[CTRL] [3] Scarlet and the Beast - A History of the War Between English and French Freemasonry
-Caveat Lector- an excerpt from: Scarlet and the Beast - A History of the War Between English and French Freemasonry John Daniel (C)1994 John Kregel, Inc. P. O. box 131480 Tyler, Texas 75713 ISBN 0-9635079-0-7 - can be purchased from: Global insights 675 Fairview Dr. #246 Carson City, NV 89701 702-885-0700 800-729-4131(orders only) --[3]-- Chapter 12 FRENCH FREEMASONRY TRIES, AND TRIES AGAIN Freemasonry in its momentary command of power, failed in its supreme endeavour. Taught by these experiences, its progress has become slower and surer. (1) Count Leon de Poncins In 1796, the survivors of the House of Bourbon escaped to the island of Sicily where they lived protected by the British Navy until after the Battle of Waterloo.(2) When Napoleon was banished to the island of St. Helena, and Europe reorganized under oligarchic rule, the Bourbons offered to return, but the French Freemasons sought a king neither Bourbon nor Catholic. They approached the Protestant and Masonic king of Holland to be king of France. Dillon explains what followed this unsuccessful bid: This failing, they contrived by Masonic arts to obtain the first places in the Provisional Government which succeeded Napoleon. They endeavoured to make the most of the inevitable, and to rule the incoming [Bourbon King] Louis XVIII, in the interests of their sect, and to the detriment of the Church and of Christianity.(3) In the first revolution French Freemasonry had shown open hostility to the House of Bourbon. Bizarre as it may seem, when Louis XVIII ascended the throne, he favored the Republican Templar Grand Orient. Stranger yet, Talleyrand became minister. Moreover, other advanced Masons of the Napoleonic empire, such as Emmanuel Sieyes, Regis de Cambaceres, and Joseph Fouche, obtained positions as well. Louis's court was filled with Masonic Templars and Sionists, who were once again plotting against the throne. Dillon outlines the disastrous events that flowed from their schemes: These men at once applied themselves to subvert the sentiment of reaction in favour of the monarchy and of religion. Soon, Louis XVIII gave the world the sad spectacle of a man prepared at their bidding to cut his own throat. He dissolved a Parliament of ultra loyalists because they were too loyal to him. The Freemasons took care that his next Parliament should be full of its own creatures. They also wrung from the King, under the plea of freedom of the press, permission to deluge the country anew with the infidel and immoral publications of Voltaire and his confederates, and with newspapers and periodicals, which proved disastrous to his house, and to Christianity, in France. These led before long to the attempt upon the life of the Duke of Berry. to the revolution against Charles X, to the elevation of the son of the Grand Master, the traitor Duke of Orleans, Philip the Egalite, as Constitutional King, and to all the revolutionary results that have since distracted and disgraced unfortunate France.(4) The French Revolution of 1830 Unable to dethrone the Bourbons, the Priory of Sion settled for a constitutional monarchy. This adjustment to political reality in fact was not as strange a departure from the character of Sion as might first appear. The authors of The Messianic Legacy explain Sion's reason for accepting a constitutional monarchy: The essence of such a monarchy is that it rests on the basis espoused by the Prieure de Sion and ascribed to the old Merovingian dynasty of France. For the Merovingians, the king ruled but did not govern. In other words, he was ultimately a symbolic figure. To the extent that he remained unsoiled by the tawdry business of politics and government, his symbolic status remained pristine. As one of the Prieure de Sion's writers declares in an article, "The king is." In other words, his currency resides in what he embodies as a symbol, rather than in anything he does, or in any real power he might or might not exercise. The most potent symbols always exert an intangible authority, which can only be compromised by the more tangible forms of power.(5) The "more tangible forms of power" were of course the plotters in the French parliament, comprised of representatives from both Sion and the Temple. The constant assignment of the Grand Masters of Sion was to steer the ship of Sion toward a course favorable to the interests of the "Lost King." This goal proved more difficult in France than it had been in England. In England, Sion had no adversary. In France, however, a constitutional monarchy was just as easily subverted by the Templars. Such was the case when in the three-day revolution of 1830 the Templars once again took power when royalty was deposed in favor of a republic. In a speech full of Masonic terminology, de Poncins quotes Freemason M. Dupin, who credits the coup to long-term planning: Do not believe that three days have done everything. If the revolution has been so prompt and sudden, if we have made it
[CTRL] [3] Scarlet and the Beast - A History of the War Between English and French Freemasonry
-Caveat Lector- an excerpt from: Scarlet and the Beast - A History of the War Between English and French Freemasonry John Daniel (C)1994 John Kregel, Inc. P. O. box 131480 Tyler, Texas 75713 ISBN 0-9635079-0-7 - can be purchased from: Global insights 675 Fairview Dr. #246 Carson City, NV 89701 702-885-0700 800-729-4131(orders only) - The author most definitly has his worldview, but it does present some interesting material. Where are the Jesuits and others, while all this is going on? The Author also gives the devil more credit than he is due,IMHO and some of the connections are ...; but all in all it is interesting. As, always Caveat leactor Om K - Chapter 12 FRENCH FREEMASONRY TRIES, AND TRIES AGAIN Freemasonry in its momentary command of power, failed in its supreme endeavour. Taught by these experiences, its progress has become slower and surer. (1) Count Leon de Poncins In 1796, the survivors of the House of Bourbon escaped to the island of Sicily where they lived protected by the British Navy until after the Battle of Waterloo.(2) When Napoleon was banished to the island of St. Helena, and Europe reorganized under oligarchic rule, the Bourbons offered to return, but the French Freemasons sought a king neither Bourbon nor Catholic. They approached the Protestant and Masonic king of Holland to be king of France. Dillon explains what followed this unsuccessful bid: This failing, they contrived by Masonic arts to obtain the first places in the Provisional Government which succeeded Napoleon. They endeavoured to make the most of the inevitable, and to rule the incoming [Bourbon King] Louis XVIII, in the interests of their sect, and to the detriment of the Church and of Christianity.(3) In the first revolution French Freemasonry had shown open hostility to the House of Bourbon. Bizarre as it may seem, when Louis XVIII ascended the throne, he favored the Republican Templar Grand Orient. Stranger yet, Talleyrand became minister. Moreover, other advanced Masons of the Napoleonic empire, such as Emmanuel Sieyes, Regis de Cambaceres, and Joseph Fouche, obtained positions as well. Louis's court was filled with Masonic Templars and Sionists, who were once again plotting against the throne. Dillon outlines the disastrous events that flowed from their schemes: These men at once applied themselves to subvert the sentiment of reaction in favour of the monarchy and of religion. Soon, Louis XVIII gave the world the sad spectacle of a man prepared at their bidding to cut his own throat. He dissolved a Parliament of ultra loyalists because they were too loyal to him. The Freemasons took care that his next Parliament should be full of its own creatures. They also wrung from the King, under the plea of freedom of the press, permission to deluge the country anew with the infidel and immoral publications of Voltaire and his confederates, and with newspapers and periodicals, which proved disastrous to his house, and to Christianity, in France. These led before long to the attempt upon the life of the Duke of Berry. to the revolution against Charles X, to the elevation of the son of the Grand Master, the traitor Duke of Orleans, Philip the Egalite, as Constitutional King, and to all the revolutionary results that have since distracted and disgraced unfortunate France.(4) The French Revolution of 1830 Unable to dethrone the Bourbons, the Priory of Sion settled for a constitutional monarchy. This adjustment to political reality in fact was not as strange a departure from the character of Sion as might first appear. The authors of The Messianic Legacy explain Sion's reason for accepting a constitutional monarchy: The essence of such a monarchy is that it rests on the basis espoused by the Prieure de Sion and ascribed to the old Merovingian dynasty of France. For the Merovingians, the king ruled but did not govern. In other words, he was ultimately a symbolic figure. To the extent that he remained unsoiled by the tawdry business of politics and government, his symbolic status remained pristine. As one of the Prieure de Sion's writers declares in an article, "The king is." In other words, his currency resides in what he embodies as a symbol, rather than in anything he does, or in any real power he might or might not exercise. The most potent symbols always exert an intangible authority, which can only be compromised by the more tangible forms of power.(5) The "more tangible forms of power" were of course the plotters in the French parliament, comprised of representatives from both Sion and the Temple. The constant assignment of the Grand Masters of Sion was to steer the ship of Sion toward a course favorable to the interests of the "Lost King." This goal proved more difficult in France than it had been in England. In England, Sion had no adversary. In France, however, a constitutional monarchy was just as easily subverted by the Templars. Such was the case when in the three-day revolution of 1830 the
