in number. First he must
    establish a goodwill or reputation attached to the goods or services which he
    supplies in the mind of the purchasing public by association with the
    identifying ‘get-up’ (whether it consists simply of a brand name or trade
    description, or the individual features of labelling or packaging) under which
    his particular goods or services are offered to the public, such that the get-up
    is recognised by the public as distinctive specifically of the plaintiff’s goods or
    services. Secondly, he must demonstrate a misrepresentation by the
    defendant to the public (whether or not intentional) leading or likely to lead the
    public to believe that goods or services offered by him are the goods or
    services of the plaintiff…Thirdly he must demonstrate that he suffers, or in a
    quia timet action that he is likely to suffer, damage by reason of the erroneous
    belief engendered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the
    defendant’s goods or services is the same as the source of those offered by
    the plaintiff.”

    56. There are a number of problems with Mr McGowan’s claim. Firstly, in terms of
    goodwill, I must be satisfied that the International OSMTH has a goodwill in the UK
    on which it can rely. My concerns on this do not stem from the fact that the
    organisation is a charitable one with religious historical roots (rather than a traditional
    trading business) but instead stem from the lack of evidence to support that OSMTH
    International have a goodwill in the UK. There is no doubt that the organisation
    exists, but there is no information provided by Mr McGrath regarding its members in
    the UK, its activities and so on. There is no information about what goods and
    services it has provided let alone the scale and significance of any provision.
    Furthermore, I am far from satisfied that the designation OSMTH is distinctive solely
    of them given that there is clear evidence that there are two OSMTH organisations –
    the international organisation that owns the CTM and another organisation, referred
    to in the evidence as “OSMTH regency” or “OSMTH Portugal” indicating, as I
    mention in paragraph 17 above, a faction of OSMTH who maintain loyalty to Grand
    Master Fontes.

    57. Even setting aside my concerns surrounding goodwill, there are further concerns
    in relation to whether there will be a misrepresentation. Firstly, Mr McGrath claims to
    have been a member of his Order since the early 1960s. The impact of such a claim
    is important given that if this is the case then the conduct that is complained of (use
    of the registered trade mark) has, in any event, been going on for some time. The
    relevance of this is material to misrepresentation given the findings of the courts in a
    number of cases6.

    58. Furthermore, whilst I am not limited (in contrast to the section 5(2) ground) to
    considering the position from the perspective of the average consumer and can,
    instead, consider the position from the perspective of those who know of the OSMTH
    (International) and the goods and services it provides (although this is not clear),
    and, that this type of person may know of the translation (or alternate name) of
    OSMTH, there are two further problems. Firstly, it is not clear whether OSMTH is a
    direct translation of Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem. There is
    contrasting evidence not just from the respective parties, but contrasting evidence
    from sources that can be attributed to OSMTH International; one claims that the
    direct translation of OSMTH is The Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of
    Jerusalem (see the homepage of OSMTH) but another claims that the translation is
    Supreme Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem (see Mr McGrath’s A006). The
    second problem relates to the existence of the other OSMTH and, therefore, even if
    a relevant member of the public believed that the Latin and the English phrases in
    question (OSMTH/The Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem) meant
    the same thing, a person with this degree of knowledge would also know of the
    existence of the OSMTH Regency and this would prevent that person from making
    an assumption and positively believing that Mr McGrath’s Order was, or is connected
    to, OSMTH International. A relevant person may wonder about a connection, but this
    is not enough for me to find that a misrepresentation has occurred. All of this is
    compounded by the fact that there appear to be a number of different organisations
    both nationally and internationally that make use of similar sounding designations,
    and, therefore, a finding of misrepresentation becomes even less likely. Furthermore,
    the fact that Mr McGrath’s full Order name also includes the words SCOTTISH
    KNIGHT TEMPLARS may also mean that the public may see that Order as an Order
    with a similar root, but one based in Scotland with an autonomous status.
    59. I note that Mr McGowan filed further documentation (but this was not, in the
    event, filed in evidence) showing that Mr McGrath has now been expelled as a
    representative of OSMTH Regency. This does not affect the matter because matters
    must be judged at the time when Mr McGrath filed his application for registration
    and, furthermore, this does little to affect my analysis of the likelihood of members of
    the public believing that Mr McGrath’s Order was that of OSMTH International. The
    ground of invalidation under section 5(4) also fails.
    See, for example, Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd [1981] RPC 429
    60. Again, for information, the parties should note that all I am considering here is
    the use by Mr McGrath of the designation SCOTTISH KNIGHT TEMPLARS
    other name (such as OSMTH) or designation.

    61. The final claim under section 5 of the Act relates to potential harm to the
    reputation of the collective CTM. On this, reference is made to section 5(3) of the
    Act. I will deal with this issue briefly. This is because, firstly, it is a prerequisite under
    section 5(3) that the marks in question are identical or similar. I have already
    determined under section 5(2) that they are not. Secondly, to succeed under this
    ground, evidence of the repute of the earlier mark must be presented to the tribunal.
    Without a reputation, the ground cannot possibly succeed. A reputation in this
    context has been defined by the ECJ in General Motors Corp v Yplon SA [2000]
    R.P.C. 572 thus:
    “The degree of knowledge required must be considered to be reached when
    the earlier mark is known by a significant part of the public concerned by the
    products or services covered by that trade mark.”

    62. As stated in relation to some of the other grounds, whilst I do not doubt the
    existence of the OSMTH International, there is no evidence before the tribunal as to
    the scale of its use and what goods and services it offers. There is nothing in
    evidence for me to even assess let alone be able to make a decision that the mark is
    known to a significant part of the relevant public concerned with the goods and
    services of the earlier mark. This is particularly so when one considers that the
    goods and services are ones potentially aimed at the general public. As I cannot
    find that the earlier CTM is similar to Mr McGrath’s mark, nor that the CTM has
    a reputation, the ground under section 5(3) of the Act must fail.

    63. In view of the above findings, all the grounds for invalidation have failed. Mr
    McGowan’s application for invalidation must, therefore, be rejected.

    64. Mr McGrath has been successful and is entitled to a contribution towards his
    costs. I hereby order Mr. McGowan to pay Mr McGrath the sum of £900. This sum is
    calculated as follows:
    Considering application for invalidity £100
    Filing counterstatement £150
    Considering Mr McGrath’s evidence £250
    Filing evidence £400
    Total £900

    65. It should be noted that when calculating the above costs, I have taken into
    account the fact that Mr McGrath has not been legally represented and the guidance
    given by the Appointed Persons on the relevance of this factor7.

    66. The above sum should be paid within seven days of the expiry of the appeal
    period or within seven days of the final determination of this case if any appeal
    against this decision is unsuccessful.
    Dated this 16th day of July 2009
    Oliver Morris
    For the Registrar
    The Comptroller-General
    See the decisions of Mr Simon Thorley QC in Adrenalin (BL O/040/02) and Mr Richard Arnold QC in
    South Beck (BL O/160/08).

    Luis Matos responded: September 16, 2009 at 4:03 pm
    The transcription only serves to underline what I said: Mr. McGowan made a small mistake on his claims. The court clearly says that the designation CANNOT be used in conjunction with OSMTJ or OSMTH. But since that was not the center of dispute, then it cannot be ruled on…

    So, again, do you think I should try my own case against the “trade mark” you so proudly use by requesting the court to deem it a few centuries older than the 1974 registration (thus public domain)? Instead of websites, I can provide the court with documents from the 30′s, 40′s, 50′s and 60′s (and that is the 19th century!!!). I can also provide a few earlier samples that show the usage of the name… Do you think I would stand a better chance than Mr. McGowan?

    Luis de Matos

    Chev James R. Weber KGCTJ Prior said: September 17, 2009 at 6:47 pm
    If you have those documents it should be revealed in court ten this mess can end once and for all let me know what help you need from USA.
    Chev James R. Weber

    consolidation said: November 28, 2009 at 10:23 am
    Noting the earlier vows and statements in the below link and then noting the comments made here on this forum by Mr. Reese; maybe the public support of Mr.Comrie whose club has been exposed using a defunct charity number seems a very strange about face.
    It may have something to do with his being expelled for rants like the below and his subsequent expulsion from the Order that Mr McGrath was then Chef Mondial of though.
    Note Mr Reece’s chasitising others and reminding all of the oath of fealty to the Order and including Mr McGrath…

    Chev James said: November 28, 2009 at 11:39 am
    I have long since repudiated some of the assertions I made in that Post article. For one thing, I now consider Chev. Vince Zubras to be a friend. Times change. But my oath of fealty remains intact. That oath was to the order, and not to any one person. I bear no ill will toward anyone. At the moment, the Templar world is still caught up in petty bickering. We all need to bury the hatchet, make apologies, and admit when we’ve been wrong. I was wrong about Chev. Zubras; he is a fine gentleman. So is Chev. Comrie. And I wish Chev. McGrath the very best. Why cannot we all work together for the kingdom of heaven? Sooner or later, we must all give an account for our actions. Remember what our Lord said about calling our brother a fool? Christians are being martyred while we are bickering and dithering. If anyone is worthy of the title, “Templar knight,” let him make peace with his brothers and sisters and pledge himself anew to the glorification of God.

    consolidation said: November 28, 2009 at 12:18 pm
    But we have taken holy oaths, including oaths of fealty, and my loyalty is to the Order–to you and to our Grand Prior General! We, who have been knighted as Scottish Knights Templar, are honor bound to follow Scotland and the head of our Order, Chev. James J. P. McGrath, and that we must do!

    I suppose to some words are cheap and promises or oaths are temporary.

    Chev James said: November 28, 2009 at 12:32 pm
    And I was loyal. I was loyal to the point that my conscience allowed.

    How about you, Will? How would you rate your loyalty to your fellow knights and to the order?

    Want to tell us about the purge you were involved in–that involved all Protestants?

    consolidation said: November 29, 2009 at 8:08 am
    sorry Mr Reese, you are defaming someone again without poof.
    I am not Will, you owe him an apology …yet again.
    I just pointed out your own words.
    In turn you present uneducated guesses aimed at innocent parties.

    Chev James said: November 29, 2009 at 7:38 pm
    So, if I understand you correctly, sir, if you joined the Army and took an oath to obey the President and the officers appointed over you, and you were ordered by one of those officers to kill innocent civilians in violation of the Geneva Convention, you would blindly follow that officer’s orders because you wouldn’t want to break your enlistment oath. Is that correct?

    I suppose that you would call a soldier who refused to kill innocents “disloyal” to his superior officer, would you not?

    If you are not whom I think you are, you still share the same views and are guilty of the same sins.

    We know what was happening in the SKT. You do, too. And, perhaps, if you had not bent someone’s ear past the limit, that person would not have gone down the ruinous path that he did.

    Out of loyalty, I told a certain person that he was wrong. He refused to listen, and continued on a ruinous path. I refused to let him take the USA priory with him.

    You, on the other hand, in a bid to gain titles and ranks, were like the “loyal” SS officer telling der Fuehrer that the “final solution” was a wonderful piece of work, and that you could hardly wait to carry out the orders.

    That’s not loyalty. It’s moral cowardice and sickening sycophancy. And it’s also a sign that you’ve ceded your soul and critical faculties to another–just like certain Wehrmacht officers did in the last century. And we all know what that led to.

    consolidation said: November 30, 2009 at 3:11 am
    no Mr Reece,
    But you have fabricated a whole story to try to justify a backflip and then invented another imaginary story about me and this after slandering Will via your ignorance.

    I have pesented on fact and your words, you have just presented innuendo including SS references and conjecture to hide your own previous failings and the blatant lack of apology to Will whom you accused without proof.
    I think your honour has been exposed as lacking, not not mine.

    well done! , very dishonourable Sir.

    I thought you wanted everyone to get along ? that sentiment you asked for seems a bit hollow words now, noting your recent posts and slanderous words.

    Chev James said: November 30, 2009 at 4:26 am
    Perhaps you would give us the honor of knowing your name, since an honorable person does not shoot slings and arrows from the shadows of anonymity.

    As for those persons you seem to be so adamantly defending, the record speaks for itself. Chev. Gordon MacGregor Comrie leads the Scottish Templars in Scotland through legitimate succession. The knights elected one, and expelled two others–and that is an indisputable fact.

    Yes, healing and reconciliation needs to take place, but that cannot happen as long as people are hiding in the shadows, making false accusations against others.

    Reveal yourself, and give your own version of what you think happened, and let the others here judge for themselves. That is what an honorable person would do!

    consolidation said: November 30, 2009 at 1:45 pm
    Dear Mr Reece, you really do not read too well do you.

    I have not accused anyone of anything. I have dealt in fact, unlike you.

    I have however pointed out your words and your errors and the fact you slandered someone and still have not apologised.

    No false accuastions from me, just your slandering Will and highlighting your words on fealty.

    I have never mentioned Graham or Will or any Order, you did! Please try to be at least moderately accurate.

    You have erred in slandering someone and now are attempting to use false indignation and outrage to hide this fact and also the fact that whilst you have been proven to be wrong you still refuse to apologise.
    Mr Reece, the slings and arrows have all been released by you alone.

    Honourable people admit when they are wrong and ensure they do not slander people with wild accusations.

    Please note Mr Reece that you did exactly this and yet you still refuse to apologise to the innocent party you defamed.

    Please do not talk of honour as it is hypocritial coming from a person following your chosen course of actions.

    I will not waste my breath on you any more.

    Chev James said: November 30, 2009 at 1:58 pm
    Slander is that which is untrue. But I would say to you, Chev. Afraid-to-State-My-Name, that if the shoe fits, wear it.

    And a corollary: “It is the bitten dog that always yelps!”

    Return to the shadows–it is where you and your brethren always to their best work!

    consolidation said: November 30, 2009 at 2:13 pm
    non nobis, non nobis…try to interpret these words some day , instead of self promotion, badge collecting and slanderering innocents.
    I have no wish( unlike yourself and Weber aka asmotj and other members of the “Supremes”) to plaster my name all over the i/net as the self professed fonts of all things Templar, I just try to deal in truth and as instructed by Psalm 115 anonomously do God’s work.
    Try it sometime, I pray you will as it is never to late to walk in the light of truth.

    Ps: I am not a Templar, I however have unfortunately proven neither are you.

    Chev James said: November 30, 2009 at 2:22 pm
    Why don’t you tell us your name and speak forthrightly?

    If you believe someone has been “slandered,” then lay out your case for it.

    Let honor and truth prevail!

    consolidation said: November 30, 2009 at 2:36 pm
    Did you not accuse someone else of being me and I quote you as you seem to be in denial…

    ” How about you, Will? How would you rate your loyalty to your fellow knights and to the order?’

    Want to tell us about the purge you were involved in–that involved all Protestants?”
    end quote …

    Mr Reece, read my previous post and this time I pray you try too comprehend its message.

    Goodbye and I hope you see the error of your ways and actions.

    I will continue to pray for you.

    Chev James said: November 30, 2009 at 2:39 pm
    Pray for courage so that you will have the courage of your convictions and will not be afraid to reveal yourself.

    consolidation said: November 30, 2009 at 3:38 pm
    Quote Mr Reese….”Osama, you have been wrong on both counts. There is a God, and there are Knights Templar who still serve Him centuries after the Crusades.

    This Knight Templar calls you a craven coward and an infidel. He calls you a murderer of the innocent, and a defiler of holy places. He calls you the favorite son of Satan, for you above all men on the earth have done your best to do Satan’s bidding.

    Not only that, but to prove to the entire world that you are a coward and an infidel, this Knight Templar challenges you to single combat in the sands of Pakistan. I challenge you to meet me with scimitar or sword, to be pitted against myself and a holy sword consecrated to our Order-a sword that was forged to destroy evil. Here’s the deal: if I win, Al Qaeda is disbanded-forever. If you win, then you can set the head of a Knight Templar on a pike outside your tent, and you can claim that you slew the chief of all Crusaders in the United States. ” end of quote.

    this is an exerpt from

    Dear Mr Reese, please attempt to control your ego, if possible (Chief of all Crusaders in the USA!… really!!!)

    Mr Reese,(PS: my apologies for misspelling your name earlier) please read / comprehend Psalm 115.

    Chev James said: November 30, 2009 at 6:50 pm
    I was quite mistaken.

    Hello, Gary. How’s the Archbishop business these days?

    consolidation said: December 1, 2009 at 1:50 am
    wrong again Jamie boy, remember he was one of your OSMTH “supremes”members when he was caught and defrocked by McGrath.

    At least Gary Martin Beaver cannot be besmirched as he is just pond scum, but you again are swining at shadows and making accusations based on no form of evidence.
    You invent things when you do not know….there is another term for that…..

    Please Mr Reese take some time to contemplate the meaning of and actions of honourable pepole and also maybe explore Psalm 115 one day.

    consolidation said: December 1, 2009 at 2:20 am
    it has been proven you do not learn from your mistakes, you still “invent” when you do not understand, there con be no honour in that.
    Goodbye for the last time, I will continue to pray for you.

    Chev James said: December 1, 2009 at 4:16 am
    Until you present evidence to the contrary, I will consider you to be Gary.

    If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it’s a duck.

    Shame on you, Gary! You tried this on another forum and were found out.

    You’ve been found out here. Oh, you are quite capable of self-imprecation if it serves to keep your anonymity intact.

    Be off with you until you can come back and speak forthrightly. I will not answer any more of your questions from the shadows, Gary. I will not respond to any more of your cowardly jibes.

    If you cannot put your name by your words, then your words have no meaning, no force.

    Nor does your life.

    consolidation said: December 1, 2009 at 2:03 pm
    how different Mr Reese, more slander and lies to cover your original errors.
    Please note, (if you can hold your temper long enough and not launch into another zealotous rant)that I did not ask you any questions, you asked me many though….

    Mr Reese, again you are wrong and off topic to hide the fact that you slander people as a matter of course when you really have no idea of what you are talking about.
    Very Christian, please talk to your priest aboiut that very poor and unchivalrous / dishonourable habit.

    Also please note, I only made you accountable for your own words Mr Reese, I have only provided quotes from you ..which you now call “jibes”. Yes they were the ravings of a fanatical lunatic and this type of behaviour cost you dearly when you were ousted from the real Templars…as was Beaver…as was Comrie as was Weber…as was Mangan…

    So we now see that EVEN YOU you think your words are worthless and with that you have provided enough evidence of your lunacy for a millenia.

    Call me who you will Mr Reese as it is the only way you can appease your guilty conscience at all the slander you have been proven to have flung (if you have one), I now see even more clearly that you have nil honour and no idea of the real ideals of Templarism and a warped and decayed moral fibre.

    No wonder you were removed and now are reduced to residing in the play neo-templar group of your own invention.

    I will however pray for you.

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 2, 2009 at 4:32 pm
    Dear Bro
    no Templar takes a another Templar to court. we don’t seek justice from pagan courts.
    read the Book of corint . so its high time that this stops. so don’t turn this spiritual man who followers the rule of st Benedict into your scape Goat. no one is a Templar until he follows the rule of st benedict.please Go read the rule of St benedict before any one can call them self has a Templar.

    From the Benedictine Oblate .

    Chev James said: December 2, 2009 at 6:52 pm
    Dr. Balavendrian, thank you! As for myself, I bear no ill will toward anyone. I have made my own share of mistakes. I do not have a “lock” on righteousness. There has been too much infighting within the Templar orders. Much time, money and even honor has been wasted in the pressing of lawsuits and in acrimonious exchanges that serve no purpose. If one makes it to heaven, all earthly titles and ranks must be checked at the “door.” There needs to be a reconciliation between all parties, with no hidden agendas. Christians are being martyred in the Communist and Islamic countries–THERE is where our fight should be, and not with each other. We do not have to be in 100 percent agreement on everything, but we should be in agreement that we should put serving our Lord above all else. For my own sins and shortcomings, I am sorry. I hope that everyone in the Templar orders will make a serious self-assessment and will resolve to put service to our Lord above all temporal concerns.

    DR balavendrian( benedictine oblate0 said: December 3, 2009 at 11:59 am
    Dear Bro
    PAx. The Grand master who was burned never even raised a sworad aginst the pope and the king of france . he was obedient till the End like christ thats why The templars are called poor knights of Christ. so if there is Fighting among this so called templars , i say they are not and they cannot claim to be St benedict says god wants the repent of the sinner not the Death, As a Benedictine oblate .this are no templars . They dont follow the The Rule of St benedict.

    we must fight the enemies of Christ but see they are fighting for patent rights its a choke. No one can take the name of the Templars Except one who follows the Rule. See Psalms 14 and paslms 15.
    Rev 7 verses 13 to 17. Read st Malackys prophercies who will fight for the Faith the Benedictine Monks they are the true Knight templars . so if are true followers of Christ, the poor Knights of christ lets be one or not do dare you call yourselfs as Templars , by your Infighting it shows you are freemasons not templars. wolves in sheep cloth. seek peace and we serve the Lord as his true solidiers.

    DR balavendrian( benedictine oblate0 said: December 3, 2009 at 12:09 pm
    what a joke now the Knights templars are for sale what they mena By trade mark, its like Judas selling christ.sorry brother there is no Trade mark patent in Heaven. its only One mark you are of christ or not see the revelation chapter Rev7 verses 13 to 17 , thats the god trade mark.
    so dont call yr self as templar
    benedictine oblate.

    consolidation said: December 3, 2009 at 12:40 pm
    Amen, read the scriptures and find it righteous to repent and maybe even acknowledge your slander here Mr Reece.Please Please read Psalm 115 and meditate on its message, I will continue pray for you and your soul as you are a Child of God needing guidance.

    Chev James said: December 3, 2009 at 1:50 pm
    I quite agree about the trademark issues. One group in the US has even trademarked the “Non nobis . . .” motto of Psalm 113. One can easily distinguish the true Templars from the Templars who have turned away from the spirit of Rule: the latter busy themselves with court cases and with attacks upon others. I have seen what people claiming to be Templars have done to one another. I have found this one thing to be true: you cannot suspend your own critical faculties. You need to check out things for yourself: if certain claims appear to be outrageous, then they probably are. If a “leader” seems to enjoy fighting with others ALL of the time, and constantly turns upon his closest lieutenants, you have to question if you are truly in a Christian organization. As our Lord said, “You shall know them by their fruits.” What are the fruits of the various groups claiming to be Templar? Is it perpetual infighting, or is it charitable works done within the community? Is it sniping at others, or does its members actually lay their lives on the line for the order and our Lord? I have sadly noted that some “leaders” will invent enemies if they cannot find any genuine evildoers nearby. My own order split off from another that was racked by the bitterest of infighting; we simply could not take it any more. We have since reconciled with the new leader of that group. And we have reconciled with some of those that we were “taught” to revile. There are those out there who are still bitter about the events of the past–to them I say that we should recall the warnings of our Lord about calling our brother a fool. Here’s what we must all remember: ALL of us fall short of the glory of God. Our mightiest works are nothing more than a pile of dirty rags in the sight of our Lord. I will say this: there is not one person out there that I would be unwilling to reconcile with. And there is one person out there who may hate me, but to him I say that I still have respect for you. I still consider myself to be your friend. You did much good. You were ill-advised in the end by some of the people closest to you, and you were physically at a very low point in your life. For people to continue to hate and revile one another is like the patrons in a pub fighting one another while the pub is burning down; our fighting only serves the interests of the enemies of Christianity! Lastly, I will say this: for any of us to not forgive others is to say to our Lord that we do not need HIS forgiveness. Is there anyone who is entitled to enter heaven on his or her own merits? No, there is not one. We are all dependent upon grace, upon forgiveness. Yet, like the servant who was forgiven of his great debt but would not forgive others their small debts to him, we run the risk of losing God’s forgiveness when we will not forgive others. It is time for a new day of peace and reconciliation to dawn in the Templar world!

    consolidation said: December 3, 2009 at 2:24 pm
    Strange words and sentiment noting your previous form, but your current actions need to match them, so far they have not and so you have produced rhetoric only and displayed false modesty.
    Aknowledging your earlier (a decade ago)mistakes is one thing but it seems you have not learnt and are repeating them here and slandering wholesale.
    Apologise to those you slandered and free yourself.
    By your own words you admit you just made up your own order and incredibly seem unaware non nobis is Psalm 115.
    Really!! I am saddened fo you;try reading the Bible some time.

    Your words again Mr Reese…

    quote, “I quite agree about the trademark issues. One group in the US has even trademarked the “Non nobis . . .” motto of Psalm 113.’ end of quote.

    Please stop PRETENDING and actually read something you are supposed to follow… the Bible and maybe even Psalm 115.
    I will continue to pray for you and hope one day you find the Glory of faith as it is plain you cannot even talk the talk, let alone walk the walk.
    There is time to repent though.

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 3, 2009 at 2:56 pm
    Dear Bro
    Pls inform this lost brothers the founder of the Knight Templar is St benedict so The Knight tempar belong to st Benedict so the only one who can Trade Mark it is the Benedictines and the Orthodox order because st Benedict rule is a Orthodox one day the Orthodox order will trade mark it so no one need to fight abusing the Good Name of the Knight Templar and their Founder

    Benedictine oblate

    Templar of the Order said: December 3, 2009 at 4:54 pm
    I see two people behaving like gentleman, and this person who refers to himself as Consolidated as simply being on the attack. He claims to be praying for someone else, but I don’t think he has prayed in a very long time. This person, who steadfastly refuses to reveal himself or his organisation, appears to have no honour. He has apparently been granted a licence by his organisation to malign and slander others. From my viewpoint, he has no standing in the matters being discussed. If he is a member of the organisation that the one knight left, I can see why he left. I should say, Mr. Consolidated, that you do not appear to adhere to the tenets of any Christian church of which I am aware, much less any true chivalric order. Your purpose here is quite clear, and because you have come here with malice in your heart, it is you who should be tending to his own soul, while leaving others alone.

    consolidation said: December 4, 2009 at 6:21 am
    Sorry you feel that way, it is strange that when someone misquotes the Bible you look the other way and when that same someone slanders others you inexplicably support them and call them a Christian.
    I have provided light to Mr Reese’s words….nothing else. I admit the scrutiny does not favour him but it does supply truth.
    I wonder if Mr Reese leads the supposed neo-Order you follow. I would be interested but only if you are willing to divulge. Then we could eliminate that your post is simply sycophantic support.

    Back to basics, Defending the Bible and Christianity from abuse is every Christians duty, even yours.

    Therefore I suggest the advice professed by you should be taken not just issued.

    I see very little focus on that here, just badge collectors trying to assert superiority from strangely warped neo-templar beginnings.

    You hide your own identity but berate me for not revealling mine very funny and hypocritical!

    I aslo see you have trouble reading. I state this as I previously admitted I was not a Templar on Nov 30th.

    I do and will continue to pray that truth finally holds sway here.

    I have yet to err or lie.
    The same cannot be said of others.
    I do not wonder which path Christ would teach?

    consolidation said: December 4, 2009 at 6:48 am
    Last comment as there is no search for truth here in these pages, just slander.

    I am not a Templar but there is so much chest thumping on the internet it is easy to see the political climate as well as the real and imagined players.

    Mr Reese, Mr McGowan, Mr Comrie, Mr Young, Mr Balavendrian, Mr Mangan, Mr Zubras Jnr, Mr Beaver, Dr Anthony C….. it’s like a who’s who of those ingloriously expelled by the real Templar Orders.

    As a Christian I will continue to pray and maybe even pity the neo-organisation that has alllowed this many ex-templars in positions of office.

    Farewell and may Christ guide you.

    Chev James said: December 4, 2009 at 6:39 am
    Can I go off topic here? Would you believe me if I told you there was a group of so called “Templars” that were so ELITIST (due to their wealth and their Order’s numerous real estate holdings) that they felt they were entitled to have a Servicemark (like a Trademark) to a verse of the Bible?

    Incredible but true! The SMOTJ Inc ( the U.S. branch of the OSMTH KTI, Knights Templar International) has a trademark on a verse of the Bible that is world-famous for being THE official Templar verse because it was sung by the ancient Templars as they went into battle, Psalms 115:1

    “NON NOBIS DOMINE, SED NOMINE TUO DA GLORIAM” – Not to us, LORD, not to us but to your name be the glory, because of your love and faithfulness. See it for yourself by clicking this link:

    What is most amazing about this strange story is that this so called “Templar” group claims to be Christian! If they had an inkling of what Christianity was about, they would realize that if Christ was alive today in human form, He would have driven them out like he drove out the Money Changers that were desecrating his Temple in Mark 11:15. Christ preached AGAINST thievery, and this time they are stealing from God. Trademarking things that don’t belong to them is theft and denies deserving groups of what has been in the public domain for over 2,000 years. By Trademarking God’s Holy Bible, they have brought shame on their Order.

    But we do have a just God, our attorney weighed in on this and insists they have absolutely no right whatsoever to their absurdity.
    According to him, “Use of established religious symbols cannot be restricted by statute or Law.” Further, our attorney states: “Scripture cannot be trademarked because it infringes on the Freedom to practice your faith. This would violate the separation of church and state.” We are confident that they will not be able to enforce these ludicrous attempts.

    But wait, there’s more! This so called “Templar” group continued to try to trademark everything they could and succeeded in trademarking many of the ancient Holy crosses used by the original Templars which had also been in the public domain for centuries. But that wasn’t enough for them, they even tried to Trademark the very name, “Knights Templar.” That’s right, the name of the Order used by over 7,000 groups around the world including organizations like the Freemasons that are much bigger than them. Think about this for a moment, if the SMOTJ, having been founded in 1962, had succeeded in Service marking “Knights Templar,” they would be denying the Freemasons from using the name they began using over 200 years earlier in approximately 1717! What kind of egotism and narcissism does it take to believe you are entitled to such an ancient name so long in the public domain? From their filing, you can see that the mark is “Abandoned” because the Judge rightly denied their vanity:

    These actions go against every code of conduct you could imagine a Templar would swear to. See a small sample of the many ancient Holy symbols they feel entitled to:

    The back story of this group was that in 1995, the OSMTH KTI / (Knights Templar International), headed, at that time, by Donald Perkins, broke away from Fontes’ group and sued him in Federal district court. Perkins accused Fontes of malfeasance in handling donations from the USA OSMTH, which were in the amount of $40,000. Fontes could not muster the resources to fight the lawsuit, and Perkin’s group won by default. As I showed above, Perkin’s group has gone so far as to get holy symbols, centuries old, servicemarked and registered! Such things happen when the other side does not show up in court!

    This SMOTJ / OSMTH KTI is an elitist one and is composed mostly of retired general officers (with the rank of general or admiral), and highly placed executives and successful business owners. Their membership roll reads like a “Who’s Who” among the rich and influential in the United States. Ordinary Christians need not apply!

    Brother John has referred to a “magistral decree” placed on the Web sites of the OPCCTS in the United States and the Priory of England and Wales in the United Kingdom. This so-called “magistral decree” states that our Grand Prior General did not have the right to be referred to as the Chef Mondial of the Order. When our Grand Prior General personally questioned Fontes on the subject, Fontes denied publishing the decree. And, only a few months ago, representatives from the OSMTH under Fontes presented our Grand Prior General the Silver Medal of Merit in a special ceremony at the Magistral Grand Priory of the Holy Land!

    Now the / OSMTH=KTI also had a Secretary General, Herr Werner Rind, who took issue with the elitist mentality of the and the fact that Freemasons were also allowed to join, and broke away to form the Ordo Militiae Christi Templi Hierosolymitani (OMCTH). About a year ago, we concluded a formal affiliation with this group. The OMCTH under Herr Rind does wonderful charity work for the poor in the Holy Land, and has as its spiritual protector the Patriarch of Antioch and Jerusalem, His Beatitude Gregory III. Neither the OSMTH-KTI, nor the international OSMTH-Porto under Fontes, would qualify for a spiritual protectorship, due to the fact they accept Freemasons.

    In the United States, the OPCCTS under Zubras still gives lip service to Fontes, while trying to undermine other Templar groups, notably our own and the OMCTH. We repulsed an attack by Zubras upon the OMCTH. Zubras has quite a few of his own problems now, and hasn’t been a player on the Templar scene for some time now.

    So we are now faced with the SMOTJ / OSMTH-KTI, which would like to assimilate us, and thereby gain our claim to legitimacy, which it totally lacks. We shall, of course, not join them or affiliate with them in any way. Grand Prior McGrath, in his great wisdom, has kept us autonomous–free to make alliances with like-minded Templar groups, but free from coming under any other group’s control.

    Chev James said: December 4, 2009 at 7:41 am
    Templar of the Order, thank you for your kind words. I do not know that I have anything more to add to the “chronology” at this time, so in the absence of valid questions, I do not think I will be posting anything again soon. Hopefully, the owner of this site can regain control of it and keep it focused on the subject of Templar chronology. I suggest that the “slate be wiped clean” of personal attacks and that they be removed from the Web site, lest anyone be discouraged from posting for fear of being attacked. The issues have already been decided: the knights have spoken and have made their will known. We went our own way for a while, but we came back squarely on the side of Grand Prior Gordon MacGregor, to whom a great debt is owed for his courage, his vision and his leadership. We are now engaged in building, and we are looking confidently toward the future. We will not be distracted or diverted from our course. Lastly, I will say this: the true knight is engaged in building, not tearing down. Any true Templar order is engaged in building, not tearing down. Fighting other Christians doesn’t enhance a person or order’s reputation: it tears down your own credibility to be constantly engaged in a fight with people of your own faith. And, as Dr. Balavendrian so aptly noted, we should keep the affairs of Christian orders out of the secular courts. And just to set the record straight for this “chronology” Web page, no one in our present order was reduced in rank or expelled: we left on our own. But now we are once again aligned with the order under Grand Prior MacGregor, and the true order in Scotland–after learning all of the facts–issued a proclamation of exoneration for all of us. This historic document is recorded in the annals of our order. Again, however, we are looking toward the future. We know that the way to future growth and developing the strength required to defend the persecuted church does not lie in fighting among ourselves or with other orders. We did not join a “fight club,” we joined a Templar order so that we could defend the faith and glorify our Lord. Anything else is a distraction and should be avoided.

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 4, 2009 at 11:03 am
    Mr consolidator if you are not a Templar you have no Business in this webside . you are just here like the Dragon who wants to confuse yr self . so Be informed there are no X templars here they are all recognized by the Bishop conference and they have good standing in Asia and The Bishop conference . this are true templars who face the enemies of Christ Like you who call yr self consolidated. please drink yr own Poison and take yr Comments to yr own kind and be at peace
    Benedictine oblate

    Brownhawk said: December 4, 2009 at 11:39 am
    Actually Dr B, you might want to research a bit deeper on your claims.
    At least Comrie(name changed recently to McGregor Comrie), Young, Mangan, Beaver and yourself were actually expelled for certain from the ancient Order and thus joined the 97 founded neo-order.
    I am not too sure of the others and so will not comment on them.
    This is the unfortunate truth that you seem to have overlooked / ignored.

    It does not necessarily stop people from being good Christians, but it also does no honor to Christ when truth is hidden or brushed aside for convienience or embarressment IMO.

    Dr Anthony said: December 4, 2009 at 2:04 pm
    now you call yr self brown Hawk , for yr Kind Information now all in this website know who you are hiding behind names it clearly shows yr background you known that what happen to the macgrath association in Asia . its not a order it has no canonical approval so you know where they stand , The Bishop in Asia knows and also Europe please don’t call that a order who is their Bishop who runs the order . its a joke. so i think you need to take yr story as brown Hawk or consolidator . so I think you need to have Peace . so read psalms 14 of the Latin Vulgate.or yr new king James version psalms 15. so Brother to be stressed we are growing stronger in this spirituality. so be at peace . we don’t Brown Hawk or consolidation or what ever name you hide behind . like wolves in a sheep cloth.

    so please spend your time reading the st malachy prophecy.
    i hope you will understand this message.

    Vade retro, satan!
    Nunquam suade Mihi Vana
    Sunt Mala Quae Libas
    Ipse Venena Bibas,

    St benedict says God wants the Repentance of the sinner not the Death of the sinner. so brown Haw be at peace .
    need not reply because its waist of our time answering yr so called dialogue with the Devil.

    Be at Peace.

    brown hawk said: December 4, 2009 at 2:33 pm
    I think I understand what you are saying.
    It is difficult at times, but I also understand english is not your fist langage and will try to keep that in mind.
    It is funny that you say anyone calling for truth is evil and that it is a waste of time answering, considering you took the effort to do exactly what you call for not to be done.
    I have never considered telling the truth the devil’s work or unChristian and so we diverge there.

    I do congratulate you for admitting finally that you were kicked out of a Templar Order though. I am sure this truth will set you free.

    I will also read the prophecy you have highlighted but consider my lowly lot in life to be to follow the teachings of Jesus and God, not to concern myself with prophecy too much.

    Every day I try to praise him and do his bidding ; as I am sure you do. However we seem to seperate on what exactly that is.
    A great pity as love is really a very simple and rewarding thing.
    We seem to diverge mainly on the ninth commandment. It seems it is a commandment you sometimes struggle with.

    Peace be with you.

    brown Hawk said: December 4, 2009 at 2:43 pm
    Dear Dr Balavendrian, I have read the prophecy and am sorry to tell you that I fully expect us both to be here toiling on this mortal coil in 2013. (after accounting and factoring in a bit of time for the calendar change ie: Gregorian/Juilian)

    brown hawk said: December 4, 2009 at 2:49 pm
    PS. I aslo disagree with any interpretation of the ending of the Papacy and lastly the whole prophecy is widely attributed to be a fake.

    and then look at the citation pages/sites

    May you find some peace.

    Michael Campbell said: December 4, 2009 at 11:52 pm
    Truth is one thing, perpetuation of another’s lies is entirely another whether we realise they are lies or not. The responsibility rests upon we ourselves to determine what is truth and that which is not. I am afraid Consolidation/Brownhawk you are one of two things : you either know the truth and are being deliberately bothersome for petty and selfish reasons known only to you, or else you have naively bought into what others with very loaded agendas have told you. I can say this because I know for a fact that the content of your posts are incorrect and I can even identify the source of your distorted information as it is extremely unique.

    Yes, truth is a wonderful and liberating thing so be prepared to learn it instead of the malicious gossip and then be Christian enough to accept it ; it will set you free. Although, given that you malign others but are not big enough to disclose your true identity then I doubt you have either the moral capacity or the factual proofs to back up what you say. I look forward to intelligent debate on what should be a forum for mature discussion on Templar related subjects instead of a sounding board for your name-calling, gossip-mongering and flawed religio-philosophical interpretations.

    Michael Campbell – a Scottish Templar since 1978.

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 1:05 am
    Ok Mr Campbell, I would like to agee with you and have learnt something… but you have just accused and offered nothing in the way of substantiation or proof for your claims.

    It is diffiult to call someone flawed or wrong when you have no alternative to offer, but you have managed to do it.

    This unfortunately is typical of OSMTHU neo-order members.
    As the OSMTHU did not exist in 1978 I assume you are original Fontes, here is some interesting truth for you.

    1933 The Belgian Grand Priory restored an international association of Templar Grand Priories. A Magisterial Council was formed with Theodore Covias as Regent.

    1934 Emile-Isaac Vandenberg became Regent and Guardian of the Order. He devoted his energy and talent to revitalizing Templar Priories across Europe, including those of Italy and of Switzerland. 1942 Fearing the suppression of the Templars during the German occupation of Belgium in the Second World War, Vandenberg transferred the archives of the Order to the care of the Portuguese Grand Prior, Antonio Campello de Sousa Fontes. Vandenberg retained the Title and Office of Regent.

    1945 At the war’s end, Vandenberg requested the return of the archives, but Antonio Campello de Sousa Fontes ignored the requests. When Vandenberg died suddenly, de Sousa Fontes assumed the title of Regent. While some Priories accepted his authority, others did not.

    1947 Revised Statutes were issued by de Sousa Fontes. There is no record of them being approved by a Convent General.

    1948 In an attempt to retain the Regency in his family without record of authority from a Convent General, de Sousa Fontes designated his son, Fernando Campello de Sousa Fontes, by a “Proces Verbal” as his successor.

    1959 Some Templars separated from de Sousa Fontes’ authority.

    Note the process of transmission and its questionable basis

    Contemplate this birth of the Fontes dynasty and also the fact that Rosseria is now in charge of the OSMTH IFA please.

    I am always happy to learn ; but not one good knight that has disagreed with me here has produced anything other than self congratulatory back slapping and slander so far.

    One of your supposed high ranking knights did not even know Psalm 115, it is just too incredible for words!
    There is a pattern in this 1997 established Order of deliberately and inaccurately hiding the truth by your members.

    Who is the bigger fool? the fool
    or the fool that argues with the fool?

    I am done here as your neo-self styled order members are not capable of truth.

    Michael Campbell said: December 5, 2009 at 1:25 am
    I think you will find we are most capable of accepting the truth, but it is rather how it is presented that matters especially in the credibility of the information that is given and the way in which it is presented.

    If I may say, your first mistake is the use of the term “OSMTH IFA” This is implies that you have taken over and represent both the IFA and the OSMTH. Which is it? Both? Or do you represent the OSMTH and the OSMTHU which the IFA became? I would ask you to then produce factual evidence of this because significant membership (thousands) of both Orders categorically disagree with you. Either you do not know your modern Templar history or you are attempting to smudge the facts here. My bet is that you are unaware of the difference but have been fed the usual misinformation from a “usual” source.

    Your second mistake is that Emile Isaaac Vandenberg died as a result of a car accident on 11th April, 1943, which is proven by the death certificate registered in Belgium and which his granddaughter now has in her possession, so you can only concede that he could not have asked for the return of the archives in 1945?

    Given that the Regent/Grand Master who executed the Decree transferring the Archives and protection of the Order to Portugal was dead, how can the same be rescinded at least two years afterwards?

    I have no “high ranking Knights” so I have no idea what or who you are referring to.

    I am very happy to supply you with hard fact and in doing so I would fully expect you to do the same. I look forward to your answers.

    Michael Campbell

    Michael Campbell said: December 5, 2009 at 2:08 am
    My apologies, I forgot to add, you state “Contemplate this birth of the Fontes dynasty and also the fact that Rosseria is now in charge of the OSMTH IFA please.”

    I presume you are referring to Luis Roseira and the expulsion of Grand Master Fontes. This is very strange because not one of the Regency Grand and Magisterial Priories have voiced any form of support towards Roseira but, in fact, all have continued in their allegiance to Grand Master Fontes. Surely in any such takeover one must go with the concencus?

    Go through the links here:
    and all units of the Regency will tell you exactly where their loyalties lie. None are with Luis Roseira and all uphold the expulsion of he and James McGrath.

    Furthermore, Grand Master Fontes was present at the Grand Convents of the Order in 2008 and 2009 and was acknowledged by all of the most senior officers who sit on the international council as being the Grand Master. Where was Luis Roseira and his faction then?

    As for the IFA part of your title : I am sure Brother Luis de Matos will confirm that James McGrath attempted to take over the IFA in 1999 but his grounds were absolutely ridiculous and far from competent in terms of their legal basis.

    I don’t mean to be sharp with you, but you obviously have let yourself be led into the machinations of others who have very petty and loaded agendas.

    Michael Campbell

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 4:31 am
    Thank you Mr Campbell for your rational response, it has been difficult to have anyone here actually respond without zealotry.
    I am certain and respect that the above post is based on truth and highlights your perspective. I will say that presence at a exclusive club meeting does not legitify the club that holds it. It is just a club meeting, IMO.

    The most recent schism has been brought about in essence by this refusal of Fontes father to hand the documents back after the war(as has most of the schisms) will continue until some honor is found and the documents are rightful home again. Mr Fontes is for better or worse a freemason, there is no doubt.
    Also the new dubious activities (another groups charity number being used in england) and the succession issues within the Fontes followers do the Order no benefit IMO.
    I as an observer, hope one day the Orders, both ancient and neo can work silently towards glorifying Christ without the need for advertising and recruiting drive webpages covered with instructions etc as per Comries site. Much better to observe and recruit those who strive without the lure of badges and exclusivity.
    It is a pledge to subservience to Christ after all!

    I however am aware of how the “Fontes dynasty” was started and have never recognised it because of this information. I recognize it as a neo-order and hope from its theft it will one day again become a Templar bastion but anyne who follows that dynasty is in error if the think they have legitamacy.
    They however may be great people and do wonderful works for Christ, but are headed by a Freemason and therefore cannot call themselves Templar.
    It must be noted that I am not a Templar though. I do have an morbid interest in the ethos and the history(especially the ast 100 yrs as it has been so soiled and diluted by the infighting).

    I am a historian only and will not bother this site any more as its agenda seems all too often to be concerned self promotion and strangley invented proclamations of superiority more than accuracy.

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 5, 2009 at 4:54 am
    Dear Bro Campbell
    Pls don’t waist Time with this brown Hawk or so called Consolidated. we are Templar and benedictine we follow the rule he need to read the prologue and Psalms 15 of New king James versionand the Latin Vulgate psalms 14. he his some phantom . so brother Campbell. he knows only psalms 115 it has been TM by some one else one day they even will trade mark the Bible. so leave this guys a lone. we had enough of this jokes because the Bishops conference of Asia and Europe of the Roman catholic faith knows their abuse .you can get the letter from Bro Gordon. see what they are , canonically they don’t have a spiritual Directors neither they belong to a Orthodox church Order or the Roman catholic church. why so much of their confusion. so bro lets serve the poor . we are in the Lords service . This Website is better used by Glorying god and helping the poor . and working with the Orthodox order which are recognized by the churches.

    Lions of war
    rough Nights in the Battle.
    we tell the Truth even it causes our Life .
    friends to friends
    Indispensable to the Enemies of Christ
    pious monk in the Temple..

    so this brown Hawk or consolidation can even get a letter from their Parish priest to state they are a order what a illusion .
    We don’t want the Death of the sinner but the repentance .

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 4:56 am
    Dr Mr Campbell, I have trawled the net for many years and found many many sites that state Emile Isaaac Vandenberg asked for the documents back and Fontes just refused, your neo-Orders statement is the first time I have ever heard differently.

    I would hate to think I am in error and so I will ask you too produce a copy of the document or a link( to show its accuracy please) as many historical claims are based on this accepted text concerning the take over. The document you speak of would temper many arguements and lead to more acceptance of the neo-order OSMTHU, the OSMTH USA, The OCCPT and indeed the OSMTH IFA which you seem to be unaware are all schisms of the OSMTH brought into being over time ( directly or indirectly) because of Fontes’ refusal to return the original documents when asked by Emile Isaaac Vandenberg.

    Lastly the willing of the regency to his son was also a very strange and devisive issue, would you like to comment?
    Thank you.

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 5:04 am
    Dr Balavedrian, I have stated time and time again I am not a Templar, will you please read my post and comprehend them before you launch into fanatical and erroneous rants. Why should you worry ? After all the world will end in 2012 in your mind.

    Please please learn, I am not supporting one group more than others just pesenting my understanding of the truth, try it sometime…. or indeed prove me wrong instead of ranting.

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 5, 2009 at 5:11 am
    Brown Hawk/consolidator

    Its seems you are wright man to prophecy you might be called a saint. for yr information there is no Templar Order canonically approved its all self made club like the lions club. I am a true Templar because we are benedictine oblate we have the rule of st benedict and we follow that so. we don’t go around judging others .we have legal standing a spiritual standing in this world we are the order. so don’t go on confusing your self OSMTH is still there and I am a part of this brothers. so if you are the original please at least produce one letter from the parish priest that yr order is a order. so its a joke. .

    To call cattle black when the port itself is Black.
    we will pray for you
    as ST Benedict states . We don’t want the death of the sinner but the repentance.
    Psalms 14 and 15 brother .
    we are in the Lords service
    benedictine oblate

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 5:21 am
    A quote from the last post of the good Dr B, ” we don’t go around judging others” end quote.

    Dr B you are now doing exactly what you claim to not do???? You really are not helping your claims with your rants. Your leader is a freemason and thus not recognised as even a Christian by the Catholic Church.
    read his please it is proof, you may want to research better your claims.

    I will continue to pray for you and any works done in Christs name.

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 5:26 am
    My last attempt….Dr B…..I am not a templar…..get it now?…will you ever learn or just proceed with more ranting and ignorance!

    I will continue to pray you do actually learn!

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 5, 2009 at 5:28 am
    brown haw or consolidation
    yu say you are not a Templar .it clearly shows yr facts are all untrue . you agree that you are a Dragon . wolves in sheep cloth. so you have no business in this Templar website. so Be gone you Satan. drink your own poison .
    prayer of st benedict.

    so i am now Exorcising you Satan.

    Crux Sancti patris Benedicti
    Crux Sacrasit mihi Lux
    Non Draco Sit Mihi Dux
    vade retro satan
    numquam suade mihi vana
    sunt Mala quac Libas
    ipse venana Bibas.

    the last word means ; Satan poisonous is your bait.
    Gulp it down yourself

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 5:52 am
    You have finally worked it out!
    well done!
    It proves I was right to put the truth in baby terms so you could grasp it( I did feel a bit guilty about it but you steadfastly refused to accept truth and just continued in your ignorance). I hope you now take time to read the other posts and answer them sanely as well.

    Interesting I have never been exorsized before…guess you really are not too good at it, noting I am back. It does prove a lot about your mental health state though.
    I thought you were after repentance not death?
    And one day I hope you find /follow the ninth commandment. ( remember you lied about being booted from an Order previously )
    Your words and actions do seem to be at odds sometimes.

    I will continue to pray you continue to improve.

    brown hawk said: December 5, 2009 at 6:00 am
    BTW Dr B,
    You do realise you prayer is actually asking/praying for someone to commit suicide dont you?

    Qoute Dr B, ” last word means ; Satan poisonous is your bait.
    Gulp it down yourself
    Amen’” End quote.

    Not a very Christian thing to do really. Contemplate on this call for a suicide by you is my suggestion, you may want to retract it or apologise to me one day.
    It would help your soul.

    I will pray you find Christ one day as you seem to be doing some good things elsewhere.

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 5, 2009 at 8:58 am
    Dear Bro hawk or consolidation.
    Christ is in us we Benedictine so we need not find Christ he is in us who follow psalms 15 and we are the true poor knights of Christ
    we benedictine follow the spirit. it clearly shows your are the wolf in sheep cloth when you hide behind this Brown hawk name . why hide we all have true birth wrights when we have christian name , i am sorry that you have none.
    only thing is that we will pray for you in my lectio divina.
    be at peace . the above words is the the word we Benedictine pray when we are encountered by the devil. as Brown hawk is not human its the devil himself
    so its effective against the Devil like you Brown hawk and his follower like you. you need to seek spiritual consoling . see I don’t hide behind phantom name like what you do may be you are related to Judas you do the same as what Judas did .
    may your soul find Salvation.

    Dr Balavendrian said: December 5, 2009 at 9:00 am
    Brown hawk
    i am now Exorcising you Satan.

    Crux Sancti patris Benedicti
    Crux Sacrasit mihi Lux
    Non Draco Sit Mihi Dux
    vade retro satan
    numquam suade mihi vana
    sunt Mala quac Libas
    ipse venana Bibas.

    Michael Campbell said: December 5, 2009 at 12:26 pm
    Brown Hawk, I think you are having difficulty grasping some points here. The “latest schism” is based upon Luis Roseira and James McGrath’s claims to have voted Fontes out of office. They cite a democratic process as their means of succession, but the entire Chivalry of the Order (thousands) remain loyal to Fontes and agree with their expulsions. Those are the facts and they are very easy to understand. McGrath and Roseira chose their playing field so how ever many turn up to support whom really does matter. They have also gone as far as to say that Fontes has been declared insane. If that is true why is he living without problems in his own home and is fit enough to travel extensively around the world? Why isn’t he confined to a hospital? Let us not allow our preconceptions to muddy our common sense here.

    The paperwork confirming the death of Grand Master Vandenberg is in the public domain. How could he request the return of the documents in 1945 when he had been dead for two years? This is another example of somebody massaging fact for personal reasons. Some have accepted this on face value and incorporated it into their own understanding but this needs to be changed.

    Concerning the succession issues, let me quote you a paragraph from the 5th February 1977 edition of the Newsletter of the OSMTH Grand Priory of the United States of America: “The most recent Convent General was held from 1970-1973, consisting of three Convents, one of each was held at Paris, France, Chicago, Illinois and Tomar, Portugal. Prince Regent F. Don Fernando de Fontes was overwhelmingly reconfirmed in his position at Chicago and again at Tomar”.

    In the same newsletter is this: “Emile Clement Joseph Isaac Vandenberg, Regent since 1935, saw fit to send the archives to Don Antonio Campbello Pinto de Sousa Fontes, Grand Cross and Grand Prior of Portugal, and, by magisterial decree of 23 December, 1942, transferred the Regency of the Order with all powers, rights and prerogatives of the Grand Master. Don Antonio de Fontes died in 1960 after he had passed the powers to his son, Don Fernando de Fontes..,”

    These are the words of officers and supporters who were involved in these events so who should know them better? The Grand Priory of the United States of America was happy to endorse these facts. Strange that it would take three and a half decades for them to repudiate them and hold them against Fontes.

    There are also documents by senior officers of the Order in 1960 confirming their support of the succession of Fernando Fontes. These are in the public domain as well but are conveniently ignored.

    As for the OSMTHU they are very clear about their lineage and the origins of their Order. Look at the information they give on the “about the Globe” link on this site. What do you not understand about them?

    You are entitled to think what you like but my advice to you is to look for confirmation of the facts both in terms of history and the accusations being flung around which are blinkering your view towards some individuals. There are also two sides to every story and you have only heard the one side. Be “Christian” enough to contact those whose names you have taken in vain on this website and find out their side. Or are you unwilling to accept you might be wrong? If you want to take this further and be shown some proof you can contact me direct on

    brown hawd said: December 5, 2009 at 5:09 pm
    seems my post was removed , nice trick!

    Templar of the Order said: December 5, 2009 at 7:03 pm
    Chev. Campbell, your post was most illuminating, and doubtless provided some information others did not know. Indeed, the truth shall set people free. And, indeed, there are some colourful characters claiming to be Templars, who would dishonour a house of ill repute, much less a true chivalric order. It should be apparent that those who are always involved in some kind of dustup are not focused upon chivalric ideals, but are trying to inflate their own egos. Misbehaviour is misbehaviour, whether or not one is wearing regalia of some sort or not. The true test for one’s actions should be this: would the person feel proud or ashamed of the actions on the Day of Judgment? That day is coming for all of us–the cheque will become due! While we have breath, it is not too late. But we are not guaranteed even the next five minutes. Everyone should examine his own actions, and ask if they are helping or hindering the work that the Lord wants us to do. Those who have malice in their heart can do the Lord no honour. As the Lord said, there are those who honour Him with their lips, but their hearts are far from Him. All hearts are open to our Lord, and every secret desire is known to Him. I will tell you right now that there will be Templars in hell on the Day of Judgment, because they did not love their neighbour as themselves, or love the Lord with all of their strength, and body and soul. For some, being in a particular order will be a stumbling block to entering the Kingdom of Heaven. Look to yourselves and be honest as to whom you are really serving. If you have been sent here or anywhere else on a mission to disparage others, you have already set both feet firmly on the path to perdition. If those whom you follow do not love the Lord and do not have love for your fellow human beings, and if you continue to follow such people, then there is no amount of works that can get you into the Kingdom of Heaven. We all face the Lord alone on the Day of Judgment; you cannot say, “This person made me do this or made me say that.” No, we are each responsible for our own behaviour, our own deeds. I leave you with this warning: do not sit in judgment of others, lest you be judged by the same measure. Some of you are judging people you do not even know, and you are using the half-truths spoken by others as the basis for your judgments. Remember that a half-truth is also a half-lie. Do not be the mindless minions of hateful or spiteful people. Such people have no place in a Christian organisation. You follow such people at the peril of your own soul!

    Michael Campbell said: December 6, 2009 at 11:12 am
    Well said, and I wholeheartedly agree with you on all your points.

    Dr Anthony said: December 6, 2009 at 12:00 pm
    Lets use this website of the Templar to Glorify God ,so we can work together in one spirit of the Templar . Thats the true spirit of the spiritual father st Benedict.
    its not for our glory but for his Glory. we has Templar have a lot to work together. To revive our mission and vision must become one Body of Christ as the true fighting force of the faith .Let the Apocalypse come through chapter 7 verses 13 to 17 . we must work with the Orthodox orders so all may be one in this journey. we are here in this world as visitors we must keep the law of psalms 14 from the Latin Vulgate(DOUAY-RHEIMS )The Holy Bible or verses 15 of king James version (latin Vulgate;Domine ,quis habitabit)

    so let the Benedictine spirituality move we Templar’s as one spirit as we are in the school of the Lord service keeping the Prologue in our life and in our Journey like our fathers the fighting monks did.
    God Bless we Templar keepers of the LAW.
    GOD Bless
    Benedictine Oblate( true Knight Templar’s )OSB.

    Luis Matos responded: December 6, 2009 at 6:18 pm
    No posts were removed. I have been quite patient along this whole discussion and have not edited or supressed any views. (Editor)

    brown hawk said: December 7, 2009 at 1:16 am
    Hello again Mr Campbell,
    I have done as you suggested and have yet to find the information you state anywhere but on OSMTH sites. I have checked n a few different languages and would again like to request you to pint to a third party or non-osmth group link.

    Quote Mr Campbell “The paperwork confirming the death of Grand Master Vandenberg is in the public domain. How could he request the return of the documents in 1945 when he had been dead for two years? This is another example of somebody massaging fact for personal reasons. Some have accepted this on face value and incorporated it into their own understanding but this needs to be changed.”end quote.

    Your groups quoted 5th February 1977 edition of the Newsletter of the OSMTH Grand Priory of the United States of America can hardly be expected to state anything else can it?

    As always, I am a seeker of truth and would like to again ask.

    Quote me ” I would hate to think I am in error and so I will ask you too produce a copy of the document or a link( to show its accuracy please) as many historical claims are based on this accepted text concerning the take over. The document you speak of would temper many arguements and lead to more acceptance of the neo-order OSMTHU, the OSMTH USA, The OCCPT and indeed the OSMTH IFA which you seem to be unaware are all schisms of the OSMTH brought into being over time ( directly or indirectly) because of Fontes’ refusal to return the original documents when asked by Emile Isaaac Vandenberg.” end quote
    I apologise in advance if this post starts the usual suspects ranting again.
    May Christ and truth guide us.

    Brown Hawk said: December 8, 2009 at 5:02 am
    I am also interested in any comments about Civic Action Service (SAC) of the Gaullist movement and Antoine Zdrojewski and your origins /relationship with the group as the succession was after the leaderships membership was exposed in the Paris convention of 1970.

    Father Andre Barbelin aka Augustine Cobbler he seemed to also be a very important figure in your neo-orders recent history but seems to have been ignored, or have I missed your reference to his efforts somewhere?

    I am still searching but yet to find any substantiation that Fontes was never asked for the documentation back and simply just refused to return it and invented his own dynasty and succession documents.
    Of course this is based upon the best info available to me at this stage and if any other is forthcoming and credible I would appreciate it being made public/pointed towards ; as I have previously asked on two occassions now.
    May the truth one day shine out.

    brown hawk said: December 26, 2009 at 11:04 am
    Merry Christmas to all the silent Sirs here!
    Let us all join the world in celebrating that Christ is Born!

    May the season fill you with the truth and light of true Christian spirit and perhaps you could join me in meditating and reflecting on the guidance within the Templar’s signature Psalm or Psalm 115 and the Ninth commandment.

    brown hawk said: December 27, 2009 at 7:44 am
    I will try to follow the lessons of our Lord and forgive (…) [edited].
    I will continue to pray for your soul.
    I will also leave this forum alone now so that the many many good Knights can get a chance to explore more about their Order.
    May 2010 bring some truth to all.

    Dr Anthony said: December 30, 2009 at 2:46 pm
    Daer Bro
    its high time this website is used for the Glory of God .
    its Christ that rules . its the Pope that will rule for he the Holy father is the one can endorse and form the Templar order . its the Benedictine that can form the order. its good news the Anglican church wants to come back to the Catholic church. its Good news that all the Orthodox order. Greek , Ukrainian, Russian they are Brothers of the Catholic church .
    God Bless.
    The Benedictine order will come back as st Malachy prophecy will come true.
    The fighting Monks are the benedictine history cannot deny .

    so let use this website to glorify God .

    mike ganja said: December 31, 2009 at 3:46 am
    Brown hawk .(mike keraj Australia) baptism.
    Is a great man, he is a Great man. he is praying for others soul , and others should also pray for his Soul. Read John 1 verses;1-18, psalms 1 .
    so use your time with the lord then going around proofing you are the angel of light and others are in Darkness.
    The Templar even they were burned they were obedient to the pope. 1. Rule; obedience 2, ;humility 3;dont judge others look at the log in your own eye before using this Templar website for your gain . use it for Evangelize .Let God Judge not we Human .

    bro you should go to Europe and evangelized Christ. there will be more Osama Brother then then so called Christians . its the revival of Islam in Europe dont Deny . In Australia yr place Christianity is High Jacked. America abortion is the Religion not Christianity.

    merry Christmas
    God Bless

    consolidation said: December 31, 2009 at 6:14 am
    I have no idea what you are saying, but I hope and pray you have had a wonderful Christmas and a great 2010.
    Write the post in your native tongue and I will probably be able to read it better and understand.
    PS. I am not who you seem to think I am, my name is not Mike. I have never heard of a Mike Keraj!
    Lastly I do not hate any religion or atheism including Islam. I am confident that we have our whole lives to follow or find the Lord as our saviour.
    I do think freemasonry is evil though.

    mike ganja said: December 31, 2009 at 2:37 pm
    so consolidation is hiding behind brown hawk and brown hawk behind consolidation so both are consolidation the message is for Brown Hawk.
    the cat is out of the Bag.
    God bless

    consolidation said: January 1, 2010 at 5:54 am
    I had already stated this earlier, but the mod (as is his right) edited the post.
    I still do not know what you are talking about?
    Sorry you missed it .
    The cat was never in the bag?
    I used brown hawk as a joke as it is a Non deplume for a certain OSMTH GP when he sends out poison letters.
    Anyway, happy new year and good luck for 2010.

    mike ganja said: January 1, 2010 at 4:18 pm
    Its seems Mr Brown hawk alias consolidation finally agreed he is the same and he also agrees he is joking in this website , (…) [edited… abusive assumption and insult]. the people who are hosting this website are serious in the Templar org .dont abuse their Good work. its high time you take your joke some where and dont go around condeming OSMTH because you have no legal standing and stop biting around the Busy . this is 2010. repent . I think Osama (…) [edited… abusive] at least wants to die for his believe he dosent joke (…) . may the almighty Allah show you into repentance. PRAY before you are Prayed for.
    This website is not a Jokers Website.

    consolidation said: January 2, 2010 at 7:14 am
    good luck with that.
    You missed the whole point yet again.
    Oh well.
    Happy new year and try to ease the zealotry.
    I will continue to pray for you.

    mike ganja said: January 2, 2010 at 1:02 pm
    MR consolidator care of brown hawk no one missed any thing you have missed every thing because you are busy minding others Business and its got you take yr confusion some where else and we will pray for you as you are lost.
    we like to use this website to strengthen our faith as you have said in your emails i have been seeing as a Observer . you claim that you are not a Templar so you got no business in this Good Templar website. so get out of our life . this is 2010. you are the past
    seek the kingdom of God and stop judging others. This website is run by Good Templar. so you are not in this family.please pray before you are prayed for my Allah show you that you are lost but must be found.

    mike ganja said: January 3, 2010 at 9:14 pm
    (…) [edited… come on, Mike… stop harrassing other contributors here… set up your website, email them, do what you will, but lower your tone here… we don’t like to be the hosts of unsubstantiated accusations and frontal abuse…]

    Luis Matos responded: January 5, 2010 at 6:18 pm
    How can a document that surfaced in the 18th century (The Charter of Transmission) have been written around the turn of the 1900′s?

    mike ganja said: January 6, 2010 at 12:16 pm
    Dear Bro Luis Matos
    he is taking every one for a good ride and this consolidator or brown hawk is phantom .pls use yr website for Gods work then listening to this new evangelist from no where.
    God Bless

    consolidation said: January 6, 2010 at 2:00 pm
    here is one view, the other is Mr Zubras and as he is a self admitted Mason, I cannot credit it.

    Fake document
    If you can read French, may I suggest a good starting point would be the ‘Cahier d’etude’ on the subject of the ‘Transmission of Larmenius’ published two years ago [1997] by the ‘Centre des Etudes et des Recherches Templieres’ in Campagne-sur-Aude.This lists a good cross section of scholarly comment on this dubious document.
    Among serious authors who have commented in recent years, may I list Peter Partner, (The Knights Templar and their Myth – Oxford University Press 1981) who claims the document was forged by Dr. Ladru in the late seventeenth, early eighteenth century. John Robinson (The Lost Secrets of Freemasonry – Born in Blood – Century 1990) who states that it is now proven to be a blatent forgery. Baigent and Leigh (The Temple and the Lodge – Jonathan Cape 1989) who are non-committal. Lastly, Knight and Lomas on the one hand and Picknet on Prince on the other, who both simply assume its veracity asit is used to support the central themes of their works, namely The Second Messiah (K & L) and The Templar Revelation ( P & P).
    Thus scholarly authorswith good reputations either condemn it, or at best equivocate, while other, more speculative authors pushing highly arguable themes, sometimes endorse it.
    What does the document itself tell us? Rather a lot. The original can be inspected in Mark Masons Hall in London. It is in cipher, which upon translation reveals not the clumsy, ecclesiastical Latin of the medieval era to be found on so many charters, documents and deeds from that time, but a far more polished and scholarly form of the language used in universities and medical schools in eighteenth century Europe. According to most scholars who have commented on the prose style used, it is quite obviously the product of a seventeenth or eighteenth century mind, well steeped in the masonic lore of that time and bears no relationship whatsoever to the phraseology current in the early years of the fourteenth century.
    The alleged list of Grandmasters includes among their number, several Princes of the Royal House of Bourbon. Some absolute howlers are made in their alleged titles which quite obviously indicate that no-one from that social class had anything to do with the document whatsoever much less became a Grandmaster repsonsible for it..
    According to the consensus among the scholars who have studied this document, the most favoured candidate for the position of forger, is not Dr Bernard Fabre-Palaprat who did most to promote it, but a certain colleague of his a Dr Ladru.

    –Aliabastre, 22:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

    consolidation said: January 6, 2010 at 2:09 pm
    As I have stated Mr Zubras is a sef admitted mason, I thought I had better prove it, to be fair.

    an exerpt from

    Mr Zubras’ post is as follows:

    Congradulations, Rob! … and thank you! You have placed into words what I
    believe so many others feel! I just joined the Sinclair “list” to monitor it for
    historical discussions… to improve my own historical knowledge…. and look what
    I’ve stumbled in to!
    I am a Mason of 25 years, a very active York Rite Knight Templar Mason of 24
    years, a “Chivalric” Knight Templar of 4 1/2 years, and a continual student of
    Crusade-and-later history all my life of 50 years. I am an active Senior member of
    the International Order, OSMTH (the European Order under the true Grand Master
    Fernando de Fontes of Portugal… NOT the schismatic “SMOTJ” of the USA and their
    cohort “Atlantic Alliance” nor the IFA… but THAT’s a whole other story!), and am
    of the FIRM belief that the Charter of Larmenius is genuine…. therefore, I
    believe the Grand Master list put forth to present day follows in legitimacy as
    well. Why not? I don’t think our earlier forefathers had any intentions of
    establishing a false lineage just to give themselves legitimacy… I just don’t
    believe they would even THINK of such a thing…. that such a thing would never
    even occur to them to do so… just too much later Templar history has been proven
    true, that would give legitimacy to that portion which has no way of being proven,
    but which is accepted as true….
    … and, what claim do the “scholars” have, other than their studies? What
    makes those “nay-sayers” possessors of the Word of God, any more so than any other
    of us Plebians? Remember, the world was considered to be flat for so many
    centuries by “learned men of society,” even to the point of being religious
    doctrine… that same doctrine that also said the world is only slightly over 4000
    years old!
    My advise: take these nay-saying arguments not with just a grain of salt, but
    with an entire PILLAR of it!
    Non Nobis, Domine!
    …. Vince Zubras, Jr., KGOTS (“GOTJ”), Dallas, Texas

    [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list,
    [ To get off or on the list, see

    consolidation said: January 6, 2010 at 2:12 pm
    As I have stated Mr Zubras is a self confessed mason, it is only fair I provide his words stating this.

    see the above link please for proof.

    May God guide us all.

    consolidation said: January 6, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    proof of self professed mason

    Be at Peace.

    Luis Matos responded: January 6, 2010 at 7:48 pm
    Dear Consolidation:

    I don’t understand why being a self professed mason disqualifies anyone’s opinion… I am a Freemason myself and that never disqualified my own work or progression in the Templar Order.

    The Charter problem is as false as the Charter itself. It has no relevance whatsoever to the present Order and its several branches. We don’t have to prove a lineage that connects us to the medieval Templars. Why should we? What difference does it make when the only thing most of us do is dine fancy and put shiny medals on each other’s breasts?

    If you have any doubts about the legitimacy of reviving old traditions and institutions, I suggest you start by banning the Olympics, which have no lineage from the original Greek event. Or why not demolish the London Bridge, which is not the same bridge, design or even located in the same place since 1831 as the original London Bridge? How dare Londoners call that 1973 modern bridge “London Bridge” anyway? And what about the modern self styled football competitions, that have no connection with 18th and early 19th century football university club pioneers such as Cambridge, Edinburgh, Oxford and many others? Surely the new competitions are not legitimate and cannot prove any historical link to the early clubs, except, of course, inspiration… Why not suspend Saint John’s Ambulances, since the Order that it is supposed to oversee them was Catholic in it’s formation and all links with it were severed in the 16th century in England? Surely the present Order of Saint John, chartered by Queen Victoria, has no claims to have any connection with the historic Order, or does it? How dare they save lives, and help the needed, using the Amalfi Cross?

    I’m being ironic, of course. There is a lot to be said about legitimacy and the need for Charters such as the “Larmenius” one.

    Oh, and by the way, the fact that the charter presented by Parlaprat has been written much later than the 14th century has no relevance whatsoever to the autenticity of its content. I have a 1971 copy of the Magna Carta and, if the original is destroyed, that gives me no right to assume that it is a false document, as it was printed in 1971… Could it be that the content might be close to the truth and the document simply a recent copy of an older one? Could “Larmenius” not even exist as a persona and be the name of a branch that fled to Armenia at the time (such as others did to Scotland, Portugal and Spain)? These subjects are not as linear and simple as they sound when we decide to be linear and simple ourselves…

    Luis de Matos

    consolidation said: January 7, 2010 at 4:59 am
    Thanks for the honesty,
    It is refreshing.
    Here is where the Pike the founder of the Scottish Yorke rite of freemasonry Templarism demeans God and states he is no better than an ideal or the devil. He also states Gatou is supreme above the Christian God.

    Albert Pike (1809-91),
    “The god of Freemasonry and the God of the Bible are not one and the same. There is a great difference between the two concepts of God. The Masonic god, “The Great Architect of the Universe” (G.A.O.T.U), is believed to be above all other gods. ‘
    According to Albert Pike, all people,
    ‘regardless of their spiritual orientation, can unite under the “Grand Artificer of the Universe.” The Masonic god is all-inclusive and all-embracing. All potential Masons must acknowledge a “God” in order to gain membership in the Lodge, but there is no definite criterion regarding which “God” is implied or what “God” is acceptable.” it could be a paper bag or the devil himself or a pile od dog poo as long as you claim to worship it.

    Albert Pike (1809-91),
    called the papacy a “deadly, treacherous enemy,” and in his letter dated Dec. 28, 1886, to the Italian Grand Commander Timoteo Riboli, he wrote, “The Papacy has been for a thousand years the torturer and curse of Humanity, the most shameless imposture, in its pretense to spiritual power of all ages.”

    Pike states that Masonry is the unifier of all religions and that “the Christian, the Hebrew, the Moslem, the Brahmin, the followers of Confucius and Zoroaster, can assemble as brethren and unite in prayer to the one God who is above all the Baalim.” he is speaking of the freemasons own deity GATOU.
    In other words, the biblical God is reduced to the level of all the other gods and at the same time rendered as equal with the gods of those religions. Therefore, Christianity is stripped of its uniqueness as the one true religion that offers humanity the only hope for salvation and diminishes the co-equal and co-eternal status of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

    The Masonic god is clearly given a greater position among all other “gods.”
    Albert Pike spoke of
    “God as being One; Unapproachable, Single, Eternal and Unchanging. . . . There is but one God, infinite and incomprehensible, to whom no human attribute can be properly assigned, even when imagined to be infinite.” When speaking of GAOTU.

    Albert Pike (1809-91),
    “To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees – The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine.”

    (Instructions to the 23 Supreme Councils of the World, Albert Pike, Grand Commander, Sovereign Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, July 14, 1889. Recorded by A.C. De La Rive, La Femme et l’Enfant dans la Franc-Maconnerie Universelle, page 588)


    Albert Pike (1809-91), 33° Mason…
    “That which we must say to a crowd is – We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees – The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him? Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil. ”

    Or for fun look here:

    Strangely the author was at the time a OCMTH knight who has now defected against his own advice on loyalty and fealty and sadly become a practicing low level mason and member of the OSMTH USA, a merry dance he led before he was cornered for his unchristian rants /dodgy claims and ousted from the real Templars or OCMTH, he now heads his own USA neoclub est.2007.

    Here are some more quotes from the founder of the freemasonry scottish rite.

    Albert Pike 33° Mason…
    “That which we must say to a crowd is – We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees – The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him? Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil. ”
    or this classic.

    Instructions to the 23 Supreme Councils of the World, July 14, 1889. Recorded by A.C. De La Rive in La Femme et l’Enfant dans la FrancMaconnerie Universelle on page 588′
    “Lucifer, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the son of the morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with it’s splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual or selfish Souls? Doubt it not” Morals and Dogma page 321

    Now some current and older bulls stating Freemasonry is incompatible with Christianity.
    CLEMNE XII In Eminenti, const. 24 Apr. 1738
    BENEDICT XIV Providas, const. 18 May 1751
    PIUS VII Ecclesiam a Jesu Christo, const. 13 Sept.
    1821LEO XII Quo Graviora, const. 13 Mar. 1825
    PIUS VIII Traditi Humilitati, ency. 24 May 1829
    GREGORY XVI Mirari Vos, encyc. 15 Aug. 1832
    PIUS IX Qui Pluribus, encyc. 9 Nov. 1846
    LEO XIII Humanum Genus, encyc. 20 Apr. 1884
    LEO XIII Dall’ Alto Dell’ Opostolico, Seggio, encyc.
    LEO XIII Inimica Vos, encyc. 8 Dec. 1892,.
    LEO XIII Custodi Di Quella Fede, encyc. 8 Dec. 1892

    The current Popes position,

    Here are some of his words:

    “The Declaration of the Sacred Congregation; affirms that membership in Masonic Associations remain forbidden by the Church and the Faithful who enrol in them are in a state of grave sin, and may not receive Holy Communion or the Sacraments. it confirms to the faithful that membership in a Masonic Lodge is unlawful. It warns them such membership is incompatible with the Catholic Faith.”

    So it does mean masonic mebership excludes you from masons calling themselves as Catholic of any form.

    I suppose this is where I am perplexed.

    consolidation said: January 7, 2010 at 5:11 am
    I think it may also prove OSMTHU are just masons of the Continental or Yoke rite who has continued or invented a play club which has nothing to do or even closely aligned with the real Templar Orders.
    I conceed most masons do some good works , but they tend to be self serving or GATOU serving and not at all any form of Templar as claimed buy your neo Order.

    Are you interested where the Fontes bought their false titles such as Dom or Count from, I can post it here if you wish?

    Chev James said: January 7, 2010 at 7:55 am
    A certain person on this “chronology” forum, who claims to NOT be a Templar, persists in labeling others as “non-Christian” and in judging others from his damp, dark hole of anonymity. For the record, I now claim Vince Zubras as a fellow knight and friend. I have some news for you, “Mr. Consolidation” you are here as an agent of an unholy faction. You seek to foment discord and to create division. Some of us have learned from our past mistakes, which you are unfortunately committing anew. The key is to start thinking for yourself, instead of allowing yourself to be used as a tool by others. You may think you are coming off as some kind of “Grand Inquisitor,” and performing some kind of holy purpose, but you are simply in the business of character assassination, and I am telling you right now, sir, that there is nothing holy about that. You are going directly against the teachings of Christ. So, I am advising you to cut your ties with the person who is putting you up to all of this, because (1) you don’t know what went on, and (2) you are serving no purpose but the devil’s here. I will also tell you, sir, that when you face the Judgment of God, you will be standing there alone, and the person who sent you will NOT be standing there beside you to help you defend your actions. So, you need to drop your sanctimonious pretenses and realize that you will one day be called to account for your conduct, which has been both ungentlemanly and unChristian. If you cannot go out and do something positive for our Lord, then you should at least desist from trying to foment strife and anger and discord. What you do not realize, sir, is that the rest of us have moved on; we do not any longer nurture the hatreds or mistrust that others would have had us do. We now make our own decisions as to the worth of a person or a cause; we do not uncritically accept gossip. Decisions have been made, sir, and the Templar world has been reordered on the basis of those decisions. If you think the Templar way is to engage in character assassination, to make cowardly attacks from the cover of anonymity, and to be an agent of strife and a promoter of infighting, then we know what faction you are with: the old, wholly discredited faction. And I will tell you this: if ANY Christian group is dedicated to nothing other than name-calling, infighting, character assassination, etc., and is NOT doing things to make this world a better place, then it is unworthy of either a chivalric or Christian designation. So, Mr. “Consolidation,” look to your own soul and search yourself for sins and shortcomings before coming here and condemning others. You have no right, sir, no right whatsoever, to come here and judge anyone else, paritcularly since you are unwilling to certify those comments with your name.

    consolidation said: January 7, 2010 at 9:25 am
    If you say so Mr Reese, by the way you never did apologise to Will did you.
    I have not judged remember, just highlighted your own self admitted words.
    Your so called Order cannot be Christian remember as it allows Masons and is riddled with them, it is more of a club based on what they know and are willing to adhere too of the real Templar ethos.
    Your own leader ( as well at least 3 of your GP’s that I know of) are open and honest in admitting they are masons, however as per the Bulls and Synod directions they are incompatible with Christianity.
    Not my words but the current Popes and Synods. I have provided proof of everything I have said and when I did err( date of the first sighting of the masons Larrubbish Charter, and your name spelling) I apologised and corrected myself here.
    I am not really amazed that you feel slighted by the truth. You have yet to prove or provide anything except malicious statements without any proofs yourself; everything you accuse me of!

    If anything I have said is in error please be rational and let me know in a rational format.

    Cardinal Ratzinger in the below 1983 document…. is the present Pope.

    Here are his words:

    “The Declaration of the Sacred Congregation; affirms that membership in Masonic Associations remain forbidden by the Church and the Faithful who enrol in them are in a state of grave sin, and may not receive Holy Communion or the Sacraments. it confirms to the faithful that membership in a Masonic Lodge is unlawful. It warns them such membership is incompatible with the Catholic Faith.”

    As you are from the USA and Baptists have a large flock there, here is their stance.

    the Southern Baptist Church, here they outline position on freemasonry, and state they do not recognise freemasons

    It seems to annoy you that I am not a Templar and my feeling is neither are you as you have broken oath and fealty and in a openly freemason led club or pseudo Masonic Temple Chapter; so can we call it even?
    If being a masonic tool rocks your socks then good luck.. but you are only kidding yourself if you think you are in any way linked to Christians,and definitely no way linked to Christian Templars.

    Now to more important things!
    Merry Orthodox Christmas to all.
    Peace and understanding be with you.

    consolidation said: January 7, 2010 at 10:37 am
    Happy Orthodox Christmas,

    To all God’s children!

    Consolidation said: January 7, 2010 at 10:53 am
    Hello Mr Reese,

    (Edited out… Please, dear friend, try and find new arguments. Don’t use these pages to insult others. Your point of view is stated in other comments. It has not been suppressed. I expect your next contribution on the “Freemasons/Catholics” Debate to be your view on the REASONS given in the Papal Bulls you quote (but never read) and what you think of it. And again, do not confuse Catholic instructions to their flock with a Christian position on a subject.)

    May Christ guide you.

    Chev James said: January 7, 2010 at 12:17 pm
    Mr. W V M Consolidation, you do not have the truth in you, not one jot or tittle of truth. You, sir, are like a crewman on Captain Ahab’s “Pequod”; you have allowed someone else’s obsession to become your own, and you are following that obsession to the peril of your own soul And I will tell you something about Freemasonry: I am not a Mason. But there are people who still call themselves Templars who have done things to their fellow Templars that almost no Mason would have ever dared to do. You, sir, are the one person here in the company of oath breakers. You, sir, are the one in bad company–a company of two or three embittered individuals who send you here in a vain attempt to besmirch the reputations of others. But we, sir, are above and beyond your ability to add to us or to detract from us. You have no standing here, sir, because you are neither knight nor Christian. You look up Bible verses but their meaning escapes you. You are, sir, like someone who has come upon the scene of a battle that took place long ago and are acting like you took part in that battle. But you don’t know why the battle was fought, or who the combatants were, and you refuse to accept the outcome. In case you do not know it, sir, I will refresh your memory: the people who were trying to betray their fellow knights are the ones who lost. The ones who were telling other knights to violate their personal conscience and their oaths to the order were the ones who lost. The ones who were willing to sacrifice their fellow knights and friends in an attempt to gain papal recognition were the ones who lost. No, sir, we were not the oath breakers–we seceded from oath breakers. Now, Mr. Consolidation, you may stick that in your pipe and smoke it . . . but be sure to watch your own back, for the one thing that is true about your own faction is that every “lieutenant” eventually staggers out of it with a knife in his back. If it does not happen to you, sir–and rest assured that it will–then you would be the only one in the entire history of your faction that it did not happen to. One last thing–be sure to pull down your window shades, lest your identity be revealed. I am sure that you do not want your real name associated with your remarks, which would be a source of shame for any man of honor.

    consolidation said: January 7, 2010 at 1:27 pm
    I see and am sorry that you have chosen freemasonry/Gatou as your sheperd.

    (EDITED OUT!… Again???? Don’t you have other arguments?????? I haven’t chosen any shepherd except Christ. Why can’t you accept that?????)

    Chev James said: January 7, 2010 at 2:13 pm
    Mr. Consolidation, the antics of your associates in St. Peter’s Square are well known, as well as your “moveable knighting ceremonies.” You might also have mentioned that your “mentor” once welcomed Masons into his particular group. Once again, you are not in a position to criticize any other group when you and your associates have treated others in such an unChristian manner, such as expelling people without due process and even without explanation. Your faction lost because it was a cult of personality. “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Tell me, Mr. Consolidation, do you have a copy of your group’s Statutes in hand, or are they still kept from you? And what “position” do you hold in this group now? Are you still claiming Australia and New Zealand and Pakistan and Russia? Have you decided that you are with Grandmaster Fontes or against him? Answer or answer not. It does not matter. The true knights of Scotland have spoken, and their words have been recorded in the annals of the Templars.

    consol said: January 8, 2010 at 11:23 am
    I am neither against or for the fake Fontes dynasty.
    I do know he is not a Templar and never was.
    I am also not a Templar as I have told you or any of the people you have accused me of being.

    You guess and accuse when you do not know, yet again and again. Please learn.

    Unfortunately for your club I know how he bought his titles, you seem to be ignorant of this and so in order to allow some truth to reign here, I offered to show you.

    As you have now asked, in your prevous post by asking me about my loyalties(they are to Christ actually) here is the reason.

    Now for revealing the Dom or Count title part of the Fontes family. This Polish Royal has plenty to say

    Fontes was supposedly given his fake titles originaly by a Mr William Masser,(who had many other claims to titles as well) a builder from New Jersey USA.
    Do a quick search in any heraldry site, you will find our good Mr Masser had no titles and absolutely no power to award anything to anyone.

    Mr Masser bought his his fake titles(and there were plenty of them bought by Mr Masser) from a very clever Brazilian farmer named Pascal Bandeita Moreria who claimed he was the direct descendant of a “Visigothic, King Atulf” of the 5th century, it’s like a Ripleys installment isnt it? Mr Moreria has never produced any shred of evidence to support his grandiose claims. Unfortunately for all these fakers , Atulf married and died in the same year leaving no children.

    here are a real historian and researchers views on the fake Fontes titles.

    Cambridge Professor and Vatican Committee Member on Orders of Chivalry, Dr Peter Bander van Duren; has also published of several books on Chivalry has less kind things to say about Fontes pathetic claims that some deluded members of the OSMTH/OSMTHU/OCCPTS AND OSMTH USA still hold onto;

    quote” Pinto De Fontes is regarded as a buffon, a figure of fun and a pathetic meglomaniac. ” end quote.

    quote ” All his titles (Pinto Fontes’; added for clarity)have been assumed by him and/or his father. He is not entitled to the appellation “Dom”. He is not entitled to the appellation “Count” etc. Also his activities as “Consul” OF Two South American States are described as illegal under Portuguese law” end quote.

    These quotes about the Fontes dynasty are from a Cambridge Professor and Vatican Committee Member on Orders of Chivalry, you just cannot get any clearer than that about the Fontes led groups such as OSMTH/OSMTHU/OSMTH USA/OCCPT ect.
    I hope this helps guide you to the light.

    I have given you researched and document evidence all of which has simple links to ensure it is credible.

    (Edited out… short part about the same stupid claim about GAOTU!!!).

    brown hawk said: January 8, 2010 at 11:38 am
    seems my responses are being blocked.
    goodbye all, enjoy the darkness but remember Christ will save you if you repent

    mike ganja said: January 8, 2010 at 2:41 pm
    Mr Brown hawk or you call yr self as consolidator.
    what are you trying to proof that you are Jesus who wants to save the world I think you are going out of your mind . please kindly pray for your soul thats the need of the Time. people are dieing for the faith but you are not uniting the Templar you are dividing them it clearly shows you are a Freemason its high time you take your game some where, I agree with bro Chev .James. you cannot split we true Templar.

    Luis Matos responded: January 8, 2010 at 5:17 pm
    Albert Pike is hardly what you seem to consider him to be. He’s a Masonic author like so many others. He does not speak for Freemasonry as a whole and he represents his own view. Why don’t you quote Louis-Claude de Sainta-Martins, for instance? His Masonic views have been far more important than Pike’s and are in line with Christianity.

    As for the bulls about Freemasonry, as a Christian that not only currently goes to a Catholic Church, but has studied in a Seminar and received Holy Orders, I will discuss that if you tell me what is the incompatibility, according to the 1738 bull, that was sustained again and again. Do you know what it is?

    Luis de Matos

    Luis Matos responded: January 8, 2010 at 5:21 pm
    Please, do not confuse OSMTHU with Mr. Fontes. We are not interested in knowing anything about Mr. Fontes. I don’t think you could tell us anything new, anyway!

    As for the Masons, again, our Order has a very limited number of Freemasons. I am one of them, but I am a minority. I don’t think we even have one in England. Our international leadership, apart from me, is composed of non- Masons. I don’t see the relevance of your comment.
    Luis de Matos

    Luis Matos responded: January 8, 2010 at 5:26 pm
    Again, dear contributor, you should read carefully what the bulls state. I’m sure you will be surprised at the reason why apparently such membership is incompatible. In any case, if such reasons were valid – which they aren’t (and you’ll understand it when you take the trouble to read them) – they would only apply to Catholics, a very small part of the Christian comunity.

    Luis de Matos

    PS: Please, again, refrain from making comments or statements about other contributor’s Orders. You can state your opinion, but do not confuse your point of view as FACT. It’s your point of view, I respect it inasfar as you respect the others.

    Luis Matos responded: January 8, 2010 at 5:43 pm
    Dear Contributor:

    As you can see, your replies are not being blocked. The software that manages the site simply witholds the posts that are considered offensive or seem to be spam for editor’s approval. I haven’t been on the net for a few days, so, it is natural that the comments (which are visible again) were not approved by the software.

    Luis de Matos

    Luis Matos responded: January 8, 2010 at 5:50 pm
    To Our Readers:

    Please, go to and kindly see that the OSMTHU is not linked with Mr. Fontes or is part of the discussion that is taking place in these comments.

    Our branch has no connections whatsoever with the facts and people quoted above. None.

    The reason why we have let the discussion go on, is simply because we know how complicated the Templar world is, with all the latest splinter groups and claims to legitimacy by so many, that we feel this information must be known and discussed. However, our own branch has the legitimacy that we have. Which we do not discuss in Foruns or comments. Anyone interested in us, can contact us to our email address.

    Thank you,
    Luis de Matos

    brown hawk said: January 9, 2010 at 2:55 am
    Thank you for your explanation Luis, but why did you edit out the part explaining Mr Comrie/ Mcgregor (or whatever his name is today) old habit of inventing titles for himself? I made sure it was all referenced and proven.
    Also why was the relevant referenced information about GATOU (as held by masons to be above Christ) edited?
    Lastly if the Pope says as I have provided on two occassions that Christianty in incompatible with freemasonry, then it is not open to discussion. It is a fct and no amount of self justification may get around it.
    I have read all the Bulls and the Anglican Synods position and most large Chrisian based religions. they are all against it as are the Orthodox Churches.
    I have proven this, with referenced document, bulls, See docs, internet sites etc.

    In an effort to learn I am always happy for you to provide a link or a document that staes otherwise for me to look at.
    Thank you for any time you can spare and may you find Christ one day.

    brown hawk said: January 9, 2010 at 3:24 am
    I always find it perplexing when you edit, Mr Reese cold call me a Nazi who would gas people, but I cannot provide proof Dr B is a very needy man who has done some terrible things in his zealotry.

    The Catholic, Anglican, COE, Orthox Churches all state that freemasons are in grave peril fo their souls and in a state of sin, I have already provided this info and instead you want to argue semantics about a 1738 Bull that you also claim is irrelevant?
    I have read every doc I have presented so far, and as you group is freemason supported SAC coupe ( advertised or not) offshoot of the OSMTH and uses masonic documents in its chronology such as the Charter under discussion. This alone makes Fontes legitamacy directly linked to your clubs and therefore very revlevant IMO.

    May Christ guide you.

    mike ganja said: January 9, 2010 at 10:48 am
    Bro Rees
    why are you wasting your time with person ( Brown Haw)who is Mentally unstable . He call him self as he has a split personality because he call him self Brown Haw the consolidated . so please Ignore this guy. he wants to prove that he is the saviour.who is this person Dr B. see another imagination.
    This guy has nothing to do so let him bee. This Templar Globe is his Punching Beg.
    He wants to be heard. so dont waist your time Bro Reese.
    God Bless

    brown hawk said: January 9, 2010 at 1:49 pm
    fair enough, enjoy Gatou, I will stick to God.

    Luis said: January 10, 2010 at 1:00 am
    The Nazi accusation must have escaped. Please, tell me where it is and I will edit it out as well. About the rest, well, you are wrong, but there is no cure for the lack of information except to study more. You are confusing me and the OSMTHU with someone else.

    Luis said: January 10, 2010 at 1:03 am
    Now you confuse me… I was going to edit out the personal abuse written by contributor “ganja”, but you comment “fair enough”!…

    brown hawk said: January 10, 2010 at 1:52 am
    I dont agree with him but I respect his right to search and be wrong IMO, I only seek to offer alternatve hat may lead some to Christ via the path the Church has shown.
    It is hs right (rightly or wrongly) to be in error, It is ganja showing he is still on a journey to find Christ, I hope one day he does and also I am not a supporter of any form of editing.( I do respect your right to edit on your own forum as you see fit though).
    I thought if one of your members could actually attempt to exorcise me 3 times( this is as ‘personal” as an attack can be made by anyone attempting to call themselves a Christian) and another few have called me Satan and yet another Dr has called for me to commit suicide ; and these personal attacks were not edited by you then you were not likely to edit poor old ganjas unsubstantiated and easily ignored comments.

    I will pray for you all.

    brown hawk said: January 10, 2010 at 2:26 am
    look to the 29th Nov from so called knight Reese, quote “You, on the other hand, in a bid to gain titles and ranks, were like the “loyal” SS officer telling der Fuehrer that the “final solution” was a wonderful piece of work, and that you could hardly wait to carry out the orders.” when i reminsded him of his own words.
    The tone was subsequently set from that post and all the personal attack on me since.
    It is a joke that you have edited some of my words which are all proveable but leave things like the three attempts to exorsice me stand, can anything be more offensive to a Christian?
    The OSMTHU like other splinter groups of the OSMTH must remember its roots and thus the info I post is relevant ( it seems you dont like them you be public though).
    Fair enough again, it is your site.
    Dismissing without any form of repudiation does not make the posts irrelevant, proof does.
    I am always happy to learn if you ever do it.
    The entire OSMTHU and OSMTH USA and OCCPTS heirachy are masonic, the good socalled knight at the lower ends may not be but look at the Gp’s? its like a masonic convention.
    The poor old followers may not be but they are being steered and led by masonic design.

    Led by people who( if they are honest and admit their masonic membership) cannot recieve the sacraments in 90% of the worlds churches.
    Think about it please good Sirs and Dames.

    Chev James said: January 10, 2010 at 10:34 am
    Well, it appears that we have solved one mystery: Mr. Brown Hawk and Mr. Consolidation are one and the same. You and your mentor are obsessed with Masons. You accuse them of all kinds of heinous conspiracies, but the worst conspiracies were to be found in the order that we seceded from: betrayal of oaths, betrayal of fellow knights, betrayal of personal conscience, and betrayal of every principle that makes one a Christian. The credo of the old order was the same as the SS: “My honor is loyalty.” Now, in the light of history, we know the folly of maintaining loyalty to one person when it means being disloyal to everything and everyone else. This is the point that Mr. Brown Hawk/Consolidation has failed to grasp. If your leader is taking you and your order down the path of destruction and perdition, then your loyalties are misplaced. We must always be loyal to a higher purpose, rather than loyal to just a single person. The SS, indeed, maintained their loyalty to a single person, but they failed to maintain their loyalty to the people of Germany, or to Christian principles, or to God. In the end, loyalty to one person meant disloyalty to their fellow citizens and to anything that would have made them Christian. In the old order, I maintained my loyalty to one person beyond what it should have been: I will admit that it was only when pushed to the limit that I realized that loyalty to one person that resulted to disloyalty to everyone else was wrong. The old order abhorred Masons, but it vaulted over the accusations against Masons to become something worse than its vilest accusations against Freemasonry. Papal recognition became an end in itself, and the ends justified the means. And where is that papal recognition today? Is it to be found in the shards and wreckage of the old order? No. It was never granted, not even one whit or scintillation. And I will tell you this, so that you may add something else to your pipe: I met with a very high level delegation in another country to ensure that papal recognition NEVER WOULD BE granted to the old order. So now you know. The time and exact place and the people involved will forever remain secret, but the message was passed, accepted and acted upon. The actions of the old order convinced me that being granted papal recognition would have been an evil happenstance, indeed. So now it will not happen. Not ever. So, take back this news to your mentor, Mr. Brown Hawk/Consolidation, and witness the rending of mantles and the gnashing of teeth. And remind your mentor that the destruction of a certain holy object–one that he destroyed personally–resulted in the sealing of the old order’s destruction. Your mentor was like Saul, who would lose his crown after killing the priests of the Lord. You can offend God only so much, and offer Him unholy fire only so many times, until you lose His favor and your mantle is stripped from you and passed to another. That was–and is–the fate of the old order. Now the mantle in Scotland is passed to Brother Gordon, and the order is being taken back to the original path first blazed by the founding knights of the order. You have a choice, Mr. Brown Hawk/Consolidation–you may either remain in the dustbin of Templar history with the old order that lost favor with God, or you may look to be a part of the order that is continuing with the original Templar mission. But you may much apologizing and soul-searching to do before joining the true order. You may continue to follow Saul, or you may choose to follow David. But choose wisely and choose quickly, for as I have found, not even the next five minutes are guaranteed to us . . . and Judgment is then upon us. Life is about choices, Mr. Brown Hawk/Consolidation. You hopefully still have time to make the right one.

    brown hawk said: January 10, 2010 at 1:12 pm
    Once Again,just for you.
    I am not a templar.
    I hope it sinks in now.

    I admited quite early and openly that I use brown hawk as it is your scottish GP Gordon and his pet boys poison pen name when they write to me. I have already explained this twice. I hope this is simple enough for you this time.

    You again produce wild stories without proof and expect everyone to take your word for it. You have recinded your word publicly before why would you be trustworthy now?

    Mr Reese you really are not that important to any Order, Christ is! and as a mason you are without Christ. This is maybe an area you could look into (badges and staus are really not that important, (try learning Psalm 115 v1 and working out what it means)
    I am not affiliated with anyone but you have labeled me many different things and names so far.
    Please just deal with facts or things you can prove. As I have.

    Mr Comrie (or whatever his name is today) has been outed attempting to trick the public on many occassions, such as the three self made peerage titles he invented for himself, Baron of Comria ring a bell? or how about the recent useage of another Orders charity number for a couple of months (he even kept using it although it had been officially cancelled via the Scottish Charities Office upon request of McGrath to stop Mr Comrie continually and falsely using it?) Embarressing for you isnt it?
    These things are public knowledge.
    I dont have to be a templar of any form to see your factions fighting mason v Christian.

    You Mr Reese are a pawn who is mason led, the Christian stance on masonry is public and reproduced /ecopy posted here by me to back my posts. Your words are hollow and without proofs so far.

    You indeed could have some interesting information, but as you say you will never reproduce or prove it , so it is just empty idle boasts until you do. I have no idea why you waste air in these idle boasts.

    You have proven your mettle in your previous posts, Dear Sir.
    Why should I give any credit to your words now?
    I am always happy to learn but you just spruke without proofs or content.
    Will you ever apologise to those you accused without proof or to me for your SS slur or is yhe medicine you prescribe only for thers and you are excluded?
    You were in the Pakistan Christian post forum and you broke a oath, this is fact.
    That you are not keen for that to be public is understandable but if you attack you sometimes may meet resistance.
    I understand your currnt tactics are an old habit for you,ask the Canadian GP you and Beaver teamed up on to persecute, I am wondering how you will make amends with Christ for persecuting her with your mate Gary Martin Beaver?

    Gatou or Christ your choice, please remember Christ is forgiving and will wait until you wake up.
    Maybe you subscribe to the 2012 rantings of the Dr, if so we shall see who is accurate and who is deluded soon enough.

    brown hawk said: January 10, 2010 at 1:48 pm
    I will not bother the forum again unless personally attacked with lies again.
    Your Choice.
    Templars should protect the weak and so hiding information away against a so called “evil order” as is indicated by a certain poster is a terribly unchristian thing to do in the best case scenario… or just a hiding tactic and untrue in the worst case scenario.
    Either way it is not even close to a real Templar’s way of dealing with accused wrongs.
    Gatou or Christ, Sirs and Dames which do you worship?
    Your choice, your soul, that is God’s greatest gift, you have a choice!
    I will pray for us all and try to see things from the perspective that Luis and other more sane posters have provided.
    I am not really sure I will agree… but I will try to understand their POV.

    mike ganja said: January 10, 2010 at 3:05 pm
    Dear Chev James
    well said who is hiding been hiding its Brown Haw /consolidation. This soul has a personality problem. macgrath and his Gang has betrayed the pope Benedict and the latin patriciath by abusing the Holy fathers name. The masons have never used the Holy fathers name. so r Brown Haw need not be the angel of Light. what is he trying to prove . he is the Revelation of anti christ.
    God Bless his soul

    Chev James said: January 10, 2010 at 3:31 pm
    Chev. Mike–This split personality Brown Hawk/Consolidation belongs to a discredited group that likes to dish it out, but cannot take it. From now on, every time I see something from him attacking others, I will post a most embarrassing fact about his discredited group. Tell me, Mr. Brown Consolidation, should I start with discussions about the Patriarch? Or what happened in St. Peter’s Square? Or how the police chased you around during a so-called knighting ceremony? Keep it up, sir, and you shall get it back in spades. Remember that it was you who attacked first, and I let a lot go by. No more. You shall get it back a hundredfold. You should look to yourself, sir, for a target has already been painted on your back. It is di rigeur for your group. No one escapes from your group without a sincere effort being made to bury a dagger to the hilt between your shoulder blades. If you think you are immune, think again. That is why we left. One day you will undoubtedly visit this forum again to detail your own story of being betrayed. Think about it.

    mike ganja said: January 10, 2010 at 3:35 pm
    Dear Bro James
    well said

    God Bless

    Chev James said: January 10, 2010 at 4:12 pm
    One more thing, Mr. Brown Stuff . . . would you like to hear from the Canadian GP herself as to how she was persecuted? I am quite certain that she would accept an invitation to come here and tell the world about your discredited group. Would you like that? Would you like for her to tell the WORLD about Mr. V being appointed a “Grand Inquisitor” to betray his own GP? Oh, Mr. Brown Stuff, you have absolutely delighted me with your lack of knowledge about pertinent facts and events. Please issue the invitation for the Canadian GP to respond, and let the WORLD hear what she has to say about your “mentor” and Mr. V and what they were all up to. Are the three of you up to it? Please issue the invitation. I am absolutely certain that the Templars here would love to hear her personally refute what you have said, and tell what actually happened. The good moderator here could “vet” her and ensure that it is she who speaks. So, are you really up to hearing what she would say? You have thrown down the gauntlet; I would give you a brief space of time to pick it up and retract your accusation, and to apologize. But if you do not wish to apologize, sir, let me know, and the invitation shall be issued, and everyone here can read what she has to say. I am sure you will wish to confer with your “mentor” first–so go ahead. Just remember, sir, that it was you who unlocked this door–I would just be pulling it open all the way. I will consider the lack of a proper apology to be the invitation for her to address the Templar world as to your accusations. So, choose carefully, sir, between making an apology and asking her to address the true chivalry here. I am sure she can detail how your “mentor” lost Canada as well as the USA. But the choice is yours: apology or having her address your accusations. Again, the moderator can verify her identity: he can email me, and I can put the two of them in touch with one another. Just remember, Mr. Brown Stuff–you made the accusation, which the Canadian GP will tear apart just as certainly as a tigress tears apart her prey! This is what a military tactician would label not just a tactical mistake, but a strategic one. And if you do not wish to issue that apology, sir, then another voice will be added to the chorus here that directs you to return to the shadows, forever and ever, with your baseless accusations and lies following you into perdition.

    brown hawk said: January 10, 2010 at 11:05 pm
    Thank you Mr Reese, that is more like the information I was seeking.
    I do not have a ‘mentor” as you keep stating wrongly and I am not a Templar.
    As far as I can see there hasnt been a Templar for 500 years odd.

    If it is true about the ex-Canadian GP then it should be revealed IMO; the truth should never be hidden, what about your claims about the destruction of religious property though or addressing the charity number use of another Order by your group etc…?

    If I am wrong about the ex-canadian GP then I am only too happy to unreservedly apologise to both her and you about this particular issue.

    However what I have stated is the information out in the internet and in many of the groups templar emails of the time.
    I admit to finding it funny and quite telling that after all your own wild and false accusations that you have the gall to ask for an apology from anyone, when you yourself are so loathe to give them.

    I however will gladly apologise if I am wrong and try to learn from it to ensure the truth is better known.

    I have never seen anything to contradict it but would obviously like to hear any proveable contradictory statements. As everything else I have stated has been accurate( and if I am in error) I would truly like to an opportunity too learn from it and (if proven)an opportunity to apologise to the both of you.

    You are also wrong to think this is the Only Order/Place/Forum that I have asked some difficult questions of, you are in just one of dozens of clubs that call themselves templars who I have used/asked for information. Your efforts ( good or bad) are really not that important too me personally until you start preaching or taliking about fealty, I did find this relevant to remind you of your past efforts with fealty in the Pakistan Christian Post.
    As far as I can see in the OCMTH charter and initiation they swear to Christ and not thier Leader, You sworn oath was self made in that post, so I dont know what your gripe was?
    Masons have a much stricter fealty oath and it can be to a tin can or the devil or Christ , as long as they believe in something/anything. However their own version Gaotu hold superiority above Christ by their estimation as per the posts and quote I have provided.

    The factional fighting even between the so called Christian Orders is very telling. All factions claim wild and often strange things without proofs; as have you yourself.
    Please remember(As I have always stated) I am not a Templar, I hope this sinks in this time.

    I will pray for us all.

    Gaotu or Christ?

    brown hawk said: January 10, 2010 at 11:39 pm
    Mr Reece, you will see I had already issued you a challenge to reveal and prove the statement untrue in the original post before you started with your threats about revealing the “truth”.
    I do not fear it, welcome it and always have.
    Please read the posts and answer them accordingly.
    “Templars should protect the weak and so hiding information away against a so called “evil order” as is indicated by a certain poster is a terribly unchristian thing to do in the best case scenario… or just a hiding tactic and untrue in the worst case scenario.
    Either way it is not even close to a real Templar’s way of dealing with accused wrongs.”

    I hope this makes it clearer for you.

    brown hawk said: January 11, 2010 at 1:45 am
    I unfortunately have run out of time here. I am in the middle of an international move with my employment (third world charity work- with only sparodic email i/net opportunities).
    I apologise ( just in case I have made a mistake about Canada) to both the the Ex-Canadian GP and Mr Reese for the comments about her being harrassed by GMB and JR.
    The information I have (emails) must be incorrect if this is the case.

    I would still appreciate / expect Mr Reese to post his proof but post the above as I would hate thier to be a delay in my apology if I was proven wrong.

    I should be back to see what has been posted in late March.

    May Christ guide us.

    Chev James said: January 11, 2010 at 6:39 am
    Mr. Brown Stuff has opened a can of worms, and we will see how he and his mentor deals with it. He has accused me of being complicit in attacks upon the Grand Prioress of Canada. I hope to be in touch with her today, and will invite her to post her own comments. Just remember, Mr. Brown Stuff–you asked for it. You have published baseless accusations against me, the one involving the Canadian GP being only the latest. I am sure that the readers of this chronology will be waiting with bated breath to hear her response. And, I feel quite confident that her response will be the anvil thrown to a provocateur drowning in his own lies. It’s risky business, Mr. Brown Stuff, to go around talking about things you know nothing about, especially when that talk takes the form of attacks. You disliked my analogy comparing you to an SS officer. All right I will fix that. You are not an SS officer: you are your group’s Reichminister of Propaganda, the Joseph Goebbels of the old, discredited order. You would do Herr Goebbels proud, sir: you have been on the constant attack and your chief attack has been to accuse others of being Masons (a group that Goebbels railed against) and to attack their sense of loyalty. I sense you are hunkered in a “Fuehrer bunker” somewhere in Scotland, plotting to resurrect your “Templar Reich” through a set of grandiose, but wholly unrealistic and unsupported plans. I also think you are like Goebbels because you stress personal loyalty over loyalty to God, or to the church, or to one’s own conscience. Tell me, Mr. Brown Stuff, if your “mentor” told you to go into the streets of Glasgow and decapitate every blond, blue-eyed baby you saw, would you do that? Would you jump off a cliff if your “mentor” told you to do that? Would you destroy a consecrated knight’s cross if your mentor told you to do that? We know you would come to a forum such as this one and engage in a “disinformation” campaign if you were told to do so–and that is why you are here. You have presented us with the ludicrous proposition that you are not in your mentor’s group, but here you are claiming to know everything that went on for the past five years, and to have intimate knowledge of all the people involved, and yet you are NOT a Templar of this group? In the words of your own “mentor”: “We do not discuss Templar matters with non-members.” So, Mr. Brown Stuff, I will posit two things: (1) you ARE a member of your mentor’s group, and (2) you are its Minister of Propaganda. Now, Mr. Brown Stuff, I shall contact the GP of Canada, and we will let everyone hear see what she has to say about your mentor’s group, and whether or not I was complicit in any attack upon her. I hope you can swim while holding an anvil, Mr. Brown Stuff, but I doubt it. There’s an old legal maxim that goes like this: “False in one thing, false in everything.” So, you will be proven false in the case of the GP of Canada, and there will be no refuting of her words, because they will be her own. Her words will sink you and the rest of the lies you have told here. I am very glad that you presented this opportunity for your words and your motives to be exposed. Now, just think about this, Mr. Brown Stuff: instead of bringing discredit down upon all of your heads, you could have been doing something worthwhile instead of attacking others. Let this be a lesson to you, Mr. Brown Stuff, and those you represent–”Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein: and he that rolleth a stone, it will return upon him.”–Proverbs 26:27. You have dug the pit, and you have fallen into it; you have rolled the stone, and it has returned to you, sealing you in your pit. If you ever get out, try taking the high road next time. You have taken the low road, and you have fallen into the very pit you dug for others.

    brown hawk said: January 11, 2010 at 2:00 pm
    long winded and again wrong, I have only 3 secondhand accounts of the threats and email attack on the Canadian GP.
    So on this one particular issue I have chosen to be neutral and allow you to prove me wrong.( if you ever do).
    Everything else has been proven and tif we use your own analogy, it would make you permanently false as you have been shown to be false in the previous posts.

    I however recognise when I could be wrong and admit or allow for it to be a possibility. I freely admit on this one issue I should have had more firsthand facts before I went public on it. However the good news is you are going to clear it up. Just as I had hoped and asked you too.

    How about the damaged property claim of yours etc…any chance of you providing proof one day or are you just a windy mason?

    You have just invented rubbish to cover your tracks previously and resorted too slander on so very many occassions.
    Any chance of apologising to those people?

    didnt think so, as per your questionable word or oaths of fealty, association with the fake achbishop Beaver, association with Mr Comrie the pretender Baron of inveted peerage, masonry etc, it stands rock solid.
    I am lookng forward to hearing tghe views of the ex-GP. Thanks.
    May truth and Christ one day enter your life.
    Psalm 115 v1 remember.

    Chev James said: January 11, 2010 at 2:59 pm
    Ah, Mr. Brown Stuff is backpedaling, now that one of his lies is coming home to roost and to confront him! Methinks that the GP of Canada will be answering soon to the defunct order’s minister of propaganda. As the legal maxim says, “False in one thing, false in everything.” With the explosion of this one lie, an entire house of lies will come down. Oh, as to the proof about that holy object being destroyed . . . the proof is in the hands of your mentor. It was the symbolic destruction of the old order! And while we’re talking about personal loyalty and oaths, what happened to your oaths of loyalty to Grandmaster Fontes? It seems that you pick and choose which oaths to keep and to break. What about the Declaration of Atlanta? Did he show that document to you? Did you read Article V, which declares that no knight would ever be asked to do anything that violated his personal conscience? Or Article VIII, which states: “All priories in the Confederation of Scottish Knights Templar shall remain autonomous, but shall recognize and honor those officers elected to serve as the governing body of the Confederation, insofar as no magistral decrees or other orders issued by the Confederation may conflict with this Declaration, the statutes of the Confederation, the laws of the land, or applicable international law.” Do you know the meaning of autonomy, Mr. Brown Stuff? In our case, these two Articles were violated . . . and their violation led to our secession. Now we are a separate, viable order, and we are aligned with the Scottish order under Chev. Gordon MacGregor Comrie. The wounds inflicted by the old, defunct order were addressed and healed. True leadership replaced infighting and intrigues. That is why the Scottish knights under Chev. MacGregor are the ones recognized by the USA and by Grandmaster Fontes, and that is why the old, defunct order–yours–has found itself locked out of the sanctuary and in the darkness. The knights themselves have spoken, Mr. Brown Stuff. The wheat was separated from the chaff. You have failed to accept the judgment of history, Mr. Brown Stuff. But you can rant and rave all you want, and you can make baseless accusations, and it will not change how the knights voted! You were voted out–and the only thing you have to show for TWO DECADES of infighting and intrigues is a court judgment for a trademark . . . and it is a trademark of a defunct organization. You think you can kick and claw your way back to legitimacy, but you cannot. Every accusation you have made, and every lie you have told, has only served to bury your defunct order deeper into the dustbin of history. You cannot accuse and lie your way back into existence . . . that would take positive actions and meaningful work, which the defunct order was incapable of doing. You see, Mr. Brown Stuff, your old, defunct order was totally negative . . . it had a hatred for the world. If there were no external enemies, it would invent them, or make enemies of its own loyal knights. If bashing others were an exercise in holiness, you would be on top right now . . . but we all know that bashing others is the furtherest thing from true holiness. Here’s a quote for you: “Lying and baseless accusations are the last refuge of the incompetent.” You cannot build anything yourselves, so you try to tear down what others have built. You want to impress the chivalry here? Then do something positive. In the meantime, I am awaiting a response from the Canadian GP. So, yes, Mr. Brown Stuff, continue to backpedal . . . backpedal back into the shadows from whence you came . . . for the truth is coming out, and you and the defunct order will be found sadly lacking in things truthful.

    Ex GP said: January 11, 2010 at 6:55 pm
    Most Noble Knights of the Order, Defenders of Faith,

    Chev. James Reese has informed me that he was accused of joining in attacks against me with a certain other person. He has asked me to set the record straight. I am most happy to do so. First let me say that Chev. James is an honourable man. He not only did not participate in any attack upon me, but he was my most steadfast and stalwart defender. It was his defense of me that banished the real attacker. I also wish to state that he tried to keep his order under Scotland for as long as he could. He was much grieved to have to secede from the parent order in Scotland. He chose the only honourable path that was open to him. He was confirmed in this painful choice by the current Grand Prior of Scotland, Chev. Gordon MacGregor Comrie. If he had stayed, he would have ended up expelling knights without cause or justification. He had the choice of destroying the order in the USA or leaving. Neither he nor his fellow knights in the USA were dealt with fairly by the leadership in Scotland at the time. I know that Chev. James pleaded with the Grand Prior General in Scotland at the time, and so did I. Our words fell on deaf ears. I found out later that the news of secession of the USA priory was withheld from the other knights in Scotland. We in Canada left, as well. There was no point in continuing. What had started out as something holy had degenerated into a tangle of plots and strategems against fellow knights. The order that we separated from had lost its way. It wasn’t so much that we left the old order as the old order left us. I bear no ill will toward our former leader. I hope, however, that he will tell the people in his organisation to cease their attacks. This is what drove us away in the first place. How can a Christian organisation always be attacking others and trying to hurt people? It doesn’t make any sense. Also, Mr. Brown Hawk please leave me out of your discussions and especially your accusations against others. I have refuted your charges against an honourable man and knight. Such attacks do not reflect at all well upon a Christian Knights Templar organisation.

    Chev James said: January 11, 2010 at 8:15 pm
    Thank you very much for your response, former Grand Prioress of Canada! Our esteemed moderator, I am sure, can take whatever steps he deems necessary to validate your identity. Here are the words of the gracious lady whom I was accused of attacking; and from her own words you see that it was not so. No knight or decent man, of course, would ever persecute or attack a lady! In light of her admonition that attacks should not be made in the name of a Templar order, I will leave things here as they are. Truly, attacks against others do not make a knight great, but diminishes him. I suggest that we now all attend to our proper business, which is to bring this world closer to the Kingdom of Heaven. The road to the Pearly Gates is paved with humility and penitence, not with arrogance and unrepentant sin. Let all attacks upon others cease, and all energies be directed into the proper channels. There is much work to be done upon this earth before we are each and every one called to Judgment, and we should not waste the precious time that we have in petty bickering. As for me, my sword is in its sheath. Let us not have any quarrel with one another, but pass the “peace” to one another. May our Lord favor all of our efforts to glorify Him and to succor our fellow man, and may be be reproved most gently for straying from the path. I pray that there will be a new dawn for the Templar orders, when all animosities and rivalries will be put aside, and we can all work for the common goals of defending the persecuted church and advancing the Kingdom of God on earth!

    brown hawk said: January 12, 2010 at 12:40 am
    Dear ex GP ,
    Thank you for your time and words of clarification.
    As I had previously , I do again apologise to both JR and yourself about my claim on this issue …
    Now that the truth by your own words is in a public arena it should never be a claim by anyone ever again.

    I admit to being perplexed that you think masonry is a christian path, but there is time to reflect on all decisions yet.
    I do also still stand by my other more proven claims.
    Any chance Mr Reese of substantiating your claim about the destruction of holy property by your ex leader?
    I personally would never think to start playing Templar because of all this ridiculous badge collecting and fighting that it seems all about, no-one ever actually does anything except congratulate themselves and dress up for conferences.
    I first learned about modern Templar pretenders from the very excitable Dr Balavendrien,( he doesnt seem to remember me though) but I am interested in the history of all these self made but false groups since the 40′s.
    Mr Reese will never understand this I suppose.
    It is a fasciniating topic full of intrigue and deceptions and betrayal..good for a book.
    It does not really matter whether Mr Reese ever accepts it or not as long as he continues to provide information.
    Must go….see you in 3months if there is no inet connection.
    God bless all.

    consolidation said: January 12, 2010 at 1:08 am
    I understand from all the twists and deception in Mr Reeses posts your confusion about my status.

    Ex GP, I have NEVER claimed to be a Knight and I dont believe there has been a aTemplar n 500 years and have ALWAYS claimed to be a historian only.
    It is just one of Mr Reese’s wild claims he has made up and refuses to acknowledge when he is wrong,( par for the course I am afraid) for this ‘Good Christian”.
    But dont hold your breath as he never apologises for his mistakes.

    No Modern Templar club reflects well on Christianity and Masonic ones are truly a joke and in direct conflict/opposition with the Major religions of Christianity. I have also seen the many emails sent out during the time( some from JR even) being discussed, and thus came my confusion as they do not state what you now state.
    I will accept your word that they are different to what actually happened.

    I had aso heard about the relationship but didnt think too give it any credit, my mistake obviously.- you can elaborate further, if you feel the urge. I wont.

    So while I will cautiously heed your words on your rationale for retiring I cannot credit anything you say about the ‘Good Knights” here being any form of masonic Christian group and anyone who thinks that should easily be steered straight by the direct words of the Vatican and thus is just amusingly confused but also a good topic for research IMO.

    Luis Matos responded: January 12, 2010 at 4:29 am
    Dear Friend:

    As you may imagine, I have a lot of other occupations other than be the referee between you and others here! I hope you behave and all contributors, behave. It’s a full time job just to read every detail of what has been written here in the last few weeks. I come here about once a week and there is always a load of comments to edit. I am forced to let some details go. And sometimes – as today – I don’t even read anything and run the risk to have you or someone else throw a rock at a poster’s head and only see the bleeding next week, when I have the time and patience to read the drivell that sometimes is unloaded here. If this goes on, I shall have to turn on the “approve beforehand” tool on this blog.


    Chev James said: January 12, 2010 at 5:13 am
    Mr. Brown Hawk, I hope you have a safe journey and a safe return. I hope that you will be able to do some good wherever you are going; much of what is done for our fellow human beings goes unappreciated. But if we please God there is really nothing else to worry about. As to all of the goings on in the Templar world, I would say this: as with churches, it is probably less a matter of what we believe than it is a matter of what we do. There will likely be no “theological pop quiz” administered before the Pearly Gates. Similarly, some Templar claims are hard to prove and some are totally beyond the realm of reality. What really matters at this point in our history is what we do. Do we serve our fellow human beings, or do we simply serve ourselves? Are we furthering the work of the Apostles, or are we simply fighting among ourselves? Yes, at this point in our history, Templar is as Templar does.

    brown hawk said: January 12, 2010 at 7:15 am
    Thank you for your rational words.

    For once we seem to be in agreement.
    My plabne is less than half a day away, I am glad some civility could be restored.
    How about the destruction of relics claim?
    I would certainly be interested if you back that post up. I will check before I leave and when I get back.
    May God not Gaotu guide you.

    Chev James said: January 12, 2010 at 7:52 am
    I hope you have a good trip. As for the cross that was destroyed, I know about it, but wasn’t there to take pictures of the event. In the final analysis, it is between the destroyer and God. The details are known by those involved. It is not necessary to repeat them here, for I am not trying to stir the ashes of the past. I have a plan for reconciling the various Templar orders which I will reveal at some time here. This plan would, of course, require that the conflicts of the past be forgotten and a commitment be made to the future. What the Templar world really needs is some “traction” on doing positive things to help the persecuted church and for “charity” at home, as well. Christianity is under attack as never before . . . from Copts in Egypt being attacked to Palestinian Christians being murdered or being literally harried out of the Holy Land. Imagine the Templar world as a house that is on fire, but its inhabitants have been fighting rather than trying to put out the fire or find an exit. The question we must ask ourselves is this: Is fighting the answer? Not if it is fighting ourselves!

    mike ganja said: January 12, 2010 at 4:10 pm
    Bro James
    You are very wright . we have to unit , this website should help us to Fight for the faith as the poor Knights of christ.
    God Bless

    Chev James said: January 13, 2010 at 11:50 am
    The Templar world needs to come together and put all past enmities and rivalries aside. While we have been fighting among ourselves, Palestinian Christians are being driven from the Holy Land by Muslim extremists, Coptic Christians are being gunned down in front of their churches, and the Chinese Communists are killing church leaders–a Catholic bishop recently died in police custody. I am afraid, gentlemen, that the churches are not alerting their memberships to these atrocities. I would like to humbly put forth two proposals: (1) that the Templar groups form an overarching confederation of orders and branches, and (2) that we become a major political force for the persecuted church in this century. Now, there are two major branches within the Templar world: the one which claims legitimacy from the Larmenius Charter, and the one that claims a direct descent from the original Templars. How to reconcile these claims? It’s very simple, really. I give you the example of the Anglican Church, which had some problems with Apostolic succession after its break with the Catholic Church. Anglican bishops were reconsecrated by special Vatican envoys during the short restoration to Roman Catholicism in England. Subsequently, and even unto this day, when an Anglican Bishop is consecrated, no fewer than three bishops take part in the laying on of hands–this ensures that at least one is of the true Apostolic succession. Now, without getting into Anglican church history to a large degree, I suggest that we adopt a similar strategy: the senior members of the two branches meet in a great conclave and KNIGHT EACH OTHER. In this way, whoever is correct from a historical point of view will transfer legitimacy to whoever may be incorrect from a historical point of view. And, from this point onward, there can be no doubt as to the legitimacy of senior Templar leaders, who can, in turn, “re-knight” their own knights to ensure the legitimacy of the “Templar succession.” Then, gentlemen, we may lay all arguments aside as to who is a “true Templar” and who is not, for most assuredly we shall ALL be true Templars when this process is completed! The ancient line of the Templars will be firmly reestablished, and from this point onward, there can be no argument about it. We will all have our direct lineage traceable to the original founding nine knights of the Order! This would, gentlemen, be the most signficant event in Templar history since 1307 A.D.! Then, gentlemen, we can start doing some very serious work, as one, united Templar confederation with knights and priories all over the world!

    Anthony said: January 13, 2010 at 7:47 pm
    Dear Bro James
    Yes its Time we fight together or die together the Church needs us , not by calling who legitimate or not .its Important are we true poor knights of Christ.
    I am with you
    God bless
    Benedictine Oblate

    henderson said: January 18, 2010 at 4:12 pm
    when did heroines of templar crusades come about

    mike ganja said: January 19, 2010 at 4:20 pm
    Dear Henderson
    its all a joke that women are Templar. we must understand that the knights Templar are Fighting Monks of the catholic church under the Pope, only the pope can form the order under the Benedictine spirituality. so no protestant or ecumenical can form the Templar.. The Templar order is 100%roman catholic its members no one can call them self as the Templar. Read st malaky prophecy. so this guys calling them self Templar are like a Lions club. its the fact .
    God Bless

    confused said: January 26, 2010 at 7:32 am
    I thought the group here on this forum were led by a mason(Luis).

    Didnt one Benedictine Oblate here have a Catholic priest in the Phillipines sanctioned for being rumoured (subsequently proven a baseless allegation falsely laid by the Benedictine Oblate) for being associated with a Templar group he was kicked out of because he thought they had masonic leadership?
    I looked into being a Benedictine Oblate once but all you have too do is attend a weekend retreat once….a nifty way to expand Benedictine education and raise revenue for monastaries really.
    It is no great issue or effort to call yourself a Benedictine Oblate, just a weekend worth of time.
    What has changed?
    Masonic membership is still strictly forbidden to all Catholics/ Christians and anyone trying to call themself Templar.

    The Catholic Church holds that freemasons are not allowed to receive the sacrements or confession until they denounce their membership and the Church also states that all freemason souls are in great peril.

    You guys and gals here are a funny and hopefully good natured dress up group only. This is proven by these obvious and real documents from real Christian leaders.

    I hope you enjoy yourselves but please do not pretend to be Christians ( let alone Templars) unless you are willing to rid yourself of freemasons.

    Chev James said: January 26, 2010 at 9:03 am
    Confused, are there any encyclicals or papal bulls specifically proscribing Freemasonry for Catholics? I have heard of proscriptions in the past, but no one has shown me a single document attesting to this proscription.

    Mike, I know what you mean in that the Templars were originally a papal order. With the Great Purge of 1307 under King Philip IV, however, and the still un-retracted Vox in Excelso by Pope Clement V that dissolved the order, I would posit that recognition of any Templar group by the Catholic Church would be problematical. Vox in Excelso provides that any Catholic who dons Templar regalia is automatically excommunicated. Vox in Excelso is still in effect.

    That leaves, in my humble estimation, only the ecumenical route. As we know, the Templars who fled to Scotland went from being a papal order to a royal order. There was no other way. And we know that the Templars in Scottish history were affiliated with both the Catholic and Anglican churches; they fought against the “Covenanters” who were Presbyterian.

    I don’t see the Catholic Church granting recognition to any Templar group within this century.

    As Pope John Paul II apologized to Jews for pogroms against them that were often conducted under the auspices of the Catholic Church, I feel that the Church owes an apology to the Templars. The Templars were, after all, found to be innocent of heresy and idolatry by Pope Clement himself in a secret trial at Chinon Castle. Dr. Barbara Frale, a Vatican researcher, found the “Chinon Document,” which had been mislaid in the Vatican archives for centuries–and the document showed that the order was exonerated of the serious charges against it. Still, Vox in Excelso stands and has yet to be repealed. The way to Vatican recognition remains barred.

    As other churches claim our Lord for their own, in addition to the Catholic Church doing so, we see Templar groups formed under the auspices of ecumenical principles. It may very well be that this is the only way, given the current position of the Catholic Church.

    It is noteworthy that the Catholic Church no longer lists Martin Luther among the heretics called out on Maundy Thursday, and that the Church has recognized that other churches are indeed instruments of salvation, although it insists that the Catholic Church is the only “perfect instrument” of salvation.

    I suggest that we lay aside distinctions between Catholic and Protestant, so long as all recognize the basic tenets of the faith as expressed through the Apostles’ and Nicene creeds. At some point in the future, maybe a thousand years from now, the pope and the heads of the other churches will surely gather and reforge the divided Church into a single Church once again. And that pope, who will preside over one Church with perhaps different “rites,” e.g., Anglican Rite and Greek Orthodox Rite, will–in the name of God–decree that all who belonged to different churches are now considered to be a part of the reunified Catholic Church, thus rendering all of our theological debates moot.

    It has also been said that it should matter less what we believe, and matter more what we actually do. We take up too much time describing what we are and what we believe, when we should be showing what we are and what we believe through our good works.

    The theologians can have their debates; what is most important for us is to ACT.

    We need to unite and work on behalf of the persecuted church–the millions of Christians who face oppression and persecution every day of their lives under Islamic and Communist governments. And, if we help free a Christian charged with blasphemy from prison, would he care if we were Catholic or Protesant?

    We have more that unites us than divides us. We should put aside theological differences and simply start on the “heavy lifting” that is needed on behalf of the persecuted church!

    confused said: January 26, 2010 at 11:38 am
    Dear Chev James,
    as you have asked, here is is the latest guidance which deals with Christianity and Freemasonry. It is pretty straight forward.

    From the then Cardinal Ratzinger (whom is presently known as Pope Benedict XVI ).
    I hope this is good nough a Catholic source for you.
    In his 1983 document “The Declaration of the Sacred Congregation”.

    “The Declaration of the Sacred Congregation; affirms that membership in Masonic Associations remain forbidden by the Church and the Faithful who enrol in them are in a state of grave sin, and may not receive Holy Communion or the Sacraments. it confirms to the faithful that membership in a Masonic Lodge is unlawful. It warns them such membership is incompatible with the Catholic Faith.”

    Here is the Vatican stance for Chritians to read, if they like.

    There are plenty of older ones listed below but I suppose the only one that is relevant is the current delaration shown above.

    CLEMNE XII In Eminenti, const. 24 Apr. 1738
    BENEDICT XIV Providas, const. 18 May 1751
    PIUS VII Ecclesiam a Jesu Christo, const. 13 Sept.
    1821 LEO XII Quo Graviora, const. 13 Mar. 1825
    PIUS VIII Traditi Humilitati, ency. 24 May 1829
    GREGORY XVI Mirari Vos, encyc. 15 Aug. 1832
    PIUS IX Qui Pluribus, encyc. 9 Nov. 1846

    LEO XIII Humanum Genus, encyc. 20 Apr. 1884
    LEO XIII Dall’ Alto Dell’ Opostolico, Seggio, encyc.
    LEO XIII Inimica Vos, encyc. 8 Dec. 1892,.

    LEO XIII Custodi Di Quella Fede, encyc. 8 Dec. 1892

    So putting aside your theological differences when attempting to represent the Church is a of a silly thing to state and actually an oxymoron.
    Freemason led groups never have and will never be any form of Church affliated/sanctioned club. The Church finds them plainly and simply self worshipping and evil.
    They are not (and will never be) representitive of Christianity as displayed by the last 300 years of direction by the real Church leaders.

    Hope this helps.

    Chev James said: January 26, 2010 at 1:01 pm
    Thank you. There can be little doubt that the Catholic Church prohibits its members from belonging to any Masonic organization.

    As for Templar activities, however, I do not think the proscription by the Catholic Church is definitive. Let me explain what I mean.

    A Catholic may be proscribed from joining the Masons, but he cannot be proscribed from associating with them at work, in volunteer organizations or fraternal organizations.

    Now, a Freemason may be a member of, say, the Baptist Church. The Catholic Church may see that person as a Mason, but the Baptist Church sees him as a Christian, as well. However, the Catholic Church does not probibit associations with Baptists, even though they are Protestant. But what about associations with a Baptist Mason?

    Let us take the case of Muslims. Many of us work with Muslims. Unlike the Baptist Mason, the Muslim does not even believe in Christ as the Son of God. He believes that Judas Ischariot died on the cross instead of Christ.

    Now, if the Catholic Church does not prohibit its members from associating with Muslims, who completely deny the divinity of Christ, how would it prohibit associating with a Baptist Mason–who, for all of his Masonic affiliation, still believes in Christ as the Son of God?

    If we cannot work together as Catholics and Baptists, as Freemasons and non-Freemasons, how will anything ever be accomplished? It is one thing for a church leader to say that members of his church cannot join the Masons, but it is quite another thing to say that his church members cannot associate with Masons.

    Would a Catholic not join the Jaycees or Lions Club because there were Masons or Baptists or Presbyterians in it? Or even Muslims?

    Would a Catholic quit his job because a Mason or Baptist or Muslim joined the ranks of his employer? I think not!

    So, I am saying that it is quite all right for a Catholic to not join the Masons because they are forbidden by his Church to join, but it is an impossibility for Catholics to be absent from every organization in which there might be Masons, or Baptists or Muslims. If such were the case, Catholics would swell the ranks of the unemployed–they would be self-barred from almost any workplace, and from the armed forces, and from almost every imaginable organization outside the Church.

    So, the ultimate question is this: if a Catholic can serve alongside a Mason in a foxhole, what stops him from serving alongside a Mason in a Templar organization?

    The real Brown-Hawk said: January 26, 2010 at 1:53 pm
    God Help us all,
    Forgive us oh descendants for we no not what we do!

    I have read the strings to date, all I can say is no hope! ….after all these years I have been in search of Good men, yes good men and women…to somehow champion a most wonderous cause……The templars will be plagued by tin pot commanders, and wood be commanders, more interested in pulling good men down by creating a legitimacy out of illusion. These same small men who say one thing and do the complete opposite. Wh say the serve in his name…but you really have to wonder when they are performing stupid childish payback prove how nationalist they really are. Who shout the rule out, but live a complete lie…is this what Templarism is about by creating a set of descent standard and ethics, then verbally deficating on then…because they couldn’t live up to them.

    James and Graham you and the misguided like you would have to be the epitamy of why Templarism cannot work – Templarism- can only exist in it’s purest of forms – Gordon find your good men somwhere, hold on to them, by example my friend, live the rule you won’t regret it…it is more than just about service to god, it is about the salvation of a species moral character, and ethics heritage-we can survie if this nobility prevails.

    As for the person using my name you don’t surprise me James, you are capable of many evils this is why it doesn’t cannot find it in your psyche to be a piece with mediocrity when all of the reset of us see it as an inevitability-primarily due to the fact that our service is a fleeting moment, our importance an illusion. Only the good or bad we do is significant…and let me tell you james over the last few years or should I say Brown consolidation you have done little to alleviate other peoples suffering…anyway what would I know…I am simply a Ghost you don’t want to talk to…you are far from the Temple and alas I must say many are…but their are others who are living the rule-true templars why don’t you Join them James or should I say Brown consolidation and start a fresh… a Templar you never know if you start with Truth it just might work.

    Chev James said: January 26, 2010 at 2:52 pm
    I think I have defined the basic problem, and I will distill it down to its essence. The problem is that Templars come from various Christian denominations. Well, it’s not really a problem unless you are one of those people who believe that ONLY their church is “right.” Do you believe that all non-Catholics are on an express train to hell? If so, you believe something that neither the pope nor the Catholic clergy believes. You seem to have a very narrow view of things: you imagine that when you are sitting in a pew in YOUR church, that you are guaranteed a ticket to heaven, while the other churches are sitting on top of trap doors leading straight to hell, and God is just itching to pull the lever! Do you also imagine that a “theological pop quiz” will be administered in front of the Pearly Gates, and that only those who answer correctly will be admitted? And do you believe that the members of other churches, from the Anglican theologian C. S. Lewis to the Methodist evangelists Dwight L. Moody and Billy Graham were all just twiddling their thumbs before going to hell? Here is your problem: you have left Christianity for Churchianity. Under the latter concept, Christ did not shed enough blood for the remission of all sins, and people must jump through infinite hoops in one particular church in order to go to heaven. So do you really think heaven will be populated by only Catholics? I am Orthodox Anglican, and I do NOT think that mine is the ONLY “right” church! Who are WE–any human being–to try to put God inside a box and declare that HE is bound to do this or that for us, if we do this or that for Him? Do you not know that we cannot “bargain” with God, that we cannot make “deals” with Him, i.e., “I promise to be a faithful Catholic or Anglican or Baptist if you will give me that promotion and admit me into heaven when I die!” Oh, no–it doesn’t work that way.

    You call me evil. I will tell you what is evil: it is supposed Christians fighting with each other while our fellow Christians are being gunned down in the streets of Rawalpindi or Baghdad.

    And it is evil to think that you are holier than anyone else because you belong to a particular church. I assure you that on Judgment Day, there will be people of all denominations in heaven, and there will be people of all denominations in hell. In fact, you will “check your denomination at the door” at the entrance to heaven.

    It is fitting to remember that our mightiest works are but as dirty rags to our Lord. How then should we be prideful or boastful over our church affiliation.

    Our Lord would not recognize many churches today. And many churches would not recognize Him.

    And whoever believes that God will sentence millions of people to hell because they were Baptist as opposed to Catholic, or Catholic as opposed to Baptist, has embraced Churchianity to the complete exclusion of Christianity.

    Our ultimate judge is God. NO human being gets to decide who goes to heaven and who does not.

    Why don’t we leave judgment to God, as our Lord told us to do, and try to bring this world closer to the Kingdom of Heaven?

    mike ganja said: January 26, 2010 at 4:26 pm
    Dear Confused , you are confused. I think if you are catholic search the truth first because No catholic who call him self catholic is 100% catholic. so its Good not to judge the masons as we catholic have also High jacked our faith . so get confused because Brown hawk is the same identity of confuse. so brown hawk or you call yr new baptized name as Confused seek advise from Confuses.

    God bless

    Chev James said: January 26, 2010 at 6:28 pm
    Brother Mike, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Our belief in God should not divide us, but unite us. Our faith should challenge us to be better, and not give us a false sense of superiority over others. And, finally, if we would be like our Master, we should practice humility in speech and conduct toward others, and not let false pride prevent us from being a credible witness for Him.

    “But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.” – 1 Corinthians 9:27

    “If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.” – Philippians 3:11-14

    We see that the APOSTLE Paul did not believe that, by virtue of his being an Apostle, that he had a “lock” on heaven. If an Apostle did not have a “lock” on heaven, could membership in ANY church or other organization give us a “lock” on heaven? Absolutely not!

    So why should the Catholic look down upon the Anglican, or the Anglican look down upon the Baptist, or the Baptist look down upon the Catholic? Membership in ANY church does not give one a “lock” on heaven! And once we accept this fact, we are much less likely to “look down” on Christians belonging to churches other than our own!

    The question then becomes, “Shall we say to anyone that you cannot be a Templar, because you belong to THAT church or THIS organization?”

    I believe this: I believe that the Templars, working in concert for the good of mankind, can be a BRIDGE between the various churches!

    I also believe this: we are ennobled by our faith, not by our parentage, or by our financial status, or by our “station in life.” Ultimately, we are justified by our faith, and not by our works.

    It is well to keep in mind that our Lord, during the period of His earthly ministry, did not select the Apostles from the ranks of the Jewish cognoscenti or intelligentsia. He selected ordinary people from the humblest walks of life. They were ordinary men who were prepared by our Lord to accomplish extraordinary things! These were not men possessed of hubris or who were used to looking down upon their fellow men; none of them possessed any titles or ranks.

    There was the time, of course, when Paul confronted Peter over the latter’s not eating with Gentiles. Peter relented and he began to sit down at eat with the Gentiles afterwards.

    Paul did not ask Peter to BECOME one of the Gentiles, he just told him that it was wrong to hold their status against them.

    Our Lord sat down and ate with prostitutes and publicans. He did not become one of them, but neither would He cast them aside. The fact that someone belonged to the “Prostitute’s Club” or the “Tax Collector’s Club” or the “Roman Occupier’s Club” or the “Gentiles’ Club” was not a barrier to our Lord engaging–or even healing–them. Significantly, the only “club” that our Lord did not have much success with was the “Rich Man’s Club.”

    Our Lord did not make distinctions as He reached out to people and looked to fill the ranks of His Disciples.

    We should remember our Lord’s ministry as we look to fill the ranks of the Templars!

    confused said: January 26, 2010 at 10:06 pm
    Ok, you asked about Catholic statements against freemasonry and I supplied the easily accessed and 300 year old answers (There were plenty of them over that period).

    Unfortunately you didnt like the truth and official statements of a real Christian Leader such as the Pope; and so instead claim you know better and provide a yourself as a better authority than the Pope.

    Not very surprising coming from freemasons.

    It is now obvious why the real Church has issues with freemasonry and thank you for giving such a prime example of why.


    Chev James said: January 27, 2010 at 9:34 am
    Confused, we did not say that forbidding Catholics from being Freemasons was beyond the prerogative of the Pope. He is the leader of the Catholic Church, and he can set such rules.

    What we are saying is that the Pope did NOT say: “You cannot belong to any organization that has Freemasons in it.” He never said any such thing. If he did, then Catholics could not be members of the armed forces, or work for anyone else, or belong to any civic organizations.

    Jews are proscribed from eating pork, but they are not forbidden to associate with people who eat pork. Jews are in the workforce, and the armed forces, and in every civic organization you can name.

    Muslims are proscribed from drinking alcohol, but they work every day with people who do drink alcohol. They are not forbidden to associate with those who do.

    The outside world is not a monastery; we do not keep exclusive company with those who have the exact beliefs that we have. We have to go into the outside world to make a living.

    We do not have to agree with someone’s religious beliefs in order to work with him or her.

    I do not have to become a Mason in order to work with Masons! They do not have to resign from their lodges in order to work with me!

    Would you tell me that if you were in a bad car accident, you would not want the surgeon to save your life because he was a Mason? Or a Baptist?

    If you saw someone lying in a ditch and bleeding, would you leave him there because he was a Mason, or a Baptist?

    Do you remember the parable of the “Good Samaritan,” and how the priest and the Levite passed by the robbery victim without helping him, because touching him would have made them “ritually unclean”? And do you remember how the Samaritan put all such considerations aside and helped the man? Who truly had the love of God in his heart–the people who passed the victim by, or the person who helped him?

    Are you afraid that you will be considered “ritually unclean” if you work side-by-side with Masons or people outside the Catholic Church?

    Can we ever get anything done if we insist on working only with people who go to the same church as we do, and belong only to organizations meeting our personal approval?

    The Pope said that Catholics should not be Masons. That is his right and his prerogative. But note that he did NOT say: “Don’t ever associate with someone who is a Mason, or belong to any organization which has Masons in it.”

    We go to different churches because we have different beliefs, but none of us have the luxury of working or associating only with people who sit in the same pew.

    Dark Knight said: January 27, 2010 at 11:02 am
    For give my intrusion Chev. Mantos,

    Of all the recent entries Chev James, you speak well…giving some dignity to the argument for equity of belief. I was a Templar or at least I though I was…it is just I fell into the outlawed variety probably because of my associations. Funny though when you got to know the outlawed variety they were very much like me in thought and deed….I thought likable wonderful people who had ethics way beyond some of my fellow church goers…anyway not the point. I thought this was about liniage and truth.
    I joined the Templars at the time for truth and service, I know the situation with the templar world is complex I acknowledge this but what of truth…if unity is not achievable?

    confused said: January 27, 2010 at 11:21 am
    We must all help the sick and needy and everyone should be comended for these acts ( Chrisitian , Muslim, Aethiest and all people) but if you try o call yourself Chritians and are standing by and allowing freemasons to be welcomed within your Order ( In fact they lead it) is really self explanatory; that you are in contravention of the Popes and the last 300 Years worth of Catholic Leaders direction and in a state of grave sin.

    Hopefully you do great works and deeds for your own glory and a bit of it acutally helps needy people; but you are not and can never be Templars whilt you allow freemasons within your club.
    It is simple really. It is you who seek to complicate it because the truth does not suit your purpose.
    Enough of this slippery sidewinding and just play freemason honestly please.

    Chev James said: January 27, 2010 at 12:11 pm
    Dark Knight–we must unite or we will become a mere footnote among all of the organizations that failed to live up to their charters. The order was created for a noble purpose, and it is a purpose that remains unfulfilled. We must focus on recruiting people who are more interested in helping others than in acquiring titles and ranks, and we must keep out of those frays that have drained some groups of their vitality–and honor.

    Confused–the issues that you raise have bearing in one and only one circumstance: if a particular Templar group wishes to attain papal recognition. Otherwise, we are left to our own consciences and beliefs as to what church to join or what other organizations to join. I can tell you that not ONE Templar group today has been officially recognized by the Vatican; not ONE Templar official has been granted an audience with the pope–and won’t be.

    It is most ironic that you have quoted papal proscriptions against Freemasonry, but you have not addressed “Vox in Excelso,” by which the papacy proscribed the Templar order itself. IF you would call yourself Templar, you are automatically excommunicated from the Catholic Church by Vox in Excelso. In truth, the papacy–as is its right–has proscribed both Freemasonry and the Templar order.

    You are telling me that I must be a good Catholic in order to be a good Templar, but as a Templar I cannot be a good Catholic, either!

    But wait . . . the Templars who fled to France in 1307 went from being a papal order to a royal order. So the question is: does Vox in Excelso still apply?

    The only way it does not apply is if the Templars today are descended from the royal order established by Robert the Bruce.

    And, if a group of Templars today claims to be part of a papal, rather than a royal order, then its members are automatically excommunicated!

    If we are now of a royal order, then we are not the Catholic Church’s order to control or regulate.

    A papal order we cannot be, for the original papal order was dissolved by Vox in Excelso, which ws never rescinded. Therefore, the pope’s proscriptions against Freemasonry cannot apply to us–any more than they could apply to the armed forces, IBM corporation, or to the Lion’s Club.

    The Templars of today are NOT a papal order. The Templars once were a papal order, but no more.

    And there is no papal bull or encyclical that says Catholics must not associate with Freemasons, or Jews, or Baptists in the workplace or in any other organization.

    Again, a Templar order would be excluding Masons only if it thought it could get papal recognition.

    And that is simply not going to happen in this century. Or the next.

    If some group calling itself Templar wishes to pursue papal recognition and exclude Freemasons, that is its right: in the US it’s known as “freedom of association.”

    But that group will be cutting itself off from other Christians . . . and members of that same group will go to work with Freemasons, and will buy from Freemasons, and will work on all kinds of projects with Freemasons.

    I am not a Mason, but I see the danger of excluding my fellow Christians from the ranks of the Templars . . . and we don’t exactly have a surplus of Templars in the world right now!

    confused said: January 27, 2010 at 11:53 pm
    Sorry Mr Reese, you are more confused that ever, just because the true path is difficult you should not abandon it.
    By your words we should ignore the Church and allow freemasons in contravention to the bulls and synods etc..

    Your path is clearly stated and that you do not represent any form of Christian Templar is also patent.
    We should guide those who have strayed back and protect the Church and God. Not Guide people towards excommunication.
    You also forgot to mention the true Templars have always been aware( although the Vatican librarians misplaced it for 400 years) of the later than the Vox document was the Chinon document ( a real document unlike the forged masonic Larmenius scrap) which did not forgive the Templars but stated there was nothing to forgive , ie: the Order was persecuted and scattered for a while but never disbanded by the Church.

    I pray one day you learn the Order is not seeking size or recognition but the ability to further the work of Christ as per Psalm 115.
    If the real Orders were to follow your advice they would then be forever refused recognition and all Templar Orders would truely perish. Luckily that will never happen.

    Freemasons must never enter the Order, they have their own neo-clubs and are not Christians.
    I for one will continue to follow the Church and God and not the self serving and sidewinding ways of the masons.

    Chev James said: January 28, 2010 at 10:52 am
    Confused, here is a quote from Vox in Excelso:

    In view of the suspicion, infamy, loud insinuations and other things which have been brought against the other… and also the secret and clandestine reception of the brother of this Order; in view, moreover, of the serious scandal which has arisen from these things, which it did not seem could be stopped while the Order remained in being, and the danger to faith and souls, and the many horrible things which have been done by the very many of the brothers of this Order, who have lapsed into the sin of wicked apostasy, the crime of detestable idolatry, and the execrable outrage of the Sodomites . . . it is not without bitterness and sadness of heart that we abolish the aforesaid Order of the Temple, and its constitution, habit and anme, by an irrevocable and perpetually valid decree; and we subject it to perpetual prohibition with the approval of the Holy Council, strictly forbidding anyone to presume to enter the said Order in the future, or to receive or wear its habit, or to act as a Templar.

    – Vox in excelso

    Do you see the part that says the Templars are dissolved by an “irrevocable and perpetually valid decree”? What part of “irrevocable” and “perpetually valid” do you not understand? Do you not understand that whether you are a Mason or not, you cannot join the Templar order and still be considered a Catholic?

    You say that the Church never officially disbanded the Templar order? Then what do you call the above? The order was abolished by the Church through an irrevocable and perpetually valid decree by Pope Clement V and approved by the Holy Council. Yes, a trial was held at Chinon castle, but Pope Clement never rescinded Vox in Excelso; nor did he spare the 24th Grandmaster, Chev. Jacques de Molay, from being burned at the stake. Nowhere in the Chinon Document does it say that Vox in Excelso is rescinded, and by the pope’s own words, it could not be–not ever.

    It seems to me, Confused, that you are confused because you are talking about excluding Freemasons from the order so that the order would be acceptable to the Catholic Church. But the order, as the old papal order, would never, ever be acceptable to the Catholic Church, as Vox in Excelso so unequivocably states.

    The Templars were created as a papal order; therefore, it was within the prerogative of the pope at that time, Clement V, to dissolve this particular papal order. And so he did.

    So the Templars today cannot be a papal order, for the simple fact that the papacy ordered it dissolved by an “irrevocable and perpetually valid” decree.

    The Templars of today are a royal order, chartered by Robert the Bruce, king of Scotland. King Robert became the new Grandmaster of the order in Scotland.

    Now, a royal order is not under the control of the Catholic Church, no more than the Lion’s Club or the Rotary Club. Therefore, a royal order is not subject to pronouncements on membership prohibitions by the Church, as it is not a part of the Church.

    Allow me to “clue you in”: there are Masons and Catholics working together in such organizations as the Lion’s Club, Rotary International, the Jaycees, and the Red Cross. There are Masons and Catholics working together in the armed forces. There are Masons and Catholics working together in hundreds of corporations. If the papacy were to tell Catholics they couldn’t be members of any organization that contained Masons, then Catholics would have to stay at home and not venture any further than the local Catholic Church. Obviously, that was not the case.

    I know who the people are who are still chasing Vatican recognition; but Vox in Excelso states that the Templars will never, ever be accorded legitimacy again by the Church. Seeking Vatican recognition is an exercise in futility.

    Now, imagine the great irony and folly of this situation: a group calling itself Templar excludes Freemasons from its ranks because it is seeking Vatican recognition, but that recognition cannot come because of a papal bull issued in 1312 A.D.! It is excluding one group while it is, itself, is excluded by the Catholic Church!

    Here is what CAN be done: a royal order can accept any Christian as a Templar. It does not need to worry about who is a Mason or Freemason any more than it needs to worry about who is a Baptist and who is a Catholic. It does not need to worry because it is NOT organized under the aegis of any ONE particular Church!

    And if anyone is insisting that he is still in a Templar order sanctioned by the Catholic Church, I refer him again to Vox in Excelso.

    “Irrevocable and perpetually valid” is a very, very, very long time to be abolished, Confused. You seem to be holding your breath waiting for this bull to be lifted–and you are excluding others while at the same time, you are yourself excluded!

    confused said: January 28, 2010 at 1:24 pm
    I will continue to stick to the Vox and Chinon docs guidance as well as the Churches, otherwise if I allow myself to see things as you do then I may as well be in a Lions club like you are.
    If a person cannot receive the sacraments then they cannot be a Templar, it is pretty simple really.
    As for your interpretations of the Vox you are welcome to it and if others follow you then I would be sorrowed by their lack of foresight. It is not about numbers and growth it is about serving Christ anonymously and not all Templars are excluded from patronage just some groups (most notably the neo’s pretenders whom allow masons).
    As for your comments about working hand in hand with masons…you should be attempting to guide them back to the fold as Christ has taught us; Not repeat Not following their UNCHRISTIAN lead.
    This alone proves you are just (as you stated ) a trumped up Lion’s Club, Rotary International, Freemasons or the Jaycees, and the Red Cross or maybe even the Red Crescent type group who allow atheist nilhists and enemies of the Christian Church in your clubs.
    It is not just the Catholic Church that forbids freemasons from receiving the Sacraments but all major Christian Churches including the new ones such as the Baptists, amish and even 7 dayers or just about any Christian group. There is a line and you have gone far past it. Look for God please and ask for forgiveness.
    All do great work at times , but all are not and never will be Templars.
    If it is your clubs choice to do so then I will pray you see better of it one day, but please do not sully the name of Christian Templar by pretending to be one.
    The templar pretender in Scotland has many false Titles such as Baron of Comria etc..and set up his own club in 2007 after an inglorious stint ending in being caught not being truthful.
    Less than a year later he was caught using a charity number from OSCR on his website he was not entitled either ethically or legally to use and then he claimed to have never received a penny from it. I hope that is true as it would have been fraudulent if he had. Not exactly a great Christian’s modus operandi.
    Follow him at your soul’s peril.

    In the meantime the real Templars are not concerned with the difficulty concerning recognition; we concern ourselves with just charity, chivalry and protecting the downtrodden Church.
    Obviously you cannot do this whilst you flout your freemason links and are unable to receive communion or the guidance of the Church.

    I pray you find time to meditate on this link.

    mike ganja said: January 28, 2010 at 1:52 pm
    Dear Confused
    You are Really confused why are you talking on Behalf of the Roman catholic church not even the pope condemns any one.
    so its better you judge yourself Read psalms 14 and 15.
    so dont judge Bro James.
    God Bless

    Chev James said: January 28, 2010 at 1:54 pm
    As our Lord said, “You shall know them by their fruits.” And what are the fruits of the “Templar groups” that exclude Freemasons–and let’s be totally honest, Protestants as well? The fruits are these: infighting, backbiting, accusations, recriminations, incessant legal maneuvers and lawsuits, character assassination, absence of all due process, and intrigue upon intrigue. Where IS the charity, the service to persecuted church and the LOVE for others? If you do not have LOVE for your fellow human being, everything you do is for naught.

    I do not think your faction wants to bring back the Templar order. I fear that you are trying to resurrect the sect of the Pharisees, and like the Pharisees of old, you will judge others by what they eat, what they drink, with whom they share a meal, or with whom they work. You will sit in your church and will pray, “Thank God I am not like that man over there, a sinner!”

    Like the priest and the Levite in the parable of the Good Samaritan, you will walk past the stricken man who is not cut from the same bolt of cloth as yourself.

    You have set yourselves up as the judges of everyone else. I know this very well. But by the same measure that your faction judged others, it was itself judged.

    And all that it has been involved in since that time has been . . . fighting. And not fighting the Islamic or Communist persecuters of the Church, but fellow Christians.

    “Oh, you’re not a Christian because you’re not in MY church,” or “You’re not a Christian because you are a Mason,” or “You’re not a Christian because you eat your eggs scrambled instead of fried!”

    There is ONE final arbiter of who is a Christian, and who is not–and that is Almighty God.

    And as for being a Templar, or a Rotary Club member . . . or Catholic or Protestant . . . ALL such titles will be “checked at the door.”

    So, my question to you is this: if we are all going to be ONE in heaven, then why in the world cannot we work together here on earth?

    Confused said: January 28, 2010 at 3:17 pm
    Dear Mike,
    Please try reading, I provided the Popes words on freemasonry.
    He did judge the group of “freemasonry” in 1983 and along with the last 300 years worth of Popes stated freemasonry was incompatible with Christianity.

    Here it is yet again, please note these are the present Popes words.

    The Declaration of the Sacred Congregation; affirms that membership in Masonic Associations remain forbidden by the Church and the Faithful who enrol in them are in a state of grave sin, and may not receive Holy Communion or the Sacraments. it confirms to the faithful that membership in a Masonic Lodge is unlawful. It warns them such membership is incompatible with the Catholic Faith

    confused said: January 28, 2010 at 3:34 pm
    Get real Mr Reese,
    It is not just Catholics, it is Anglicans, CoE, Copts, Orthodox etc that maintain freemasonry is evil (not freemasons just the ideals of the false religion that is freemasonry).
    Even the Amish and Baptist and Quakers etc.. reject freemasonry and call it incompatible with Christianity.
    You would struggle and hollowly argue only because you follow your freemason code more than Christ.
    It is clearly demonstrated on many occasions that freemasons may (and indeed are) expected to worship Satan/Lucifer as Christs and God’s equal.

    Did you even bother to look at the links?

    This “Christianity being incompatible with freemasonry” point is far more relevant to your soul than your masonic justification for starting another pretender neo-Templar movement that is ridiculously supposed to be sympathetic to Freemasonry. Please wake up.
    I will pray for you.

    confused said: January 28, 2010 at 4:25 pm
    I just read the post from the “real brown hawk” or Mr Comrie AKA the 1997 self appointed GP of OSMTH and false user of a OSCR charity number. Notable it is that when you check his own supposed charity number(now he can no longer hijack another groups) it is only a business number and not a charity numer at all! TRY TO FIND THEM HERE.
    Thankfully they were outed and have finally removed that claim as well.

    Very funny noting his history, should I call him Baron of Comria or Baron of Dunria or the Baron of Strathhearn even though they were all proven as false and self appointed titles?
    Praise the Lord you have given up on that deception.
    I will pray for you too.

    Chev James said: January 28, 2010 at 7:42 pm
    Confused, you have made the case that the Catholic Church proscribes membership in Masonic organizations for its members.

    I have also made the case that the Catholic Church proscribes membership in the Knights Templar AS A PAPAL ORDER. Vox in Excelso is irrevocable, according to Pope Clement V.

    When the Templars became a royal order under Robert the Bruce, they were no longer a papal order; in fact, Robert the Bruce was officially excommunicated from the Catholic Church when the Templar refugees landed in Scotland. As a royal order, the Templars were removed from the authority of the Catholic Church and placed under the authority of the Royal House of Scotland.

    Now, Robert the Bruce was eventually readmitted to the communion of the Catholic Church, but he did not give up his position of Grandmaster to the now-Scottish Templars. In fact, it was not a widely advertised fact that he was now the leader of the once-papal order.

    Let’s fast-forward to 2010. The Templar groups of today cannot be papal orders. Nor are they under the authority of any church.

    Therefore the members of today’s Templars may follow the dictates of their particular church, but no particular church exercises control over any of the Templar orders.

    So, we have a situation in which one church may proscribe membership in the Masons for its members, but it does not proscribe its members from working with Masons.

    We have a situation in which one church may proscribe alcoholic beverages for its members, but it does not proscribe its members from working with people who do drink.

    We have a situation in which one church may proscribe dancing for its members, but it does not proscribe its members from working with people who dance.

    In other words, with whom you associate is left TO YOUR INDIVIDUAL DISCRETION AND CONSCIENCE.

    The Samaritan who helped the victim of robbers would not have been welcome in the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. The priest and the Levite who bypassed the bloodied victim in the ditch wouldn’t have given the Samaritan the time of day.

    Now, does anyone think that the Jew left for dead in the ditch gave two cents that his rescuer was a Samaritan? No, he was glad to be rescued–period!

    Does anyone think that a Christian sitting in a Muslim prison for blasphemy would give two cents that his rescuer might be–among other things–a Mason? No, he would be glad to be rescued–period!

    Isn’t it great that we would be fighting about who is Templar and who is not, and who could join and who could not . . . and while these debates are going on, Christians are being slaughtered at the rate of 359,000 per year.

    So, let’s keep the Templar groups splintered and disunited, and debate the Masonic-drinking-dancing issues until the Second Coming!

    The real Brown Hawk said: January 28, 2010 at 11:48 pm
    “Confused” – I’ve got you! Poor old Gordon has been coping a great deal because of us, but you…my goodness. James M…th and Graham…R
    Got you mister Brown consolidated you have been giving Chev James a hard time and everybody else about your anti-mason clap trap…in the hope of recognition by a poor embatled church… Give it up unify the templar or become an idiological fossil. Christ has suffered enough. Sorry Chev. James and all other dignified people of this forum…simple respect J&G show some to the peopple you condemn..

    The Real Brown Hawk said: January 29, 2010 at 2:08 am
    “unify the Templars into a positive fellowship….or slip into ideological oblivion” or worse exhil to the land of fantasy, the splintering that has been happing over many years is a devise used by those who have no love for man or God, just self importance……Gentlemen you all have the potential for great Good ! why not the expression of respect, truth honor and fellowship of those things that unite you… all have the essential elements…I have heard some good things in this forum and then again I have heard some clap trap about whose club some of these members belong to ……does it mater ….after all the templars started as a few good men going to the holy land to protect the inoccent and the holy places…fellowship and purpose not power…

    Chev James said: January 29, 2010 at 5:48 am
    Thank you, Brother Real Brown Hawk! Quite truthfully, I bear no animosity toward any in the Templar world, save one with the initials GB, who has assailed many innocent people, including the leader of Confused’s faction–whom he mercilessly prosecuted. I have sought to disparage no one or damage any reputations. Mistakes were made in the past by all concerned. It is, as you say, time to reconcile–as Peter did with Paul. The Church wasn’t about Peter or Paul, and the Templars shouldn’t be about any one individual. It shouldn’t be about any one church. We cannot, in these troublous and perilous times, afford to leave any group of Christians behind! We need everyone who has given him- or herself over to our Lord. It is not for us to sit in judgment of others. What we should be doing is sitting in one big–real or virtual–”peace council” to put our past fights, wounds and affronts to rest, and decide how we are going to serve in the future.

    The researcher Justin Long estimated that Christians are martyred in the Islamic and Communist countries at the rate of 359,000 per year. Our fellow Christians need our help, and our labeling or accusing each other doesn’t bring help to them. Imagine, if you will, that your house is on fire, and on the way to put out the fire consuming your home, the fire truck pulls to the side of the road, and the firemen hop out to debate who should be considered a real fireman, and who was worthy to man the hoses! You, as the owner of the burning home, do not care about the ethnicity or rank or family backgrounds or the churches of the firemen–you only know that you want your home to be saved!

    The defining characteristic of the Templar orders is that they are Christian. Of that, there can be no doubt. They can come from all of the Christian churches.

    Like the firemen in the example above, we do not need to pull over to the side of the road and debate theology or provenance. We need to hurry to the fire and put it out!

    Whether Scottish tradition or Larmenius Charter . . . let the senior leaders meet and KNIGHT EACH OTHER! Then the question of legitimacy and provenance is decided forever. We can then get about the business for which the original Templar order was founded–and that is the protection of Christians in foreign lands!

    We should all serve in ONE confederation . . . autonomous priories, all working in concert for the protection of the persecuted church . . . gathering strength in our respective nations and communities, becoming a powerful lobbying force for the persecuted church . . . making human rights–and particularly religious freedom–the center piece of any negotiation with a Communist or Muslim country. Any nation wanting aid from the West or trade with the West must guarantee religious freedom for all of its people–or else no deals! Countries like China would immediately begin looseing their grip on the Christian Church; countries like Saudi Arabia would be bound to allow Christians to worship freely.

    Would not this be preferable–far more preferable–than fighting among ourselves? Would it not be better to be freeing religious prisoners in Pakistan than arguing among ourselves? Would it not be a far greater thing to lessen the persecution of the Church in China than to be squabbling about which Christians to include and which to exclude?

    Finally, if we are sitting on the side of the road debating things about the Templars while a home is on fire . . . I submit to you, gentlemen, that there can be no winner of any such debate!

    confused said: January 30, 2010 at 7:02 am
    circlar arguements. pyramids and pentagons for the masonic upholders of the ridiculous attempt to be known as Templars.
    By your own admission you cannot be Templars and by your own actions you cannot be Christians.
    Please play badge collecting buddies with another name and leave the real Templars to God’s works ….or repent and finally follow Christ.
    Ps Mr real brown hawk AKA ‘Gordon of no fixed last name’ I am none of the people you have tried to label me. Please be truthful and not just dishonestly accusatory because you are ignorant of facts.
    Play nicely children and I will (as always) continue to pray for you.

    Chev James said: January 30, 2010 at 9:39 am
    Confused, you have set yourself up above the pope and above the founder of the order, and you have–by your actions–declared yourself the final arbiter of everything that is Christian, and right and wrong. How did you come to receive such a commission? Did you climb Mt. Sinai and receive your “credentials” on stone tablets?

    Do you not know that we will all be judged by the content of our hearts, by how much love we showed our Lord and our fellow man? Do you think that Baptists and Presbyterians are going to hell because they differ from you on some theological points?

    Were you given the task of writing the “theological pop quiz” that will be given to everyone appearing before the Pearly Gates, and which they must pass before being granted admittance?

    Did Sir Hugh de Payens materialize before you and charge you to decide which were the legitimate Templars and which were not?

    Surely you hold some stone tablets from Mt. Sinai and a document from Sir Hugh that grants you this absolute authority!

    If you can produce those tablets and that document signed by Sir Hugh, then I yield to you. But until such time, you are simply making judgments based upon your own beliefs–and making the oft-repeated mistake of judging everyone else while refusing to judge yourself–and your own faction.

    Have you given serious thought to fixing your own faction before telling everyone else what is wrong with their particular groups? Have you thought about formulating a strategy of POSITIVE action rather keeping one that is totally NEGATIVE and completely NON-PRODUCTIVE?

    Our Lord warns us many times about making judgments. When the crowd was about to stone the adulteress, He picked up a rock and said, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

    Similarly, let it be said here: “Let he who is without sin and who comes from a PERFECT Templar organization cast the next stone.”

    The real Brown Hawk said: January 30, 2010 at 11:17 am
    Forgive me Good fellows of this Forum, I seek communion with those who are inclusive, honorable, with a Christian philosophy but…Play nice Children? Oh that is very rich ! “Confussed-Brown-consolidation” – AKA JPM and GR. One message “Unite or face idiological and organizational oblivion”, like many of the organizations who just didn’t make it or are rambling from one missguided attempt at service to another, because dwindleing numbers below any level that could or would be considered significant, your if you could call it an organization- JPM and GR faces oblivion or outing to the fring not because of your commitment to the service but because of your exclusivness of all those you think will bring you bad credo with the powers that be. You are legitemacy chasers and will do anything to get it even bend the truth. This is worse than a badge chaser.
    Further these same factions- JPM and GB have become absolute embarrasments to all because of idiotic attempts at appearing legitiamte by claiming a public history that couldn’t possibly be verified and has to be contested by their own members – Hey JPM and GR. More smoke screens about masons…you know it really doesn’t mater, next it will be any group that is on the outer with whoever is not in with the percieved nominated authority. The Templars are their own authority……”unite and champion the wonderful things about Christianity-Whatever denomination you are from” make this your badge and your legitimacy-your truth.
    However Chev. James a Fellowship of self governing, Autonomous, brothers of purpose…dedicated to the ideals of Christianity and Chivalry would be a start…but start with truth and I guess work from their the original templars started with a handful and forgive me but they were not under the authority of the pope-but they championed for service.

    ” Unite and do good” you have that capacity

    Chev James said: January 30, 2010 at 11:46 am
    Brother Real Brown Hawk, I agree with you completely. Here are some points I would like to lay out for the consideration of those who believe that all Templar groups should work together in a confederation of autonomous priories:

    1. The confederation must be ecumenical, or we shrink our available “base” to unacceptably small proportions, i.e., excluding Catholics or Baptists would not only unnecessarily offend, but would decrease the number of available applicants dramatically. We need to grow our base, not slice it up or shrink it!

    2. We must not insist that member priories take a stand on Masonry, alcoholic beverages, dancing or any other of the issues that should be left to individual conscience. Individual members may choose or refuse any such practices themselves based upon conscience or the teachings of their individual churches.

    3. This confederation should have an overall leader, but not one with dictatorial powers. The idea is to present a face to the world, rather than to bring all Templars into subjection to one person.

    4. Autonomy of the individual orders and priories must be preserved, so that the order is impossible to “hijack” by any one person or group.

    5. The confederation should be dedicated to the defense of the persecuted church, and develop a lobbying arm to press governments for the recognition of religious freedom in all countries.

    All of this would not be easy. But it is probably one of the very few alternatives to finding ourselves made completely irrelevant by the continued, but mostly unopposed, persecution of Christians in the world.

    confused said: January 31, 2010 at 2:07 am
    Dear Children of Christ, You may be too quick to take offense( a sign maybe of vanity) and too quick to ignore facts( a sign maybe you need time to mature your ideas via further guidance/meditation).
    There are already ecumenical Orders such as you speak of… excepting they do not allow masonry.

    This is a given as all major Christian religions hold freemasonry ( not freemasons) as evil.

    Your true Christian calling if you wish too be Templars is to one day try to guide the lost and help the needy.

    Freemasons are one such group requiring our love and guidance to bring them back to Christ.

    Attempt instead to emulate a Christian and try following the teachings of your church and then look to becoming a Templar one day.

    The Orders have survived this long and in much more duress than now, it is only your lack of faith and aqrrogance that lead you to believe the Orders will become irrelevant now some how ( size is not important, the ideals of Christian based chivalry are our goal).

    The true enemy (of our ancient name only) are masonic affliations such as Mr Carey’s pretenders …and you wish to become one of their fold?, I am sorrowed, but Christ has allowed you free will. But be advised it is against Christianity and my faith will guide me to continue to try to save your soul.
    If you fail to heed this advice then you are in peril ( hopefuilly via your ignorance) and would be as guilty as the freemasonry code of heresy and you would be trumpting the setting up of yet another pretend club with established heretics who openly accept devil worship and aethist, thus your proposed club will never be anything but a irrelevant club by the teachings of the Christianity.
    You can never be Christian Templars if you chose this path. Why not repent and join the real Templars one day?

    Why don’t you petition the Church (any real one) instead and seek an answer there on freemasonry.

    Unfortunately for your aim; a lot of dot-points do not equal a proper rationale, instead the points outline your confused thinking and attempt to justify your call to subvert the message of Christianity.
    Your present words are the way of scientologists and masonic temple teaching etc…not any real form Christianity based on the teachings of Christ.

    Look into yourself and see if Christs love and deeds toward this are your objective or do you just seek recognition and adoration for yourself by your fellow man based on leeching off a existing and active Christian Order’s name.

    Dear Mr Comrie, As I have explained before; I am not who you call me so please try to be more accurate in your indentifications in future. I understand your past being revealed may cause you to become heated but it (at least) is true.

    I will pray for you.

    mike ganja said: January 31, 2010 at 7:47 am
    Dear Bro Confuse
    Its no point arguing here the facts lies that only the Roman catholic can form the Knight Templar order under the pope so only the benedictine oblate can form the order so its waist of time . you known who is the first Bishop of church of England its st Augustine the Benedictine Monk. so no one can change the Root . so here it looks like Judas is calling him self Jesus of he call himself Antichrist its Excepted,
    God Bless

    The real Brown Hawk said: January 31, 2010 at 8:13 am
    We could go on like this forever! As ammusing as all of this is Mr. Confussed-brown-consolidation-AKA JPM and belive me you have been less than ammusing…in more places ,many could choose to mention ….. you are still confussed! In 1995 you were confused, in 2004 and 2007 you were very confussed to the point of not even believing your own ideas of liniage and now well I’ll let the forum descide with your anti everyone except all those who belive JPM.

    “unite or face idiological oblivion”, you are who I think you are, “Confussed – brown – consolidation” AKA JPM very unbecomming particularly of your standing and yet again there it is…there is the contadiction, you would rather splinter any talk of unification, co-opperation, fellowship and mutual respect…well for most part, however distant the possibility is, because obscurity is your only fear consolidation of power and title your aim at the expence of numbers and truth….”unite or face idiological oblivion”. Become something much more grounded than fring dwellers vurging of what the general public call loopy, an please if you have to pray for somone please pray for yourself and not for Chev. Gordon.
    Chev. James A confederation: Interesting! but hasn’t this been done before and if I can remember there were key people who railroaded this…and claimed to have this status…no hints as to who that was!

    Chev. James your points are quite valid and I believe it would be very hard to implement knowing the number of very difficult personalities in the positions that they are in…forgiveme Gentlmen from this forum…may tinpot commanders not enough leadership but what if a memmorandum of understanding were struck and a commitment for mutual co-opperation. These things must be explored.

    How would these ideas get out to the Templar Bretherin, let them descide….what formats…I have said no hope but I have been battling with may a negative element in the past and it has not been easy.

    I would be happy to explore constructive, creative ideas towards a unified Christian confederated brotherhood of Templar Knights…. we would need many commited souls of extremely noble spirit and a Christian heart – is this possible?

    Dark Knight said: January 31, 2010 at 8:29 am
    I am interested in what Chev. James has to say what of a “confederation”, how would this work? are there already multi-denominational templars about or do you have to join yet another club, just to get in….I’m currious, well actually I’t would be a good thing there isn’t any concrete evidence that the liniage is unbroken so then…..The Templar Order can re-invent itself really can’t it. Just Like the Order of the Holy sepulcre- I thought it was Orthodox to start with…

    Chev James said: January 31, 2010 at 12:28 pm
    All right, Mr. Confused, you threw the next stone. You have, by this act, have proclaimed your own faction perfect. You have condemned all the other orders as non-Templar; you have implied that the Roman Catholic Church is the only church that matters, and that all of your members following its precepts exactly and perfectly.

    Let me preface my next comments with these verses from I Corinthians: “But instead, one brother goes to law against another–and this in front of unbelievers! The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already! Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and do this to your brothers.” (I Corinthians 6-8)

    Sound familiar, Brother Confused? Your faction recently sued its brothers in a court of law, and your faction has also cheated and done wrong, both in the eyes of God and in the eyes of your fellow knights, who expelled your kind from the ranks of the true Templars.

    And this: “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders will inherit the kingdom of God.” (I Corinthians 6:9-11).

    Was not one of your leadership living openly–at least until recently–with a woman who was not his wife? And, since you like to quote Catholic canon law, is there not one among your leadership who takes communion at Church, although he is divorced and has not had the marriage annulled by the Church?

    “Be not deceived, God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” (Galatians 6:7-8).

    You are worried about Freemasons, and your very own leadership has proven it cannot follow the teachings of your own Church and the admonitions of our Lord? You violate your own canon law, and yet come here to condemn others! Do you know how that makes you look to the rest of your Brothers?

    Do you know how that makes you look to God?

    I do not claim to be perfect. I am a very imperfect man; I am a sinner who would have no chance to enter heaven but for the grace of our Lord.

    Yet you have come to us proclaiming yourselves to be sinless and the final arbiter of right and wrong, and saint and sinner, and knight and non-knight. You have climbed the highest of pedestals–but you have also fallen the greatest height because you cannot live up to your own standards.

    You talk about praying for others when your faction raised vile calumnies against its fellow knights, and went so far as to appoint a “Grand Inquisitor” to “investigate” the Grand Prior of the United States.

    And all that your faction achieved was its own destruction.

    It is most interesting that actions were taken by your faction against non-Catholics, a “purge” reminiscent of King Philip IV’ purge of the order in France. Your faction hoped to force all Protestants out of the order, beause one of your leadership promised Vatican recognition if the order were Catholic only.

    How’s that “Vatican recognition” working out for you now?

    Let’s see, your faction went on a witch hunt for Masons, asked one of your own to serve as a “Grand Inquisitor” for this witch hunt, found NO Masons, but lost the USA as a result of making vile, baseless accusations against the entire Templar chivalry there.

    Your faction is obsessed with Masons like Ahab was obsessed with Moby Dick; and your faction suffered the same fate as Ahab’s hapless ship, the “Pequod.” Like an obsessed Ahab, your leader destroyed his organization because of a maniacal obsession. Of course, he was helped along the way by one who took advantage of his state of mind and health. He knows who he is.

    Why condemn the Masons when your own faction was guilty of everything you accused the Masons of doing, and much, much more?

    You are trying to remove a speck from the eyes of others, but your faction has a plank in its own eye.

    You can come to this and other forums, Confused, and try to enlist others in your witch hunt until Doomsday. But no one is buying. The knights–what were your own knights–have spoken. They deposed one leader–and his chief henchman–and elected another. Nothing you say or do can change that. Like Saul, your leader was deposed because of excesses–and because holy things were desecrated. For Saul, it was the murder of God’s priests; for your own leader, it was the desecration of a holy cross. With that one act, he brought the judgment of God upon himself and his mantle of leadership slipped from his shoulders onto another’s.

    Confused, you are fighting with no one but God, and He has already made His decision about your leader and your faction. Your faction went to a secular court to claim a “trademark,” in the same way another faction did in the USA. Yet you condemn that other faction for which you yourselves have done. Shall you trademark the Holy Cross and all of the saints?

    The way ahead for you and your faction, Confused, is to ask forgiveness from those you sinned against and hurt, from those you falsely accused and from those you expelled without fairness or due process. By the way, a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” was set up by your deposed leader’s legitimate successor–and I want you to mark this–all of those who were unfairly expelled by your faction were restored and made whole again.

    Your deposed leader was a divider and a sower of discord; his legitimate successor brought healing to the wounds inflicted by your faction and a full restoration to those who were injured.

    So, why do you not go off, sir, and see if you and the rest of your faction can keep your own Church canon law, and adhere to its teachings, before ever venturing forth again to tell others how to live and serve God?

    And, by the way, Confused, we could never go back to the way things were before . . . when you never knew who was going to be the next victim of a witch hunt and who was going to get the next knife in his back!

    confused said: January 31, 2010 at 12:53 pm
    A confereration already exists! its called the ifa and another called the osmthu or this sites neoclub both are ecumenical already…one allows masons , the other does not…all that you megalomaniacs are planning is for your proposed neo clubs to be postioned to be swallowed by Carey’s larger masonic pretender club .
    Please get some foresight.

    As to my identity Mssrs Comrie and Young( the poor spelling indicates when Mr Young is typing) you are wrong and have been told so …yet you perpetuate your own lies! how different for you.

    Mr Reese , you seem determined to deliberately ignore Christ and twist truth to further the freemason takeover. I can only assume it is because of your vain hope for personal distinctions.
    I hope one day you awaken from your daze and actually rescue someone being persecuted rather than invent stories about it and spend your time planning your power base increases for your seemingly insatiable need to control everyone.
    I will allow you some time to meditate on this and you could also possibly try to learn Psalm 115.

    I will still hold out hope for you and pray for you.

    Goodbye and may you find Christ one day as you are now in the wilderness.

    Chev James said: January 31, 2010 at 1:36 pm
    Your standards and your flags were lost in the battle you started–but lost, and you have the dust of defeat in your mouths. Because of your own actions against your FELLOW KNIGHTS, you are now but a footnote in the annals of the Templars, and your faction has slipped into the dustbin of Templar history. You are, Confused, but a faint wailing that is being carried away by the winds of change . . . yours a wraithlike presence in the ruins of failed expectations. You are the banshee of the Templar world . . . a ghost in whom no one believes any more.

    “And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.” (Revelation 18:2)

    That is your legacy, Confused. You could have built the order into something great, but blind ambition got in the way. Friendships, trust and morality were sacrificed on the altar of papal recogntion: an altar that today lies as broken as the ancient altars of Baal and Molech.

    And now your faction truly is the habitation of unclean and foul things–things that no one else wants anything to do with: false accusations, betrayals, intrigues, conspiracies and even idolatry.

    Yes, idolatry. Because a THING–papal recognition–was put above service to God and love of your fellow knights.

    Was it worth it? Have you had that audience with Pope Benedict XVI yet? Have you received that document–with the pope’s seal–that recognizes you as the restored Templar order of old?

    No? You mean that prancing about in St. Peter’s square gained no attention?

    And how about the Patriarch of Jerusalem? Has he yet retracted that message to you that said, in effect, “Be off with you!” ?

    NO papal recognition. And the Patriarch of Jerusalem won’t give you the time of day?

    And tell me, what did you catch in your “net” when the Great Witch Hunt of 2005 was carried out in the USA? More importantly, what did you lose?

    You lost everything.


    There is little else to say. A pit was dug, but it was the diggers who fell in the pit. A stone was rolled uphill, but it rolled on top of those who had been pushing it.

    Mr. Confused, the problems you face have nothing to do with Masons, or with Protestants, or even with the Girl Scouts. The problems you face are your own behavior and your track record of ill treatment toward those who were once your fellow knights.

    You and your faction owe much in the way of apologies to others. But your pride prevents you from doing the right thing–an arrogant pride that leaves no room for Christian love in your hearts.

    And, as the Book of Proverbs tells us, “Pride goeth before a fall.”

    The Real Brown Hawk said: January 31, 2010 at 1:39 pm
    I am in total agreement with Chev. James, his successor is a good man, my predessor thought so and in my travells I have come to appreciate the dignity and scope of his humanity. He has a love for men and God – ” by his deeds you will know him” – I know you GMC move forward “you are one good man”. Men make mistakes, many as a mater of fact but in the core of this man lies a nobility that is worthy of the Templar ethos. Inclusion not exclussion forgiveness, not condemnation, mercy and fair play, protection of the condemned, and brotherhood -it has no denomination, but reflective of the core of all denominations – and at the core of Christianity.

    Defend this!

    Not some easy means, to a most worthless end! Digging up some clap trap about how the route to all evil is “Free masonry”…when evil prevails within the confines of your own head.

    There is no nobility in it, no honor! no purpose!
    You do not need to pray for anyone “Confussed Brown consolidation” Pray for yourself you undoubtedly need it.

    I will pray for those I cannot help tonight because I am one and there are many who perpetrate witchunts in lands where the consequences for being Christian is death…..but I dream of what if?…….don’t you? ” Unite brothers of Christianity, brothers of the Temple – you have the prerequisites already -confederate you are most worthy” – dispite the clap trap that is devised to seporate you. Write your own true history the year begins 2010-
    This is what I pray for Mr. Confussed Brown Consolidation-AKA JPM/GR.

    There is my dishonor

    confused said: January 31, 2010 at 1:46 pm
    wow Mr Reese that was a longwinded post just to have a rant at one man. I am not in the JM or GFR Order but a very good attempt by you as they do follow the anti-mason rule.

    I read your words where you stated you only had issues with Beaver but again you prove your typing and actions are often contradictory and you defame as a matter of course when you have no idea, it is normal modus operandi for you.

    This would be fine excepting your continual sanctimonious masonic preaching where you ask everyone to stop doing that type of thing ….I now see that is that everyone… but you!

    Your words and actions have never equated in the last ten years, why should i expect them to suddenly do so now.

    I will pray for you.
    Good bye.

    The Real Brown Hawk said: January 31, 2010 at 2:27 pm
    Are you actually reading what you are writting….

    ” Confussed Brown Consolidation” nice try very clever you win….does it satisfy you to throw smoke screens, why don’t you produce the evidence that was asked of you earlier in this forum…..lets get back to what you haven’t done, hey GRF. You still haven’t produced any shred of evidence asked reminiscent of many occassions…

    Mischief is what you have created…and this is a device in itself…it is exactly the work of the apprentice hey GRF…. it is designed to bring out the worst and this is unfortunate because it is not constructive….

    Chev James said: January 31, 2010 at 8:49 pm
    Confused, you say that you are not a member of any Templar order . . . but I learned this from an early age: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck–it’s a duck!

    You are in the very thick of things–so why deny it? It is just that you are fed half-truths and outright lies–one of which was debunked here by an independent source–and yet you persist.

    You are obsessed with Freemasons . . . you see them behind every tree, and lurking within every shadow. But the Freemasons aren’t your problem–it’s yourselves!

    When your faction had no enemies, it invented them–it made enemies out of its own knights. It calumnied good men, and sought to put false stains on the honor and reputation of those who had done no harm.

    Everyone here knows what went on, Confused, with the exception of yourself. There is a reason that your faction is now a band of outcasts and outlaws. The reason is that it ran roughshod over your own Statutes, and over its own knights.

    Your faction went on a Quixotic quest for papal recognition, and now you find yourselves barred from churches in which to conduct any accolade ceremonies!

    But it was not any enemies who discredited you–it was yourselves.

    My record stands. I know that your faction even lied about my mission to Pakistan, first trying to take credit for it, and then denying that it ever happened. Your faction sunk to the lowest depths of depravity with those false accusations!

    Do you think you can build a Christian order upon lies, false accusations, calumnies and a cult of personality?

    I truly believe that you would drink the Kool Aid if you were told to do so . . . or jump off a cliff if you were so ordered.

    Once I was like you. I believed. But finally my sensibilities were pushed beyond all tolerance, and I could take no more. I was asked to betray a fellow knight and a friend, to throw him to the wolves. One of your “leadership” asked me to do that, to make a “sacrifice” to show my loyalty.

    But I would have none of it, and after enduring beyond all endurance, I published the order of secession with the full consent of 95 percent of our knights.

    One day, Confused, you will find that your usefulness has been all used up. You are, in fact, already on the “hit list.” It’s just a matter of time. Someone will whisper in someone else’s ear, and then you shall be marked for an ignominious dismissal. Mark my words, and remember that this day I gave you this warning.

    Yours is a lost cause. You are fighting chimeras. The cancer is not Freemasonry; the cancer is within yourselves, and it is still consuming you.

    As long as you have hatred in your hearts, your home shall remain the graveyard of failed organizations and punished hubris.

    confused said: January 31, 2010 at 11:04 pm
    thanks for the warning but if I am not a member then how can i be thrown to the wolves?
    Just because Comrie says something or Young states something ( it looks like Mr Young has taken the task to me , easily recognised by the terrible spelling) it sort of proves it isnt true , those two have not spoken straight in the last 5 years.
    But I do appreciate any concern you have for me. Pity it is misguided.
    If being a Templar is too difficult then why dont you consider applying to Jaycees and forget this foolish allowance of freemasons in your supposed Christian neo Order.
    I will continue to pray for you and all here.

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 1, 2010 at 2:06 am
    Not much to say to you CBC-AKA JPM/GRF….yes you got me….you win. Can we get back to a confederation or back to the Time line…..I am much more interested of the future of the Templars…..please give up you obssesions with other members of the Templar world who had the good sence to leave not the order but rather your ego mania.

    Back to a confederation of Christian Templars…

    Chev James said: February 1, 2010 at 6:18 am
    Thank you, Brother Real Brown Hawk. I have considered a possible waste of time to reply to Confused and his quiver of nom de plumes, but I wanted to set the record straight–and I believe that I have done that. Confused’s postings have provided validation for our secession, as did the REAL Scottish Knights Templar (RSKT). It should be obvious to even the most casual observer that our secession was forced by a series of witch hunts for Masons–that and a purge of Protestants in a futile bid to gain papal recognition. As I said before, I met with a high level delegation that sealed their fate as far as that recognition was concerned–a Catholic delegation, I might add. That delegation reported to the Roman curia, which in turn reported to the pope. The only Vatican recognition they shall ever have now is from the Swiss Guard–who will make sure they never get within a kilometer of the pope!

    The ironic thing is that after my meeting with that delegation and its subsequent report, Confused’s faction could erase Freemasonry from the face of the earth and still not gain papal recognition. You can be sure that Pope Benedict XVI was”read in” on the situation upon his accession to the Throne of Peter.

    For Confused’s faction, the ends justified the means–but that was Machiavelli’s mantra, and not the teaching of our Lord.

    What Confused’s faction did was to throw passengers out of the sleigh, hoping to arrive at the finish line before everyone else. But en route to the finish line, it lost its way and the horse kicked out of the traces!

    But let us now continue with a true chronology, and build on our foundations, and work to unify all the branches that agree to work for common cause.

    Let those who wish to sit and judge remain sitting and judging; the rest of us are going to work on building an enduring legacy.

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 1, 2010 at 8:44 am
    I’m sick of what can’t be! I want to know what could be! what will be!…..! I want to explore the possibilities and I want to be part of it if it would save one soul. ” An enduring legacy” – What a wonderful thought ! I have been ready for this madness for a good while and so I think are many others…I would live this madness…”Confederate be the Christian Knights you are ment to be” – Chev. James, Sir you are a Templar

    Chev James said: February 1, 2010 at 9:10 am
    Thank you, Brother Real Brown Hawk! This is all part of the “art of the possible”! There are so many of us ready to move forward and unite–which is the only way we can really be effective! The conflicts and enmities of the past must be jettisoned as just so much dead weight! We cannot carry this dead weight up the hills we must climb! We need to focus on what needs to happen in the next 5, 10, 20 and 30 years!

    I would like to see a Grand Conclave of the Templar orders in which they pledged mutual cooperation and extended mutual recognition. The different orders could be “in communion with each other,” like the Anglican and Lutheran churches are with each other, e.g., sharing the sacraments and recognizing each other’s Apostolic succession and authority.

    This should be much easier than churches coming into communion with one another, as our business should not be debating theology–but simply carrying out the work of our Lord!

    In the end, I believe, we will be judged by our faith in God and how we demonstrated that faith through love, and not by rigid adherence to legalistic rules. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, our Lord showed that people could abide by the letter of the “law,” e.g., the priest and the Levite, but still not have love in their hearts. The Good Samartian didn’t follow Jewish practices to the letter, but he had love in his heart for his fellow man. The priest and the Levite did, indeed, follow the rules for ritual purity, but they left a human being to die in a ditch! Our Lord clearly illustrated which state was more acceptable to God!

    The way ahead for the Templar orders is the one shown to us by the Good Samaritan–it is the way of the heart, the way of love . . . and not insistence on a set of rules that do not take people into account.

    Let us now see if we can do that!

    confused said: February 1, 2010 at 1:49 pm
    what a surprise two ex yemplars trying to dismiss the Churches guidance and start a new club because they are not welcome in any real Order.

    Please just try being Christians first, then worry about your new club as the Templars already exist and have rejected you both.
    It has never been a Catholic issue it has always been a Christian issue. Yet the band of ex templars here squirm and pontificate but refuse to take the first step toward Templarism, being a dedicated and practicing Christian.
    This is maybe some insight towards why you are no longer Templars and trying to set up yet another neo group because you are no longer welcome in any of the real Orders.
    Ask Luis if I am even in the same continent as the people you accuse me of being…

    Luis Please do not tell them which continent I am from, but feel free to let them know it is not Europe and never has been.

    After this Mr Reese, Mr Young and Mr Comrie ( all ex templar rejects) will owe a great deal of people many apologies, I trust you can remember all those you have slighted through your ignorance and wild accusations. If you have trouble you could review this forum as it is full of your ignorant and unchivalrous accusations.
    It seems to be rather bare of your apologies though.

    Mr Comrie’s and Mr Reese’s continued inventions about me and their past’s have revealed much about their characters( for all too see) and all the mutal backslapping does not eliminate the basic rationale for them no longer being accepted as Templars by any Order other than Masonic pretender groups, they put themselves and their lust for power above the truth and even their Church.
    When things are tough they have run and diverged at will from truth and instead sought communion with the enemies of the Church for support instead of searching within themselves for forgiveness.
    When challenged on their past they cast accusations and brimstone with all smoke and mirrors (but no substance or supporting fact) yet they condem others if they reveal truths and provide evidence of their transgressions against the Church?.
    I trust the many good men here will contemplate these things and review the comments on this site to make their own unfettered and unbiased choices.
    I will pray for you fallen templars to return to Christ and the Church still , as a humble Christian should.

    Forget this latest false quest for recognition and size as a main issue , it is not important, I pray you concentrate on the message concerning masonic assosciation issued after careful deliberation and hundreds of years of study by your Christian churches whatever they may be.

    Forget the wayward egocentric ramblings of these few ex-templar rejects trying to deceive with honeyed tongues and even forget my pleas for sanity to take hold here …look to the declarations by your Church is all I request, in the hope of helping those wayward souls.

    I pray will all be able to receive comunion together as you will have returned to the fold and accept Christ and God as your leaders not your own egos

    Chev James said: February 1, 2010 at 3:22 pm
    Confused, you do not have to hide your whereabouts from us. You do not have to hide your name from us. There are no vindictive people here. You are absolutely free to associate with whom you want and to choose your own church affiliation.

    It is our position that you should find your own church and serve it well. If you are Catholic, and you follow your church’s canon law, then you cannot be a Mason and a Catholic. That is fine. Or if you are Baptist, then find a Baptist church that you can serve well. If you are Baptist and your church proscribes alcoholic beverages, then by all means observe its teachings and practices.

    What we say here is only this: if your church does not allow you to be a Mason, that is fine: but do not tell the Baptist that he cannot be a Freemason, just as the Baptist should not tell you that you will go to hell for drinking a glass of wine.

    Does arguing about such things advance the cause of the Templar orders? If we bring our own personal theologies into an organization and try to impose them on everyone else, that will lead only to discord and trouble.

    The Masons have learned that. And that is why they proscribe discussions about religion in their meetings. I am not a Mason, but I know that much about them! It is also not wise to discuss religion or politics when dining with friends–again, just common sense!

    We will all meet God individually and have to give account for our own actions. That is so monumental a task in itself that we really have no business judging others–and no time for judging others if we are taking care of our own business.

    I would also remind you that your own faction once had Masons in it, and they were welcomed; it was only under a certain person’s leadership that the “Masonic purge” began . . . followed by the “Protestant purge.”

    I would remind you further that we are not the ones isolated by an unyielding, intransigent position. It is your faction that is isolated–it is your faction that could not leave such matters for the individual to decide on his own.

    Only your own leader is stopping all of us from sitting down together and working for common cause. Why not appeal to him to change his attitude and “give brotherly love a chance”?

    I would sit down with your leader and talk with him as I once did. So would others. All of the old animosities of the past should be set aside.

    It’s a new century, a new millennium and a new decade. It should be the time for a fresh start and a new era of cooperation.

    The Christian churches in the Middle East and Asia are targeted by the Islamofascists and the Communists for destruction. Christians are being martyred every day. Shall we do nothing because we are too busy worrying about who is a Mason, or who drinks, or who dances?

    Does that pass the common sense test, Confused? Please give us an answer to this question.

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 1, 2010 at 3:29 pm
    ” God as your leaders and not your own egos” a very, very interesting statement….again you win if you like! If it makes you happy and your statements are not about ego?…..”come back to Christ” and what, Join you? or be like you? I’m not sure what you mean?….what because you are representative of the true Templar way?…… that it?….. different face different name same argument round and round. Don’t you think these are devisive statements.

    Splinter the factions further – divide them by setting yourself as the true way…”Macarthism” set itself up in such ways….to the detriment of all. And finally keep each at each others throat? of course you don’t mean that do you? my appologies if you so wish……History is full of such debates of who is more legitimate than who and it always proves to be futile….who has claim to the Templar name? ……………or the Templar legacy?….. you CBC-AKA JPM of course how stupid could I have been?

    “Mr Comrie’s and ………… continued inventions about me and their past’s have revealed much about their characters( for all too see) and all the mutal backslapping does not eliminate the basic rationale for them no longer being accepted as Templars by any Order other than Masonic pretender groups, they put themselves and their lust for power above the truth and even their Church”………a very interesting statement ……you actually mean me not Chev. Comrie, nor Chev. Young and can you state who these masonic pretender groups are?…….can you tell me who are the legitimate ones, I am rather curious?…..feel free to illucidate……. You obviously think you have me pegged if it makes you happy I’ll be anyone you want me to be…… because of the nature of my had writting and because you think I am worthy of attaking afterall you consider me a turffed out Templar not worth of any group because of my…..what did you allude to…my unchristian stance? o.k. just for this moment and because I am curious…tell me of your group where do they fit in the time Chronology….please illucidate!

    Chev James said: February 1, 2010 at 5:56 pm
    Brother Real Brown Hawk, you are quite right about those instances in history where one group was constantly at the throat of another. I am reminded of the Shakers, who took an oath of celibacy and who liked to enter the churches of others and disrupt the services. I see parallels between the Shakers and Confused’s faction: (1) like Confused’s factions, the Shakers didn’t believe in making serious efforts to increase their numbers; they died out as a result; and (2) they didn’t respect the rights of others to serve God in their own way, and thus earned the ire of the rest of the Christian community.

    It was quite within the prerogative of Confused’s factions to proscribe Masons from joining their group: we know this as freedom of association. What was wrong was for them to waltz into this forum and condemn everyone who didn’t see things their way–much like the Shakers waltzed into other Christian’s church services to disrupt worship and make themselves the center of attention.

    All of this, of course, makes for more heat than light. OK–we know the position of Confused’s faction. So now I am asking Confused to go to his leader and ask him if he would work with other Templars toward common goals. I am asking if he could lay aside his personal objections in order to serve God and his fellow man.

    We are aware of the positions of the churches on various things. Some proscribe drinking alcohol. Some proscribe dancing. Some proscribe short dresses for women and long hair for men. Now, people who belong to those churches subscribe to those proscriptions. The real question is this: are they willing to work with people who do not believe or worship as they do?

    In other words, if a home were on fire, and some of the firemen were Catholics, Baptists, Masons, whatever . . . should the other firemen “boycott the fire” because they might rub shoulders with someone of a different belief while fighting the fire?

    The “fire” in our case is the continued martyrdom of Christians; WE are the firemen. Now, we can either fight the fire together and rescue people from the burning home, or we can debate our beliefs while the home burns down and consumes its inhabitants. One of these is an honorable and noble course of action, while the other is necessarily a dishonorable and ignoble course of action.

    The Pharisees and Sadducees were fond of arguing with one another. Our Lord pointed to them frequently, as they were more concerned with the appearance of things than the actual substance of things. Jesus, too, was taken to task for the “people he kept company with.” He was condemned specifically for sitting down to eat with tax collectors. But our Lord was able to work with such people: one such tax collector wrote the Book of Matthew!

    Confused reminds me very much of St. Paul, when he was known as Saul and was sent to persecute and arrest the Christians. Saul believed that he was serving God when he was carrying out the orders of his superiors. It was supposedly St. Paul who held the coats of those who stoned Stephen to death.

    So I am hoping that Confused will have an epiphany similar to Paul’s on his own Road to Damascus. I hope that he will see that the “Sanhedrin” that he is currently working for no longer has the favor of God, and has been involved in the persecution of the innocent rather than in the punishment of the guilty.

    “And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.” Acts 26:14.

    Confused, is it not hard for you to keep kicking against the pricks, being the “point man” in these attacks upon the Templar orders?

    “And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.” Acts 9:18.

    Confused, think about what you have seen, and what you have been told, and you know that you were told wrongly in the case of the Grand Prioress of Canada . . . you have been told only half the truth about so many other things.

    I was once where you are now. And I had my own epiphany, and the scales fell from my own eyes afterwards. I, too, had been “kicking against the pricks.” Like you, I had persecuted other Templars because I believed that my leader–my own “Sanhedrin”–had told me the truth about everything, and was the leader of the only “true” Templar order.

    It pains me to say these things. But I repented, and I followed my own conscience, and it was revealed to me that persecuting others and denigrating their beliefs was not the way to bring the kingdom of God nearer to my fellow human beings.

    Whether you know it or not, Confused, you truly are on your own Road to Damascus. You have been kicking against the pricks, and I dare say that it has taken a toll upon you.

    I pray that you listen to what others have been saying here, and more importantly, I pray that you listen to what God has been saying to you. When you listen, Confused, when you truly listen–the scales will then fall from your eyes as they did from mine.

    And you will be confused no longer.

    Throw away the “warrants” given to you by the “Sanhedrin,” and listen to God for yourself. You could then become a true luminary in the Templar world . . . just as St. Paul became a true luminary in the Christian Church.

    It is up to you. Please listen. Please listen and learn what God would have you do!

    confused said: February 2, 2010 at 4:05 am
    Mer Reese again you are speaking of that which you have no idea.

    the Baptist Church also states freemasonry is incompatible with Christianity.
    This was outlined by a referenced internet link by consolidation on 7 Jan. I trust you will check it sometime.

    (Edited out: personal attack)

    Just seek a real Christian Church leaders guidance is all I ask.
    But instead you claim to know better than the Catholic, Church of England, Anglican, Baptist, Orthodox, Coptic, 7th Day Adventist, Amish, Quakers, Roman Catholic and so on and so on…
    I pray one day you will return to Christ and renounce your present egocentric and self serving ways.
    I live in hope your souls can be returned to Christ.

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 2, 2010 at 7:11 am
    CBC-aka- JPM/GRF you are once again attacking men not part of this forum, and openly creating mischief…..if you have a constructive critsism or you, at least can cease your rediculous condemnation of Knights who are not part of this forum please do so. I know you do not believe this but I really am not who you think but by your words you are known.

    I claim to know better than no one, ……especially not any church of our lord, I am a sinner and love my church – and truelly what it stands for but this I do know the two gentlemen you slight are not part of this forum…….again sir answer the questions asked of you in my last post…I am most curious, humour me!

    Chev James I will listen……and so will many. You do have important things to say and I want to listen….and to all knights who have a positive voice of truth………

    Chev James said: February 2, 2010 at 7:18 am
    Dear Confused, you are now cutting and pasting comments from your leader–I would recognize his style of writing from 100 miles away!

    Your Road to Damascus is going to be a long and hard one. I hope that you will have your own epiphany and will discard the “warrants” issued by your own “Templar Sanhedrin.”

    You totally miss the point that it is not the realm or the duty of a Templar order to enforce the canon law of any particular church. If your church proscribes dancing, you do not place leg shackles on your fellow Templars who are under no such proscription. If your church proscribes alcoholic beverages, you do not enter the homes of your fellow Templars and smash their liquor cabinets with an axe. If your church proscribes membership in a Masonic organization, you do not light a torch and go on a witch hunt among your fellow Templars . . . unless, of course, you belong to the “Templar Taleban.”

    Let’s see some of the Masons that Confused and his faction condemn:

    Sir John Abbott
    Sir Joseph Banks
    Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
    Simon Bolivar
    Giuseppe Garibaldi
    Astronaut John Glenn
    Lord Kitchener
    Gen Douglas MacArthur
    Gen George C Marshall
    Gen John Pershing
    Franklin Roosevelt
    Harry Truman
    Sir Ernest Shackleton
    John Wayne
    Sir Edward Victor – Nobel prize winner for physics
    Robert Burns – Scottish poet
    Davy Crockett
    Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh (husband of Queen Elizabeth II)

    How about all of those “Sirs,” Confused? Those were knighthoods conferred by JPM’s past and present sovereigns. Am I to conclude that he has no respect for his sovereign? No respect for the UK’s kings and queens? No respect for Queen Elizabeth’s husband?

    Perhaps your leader should tell the Queen just how he feels about her Masonic husband!

    And I’ll bet you that Prince Phillip takes communion in the Anglican Church every Sunday!

    Do you not see, Confused, how you are setting yourself above your own church, above your leader’s own sovereign, and you are condemning such people as the Queen’s own husband and such heroes as Sir Ernest Shackleton?

    Perhaps he should get an audience with the Queen to tell her to stop knighting Masons!

    Take Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Sir Ennest Shackleton–now there were some real workers of iniquity for you!

    And John Wayne? The iconic American movie legend? How can anybody condemn John Wayne?

    This small list shows the kind of people that your branch would have excluded from membership. Is it any wonder that your branch hasn’t grown?

    The choice is yours. You can be either Templar or Taleban.

    You are the latter when you think yours is the only way, and that everybody else has to be brought in line with you!

    The real Brown Hawk said: February 2, 2010 at 9:54 am
    My Dear brother Chev. James and other most noble knights Templar both I and Mr. Confused are not worthy to be on this forum….nor to be amoungst Templars …I most definitely know who this man is without a doubt.

    But he has slighted and continously slighted men who have not attacked him, nor caused him any malice, other than to point out incosistencies in a dogmatic misrepresentation of the truth that I know to be untrue…. this witchhunt started many years ago…..and continues.

    I will not go through this but I was a Knight and in my heart of Hearts I still am….but my behaviour is not… communion is with god but I will not be like this mans brand of knight, neither will any other that I am associated with, or work with or know. I will not condemn men who have show exeplary Human and spiritual qualities ,nobility and honour, I will not exclude these men on the basis of their association….and I will be like the Good samaritan because I know this to be the way…I would stand with you good men of faith an honor though stand appart because I am not worthy….and niether are you CBC-AKA-JPM/GRF

    Chev James said: February 2, 2010 at 10:43 am
    Dear Brother Real Brown Hawk, if there is one thing that these discussions have accomplished, it is to show the way we do not need to go. I am in complete agreement with you as to the way we should proceed: with respect for one another, with brotherly love, and a true desire to serve God and our fellow men.

    The “old faction” offers nothing but an opportunity to ruminate over past transgressions, whether real or imagined. They will not attract members who wish to see positive results from their efforts. If there is anything that turns people off, it’s constant bickering and infighting.

    Christianity has not been a monolith since the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, or even since the “Great Schism of 1054″ between the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches. Like it or not, we have many different churches and denominations to deal with. We can either embrace our similarities and work together, or we can focus on our differences and fight until the end of time. The former would seem the more logical choice.

    Those who wish only to fight consign themselves to a Templar backwater where they will eventually fade into the past.

    Yes, the Templars were known for fighting–but not for fighting each other! They fought real enemies–not other Templars. The penalties for fighting a fellow knight were swift and harsh under Rule!

    What the Templars are remembered for today is what they built: the first international banking system, impregnable fortresses and beautiful churches and priories–and a reputation for standing up for what was right, even if it cost them everything they had–even if it meant enduring torture and facing death by burning.

    Likewise, we will be remembered for what we build, or forgotten because we built nothing.

    We must, my fellow knights, leave a lasting legacy. The way ahead is very difficult, to be sure.

    We must be wary of side roads and distractions. Just as if we were on the way to church, we do not want to stop in a bar where a brawl is already underway. We need to leave the brawlers behind if we are going to reach our destination and look presentable when we get there!

    I believe it is safe to say, Brother Real Brown Hawk, that we have been validated and exonerated in the “court of Templar opinion.” Our fellow Templars know that the way ahead lies through cooperation and mutual respect–not through intransigence and bigotry.

    The governing principle here is that you don’t have to compromise your own beliefs and values to work with someone of a different faith or culture. The armed forces of various Western nations are the more salient examples of this principle: people from every walk of life and faith and culture fight and die beside each other!

    The Templars surely can be no more monolithic than Christianity itself. It is enough to be a Templar to embrace the core principles of Christianity itself: belief that Christ was the messiah, that He died for our sins, and that we must take up our cross and follow Him if we would enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

    As for the other things, we can find individual churches that accommodate our personal beliefs and ideas about God.

    We can worship our Lord as our conscience dictates in our individual churches.

    And that, my fellow Templars, is exactly what we should be fighting for in the case of our fellow Christians in the Islamic and Communist countries–freedom of religion as recognized by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the United Nations in 1948.

    Lastly, if we are to be effective in this fight–and this is most important–if we are to be effective in promoting freedom of religion, in promoting the right of Christians to worship in the Islamic and Communist countries according to the dictates of their own conscience–then we must recognize the same rights for our fellow knights in the Templar orders!

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 2, 2010 at 1:00 pm
    Thank you dear brother Chev. James I am honored, I will stand next to you in this…I maybe a fallen, cast out knight but my soul belongs to Christ as yours most definitely does and this makes us brothers…..thank you brother.

    ….the Chronology will perhaps eventually read 20.. The Templar Orders formed the first World onclave of Templar Knights…….a unified effort to defend what we consider dear to the Christian world “Christianity” and the “freedom to believe without persecution”.

    Thank you brother!

    confused said: February 2, 2010 at 1:25 pm
    Good words about the constant bickering, but Templars are not fighting with each other ….in fact if you review the forum you will see only neo pretend Orders here bickering and trying to twist truths such as the Popes decrees, Baptist standpoints etc… .

    The real Templars are attempting to alert good Christian people to the false claims of pretenders ( I think as Christ would have us do…protect the needy and weak etc )
    The public should be warned about the false words and short and very selective memories of those individuals who are hopefully well meaning but still unfortunately pretenders such as yourself .
    Your ambition mixed with freemasonry tolerance and Mr Comries existing masonic membership within his new club(est. 2007) seem determined subvert the messages of the Churches in order to find new and ever more deceptive ways to try to represent yourself as something you are not qualified to become at this time.
    You are no friend or follower of Christianity at this time by your own admission you know better than the Churches, but evidently you don’t really know or have ever look into what the majority of Christian Churches say by the ridiculously ignorant comments you keep trying to pass off.

    Unfortunately you will never be Templars because of your histories. This does not mean you will never be a good Christians again; but all Orders have rules, you seek to twist your way around them and thus are forever excluded from any real Order.

    Templarism is just not possible for you or Mr Comrie with your current and previous mindsets focused squarely and singularly on building your own power over people via deception.

    May you return to Christ one day.
    I still pray you all will one day soon and have hopes you will defend the persecuted Church instead of supporting and proposing yet another false club that will be run by the Churches enemies and fraudulently guised as a psuedo Christian neo-Order.
    Rhetoric and exaggeration, that you specialise in, does not equal action…Templars are about deeds quietly done so that God may receive the Glory. Psalm 115. Try learning the meaning and following this biblical guidance as a starting point.

    Why not call yourself a rhetorically charitable but strictly mason friendly club for any unhinged pretend royal patron willing to recognise you? It worked before and still does with Fontes!
    I saty this as you seem unconcerned by recognition as a Christian. Just please stop pretending to be a Templar and advertising yourself as a Christian. It is proven untrue so many times over.

    One major problem with the new proposal of yours, The club you propose already exists, It is called freemasonry and is incompatible with Christianity…I suppose you may want to join ( Our Lord gives us Choice) but I would and am attempting to guide you back to Christ.

    confused said: February 2, 2010 at 1:45 pm
    Dear moderator or Mr Matos, would you please confirm for this forum that I am not in Europe.
    I requested this previously… but as we both speak english as a second language I feel it may have been overlooked.

    I would appreciate not revealing which continent I am from, but feel free to exclude Europe to hopefully quieten the slander that Mr Comrie and Reese seem to delight in.
    Apologies to those they slandered or accused would be in order for any good Christian.

    @ 1st feb

    Ask Luis if I am even in the same continent as the people you accuse me of being…

    Luis Please do not tell them which continent I am from, but feel free to let them know it is not Europe and never has been.

    After this Mr Reese, Mr Young and Mr Comrie ( all ex templar rejects) will owe a great deal of people many apologies, I trust you can remember all those you have slighted through your ignorance and wild accusations. If you have trouble you could review this forum as it is full of your ignorant and unchivalrous accusations.
    It seems to be rather bare of your apologies though.

    Mr Comrie’s and Mr Reese’s continued inventions about me and their past’s have revealed much about their characters( for all too see) and all the mutal backslapping does not eliminate the basic rationale for them no longer being accepted as Templars by any Order other than Masonic pretender groups, they put themselves and their lust for power above the truth and even their Church.
    end quote.

    confused said: February 2, 2010 at 2:12 pm
    Now for the last time, and I hope this time you will listen, I am not in an Order and am not affiliated with those you accuse me of being affiliated with…iI have also questioned many things such as 5 supposed princes and their legitamacy….Your constant attacks againt that group which has had the foresight to boot you all does however reveal who YOU consider to be the real Templar Order to be via your envy and need to attack without proof.
    Mr Comrie even supplied the greatest compliment when he absonded with their rituals and documents after he was ‘helped’ to retire and he then set up his own pretend Order in late 2007.
    OSMTH Scotland aka ‘Founded by theft’.
    Let us not forget his unscrupulous use of a charity number he had no right to use either up until feb 2009! ….theirs.
    By your actions you shall be known…your words are as usual… just words.
    I will keep praying and hope you find some better leaders such as the Church provides as the supposed leaders here are seemingly restricted to self promoting badge collectors.

    Chev James said: February 2, 2010 at 2:20 pm
    You know, Confused, I think that you really should take this message to Her Highness, the Queen, and tell both her and her husband that they are doomed to perdition because the Prince is a Mason!

    I want to see the look on the Queen’s face when you call her husband an “unhinged pretend royal patron”!

    Perhaps you should go to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and tell him that the Prince should be denied communion!

    Tell that to the descendants of Sir Ernest Shackleton and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, as well.

    It is elementary, as Dr. Watson, would say. Your faction is obsessed: Masons or Moby Dick, one obsession is just as good as another!

    Your faction, by the way, was stripped of any recognition it had . . . stripped by the knights who had had enough of the witch hunts and the false accusations and the obsession with everything but trying to serve our Lord with a modicum of humility.

    Your faction, Confused, now exists only as the discordant sound you make in this forum. It has no power, no force, no raison d’etre. The cross that was broken was reforged; but the faction that was broken shall never arise again.

    You are still carrying those “warrants” issued to you by the old, discredited “Sanhedrin.” But there is no one to honor them.

    Your fellow Templars have weighed the evidence, and your leadership was found wanting. The knights voted, according to Rule. The leadership was changed, and now the true Templars of Scotland have taken a new direction, are once again on the path they needed to be.

    You could tar and feather every Mason on earth, and every Anglican, and every Baptist, and every other non-Catholic, but it would not mitigate the sins of your leadership, nor would it change the outcome of history.

    You could apply for readmission. If you were to put out your torches and cease your witch hunts, and if you were to express true remorse and repentance for your actions, you would probably be readmitted.

    I fear, though, that all of you will continue to “kick against the pricks.” You will continue persecuting others with the zeal of Saul, but you will fail to realize your mistakes as did Paul.

    Does your righteousness exceed that of the group you are persecuting? I dare say, sir, that it does not.

    You have, in effect, called your brothers “Raca” time after time, and our Lord issued the sternest of warnings against such conduct.

    All of your faction, sir, have been stripped of what they once had: titles, ranks and position. All you have in this world is a two-dimensional trademark, won by virtue of taking your brothers to a secular court. What good is a trademark when you are parading about naked, stripped of all your habiliments? Your very mantles are forfeit, your swords broken and your golden crosses now only so much dross–their connection with our Lord broken after your leader desecrated one of them.

    Before your fellow Templars you stand naked and shivering, hiding behind that ill-won trademark. You have joined others that you once condemned for trying to trademark such things.

    No others take up your cry. No others take your proffered torches and join in your drives against your fellow Christians.

    You are all alone out there . . . the last remnants of the Pharisees, who put appearances over what was in the human heart.

    There are those of us who wanted to reconcile with you, to make peace and common cause with you, but you hardened your hearts and you would not.

    These discussions have arisen for one simple reason: not that Masons exist or do not exist, not that they are benign or evil, but for the hardening of your hearts.

    Hearts were hardened against myself and so many others; we tried to reconcile with you, and we held out until honor dictated that we could stay with you not a moment longer.

    All of you have lost so much. Deep inside, you must feel the pain of your loss. You must yearn for those places where you once held sacred ceremonies, and for the company that held you in such esteem. There were people who truly believed in you then.

    We did not leave you; you left us.

    Shall our Lord take us all before there is a reconciliation? Shall we go to our graves while there is yet enmity or regret in anyone’s heart?

    I have done everything in my power to exhort you to change course, to come back into the fold.

    It is said that the Good Shepherd exults more over finding one lost sheep than in returning to find the rest of the flock fully intact.

    Take this message to your leader: tell him that Seamus wishes him well. Tell him that Seamus would meet with him as a friend, and leave all strife and enmity in the past. Tell him that Seamus said that none of us is getting any younger, and that not even the next five minutes is guaranteed to any of us. Tell him that Seamus never was his enemy, and never will be. I pray that you will tell him these things.

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 3, 2010 at 3:35 am
    You my dear” Confussed ” have been offered something more than anything you have offered me…..nor ever would. If I were a better man and a man of the true temple….. I would offer you my hand…and ask you to step up an join your brothers….but you won’t will you or will you? Truth, Brotherhood, inclusion, co-operation, justice,forgiveness, mersy….you blame inocent men who are not attacking you in this forum.

    Chev James said: February 3, 2010 at 5:57 am
    Peter and Paul and James could have split the church over the question about association with Gentiles.

    But they didn’t. They talked to each other. Most importantly, they listened to each other.

    Paul humbled himself. Peter changed his viewpoint. James provided solutions.

    The church remained intact . . . because these three Apostles put the church ahead of their own egos, ahead of their own pride.

    Paul then went among the Gentiles to solicit support for the Jerusalem Church.

    I submit to you that the Gentile issue in the 1st century A.D. was far more volatile than the Masonic issue of the 21st century A.D.

    The issue was solved because three Apostles met and discussed it in a civilized way, always keeping Christ and the church uppermost in their minds.

    The issue was not solved through name-calling, making accusations or denigrating one another’s character.

    It was not solved by making speeches in the public square. It was solved in face-to-face discussions without the benefit of an audience.

    We have the example set before us of how to proceed.

    What say your leadership, Confused?

    The real Brown Hawk said: February 3, 2010 at 10:39 am
    what say your leadership, Confused?……you would be a better men than I by taking the path of consulatation.

    confused said: February 3, 2010 at 11:42 am
    Thanks for the offer but yet again…I am not in that Order and have never been in a Order.

    short simple hopefully one day you will get it.

    Church v long masonic passages by you…I think I will follow the Church.

    You seek something but via a deceptive route…to legitimize freemasonry and sully the name of Templar.
    I cannot join your proposed psuedo templar playclub as my Church forbids it and my conscience would not live with me abandoning my hope that one day you will return to Christ.
    I dont run from true and difficult tasks. I prefer to continue as my Lord has taught and guided us to do.
    To praise his name, sheperd the lost and protect the weak.

    Please get it this time.
    I will leave you to contemplate your many highlighted errors that have combined with the need for self promotion and led you away from the path of Christianity.
    Mr Young have you anything to say excepting “yeah, what he said!” any rational statement with a point would be good.

    Chev James said: February 3, 2010 at 12:13 pm
    Confused, the offer was put forth to talk, not to try to force anyone to do anything.

    I must accept the fact that your faction prefers schism to solidarity, conflict to cooperation and arguing to constructive conversation.

    Let it be known, however, that the olive branch was offered, and spurned.

    You are, of course, free to make such a choice.

    I do wonder how your members navigate in the real world, when they have to work alongside Masons, and Anglicans and Baptists. I see your faction as cutting itself off from mainstream Christianity, and instead engaging in what I refer to as “Churchianity.” When Churchianity conflicts with what Christ taught, it is the latter to which we should adhere!

    I wish you all well. If you ever decide to rejoin the mainstream Templar movement, you know where to find us.

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 3, 2010 at 1:08 pm
    You are continuosly attacking the man and he is not even here……. again you are commiting what you are saying I am guilty of….again you are the more rightious….”I dont run from true and difficult tasks” no you are just creatively resorcful about diverting from who you are and what your real agenda is, well if I didn’t know who you were in the first place WV you win I didn’t think you would take the offer “confussed- brown-consolidation” but that is o.k. …….I tried you win yet again how does it feel! Christian perhaps? maybe noble? Satisfied that you bested and evil man. You are absolutely right you are not a member of an order nor a Templar, nor a part of that faction whatever that faction is now…..and niether am I actually I don’t think they would let you in, I must inform you they do have standards, don’t you know.

    The poor old Church everyone interprets for it, hipocritically fights about its spiritual position while other churches burn, christians die, and self rightious, non christian, powerhungry badge collecting individuals, who supposedly been turfed out of the only true templar order in the world, try to discredit and infiltrate the church in order to gain recognition? Um! o.k. if you say so….one question why? so I am not Christian because I see other peoples humanity dispite their ideological differences or spiritual differences….I am not trying to clever this is what you believe is this right?

    You have done extremely well you have managed to distract and digress from the main thrust of the Chronology and as much as this has been a thrilling exercise for all I think you and I should stick to the main thrust.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 8:17 am
    Again wrong with your accusation Mr “he of the constantly changing titles”, I am not WV.

    What is the purpose of Chronology if it is not to discuss the relevance of historical and current documents and also examine the integrity of those trying to subvert this?

    If it is just open so that you man say “I agree” or sycophantically crawl then it is a wasted forum.
    Military lines of address and communication are expected in any true Order of Templars and this does not tolerate unhinged statements such as…. I dont like what you are saying even though its true, so sod off.
    It means you need to keep quiet unless you have something relevant too say.
    As you were never in the Military I understand your ignorance and have so far ignored it as much as possible.
    It is not about being nice to each other it is about showing respect for truth and not lying to each other. You have failed this on so many occasions you would be dishonourably discharged many times over.

    The masonic takeover is the root cause of the issues faced for the last 3 decades and coupled with the ridiculous neo-psuedo clubs such as you lead are an important item to be considered by those good people still looking for the true path.
    The Masons are not bad people, Freemasonry is deceptively evil and many good people are caught out or find it a necessity because of work etc…
    Masonic Templars need to be at a minimum of 30th level to undertake study in the Yorke or Continental rites.
    They however do not have to worship God , they could worship a Tin can or a dog…but they do have to hold GAOTU above Christ. This is the issue being discussed, try joining in. The chronology uses a masonic forgery in its timeline and this is also a issue being discussed.
    The vox was superceeded by the Chinon; or was it? .. is a topic for debate also.

    You may not agree with my points, and that is your perogative but that does not give you any right to attempt to silence my thoughts/queries in another neo-groups forum. Your arrogance extends beyond all bounaries it seems.
    If Mr Matos edits then that is his perogative alone, as it is his forum and by joining in we agree to his discretionary editing.
    Mr “whats my name today” your playclub is founded on ego and documents you spirited away dishonestly from an Order that set you up to boot yourself out based on your continuing dishonesty and they chose to use your own excessive personal ambition as the tool.
    As previously stated I do not agree with the method but it does have precedents in the 15th century.

    I will not answer your foolish jibes again unless you actually have a point as your past history shows your interpretation of truth and lie are very flexible and interchangable.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 8:28 am
    Mr Reese , again you twist truth without conscience.

    I am not in a Order, I have stated that many times!

    If you really want to offer an olive branch then do it to GFR or JM of the Order that you keep accusing me of being in.

    Your deceptive attempt is only given to me as you know (by my own many admissions) it is doomed and impossible to take.
    Firstly as I am a Christian and secondly as I am not a memeber of that or any Order.

    It is a false Olive branch full of thorns if you offer it too me then hold others as accountable for declining it.
    It does you no credit.

    I will continue to pray for you.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 8:36 am
    Lasty, as it is a valid pint Mr Reese raises about working alongside masons.
    Ther is no problem with that as long as you are trying to guide them back to the Church, however they will never be Templars.
    All Orders and Clubs have rules and freemasonry association is and will be enternally a exclusion point for these generally good but misguided souls when considering joining a Templar Order. It is a Christians role to guide them back…not too give up on the Church and join is that simple really.
    I pray one day you will understand and rejoin Christianity.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 8:42 am
    Mr Reese,
    I just noticed your post about Anglicans.
    That is just too silly for words the Order curently headed by GFR( one of the few Christian based ones and your ex stomping ground) has a GP who is an Anglican? They aslo have members who are Baptists. Your point is wrong and invalid.
    Please research better

    Chev James said: February 4, 2010 at 9:09 am
    Confused, the olive branch was offered and rejected. And, whether you acknowledge being in the old faction or not, you are its de facto spokesman. It is you that was appointed to do what you are now doing. Since there has been no objection from that faction as to your statements here, we can only deduce that you are making them with the full knowledge and consent of your “superiors.”

    The problem, however, isn’t Masons. It is your insistence upon superimposing a Roman Catholic template over all of the Templar orders.

    In short, you are insisting that all Templars follow Roman Catholic canon law, rather than allow them the freedom to worship and believe as their consciences dictate.

    It’s the same as if I belonged to a church that proscribed drinking, and had launched into diatribes about how you couldn’t be a true Christian or Templar if you drank alcohol.

    What all of us here have been saying to you–to apparently no avail–is that you are free to follow the canon law of your church and to practice your faith as your church instructs, but that problems arise when you attempt to force others to conform to the precepts of YOUR particular church.

    If we ALL did that, Confused, then NOTHING would ever get accomplished.

    You think Freemasonry is bad? OK–don’t join the Masons. You think drinking or dancing is bad? OK–don’t drink or dance.

    But if you go around condemning people in your workplace or in your community for being a Mason, or drinking or dancing–you are simply being discordant and a divider, not a uniter.

    What we need right now is unity, nor division. We need people who are willing to roll up their sleeves and go to work, not people who are going to sit around debating theology, or why their particular church is perfect and every other church is doomed to hell.

    And to be quite blunt about it, I’d rather take one Mason into our order who is willing to serve and truly work, versus a thousand non-Masons who don’t care about accomplishing anything, but who just want to keep some kind of controversy constantly stirred up.

    You know which end of that spectrum your faction is located.

    And, just to add to it–and this is from a non-Mason–when your faction has done something for humanity like the children’s and burn victim hospitals the Masons have set up, then come back and criticize them all you want.

    When you have something to offer more than talk, then come back and criticize the Masons and the rest of us.

    If you’re going to talk the talk, Confused, then you need to also walk the walk!

    If your true concern is, indeed, leading Masons back to Christ, then you should logically start with the Duke of Edinburgh, who is the Queen’s husband. You could tell the Archbishop of Canterbury to deny him communion until he renounces Freemasonry!

    Somehow I don’t think that is going to fly.

    Chev James said: February 4, 2010 at 12:16 pm
    Brother Real Brown Hawk, I believe that you are absolutely right: this person was sent on a mission to disrupt and damage. It is akin to someone entering a bar with the intent of inciting the patrons to brawl, and then that someone slinks under the tables toward the door.

    But it did not work. The faction represented by Confused is so prejudiced and bigoted that it has all the appeal of the Ku Klux Klan to people with any intelligence.

    Their faction purports to follow Catholic canon law, but they are, ironically, anathema to the Catholic Church. If they call themselves Templars, they immediately place themselves under the jurisdiction of Vox in Excelso, and they are automatically excommunicated.

    Not even Dan Brown, the author of “The Da Vinci Code” and “Angels and Demons,” has the imagination to conceive of something this extraordinary: Confused’s faction is an excommunicated faction, but their chief worry is not their own excommunication, but Freemasons! The Catholic Church has not gone so far as to excommunicate Freemasons within its ranks, but to simply deny them communion. Now, I ask you, what is worse in the eyes of the Catholic Church: a group that is excommunicated or a group that is simply barred from taking communion until it renounces Freemasonry?

    “Therefore, with a sad heart, not by definitive sentence, but by apostolic provision or ordinance, we suppress, with the approval of the sacred council, the order of Templars, and its rule, habit and name, by an inviolable and perpetual decree, and we entirely forbid that anyone from now on enter the order, or receive or wear its habit, or presume to behave as a Templar. If anyone acts otherwise, he incurs automatic excommunication. ” — Vox in Excelso

    Confused, your leadership is officially churchless according to Pope Clement V, who issued the above “inviolable and perpetual decree.” Vox in Excelso was never repealed. Nor can it be!

    So, you have told us about the Church’s position on Freemasonry, and we have told you about the Church’s position on Templars.

    It seems you have the audacity to quote Roman Catholic canon law concerning Masons, but you dismiss this “inviolable and perpetual decree.” What part of “inviolable” and “perpetual” do you not understand.

    Is that WV over there, squirming in his seat?

    Do you not know that the delegation that I met with returned to Rome, and re-read Vox in Excelso in the original Latin, and that they were assisted in this by a foremost Vatican archivist, and that the matter of your papal recognition has been laid to rest forever? No, you would not know these things, because I held them back.

    So, my dear fellows–you who have come to sow discord and doubt here–you have sought papal recognition while under excommunication! You have condemned Masons and true Templars as being unChristian, and you have quoted the canon law of your Church, all while under excommunication!

    You may apply for papal recognition as the Mason Hater’s Club, or as the Anonymous Instigators Club, or perhaps even as the Glasgow Gloom Society, but you cannot ever apply for papal recognition as Templars. Nor can you legitimately set foot into your own churches as long as you claim to be Templars!

    And that, dear sirs, rather closes the book on the history of your faction, which defied the newly elected pope in St. Peter’s Square by dancing about in the habits of Templars in defiance of Vox in Excelso. What audacious blasphemy, sirs! And yet you come here to lecture us on how to follow the canon laws of the various churches!

    All right, Confused, you have your work cut out for you: reconciling your status as Templars with Rome while being excommunicated. A thornier problem has not graced the pages of history! This should take up all of your available time for the next several millennia.

    Until you have resolved this problem, I think you should refrain from criticizing others and whether or not they are following the canon law of their churches.

    Any issues concerning Freemasonry pale in comparison to the excommunication problem your faction is now facing!

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 1:32 pm
    Iam sorry you see it that way, in fact I have only commented here as the essential and core issue of Faith has been put into second place by your need for seeking expansion and recognition.
    Seek God not a bigger club.
    If Christ wishes Templars to continue then they will.
    Of course I believe they will continue as I have faith in our Lord, whether that equates to recognition or not is irrellevant.
    I have faith in the ideals and ethos of Templarism and that essentially is a Christian warriror.
    Be that in administration, preaching, or action but by their deeds they will glorify God’s love.

    You seems to continually to judge Orders by the actions of a few and have lost or ignore the ethos of the Order as the most important and continuing thing. 700 years later you would sully the name and truly destroy it by setting your personal opinion above the Church.
    Yes I am sure many good Templars do stray and make poor decisions( as it has always been), but the ethos has always remained unsullied and strong. This is why you seek to emmulate them but unfortunately you place God a distant second to your own instant needs for recognition.

    The Vox is negated by the Chinon and the Church already has had much too say that you are ignorant of. This is not your fault since the OSMTH was singled out to be never recognised and why I seek to guide you.

    You have lost this necessary element of loving the Church and Christ above yourself, and without this essential ideal you are just pretenders with wonderful dress ups and badges. Being a Templar requires humility and servitude not self promotion( it is not even a consideration that you may or may not gain earthly recognition for the Order, Service is a calling not a logic problem to be solved).
    Therefore at this time you are not able to call yourself Templar, but instead may feel free to form a club to do some great works by another name in your non-Christian diluted versions based on Templars….say like freemasons or the New non judgemental Jaycees?
    That would not be an issue to most I think.

    But please dont fool yourself or others as you cannot call yourself anything resembling the ancient and continuing Christian Templars.

    I will continue to pray for you.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 1:46 pm
    Again Mr Reese, I am not aligned with any Order and the Order of which you continualy attack has not commented since GFR on 22nd March 2009 as far as I can see.
    Please be accurate.

    I speak for myself as a lone interested Christian researcher and none else.

    One against the tide, but I feel it will be worth it if I save one soul from this hopefully simply ignorant egotistical and unchristian venture you would be too hard for you and you would simply quit and form another faction as proven twice now, I suppose.
    I also suppose this comes from serving your own egos needs before Christ and Christianity.
    I will continue to pray for your recovery.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 2:00 pm
    I know I should not bait you too much, but have you yet worked out your words on Papal recognition and your interpretation/application of this you claim towards that other Order ( the one you are not welcome in) actually proves ( by your logic) that you have never been a Templar yourself and your displayed lack of faith in the Church again shows you are not even Christian.

    I dont agree with that logic and you seem stuck in the 1300′s and the vox’s message…look beyond to more modern official documents.

    You have hopefully a long time to repent this and I pray you return to Christ and your soul is returned from “grave peril”.
    Faith is a key word and humility is another you may wish to practice.
    Psalm 115, I see you still have not read it. I will pray you contemplate its message one day.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 2:18 pm
    Mr Reese, your point about applying a RC template to all Christian religions is also invalid.

    I have shown the vast majority of Christian Churches inclusive of all the large ones forbid masonic membership.

    I have also shown that it is freemasonry that is evil, not freemasons. In fact freemasons do some wonderful things, but they are not Christians and thus not Templars…please get it now.

    I have aslo shown your true colours where you elevate your opinion above the Church.
    when cornered you bring out wild and inflammatory statement like the SS or the KKK (which by they way are still allowed to join freemasonry in your country). Yet you offer a fake olive branch to a nonmeber then use that to again attack. You have no honour or credibility and have not had since you backflipped on your own oath of fealty, you left…you did not stay and fight to protect the order( as you saw it was under attack, in your opinion)…you ran away and want to start your second fake group but this time actively recruiting masons, case closed.
    Mr Comrie” the real brown hawk (or dirty pidgeon with an overinflated sense of self), please say something new or at least rational and true, just for a change please.

    confused said: February 4, 2010 at 2:27 pm
    whatever your next response is please remeber that God loves you even when you stray and will welcome you if you listen and follow his guidance.
    I can say no more than this and I plea with you to repent and seek guidance of your Church.
    Only he can save you I am just trying to guide you to him.
    Goodbye and may Christs love fill you one day.

    Chev James said: February 4, 2010 at 6:43 pm
    Confused, you and your fellows are excommunicated. If you take communion, you do so at the peril of your own souls:

    “This means that whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily sins against the body and blood of the Lord. A man should examine himself first, only then should he eat of the bread and drink of the cup. He who eats and drinks without recognizing the body eats and drinks damnation on himself. That is why many among you are sick and infirm, and why so many are dying” (I Corinthians 11:27-30).

    Now, you are excommunicated by order of Vox in Excelso, and you are still taking communion in violation of an “inviolable and perpetual decree” of your church.

    I have stated nothing here that you cannot verify for yourselves, but you are afraid to consider its implications. You came here to assail others . . . but you now have “Excommunicated” hanging around your necks like a big sign.

    Perhaps this is why, Confused, you claim to not be a Templar–hoping that you, too, would not suffer excommunication. But what of the rest of your faction–the ones who sent you?

    Confused, you and your faction have a lot more to worry about than Masons.

    How ARE you going to get out of this predicament?

    Tha Real Brown Hawk said: February 4, 2010 at 8:05 pm
    You stand behind Christian ethos use it and claim to be a Christian historian. I hear no history just a chant, a practiced rehtoric …but comming from a man who practiced un-christan behaviours many times even in this forum…You spit insults at me calling out what you think my name is because you know I know who you are….and based on our history together….not as the men you slight but as this seudonym……we have tangled in the dark many times …..I a brocken ghost and you your un-christian practicing self rightious man too interested in perpetuating your political manuvers of recognition and attempting to consolidate a powerbase you no longer have……only few people could know or do this but really this is a muet point. You are the embodiment of the lie… who acuse both masons and inocent men.

    Lies were not unbecomming in this world you yourself created untruths about the past, hoping that others would be convinced of that you were the only one……a manufacturing of a history, blatant lies, conection with a past you just simply did not have. Claiming to have papers, wills, document “proof proper” of your supreme position in a world you were never part of but boasted being the head of. No different than others fallen from an over inflated ego and an over active ambition to finaly be recognized……there are many still crying out show me your evidence?, where is your proof?….you hide and spout rehtoric, and spit at a man who has done you wrong yes….he told the truth, not your truth, but what was varifiable. And yes you condemn him for it! You taunt and bait as you have always done…..using Church law and christian ethos …..there are many sins a man can commit but you have certainly clocked them up more than just communing with the so called enemy……your enemies to be precise.
    Let us just fantasise for a moment and say you are not part of an Order…a templar…….and it is a stretch I know but humour me… if I were in such a service with you….I would seek more christian branches and wipe my shoes of the dust you have created of your over inflated sanctimonious ambition.

    Again you seek disharmony, not brotherhood it is your design as always, “Confused-Brown-consolidation”-AKA- JPM/GRF

    Chev James said: February 4, 2010 at 8:51 pm
    We have witnessed the complete destruction of a so-called Templar order. First, the faction that came here to attack had been expelled by the knights who now guide the true order. Now we see that this faction is under excommunication from its Church. They came to discredit Masons and all who would treat them with respect, and they have now become fugitives within their own church.

    Now, make no mistake–all of this has caused them no little consternation.

    I know the way out for them, but I shall not tell them while they are bellicose and intransigent.

    In the meantime, their faction is under papal interdict. They may not receive the sacraments unless they sneak in and out of their Church like thieves.

    In the meantime, our order is welcome in the churches . . . one of which retains a document granting us access from the 1200s onward . . .
    It is not, however, like I enjoy their squirming. I genuinely want to help them cast off the bigotry and intolerance that have hobbled them for the last 20 years.

    But if they will not change, if they will not reconcile with their brothers . . . let them consider this passage:

    “Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift,” Matthew 5:23-24.

    The faction of Confused takes communion while under excommunication, and while they have refused to reconcile with their brothers.

    Confused–you and all of your brothers–you are afflicted with spiritual leprosy. You have been virtually consumed already. That is why you have come here to attack and undermine your brothers.

    You are in no little danger. What would it profit you to have gained papal recognition but to have lost your own souls in the process?

    You must reconcile with your own church, and you must reconcile with your brothers. You can neither call yourselves Christians nor Templars unless you do these two things.

    The evidence of your danger has been laid out before you. It is incontrovertible.

    It is not us you rail against now, but heaven itself.

    confused said: February 5, 2010 at 7:41 am
    Mr Reese as per usual your points are not valid and full of deception. like your attempts to persuade of your Christianity or your fealty or yor understanding of thewords of the Bible, or rhe proclamations of the Churches on freemasonry.
    Time and time again you publicly prove your ignorance and then attack when you are outed…nothing has changed in 15 years.
    I am not Templar therefore you words are just hollow attempts to divert from truth yet again and I do hope to see you in Church one day but not until you renounce your ridiculous urges to lead yet another attempt by freemasonry to infiltrate and destroy the Christian Templars.
    You are an unknowing pawn who knows nothing of the evil you seek to call kindred. That is why I have tried to guide you.
    I wish you all the best and hope one day you join the followers of Christ not GATOU once more.

    One day I hope you will become brave enough to fight for God and not just your own influence.
    Mr Comrie you are ludicrous and unhinged.
    I will pray for all here.

    confused said: February 5, 2010 at 8:19 am
    Mr Matos, would you please inform the pretender called “real brown hawk” or Mr Comrie that I am not from europe, but not reveal which continent I am from.

    I have requested this 3 times now and would appreciate it if you have the time as it would serve to provide an end to some of the slander here, thank you.

    I wonder if Mssrs Comrie and Young would be willing to prove the same ?, as “the real brown hawk” falsely claims I am wrong about him.

    I dare this as I have collected many emails from Mssr Comrie and Young calling themselves brown hawk when they were busy sending poison emails to women and pensioners threatening them over the past few years.
    You are not well and should seek medical help for your issues
    However I will pray for these masons and sinners as they have no other tools to win hearts and respect but deception.
    I speak for myself only and no other I also do not speak for any of the many psudeo or real Orders.

    Mr Reese one day your historical search may inform you that Papal recognition was after the formation of the Templar Order, it is not a key element but a thing to strive toward, your psuedo order is outed and proclaimed specifically to be never recognized because of your masonic affiliations. Please Please get it now. You are in a buch of pretenders deviously trying to build their reputations by trying to fool the public that they have some form of link to the real Templars. It will not decay just because it is small, it will however decay if its ethos is corrupted as you propose.
    Mr Reese I aslo hope you will one day study more than 1 very old document that was repealled by another document but then misplaced for a while.
    The Vatican moves at a speed it decides upon not at a speed you wish. The document is clear and whilst it does not forgive, it does state there is nothing to forgive, comprehend this please.
    You quote secret meetings like candy and yet have no proof or substance, ther is a reason for this as I have already alluded too. I will say no more on this issue until it is made public.

    I have faith that praying for all men to follow Christ and their Church is what a good Christian should do.

    Chev James said: February 5, 2010 at 8:33 am
    Mr. Confused V, you may not be Templar, but you belong to the faction that has come here to cause disruption and damage.

    But your predicament has nothing to do with Freemasons; it is how your faction shall now reconcile itself with its own Church.

    Your faction is like a man crossing a wide chasm on a tighrope that is fraying and about to drop him, and instead of noting his own danger, he is shouting to others that their shoelaces are untied.

    All of you, who are excommunicated, are now churchless. So what, exactly, are you trying to guide us back to? Are you looking for people to join you in your excommunication? Are you trying to be the Pied Piper of Perdition?

    Your argument is with Rome, sir, and with heaven itself.

    We offered the hand of reconciliation and friendship, but you would have none of it. Now there is really nothing we can help you with.

    It as if you are on a sinking ship–which you are–and instead of grabbing a life preserver, you grabbed a sword . . . which now drags you down into the depths.

    We can truly do nothing more for you. You have lost your knighthoods, your titles, and your ranks . . . and now you have lost your Church.

    The way back from this spiritual debacle lies through humility and repentance, neither of which your faction seems capable of doing.

    Remember that it is not we who condemned you. In truth, you condemned yourselves. It is no small matter being excommunicated. That is a far greater thing than worrying about some social fraternity!

    Chev James said: February 5, 2010 at 8:58 am
    One last thing, Mr. Confused V. The Chinon Document–which I have read in its entirety–does not repeal Vox in Excelso. That papal decree can never, ever be repealed, as stated in the words of Pope Clement V himself.

    You are excommunicated. You could convince every Mason on earth to leave Masonry, and you would still be excommunicated. You could convince every drinker to stop drinking, and every dancer to stop dancing, but you would still be excommunicated.

    Yes, there were secret meetings, and the evidence of them is in the Vatican archives, something which you will never be able to access.

    You did, however, achieve a sort of “papal recognition.” Your existence is now known to the Roman curia and to the pope himself, so I actually advanced you more than you could have ever done yourselves. But the word is perhaps more accurately stated as “notoriety,” rather than “recognition.” You would be most assuredly be “recognized” by the Swiss Guard.

    Yes, Mr. Confused V, those meetings will remain secret. I was sworn to secrecy, and I will stand by my word to those delegates with whom I met.

    I did what I believed to be my duty. And I will tell you this: it was precipitated by a certain “witch hunt” that your faction engaged in against one of our knights. I decided that such a faction did not deserve even the slightest chance of papal recognition. The delegation was most appreciative to learn of these things, as the Church was working to put such things behind it as the Spanish Inquisition and the Jewish pogroms of the Middle Ages. It did not need a self-styled “Templar Inquisition” operating under the aegis of Rome.

    There was certainly karma involved: your faction would have destroyed someone in order to obtain papal recognition, but because of its actions, papal recognition is now forever denied.

    The words of your leader were that our knight was being used as a “goat in a tiger hunt.” Such sensitive words about a ploy to destroy someone’s reputation! I was asked to sacrifice him, but I would not. We all know that the secession followed.

    So, Confused V, all of your chickens have now come home to roost.

    It is somewhat funny, is it not, that you were willing to bring down heaven and earth for papal recognition, and now you are fugitives in your own Church!

    When you are offered the Host this coming Sunday, remember what was said here, and remember what our Lord says about those who receive it unworthily–with malice in their hearts or who are under excommunication.

    My advice to you: you need to skip communion until you are reconciled with your Church and with your brothers here.

    And those are two things that only yourselves can do.

    confused said: February 5, 2010 at 9:35 am
    I am not a templar…please stop this lying you have so comfortably taken too, I am not in a faction either.

    You were booted/left under pain and started your own neo-faction under a pretenders banner…the original Order you left still exists and was never stripped of anything …more ignorance from you.
    I see how you are confused but how can a fake count pass judgement on anyone and be listened too?
    Mr Fontes is a pretender remember as previously proven, as is the whole dynasty issue a matter of self promotion, as is the document given (incredibly) in this chronology. These issues are the root or cause the factional wars…Fontes is a mason as well.
    Fontes went as far as offering the nonmasonic templars dual membership even though the non masonic templars were individually given the option and everysingle man and woman refused it.
    He even issed brevets for them he was so desperate for credibility.
    Admittedly it is easier to join Fontes as you only have to open your wallet and never even see a Church let alone do any charity. Yopu do have to buy the regalia and badges though and you can buy rasnk there. Maybe this is your way ahead.

    As I STATED I am not a templar…please stop this lying you have so comfortably taken too, I am not in a faction either.

    This continued slander makes all your rambling against people who will not even talk to you all the more stupid.

    At least they did not answer me with lies when i quizzed them…they just refused to answer me as they said they do not discuss templar issues with non templars,(their perrogative I suppose)
    This alone makes them more worthy of respect than your egocentric outbursts.
    That they dont advertise their deeds is in line with psalm 115, something you have never read or understood.

    Too many real lies and deceptions from your pretend faction to be ever held as anything but a deceptive and masonic joke.

    Even the freemasons think your group are just pretenders. Freemasons need to study for years to reach the Templar rank in their unclean psudeo Temples. Unfortunately for them their interpretations of bits and pieces of ancient rites are a false corrupted and unclean version of the original Templar ethos and purely invented( by his own admission) by the emminent freemason Mackey in the late 1800′s when he was sent to search for any true links, he found none and at least was honest enough to state this.

    I think you want to do service… but also want the glory and you will quite possibly find this in freemasonry, I strongly plea against it from a Christian POV, but you have free will as God has given us.

    However you will not be joining or saving Templar ethos, you will be joining those who seek to corrupt and destroy it whilst trading deceptively via an established and true Order’s name.

    It was Freemasons who had the audacity to attempt to trademark and patent the original Templar name in USA and they who forced true Christians Templar to protect thier names when Carey’s mob took Fontes jokers to court.
    Luckily for the true Templars Carey’s mob could not translate and they trademarked the wrong name….then they bought recognition in the UN using Fontes groups name…quite funny really.
    Anything with supreme in the title prove that group to be just a poor masonic joke.
    Check out the UN register and see who is recognised there…supreme or sovereign.
    You seem to know only a little but shout a lot, learn some more then rethink your position please.

    I will pray for you still.

    Chev James said: February 5, 2010 at 9:41 am
    I am sorry, Mr. Confused V, but what part of “excommunicated” does your group not understand?

    Your tightrope is fraying, and you are about to plunge into the abyss, but you keep telling the rest of us that our shoelaces are untied!

    The Real Brown Hawk said: February 5, 2010 at 11:13 am
    When creating doubt claim – that the other is unhinged, when a villan hide behind the church – when confronted with truth lie , when you want power divide by political stealth and confuse – these are your tenaments. You use scripture as a weapon, not to heal, not to forgive, and as it is now you are using pensioners and women…or rather one pensioner who is very good at delivering proverbial blows and a leftenant who is in unison with her master at condeming others…and laughing in e-mails back and forth between competing factions ..within and without….destroying the reputations of others not only in forums but all over websites destinctly designed for such brutality without mersy….to deliver pure vitriol, contempt, slander and lies about unions between church patriaches, acceptances by Churches and orders that would not even contemplate aligning themselves with you even in a pink fit, and lies about expulsions, masons……. very Christian?………very helpless?.
    very wrong but unyielding unremorceful….Christian?

    To top this off:
    You have literaly a storehouse of archives on information on people…. your enmies and friends that you use as a weapon…if confronted. You have gathered this for many years back and it is at your disposal….like the winning cards in a game of poker…. those who know you are not surprized….even amoungst those you have as your associates and again you spit at me. Christian……? Of the Temple….?

    I am not the men you acuse of sending you messages, truly…..(God forgive me) and I don’t appreciate you attacking them in my name but like you I am not ment to be of the Temple…you because your motivations are politically motivated, personally driven, by acts of cruelty….and mine due to the crusefiction you gave me many years ago after you made me in your image…then did what you did to many of us before me and made me watch…… in abject terror of expulsion, and follow up persecusion like you are doing right now to two newer targets….Christian? I do not thank you for this…….and you spit at me!

    I certainly will pay for my sins and I expect to without forgiveness….nor do I expect the chance of brotherhood…………. but my brother yes I call you my brother I am much like you…in your image this is what I have become….god forgive me!

    Gentlemen like my predisesors (the product of a villan in question)who passed away before this message could be delivered, ” Unite brothers of the cross” you are your own legitimacy make Christianity your badge, truth your goal – move away from exclusiveness to inclusiveness and reject such tin pot commanders………I will not be so flipant with the lords name but I will pray you will pray for forgiveness…for the damage you have done and are doing, brother “Confussed – brown-consolidation”- AKA LP-Military man-historian-Non templar in another Continent other than Great Britan

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 2:24 pm
    Generally correct, but wrong in the details, dear Mike…

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 2:34 pm
    Again, I am Christian, go to church regularly and have a catholic confessor. I take communion and yes, I am a Mason. The thing that you call “Catholic Church” is a group of 25 different denominations that is headed by His Holiness the Pope. There are many variances within that entity that you perceive as being a block. It’s not. Being a Freemason and a Christian is not a contradiction.

    Luis de Matos

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:03 pm
    But have you read the reason why the first bull was issued and sebsequently reaffirmed?

    Should I remind you that the Congregation for the Doctrine and the Faith is the modern name for THE INQUISITION, since it was changed in 1908 and 1965? Is that the only authority you have? Should I be affraid of being burned at the stake? Or would you rather burn the servers where this page is stored at?

    The declaration says: “Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. ” So, it seems important to understand what has been, from the start, the main objection. Is it that Masons pray to Statan? Is it tha they deny Christ? Do they spit on the cross? Why is it that the Church in the 18th century published a bull against masonic membership? Does anyone know?

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:05 pm
    “Now, a Freemason may be a member of, say, the Baptist Church. The Catholic Church may see that person as a Mason, but the Baptist Church sees him as a Christian, as well. However, the Catholic Church does not probibit associations with Baptists, even though they are Protestant. But what about associations with a Baptist Mason?”

    Ah! Dear James, we are getting closer! Closer and closer to the real issue here! Very good!

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:10 pm
    Now you are a better authority than the Pope! If not, please, would you care to tell us why have the Masons been found as not in communion with the church since the 18th century?

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:17 pm
    Our basic difference, Confused, is that you are free to state your views on MY website and keep insulting me with half truths and I don’t erase your uninformed one-sided view because as a Freemason I believe in the freedom of expression, unlike some of my fellow Catholics… More than 300 years of history prove this statement.

    Luis de Matos

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:25 pm
    “I will pray for you.”

    You’re so kind… And so superior… Thank you for your light.

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:30 pm
    “A confereration already exists! its called the ifa”

    The IFA does not exist. I was the last Secretary General. The organization was terminated after it served the pupose of uniting a signifficant number of Priories and electing a Master in 1999.

    Chev James said: February 5, 2010 at 3:45 pm
    Brother Real Brown Hawk, you have shown yourself to be a man of true humility and nobility. We have all–and particularly I–fallen short of the mark. We are sinners. We know that we could never enter heaven on our own merits.

    You and I are aware of our human frailties. We know that we should both look to ourselves before attempting to correct or criticize others.

    And therein lies the difference between us and a certain other people.

    We did not come here pretending to be in exclusive possession of righteousness or legitimacy. We did not come here with the thought of causing disruption and division.

    We simply defended against attacks, and we responded in order to set the record straight. That we have done.

    We have not borne malice in our hearts for anyone, nor have we engaged in characte assassination or have dealt in half-truths and falsehoods.

    I hope that you will take solace in the fact that you have behaved as a true knight, and you have been justified as a knight by your faith and your chivalrous conduct toward others!

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:46 pm
    “Dear moderator or Mr Matos, would you please confirm for this forum that I am not in Europe.
    I requested this previously… but as we both speak english as a second language I feel it may have been overlooked.”

    I have confirmed that you are not in Europe.

    The request was not overlooked. I am just so taken by private professional duties that I have neglected my role as moderator. Sorry!

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 3:55 pm
    “Masonic Templars need to be at a minimum of 30th level to undertake study in the Yorke or Continental rites.”
    You are confused, dear Confused. The Masonic Templars that you quote (the York Rite/Royal Arch path, depending on country) are Masonic indeed and a complete fabrication. They have no connection whatsoever to the Templar history or possible line of succession. They have nothing to do with the present Chronology (that dos not feature them in any place) and – although a Mason – I am not part of that Order and don’t want to be. The Masonic Templar Order has no connections with the OSMTHU. You are mistakenly confusing two different feature films here. Only the title is deceptively similar.

    Luis Matos responded: February 5, 2010 at 4:01 pm
    “I have shown the vast majority of Christian Churches inclusive of all the large ones forbid masonic membership.”

    You haven’t. You have stated it, not shown. And you can’t show it because it’s NOT TRUE. Simply put.

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)

The forum ‘Click Here To Enter Knights Templar Discussion Forum’ is closed to new topics and replies.