Mary Magdalene and the Holy Bloodline

Interestingly enough, I Googled the phrase 'Merovingian Kings usurped by Charlemange and the Pope', and came up with a great link touching on the subject of the bloodline of the Biblical 'seed of promise' from Jesus to the Merovingian Kings, and how, in one of the West's first major conspiracies, The Franks and Rome conspired to overthrow the bloodline of Christ. Is it true? I don't know.

"From the 1st century, the Ring Lord culture fell into decline when various Roman emperors decreed that the Messianic heirs (the descendants of Jesus and his family) should be hunted down and put to the sword. This fact was recorded by eminent chroniclers such as Hegesippus, Africanus and Eusebius. Then, once the Roman Church was operative from the 4th century, the sacred dynasty was forever damned by the bishops.


It was this formal damnation which led to such events as the Albigensian Crusade in 1209 and the subsequent Catholic Inquisitions - for these brutal assaults by the papal machine were specifically directed against the upholders and champions of the original concept of Grail kingship, as against the style of pseudo-monarchy which had been implemented by the Bishops of Rome.


In practical terms, Church kingship has prevailed from the 8th century and has continued, through the ages, to the present day. But the fact is that, under strict terms of sovereign practice, all such monarchies and their affiliated governments have been invalid.


Church kingship is precisely that with which we have become so familiar. It applies to all monarchs who achieve their regnal positions by way of Church coronation by the Pope or other Christian leader (in Britain, by the Archbishop of Canterbury). Previously, in terms of true kingship, there was no necessity for coronation because kingly and queenly inheritance were always regarded as being 'in the blood'.


The change was made possible by way of a text called the Donation of Constantine - a document which led to just about every social injustice that has since been experienced in the Christian world. When the Donation made its first appearance in 751, it was alleged to have been written by Emperor Constantine some 400 years earlier, although strangely never produced in the interim. It was even dated and carried his supposed signature. What the document proclaimed was that the Emperor's appointed Pope was Christ's personally elected representative on Earth. He had the power to 'create' kings as his subordinates since his palace ranked above all the palaces in the world.


The provisions of the Donation were enacted by the Vatican, whereupon the Merovingian Kings of the Grail bloodline in Gaul were deposed and a whole new puppet-dynasty was supplemented by way of a family of hitherto mayors. They were dubbed Carolingians and their only king of any significance was the legendary Charlemagne. By way of this strategy, the whole nature of monarchy changed from being an office of community guardianship to one of absolute rule and, by virtue of this monumental change, the long-standing code of princely service was forsaken as European kings became servants of the Church instead of being servants of the people."

The Ancient Legacy of the Ring and the Grail

Hello All,
I have posted this reply before on a similar thread so I'm sorry if it's redundant: The Da Vinci Code "PROVES" nothing!!! Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't part of the theory preposed by the Da Vinci Code and the Knights Templar and the Priory Of Sion and the other so-called secret societies was not only that Jesus was married and sired children by his wife MM. But it also proports that Jesus was never crucified. He had children through MM and then somehow Mary Magdalene (after Jesus' natural death) migrated to France and that only the Priory Of Sion and other secretive groups know this secret and are consecrated to guarding and preserving the royal and Holy bloodline of Christ...

Now comes the rub...WHAT HOLY BLOODLINE? If Christ was not crucified and did not obtain a bodily ressurection then what "royality" is there to protect? He is now relagated to being just a great prophet, philosopher and teacher. He is now no different than Ghandhi, Moses, Plato, or any other great prophet or leader. Why would his "Holy" or "Royal" bloodline be worth "protecting" even at the cost of death? That would be like having a secret society that protects the "HOLY" bloodline of the prophet Hosea. It makes no sense on those grounds!

Lapi7,

It was this thread, and what makes your statement not only redundant but irrelevant is the reply stalking wolf has already given; Jesus carried the royal bloodline of the House of David, regardless of whether or not he was the Messiah. No offense.

quote//The Da Vinci Code is history revisited.
In the guise of a novel,
it is a serious attempt at reintroducing Arianism,
‘proving’ that Christ was not,
and therefore is not, God.
Using the format of a novel is indeed a brilliant tactic.
It allows history to be rewritten,
and facts to be mutilated and reinvented with impunity.
Concerning its claim to factual accuracy see Figure 1 – the first page of the novel.
And so it’s a novel when it suits the cause,
and at the same time it’s a factual,
historical exposé that surfaces insidiously to enlighten deluded Christians, and strengthen the rest in the knowledge that

Christ is not God – this is its primary goal.

Everything else is secondary.
This was recognized by the very first Christians – if Christ is not God then Christianity is meaningless and ultimately is of no practical value to mankind:


But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised: and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, your faith also is in vain. [1Cor 15:13-14]

helen..




www.rocor.org.au...

Originally posted by Atomix
Hello Children, it is I, Atomix. After reading "The Da Vinci Code"

Bram Stoker's Dracula has some truth to it as well, but that's not to say it should be taken as anthing other than a story.







[edit on 4-5-2005 by dbates]