 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
184
“Haven’t you read, that at the beginning the Creator ‘ made them male and female’, and said,
‘ or this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the tow
for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the tow
will become one flesh?”
’?”
Marriage was compulsory according to Jewish custom.
The unmarried state was severely
judged.
If Jesus had not been married, he would not have been accepted by the Jewish
people as he was, and this kind of break with Jewish tradition would have found some
mention in some of the gospels. Further Jesus was called Rabbi by his disciples. And the
Jewish law of the Mishnah clearly states that an unmarried man cannot be a rabbi.
Baigen, Leigh & Lincoln add:
“Underlying most Christian theology is the assumption that Jesus is God incarnate.
In other
words God, taking pity on His creation, incarnated Himself in that creation and assumed
human form. By doing so He would be able to acquaint Himself at first-hand the vicissitudes
of human existence. He would come to understand, in the most profound sense, what it
means to be a man – to confront from a human standpoint the loneliness, the anguish, the
helplessness, the tragic mortality that the status of manhood entails. By dint of becoming
man, God would come to know man in a way that the Old Testament does not allow.
Renouncing His Olympian aloofness and remoteness, He would partake, directly, in man’s
lot. By doing so, He would redeem man’s lot – would validate and justify it by partaking of it,
suffering from it and eventually being sacrificed by it.
“The symbolic significance of Jesus is that he is God exposed to the spectrum of human
experience – exposed to the first-hand knowledge of what being a man entails. But could
God, incarnate as Jesus, truly claim to be a man, to encompass the spectrum of human
experience, without coming to know two of the most basic, most elemental facets of the
human condition? Could God claim to know the totality of human existence without
confronting two such essential aspects of humanity as sexuality and paternity?”
[H: Wow!]
The authors go on to describe how after the flight from the holy land, the wife of Jesus with
her family found refuge in the south of Gaul where the lineage was continued in a Jewish
community. It seems that during the fifth century this lineage united by marriage with the
royal line of the Franks and thus founded the Merovingian dynasty. The descendants of
Jesus have survived all attempts at wiping them out. Later the royal blood was safeguarded
by the Prieure de Sion. This is a secret society whose aim it was – according to these
authors – to keep and guard this secret about the marital status of Jesus. Grand Masters
were among others: Leonardo da Vinci 1510-1519; Robert Fludd 1595-1637; Isaac Newton
1691-1727; Karl A. Emanuel von Lothringen 1746-1780; Maximilian Franz von Habsburg-
Lothringen 1780-1801.
The house of Habsburg-Lothringen descends – according to the authors – directly from the
Merovingians and therefore from the lineage of Jesus.
There are however several other
families who can claim the same for themselves.
Baigent, Leigh & Lincoln say to this:
“During the nineteenth century, the Prieure de Sion, working through Freemasonry and the
Hieron du Val d’Or, attempted to establich a revived and ‘ updated’ Holy Roman Empire – a
kind of theocratic United States of Europe, ruled simultaneously by the Habsburgers and by
the radically reformed Church. This enterprise was thwarted by the First World War and the
fall of Europe’s reigning dynasties. But it is not unreasonable to suppose that Sion’s present
objectives are basically similar.”
It is very probable that these aims are still followed today. Judging from the speech Otto
von Habsburg – Honorary Knight of the Deutschritterorden (Teutonic Order of Knights) –
gave on May 9, 1993 at Bad Mergentheim befor the Deutschritterorden, it is still in its
interest to establish a “Fatherland Europe”.
It is most certainly no accident that recently the
son of Archduke Otto von Habsburg (member of the Committee of 300), Karl von Habsburg,
