Thursday, 24 May 2012

the Mantle of St. Martin

Martin's Mantle

In Avignon the large scheme to create its own version of the great Khanate in Europe stranded. The Western Roman church likes to boast it has created the idea of separation of church and state, but it is not the Papacy which should be given the credit. It should be given to the European monarchs who created the idea to take the pressure out of papal claims of the period. 

France had reduced the pope to a national chaplain and to create an end to that situation the papacy had to be placed in an independant position in European context. That was not easy.

At the end of the Avignon period in 1377 every political power block in Europe had arrived at its own version of the Papacy. Well, the European monarchs must have thought: if it's good for them it can't do us any harm!

In an attempt to deal with the situation the papacy under Gregory XI was transferred to Italian Rome.  Thus Rome existed as a twin entity. Rom(us unam sanctam) and Rom(ulus), the Rome of the ulus of Jochi! Both were nurtured by the wolf or Guelph. And its history in its present form is really only 600 years old. All other claims are fraudulent.

This would have worked if Italian Rome had had any of the claimed splendor of the Roman Empire. 

But there was very little to build on, because until the period of the Latin kingdom of Byzantium the patriarchate for the west had been Ravenna and not Italian Rome. the Roman capital (Rome) had been Constantinople. 

For this reason Rome had to be re-built. This took 40 years and at times there were three popes in all. In a mild subliminal reference to the Khan the issue was settled in the 'place of the Khan' Constanze. 

All three popes were forced to resign and one for all was elected hoping to achieve an all for one: Martin V.

The clock stroke 11 november 1417.

That was an inter- esting name for the one pope for all, because St. Martin of Tours to which the name referred split his mantle in two parts, giving a poor man one halve of the mantle.

And there is another interesting co-incidence too! In Germany the alleged founder of the Rosecrucian movement, one Christian Rosecreutz was allegedly born in 1378. In this context that is an interesting date too. It is saying as much as: 

The Rosecrucian movement was born in 1378, one year after the end of the Avignon period.  

It seems that the symbol of the Rose would remain an open referral to the origins of what Batu Khan had set in motion, namely the White Order of Russia for a new Europe. 

Seeing that the papacy had stranded in family factions and political power struggles of different power blocks the situation was ended by rotating the papacy between the different power and family blocks. 

This would ensure a constant need for reform. 

To ensure some sense of direction and unity behind it all an esoteric and hidden society was created with the Rosecrucian movement.

It was RC (Rose Crucian) movement against RC (Roman Catholic) movement. Still, bear in mind that at that time the Roman Catholic church did not  resemble what the church is today, although it brought from Avignon its structure of the Curia, Cardinals and Novus Ordo. It even did not have that bastion of Tridentine Mass yet, so representative of full confident Roman Catholicism. 

It was also esoteric against exoteric Christianity. But as open power structure the movement of Batu Khan (Vatican) had stranded. 

In Italian Rome a bold new direction for Europe was set in motion. Entirely solitary and isolated from the rest of the world. Europe had escaped the clutches of the Mongol (great) order of the East.  

At least seemingly so.

Is it a coincidence that Rome translates to 'Russian Order of the Great (Mongol) Empire?' Just see it as a meaningful joke.  To safeguard the interests in the outcome of the whole enterprise the Rosecrucian Movement was created. For this purpose it needed to enlist in its membership European intellect. That policy it would succeed rather well. 

A constantly blundering papacy would guarantee this success!

With the goal in the long run to reclaim the Papacy. 

In this context it is only interesting to note that Pope Martin must have realised what the split of the mantle would have referred to. But on the other hand, it is entirely possible that he didn't. 

No comments:

Post a Comment