The Knights TemplarsAddison, C. G. (Charles Greenstreet)
History
The Knights Templars
Addison, C. G. (Charles Greenstreet)
Templars
On the 9th of January, A. D. 1310, the examination of witnesses was
resumed at London, in the parish church of St. Dunstan’s West, near
the Temple. The rector of the church of St. Mary de la Strode declared
that he had strong _suspicions_ of the guilt of the Templars; he had,
however, often been at the Temple church, and had observed that the
priests performed divine service there just the same as elsewhere.
William de Cumbrook, of St. Clement’s church, near the Temple, the
vicar of St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields, and many other priests and
clergymen of different churches in London, all declared that they had
nothing to allege against the order.
On the 27th of January, Brother John de Stoke, a serving brother of the
order of the Temple, of seventeen years’ standing, being examined by
the inquisitors in the chapel of the Blessed Mary of Berkyngecherche
at London, states, amongst other things, that secular persons were
allowed to be present at the burial of Templars; that the brethren
of the order all received the sacraments of the church at their last
hour, and were attended to the grave by a chaplain of the Temple. Being
interrogated concerning the burial of the Knight Templar Brother Walter
le Bacheler, Grand Preceptor of Ireland, who had been confined in the
penitential cell in the Temple, for disobedience to his superiors,
and was reported to have been there starved to death, he deposes that
the said knight was buried like any other Christian, except that he
was not buried in the burying-ground, but in the court of the house
of the Temple at London; that he confessed to Brother Richard de
Grafton, a priest of the order, then in the island of Cyprus, and
partook, as he believed, of the sacrament. He states that he himself
and Brother Radulph de Barton carried him to his grave at the dawn of
day, and that the deceased knight was in prison, as he believes, for
the space of eight weeks; that he was not buried in the habit of his
order, and was interred without the cemetery of the brethren, because
he was considered to be excommunicated, in pursuance, as he believed,
of a rule or statute among the Templars, to the effect that every one
who privily made away with the property of the order, and did not
acknowledge his fault, was deemed excommunicated.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account