“John 23” and the enigma of Bérenger Saunière Part 2: Prophets in their own land

 

“2000 years after the time of the Saviour”

With the prophecies in place and supported if not used as a framework by the Church, we need to focus our attention on the phrase “2000 years after the time of the Saviour”, which defines a clear end time. Jesus is believed to have died in 33AD, at the age of 33. Even though it now seems likely he was older, the scholars have equally pushed back his date of birth, and thus 33AD is used as the year of his death and 4 to 6 BC as the likely period of his birth. We note that 33 is a highly symbolic number and it is perhaps why it was chosen and linked with Jesus to begin with, whereby a symbolic message was perhaps deemed to be more important than being historically accurate about Jesus’ age. Furthermore, there were 33 miracles performed by Jesus, there are 33 songs in Purgatory, and much later there were 33 degrees in Scottish Freemasonry. And let us not forget that the number of the Beast is 666, which bears a relationship with 33. Also, we should note that the list of Malachy contained 111 names. Times six…
33 AD is therefore the standard date, though as mentioned not necessarily the “right” date. And this is a problem for anyone trying to calculate the 2000 years. Do we start at his birth? In which case a period of 2000 years could have been 2000 AD, but also 1994, or 1996. Do we count from his death? In which we case we end up in 2032 or 2033 AD, but with no firm evidence that it is indeed in 33 AD that he died. Finally, what if Jesus did not die at the cross at all, as some theories have promoted? In that case, we would need to know to what age he lived… though would anyone really bother if we knew that our “Saviour” did not actually die to “save” us? In short, there is little or no hard evidence – at least not in the public domain – and as such, it seems that trying to date the return of “Our Saviour” is fraught with errors and guesswork from the very beginning. Hence also why the most bizarre theories have been proposed, none of which seem to have come true – unless, of course, we have all missed His return.
Still, let us note that whereas the possibility that Jesus was a man like any other, a man who did not disappear from an empty tomb but instead lived on elsewhere, is a line of thinking that many Gnostics supported, until their beliefs about Jesus were no longer condoned in the 4th century. Let us also note that Saunière’s model carries “The Tomb of Christ” as one of the inscriptions. It offers the most straightforward conclusion that this is indeed the Tomb of Jesus… but simply because it is easy and logical does not mean it is right. What we do know, is that on that location, there is a site of interest, searched after by many, since long.
Let us therefore quote from The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, stating: “Pope John XXIII inaugurated the Second Vatican Council which enacted significant reforms to bring the Roman Catholic Church into the twentieth century. He also broke with at least two centuries of entrenched tradition [...] pronouncing that a Catholic might be a Freemason. And in June 1960 he issued a profoundly important apostolic letter [which] emphasized Jesus's suffering as a human being, and maintained that the redemption of mankind has been affected by the shedding of his blood. In the context of Pope John's letter, Jesus's human Passion, and the shedding of his blood, assume a greater consequence than the Resurrection or even than the mechanics of the Crucifixion." In short, he redefined the role of Jesus, claiming that his suffering, rather than his Resurrection, was most important. Was it because Roncalli did not believe – or knew – there was no Resurrection?

Malachy: prophet or initiate?

We have noted that the history of Perillos comes with people who seem to know something, some who know a lot, and then those who search in the hope of finding. Some of these people are known, but no doubt a lot more people should be placed in one or the other category, yet we will never know who or what they knew or how they knew.
One intriguing question we could ask is whether Malachy knew… or tried to know. Malachy was an Irish monk who lived in the 12th century, the bishop of Bevehor and archbishop of Armagh. He died on November 2, 1148. Did he have access to certain information? If he did, we need to ask how he knew, for Ireland is not specifically close to Perillos… though we equally know that less than three centuries later, there would be an intriguing bond between Ramon de Perillos and St Patrick’s Purgatory. Indeed, if Ramon had to go to St Patrick’s Purgatory to retrieve certain “knowledge”, than it is possible that this information was present in Ireland two centuries before. And as archbishop, Malachy should safely be expected to have known. Perhaps the knowledge dated back to St Patrick himself, whose name remained linked with the Purgatory, a site which itself is linked with the end of times and the destiny of our souls – the Last Judgment. It is merely a hypothesis and we only offer it as such. Once again, it is an extrapolation from the evidence, and nothing more. All we propose is that we should consider the possibility that Perillos is linked with an “end of times” (and we underline again that this may not be factual, but merely what certain people believed or hoped) and that Malachy was equally concerned with the Fate of Rome. But as to the timing, those infamous “2000 years”, let us note that J.L. Maxence writes that “a path is traced in the night of the future and equipped with illuminated stops. The prophecy is not concerned with showing us “the time of the End”, as so many of its related prophecies, but it shows us the symbolic signposts that lead us towards the death of Rome.” Indeed, other apocalyptic preachers that have a connection with Perillos and its lords, specifically Vincent Ferrer, underlined that the apocalypse was not an event that would happen, but which would have to be brought about.

Knowledge in high circles

If there was a secret preserved in the higher ranks of the Church, if these ranks feared that the end of the Church might at some point be nigh, then this would explain certain things about the life and times of Pope John XXIII. And we should note that this is not specifically linked with Rennes-le-Château or Perillos. For all we know, there are a lot of smoking guns which the Church needs to follow carefully so that it does not blow up in their face and the Church’s handling of the Dea Sea Scrolls clearly shows the potential explosive nature of such material.
But back to John XXIII: it seems clear that Roncalli was initiated in 1935, but does this specifically have to be the Rosicrucians, as the extrapolation of the evidence suggests? This organisation is often used and abused to explain certain more intriguing initiations, whom people nevertheless do not want to reveal, instead claiming it was “only” Rosicrucianism they were initiated in. Or perhaps there was a more secret dimension hiding within this organisation? Let us remember that the statement “to have found a tomb”, as Saunière claimed to do on his model, is indeed a Rosicrucian expression, specifically linked with installing a new lodge where none was before; an intriguing consideration, if only in light of that enigmatic cartoon series, “Le Triangle Secret”.

Which brings us back to Saunière and what he supposedly said with his final breath: “John twenty three”. The link between the pope and the mystery of Saunière seems tenuous at best, however interesting the life of this pope was. Indeed, we would not have belaboured the point were it not for one aspect which we have left untouched so far.
After Saunière’s death, there is still Marie Denarnaud. Though Saunière may have said certain things to his confessors, there was no such need to inform Marie, for she knew since decades, had stood by her priest through thick and thin. Years later, people would try to befriend her, in the hope that she would pass on information to them. Perhaps she did not, perhaps she did. But it is clear that Marie was a strong woman, who could stand her ground and if times had been different, would have been a formidable player; the mystery of Saunière would not have died with him, it might have become known as the mystery of Saunière-Denarnaud.
After Saunière’s death, Marie remained in Rennes-le-Château. The bishopric even tried to extract certain information from her. To get this information, a close friend of her family was even locked in prison, thrown in following a “moral order” from the bishop, apparently in the hope that this pressure would result in a trade-off. Indeed, when Saunière said that de Beauséjour was only beautiful in name, it seems he too was prophetic! But we can of course wonder whether this pressure came from the bishop himself, or whether the man was merely following orders, whereby the real pursuant of this information must have arrived from higher up the Church chain.
Marie Denarnaud died on January 30, 1953, after having sold the estates she had received from Saunière on July 22, 1946 to Noel Corbu and his wife Henriette. Let us stop here, for this too is a signpost on the road to illumination. It is the Corbu family who demands, directly to the Vatican, that their children are educated on a scholarship in a religious school in Carcassonne. The Vatican seems of good will, for it allows this to happen. Incredible that a rather well-off family can write to the Vatican, demand money so their children can have an excellent education, and the Vatican agrees – even though the local bishop earlier had declined any such help – and why indeed would he help? But it seems the Vatican was better informed that the local bishop.
But wait, that is not all! When the request is made, a dossier is opened, as should be expected. And a man is placed in charge of the dossier. A man who will of course have to speak to the people involved, i.e. the Corbu family, the family that have bought and/or received most of what remained from Saunière’s estate. Does anyone care to guess which person is in charge of this dossier? A hint: someone who would work for the Vatican? Who would be working for the Vatican in France. Indeed: Mgr. Angelo Roncalli, Apostalic Nuncio for France. Indeed, he could not have known Corbu would make such a request. But he was placed in charge of a dossier that involved Rennes-le-Château and Saunière, before it attained any notoriety or publicity. And did he learn certain things? If so, did the things he learn offer him certain advantages, advantages he could later exploit, like in papal elections? Did this knowledge somehow link back to De Gaulle and a group of people whom were allied with him… people like André Malraux… and others? People and circles whom then decided to promote the case of Rennes-le-Château and create the Priory of Sion?

Let us repeat what everyone agrees upon as being the truth: Corbu puts in a request for a scholarship with the bishopric, who declines the request. He then goes to the Vatican directly, who do offer him this scholarship! General consternation indeed, but it seems that Corbu must have known what he was doing…
But let us also note that there was another man, Saunière, who too was upset with the local bishopric some decades earlier and he too went to the Vatican to see whether his sentence could not be overturned. In his case, the Vatican did not want to touch his case, stating it was a matter for the bishopric. Corbu must have known that Saunière had no reprieve from the Vatican… yet why did he think he could? And did get what he wanted?
The impossible question needs to be posed: it is logical to assume that Denarnaud passed on certain information to the Corbu family, irrespective of the official line which stated she would reveal it, but then died without having the opportunity to do so. If someone wants to reveal something, that person does it sooner rather than later, as they know that they are like everyone else mortal. So let’s assume Corbu knew. Did he inform Roncalli of what he knew and did he as such get the scholarship? Who dares to say no? Furthermore, was it Roncalli who made this decision himself, or did he too have to speak to people in the Vatican to resolve this problem? If Roncalli was a clever politician, he would have made sure that Corbu got the scholarship, but that only he would know that he knew… and would save this ace card for later, to play when it would be opportune to play. Like a papal election perhaps?

A contested election

The 1958 papal conclave which elected Roncalli as pope was also surrounded by conspiracy theories. These focus no the role of a conservative cardinal, Giuseppe Siri, who was apparently the conclave's first choice for pope, but was forced to decline the papal tiara. As the papal conclave does not come with a press statement later as to what precisely happened, it is up to the indiscretion of attending cardinals to know what precisely happened.
Remarkably, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) claimed that Siri had indeed been elected on the third ballot. What is unambiguously known is that Vatican Radio did conclude, on the basis of apparently white smoke, that a pope had been elected and announced that a new pope had been elected. After the 6pm third ballot, the Swiss Guards assembled to give the ceremonial salute to the new pontiff, only to have to withdraw again. Allegedly, Siri had even chosen a name, "Gregory XVII", and was preparing to appear at the balcony, but was somehow threatened and forced to stand down, leaving the cardinals free to elect Roncalli as Pope. If the “conspiracy theory” is true, then it seems that someone was able to put pressure on the election… and Roncalli “somehow” became the winner out of nowhere. The question is: if true, what was the hammer with which Siri was beaten?

Angelo, the prophet

If the prophecies of St Malachy have any importance in the long list of popes and specifically in the end time of the Church, there is nevertheless no hard evidence that shows he is the genuine author. As mentioned, there is another series of prophecies, published by Pier Carpi in 1976, under the title of “Prophecies of John XXIII”, a work which mysteriously went out of print within one week of publication. There is no doubt that Roncalli was the author of the prophecies that carried his name. Roncalli wrote down these prophecies in 1935, when he was in Turkey and when he made contact with the old man who introduced him to one of the lodges. The prophecies are little-known and hardly reported. Many may believe that Pier Carpi just invented the story, but that is definitely not the case. The fact that his book disappeared and his knowledge has been isolated, should best be seen in the light of a campaign to “manage” certain information. After all, a pope who writes prophecies is not an everyday occurrence and many would consider it prudent that this information does not receive the largest of audiences. And certainly if this information would leave a trail to other information that would be even more important to suppress.
We should add that Roncalli never considered his work to be the result of a delirium or created in a moment of exaltation; he never made any modifications or tried to destroy it. Instead, he carefully preserved the work in its entirety and actually did not hide the fact that he had written it at the time of his ascension to the papal office. In short, he never disowned his own writing.
But what would be of interest, is to learn what the exact relationship was between these prophecies and his initiation. Was the former leading towards the latter, were they independent of each other, or did his initiation somehow “make” him into a prophet – a visionary? Also, should we see the prophecies as purely the work of Roncalli, or was he perhaps more the receiver of this body of knowledge? Was it “given” to him at the moment of his initiation, or was he the writer, when someone else was prophesising? None of these questions and their answers change the fact that the prophecies are linked with Roncalli and are deemed by all to be genuine, but the detail is of interest as it would add genuine information to the framework…

Visionary games

The prophecies of John XXIII are two series, one of 38 phrases which are described as “long and without title” and a second series of 26 sentences, “short and titled”. We do not know whether the two are interrelated or part of one piece, or totally unrelated. If there is some relationship, the important question of course would be whether we can just take and read them as they are, or whether some transformation, some type of cipher needs to be performed before they really make sense.
But let us note one aspect of them: the final “short” prophecy has as title the word “MARLE”. This word seems nonsensical, but this is not out of the ordinary for prophecies. But we should underline that the word is actually a place-name, and that the site can be found in the Pilat region. It is the name of a small and apparently unimportant hamlet, but which does hide a more interesting past. Marle was in fact the location of the only Templar commandery in the Pilat region, which was known as Marlette or Marlhette. The commandery was constructed on the remains of an ancient megalithic structure and was maintained by the Carthusian monks from Sainte Croix en Jarez. It was also “looked over” by the enigmatic megaliths of MARLin. It is known that one of the commanders of this small Templar house departed with Guillaume de Roussillon to the Holy Land, where he would die during the siege of St Jean d’Acre. The commandery has not received any specific attention in the annals of the history of the Order, but perhaps this is a serious omission on the part of the historians. And perhaps, indeed, a prophet like Roncalli was able to scan its genuine importance?
Let us note that the Charterhouse of Ste Croix en Jarez was founded by the widow of the same Guillaume de Roussillon. And there are accounts that state that on the eve of the arrest of the Templars, a small attachment left Marle towards Ste Croix. And it is said that all these men then suddenly disappeared from history when the Templars were arrested, as if they never had existed in the first place. Could it be that one order of monks welcomed members of another, now condemned order, into their hearts… as well as anything else they might have been carrying with them? Of course, the link between Roncalli’s mention of this word and the place-name itself could be just another coincidence. Equally, though, the final sentence of a prophecy, one would think, would also be the key prophecy, as it would be the “apocalypse” of the preceding statements. Or so logic dictates.

Saunière, unless he was a prophet himself, could more than likely not have been referring to Pope John XXIII on his deathbed. But what is known, is that Saunière was mixing with people who were trying to bring about social reform. He was also working with people interested in the Apocalypse. Also, Saunière himself had a copy of the Prophecies of St Malachy in his library, but we would not expect to see otherwise.
The important question is this: before becoming Pope John XXIII, did Roncalli become aware of the mystery of Rennes-le-Château, because of Corbu’s request to the Vatican to fund the education of his children? Already an initiated man by that time in something out of the ordinary, did he understand the true importance? The final question is this: did he perhaps learn about Saunière’s dying words during his investigation? And did he therefore decide that he would take the name John and become the XXIII, a name which had not been used for centuries. As bizarre as it may sound, Roncalli’s selection as John for his papal name is so bizarre, that no-one has given a solid explanation for this choice. Furthermore, at the moment of his election, there was some doubt whether he should be John XXIII or XXIV. It was Roncalli himself who made the decision: John XXIII.

André Douzet