Sunday, May 29, 2016

The early years of the Knights Templar - 1104 - 1120

source
"The first history of the Brotherhood is known as the time that occurs between the Synod of Nablus (January 16, 1120, TN) until the Council of Troyes (January 13, 1129, TN), where the Order is definitely created, but...what about before?

Before this period that covers from 1104 through 1120...what occurs during this period? This prehistory is the dark era of these knights. How did they support themselves?

As we shall see they had more than ample support, powerful support such as no other group of this sort ever counted on, not even the Deacon of St. John Hospitalier, to take off with such self assured success. They had economic power, they had hosts, they had lawfull cover. Later would come donations that miraculously multiply upon being accepted at Troyes. Their logistics and marketing worked marvelously.

Their provenance was made up of members of royalty and from the different noble houses of the Franks: Burgundians, Normans. etc. made the rest an easy passage of alliance with the highest spheres of the church, perhaps as Mellado says about its early ambition having no measure, perhaps it was not all bucolic and romantic as it has passed on in the annals of its first history.

It is a natural understanding that prior to this time there was already a formation “in testing” since previous  years. How many? Not known, but logic prevails and we must yield and honor the closest hypothesis based on archival documents that were consulted. If my conjectures are correct (and there is no authentic proof to think that they are not possible) we could be talking not of the nine years of its existence until Nablus. If we count 1104 as the year of its conception until 1114 when it is already constituted and is put into practice upon the arrival of the Hugh’s, in that year, until 1120, when its officially recognized at Nablus, some 16 years had transpired that would encompass the novitiate, the temporal acknowledgment; the creation of the Brotherhood or congregation in the aforementioned Synod. It can be stratified in six different periods.
  1. Ideological and embryonic phase from 1104 until 1107, in which the creation of a police force is perceived as necessary. Creative steps are taken that leave Godfrey of Sainte-Omer tasked with its creation.
  2. Formation of the Militia Christi phase, incorpora-ting same with knights related to the conquerors that take Palestine as the new promised land, there whe-re the mister nobody’s can become someone, forcing that social stratification (35). In the long run, the church had served on not few occasions as a means of social climbing.
  3. Phase of activation with the presence of the Hugh’s from 1114 to 1120, where their relationship would be without rules,habits, monastic vows, no depen-dency on military or ecclesiastical authorities, bound only by the particular and personal oath of each of its members. Here we may apply from William of Tyre who wrote “the knights wore secular garb, they wore clothing such as all folk wear...”
  4. Foundation phase, Synod of Nablus (1120, TN) of the congregation or brotherhood, with a proper name, rules, dwellings, monastic vows, uniformity, disciplines, etc.,
  5. Acceptance by the church at Troyes phase (1129, TN). The Creation of the Order.
  6. Definite consolidation of the Order in 1139 by the Omne Datum Optimum Papal Bull.

(...) Thus the date of creation of the embryonic Templars, would be around 1107/1113, (...) From 1114 until 1120 is the recruiting phase. In 1120 the Brotherhood is legalized and in 1129 the Order is created by the Holy See, and is confirmed in 1139."

This blog quotes from an article "The First Templar Knights (Part 2)  -  The origin of the Temple" by Josè Maria Fernandez Nùñe in the December 2015 OSMTJ Spain The Graal Magazine to be downloaded here
 The text and interpunction was slightly improved and clarified. For references see the original text.

Carta caritatis: the Cistercian constitution - blue print of the Templar rule

Cistercian genealogy source
This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here

"Carta Caritatis’ (also known as the Charter of Charity) is a Cistercian source that is considered ‘the fundamental constitution of the Cistercian Order.’49 There is much debate amongst historians as to when the charter was actually written. Many historians, including W. A. Parker Mason, believe the charter was completed by 1117, however, the modern historian, Lekai, argues that such a document would have taken decades longer. The work is generally attributed to Stephen Harding, the third abbot of the Cistercian Order, though modern historians agree that he was probably the author of only a primitive version of the source, and that the ‘Carta Caritatis’ was expanded by later generations, as and when it was appropriate....

At face value, the ‘Carta Caritatis’ is startlingly reminiscent of the Rule of Saint Benedict in its structure. However, while the Rule is a guide to how monks live their lives in the monastery, the charter reads much more like a legal document, not a guide, but an order. Thecharter is considered the Cistercian constitution due to its regulations for an intricate network of Cistercian houses. The formation of a constitution illustrates how quickly and rapidly the Cistercian Order had grown, no matter what part of the twelfth century it was written. The complex organisation and the mention of daughter-houses having daughterhouses of their own is testament to this."

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Religious fanaticism in the 12th Century Muslim camp

source


"The fiery zeal and warlike enthusiasm of the Templars were equalled, if not surpassed, by the stern fanaticism and religious ardour of the followers of Mahomet. “Noureddin fought,” says his oriental biographer, “like the meanest of his soldiers, saying, ‘Alas! it is now a long time that I have been seeking martyrdom without being able to obtain it.’ The Imaum Koteb-ed-din, hearing him on one occasion utter these words, exclaimed, ‘In the name of God do not put your life in danger, do not thus expose Islam and the Moslems. Thou art their stay and support, and if (but God preserve us therefrom) thou shouldest be slain, it will be all up with us.’ ‘Ah! Koteb-ed-deen,’ said he, ‘what hast thou said, who can save Islam and our country, but that great God who has no equal?’ ‘What,’ said he, on another occasion, ‘do we not look to the security of our houses against robbers and plunderers, and shall we not defend religion?’”

Like the Templars, Noureddin fought constantly with spiritual and with carnal weapons. He resisted the world and its temptations by fasting and prayer, and by the daily exercise of the moral and religious duties and virtues inculcated by the Koran. He fought with the sword against the foes of Islam, and employed his whole energies, to the last hour of his life, in the enthusiastic and fanatic struggle for the recovery of Jerusalem.

The close points of resemblance, indeed, between the religious fanaticism of the Templars and that of the Moslems are strikingly remarkable. In the Moslem camp, we are told by the Arabian writers, all profane and frivolous conversation was severely prohibited; the exercises of religion were assiduously practised, and the intervals of action were employed in prayer, meditation, and the study of the Koran."

This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here. References in the source.

Religious fanaticism in the 12th Century Knights Templar camp

source


"The Templars style themselves “The Avengers of Jesus Christ,” and the “instruments and ministers of God for the punishment of infidels,” and the Pope and the holy fathers of the church proclaim that it is specially entrusted to them “to blot out from the earth all unbelievers,” and they hold out the joys of paradise as the glorious reward for the dangers and difficulties of the task.

“In fighting for Christ,” declares St. Bernard, in his address to the Templars, “the kingdom of Christ is acquired.... Go forth, therefore, O soldiers, in nowise mistrusting, and with a fearless spirit cast down the enemies of the cross of Christ, in the certain assurance that neither in life nor in death can ye be separated from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus, repeating to yourselves in every danger, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. How gloriously do the victors return from the fight, how happy do the martyrs die in battle! Rejoice, valiant champion, if thou livest and conquerest in the Lord, but rejoice rather and glory if thou shouldest die and be joined unto the Lord.... If those are happy who die in the Lord, how much more so are those who die for the Lord!... Precious in the sight of God will be the death of his holy soldiers.

"The close points of resemblance, indeed, between the religious fanaticism of the Templars and that of the Moslems are strikingly remarkable. In the Moslem camp, we are told by the Arabian writers, all profane and frivolous conversation was severely prohibited; the exercises of religion were assiduously practised, and the intervals of action were employed in prayer, meditation, and the study of the Koran.”"

This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here. References in the source.

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Origin of the Cistercian Order: isolation and poverty

Cistercian monks working an praying source
This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here. References in the source.

"The self-induced exclusion from the world discussed in the ‘Exordium Parvum’ is perhaps the first instance we see of the ideal of poverty, which became a part of the Order’s mantra. Burton and Kerr point out that with the ideal of poverty, the author of the text is perhaps trying to conjure a comparison; ‘… embraced that poverty which… at one and the same time evoked the notion of apostolic poverty (making the ‘new monks’ the successors of the apostles as well as the early monks). They also argue that the formation of Cîteaux did not occur in complete isolation at all, and that the location of the founding house as described in the source is a manufactured ideal to reinforce the apostolic imagery and an association with the desert fathers; ‘…the reality of the site of the New Monastery was that it was far from remote but it was integrated into the territorial holdings of Burgundy, not many kilometres from the ducal and ecclesiastical centre of Dijon, and settled enough to have a rural population.’

This is an argument that holds substance, as surely the later recruits that saved and ensured the success of the Order would not have heard of the way of life of the monks if they were so far from society. It seems likely that the founders of the Order sought uncultivated land but within a reasonable distance of the civilised world. Considering the success and riches that the later generations of the Order gained, partly through the cultivation of the isolated lands they were given and other ventures such as sheep-shearing in the desolate lands of Yorkshire, this isolation from the world could be considered as a break away from society to gain land (that their benefactors would not mind bestowing) and to avoid competition from other orders.

However such a view perhaps suggests that the early Cistercians did not hold the values that the Order held with esteem, and were only seeking to gain. It would be wrong to suggest that their search for isolation was borne out of greed, but it is interesting to note that their initial ideal of poverty led the Order to become vastly rich and powerful."

Knights Templar and Papal bulls: Milites Templi (1144)

Pope Celestine II source
This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here

"The second of the papal bulls, ‘Milites templi’ was issued in 1144 by Pope Celestine II. The bull discusses briefly the military aspects of the order; ‘through them that God has freed the eastern church from the filth of the pagans and defeated the enemies of the Christian faith.’ This shows the complete sanction for the military aspects of the order, even the taking of human life, if it means fighting for the Christian realm.

This consent for violence is in stark contrast to other monastic orders, including the Cistercians. The papal bull moves on to petition the clergy to ‘encourage the people that God has entrusted to you to make contributions in order to supply their needs.’ The bull also goes on to explain that there would be spiritual rewards for those that provide support for the brotherhood which was an important privilege for the Order as it ‘helped them to attract and keep new members and attract associates and donations.’

This request of donations and the subsequent wealth which was transferred to the Order is very similar to the beginnings of the Cistercian Order. Though both orders would not allow personal wealth and sought for a life in which to live by the barest essentials, both orders became extremely wealthy in a short space of time. This bull was important because it allowed the order, for a time, to grow at an astonishing rate, as did the Cistercians. "

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

The exemplary military conduct of the Knights Templar documented

source www.dianasprain.net
"Brother Everard des Barres, the newly-elected Master of the Temple, having collected together all the brethren from the western provinces, in 1147 joined the standard of Louis, the French king, and accompanied the crusaders to Palestine.

During the march through Asia Minor, the rear of the christian army was protected by the Templars, who greatly signalized themselves on every occasion. Odo of Deuil or Diagolum, the chaplain of King Louis, and his constant attendant upon this expedition, informs us that the king loved to see the frugality and simplicity of the Templars, and to imitate it; he praised their union and disinterestedness, admired above all things the attention they paid to their accoutrements, and their care in husbanding and preserving their equipage and munitions of war: he proposed them as a model to the rest of the army, and in a council of war it was solemnly ordered that all the soldiers and officers should bind themselves in confraternity with the Templars, and should march under their orders.

The services rendered by the Templars are thus gratefully recorded in the following letter sent by Louis, the French king, to his minister and vicegerent, the famous Suger, abbot of St. Denis.

“Louis, by the grace of God king of France and Aquitaine, to his beloved and most faithful friend Suger, the very reverend Abbot of St. Denis, health and good wishes.

... I cannot imagine how we could have subsisted for even the smallest space of time in these parts, had it not been for their (the Templars’) support and assistance, which have never failed me from the first day I set foot in these lands up to the time of my despatching this letter—a succour ably afforded and generously persevered in. I therefore earnestly beseech you, that as these brothers of the Temple have hitherto been blessed  with the love of God, so now they may be gladdened and sustained by our love and favour. ...

I have to inform you that they have lent me a considerable sum of money, which must be repaid to them quickly, that their house may not suffer, and that I may keep my word....” "


source "The History of the Knights Templars, Temple Church and The Temple", by Charles G. Addison Esq (London 1842)

The Templar Rule and the Cistercian influence

This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here

"The Latin Rule, also known as the Primitive Rule, is one of the earliest sources of the Knights Templar. The Primitive Rule is a result of the discussions that took place at the Council of Troyes, which was under the heavy guidance of Bernard of Clairvaux, the new rising star of the Church....The Council of Troyes took place in either 1128 or 1129, though many modern historians believe it was the latter. The original Latin Rule, from the Council of Troyes, was actually written by the council’s scribe, John Michael, though the credit for its contents go to St Bernard; ‘At the very least he must have been a major influence on the framing of the Latin Rule, for it is clear that the later Templars valued their Cistercian links above all’.

The structure of the text is strikingly similar to that of ‘Carta Caritatis’ and the Rule of St Benedict, which implies a replication of Cistercian organisation and values. What is very interesting to note is that it was at the Council of Troyes that the Knights Templar came to follow the Rule of St Benedict; ‘At the time of the Council, the Templars had been following the Rule of St. Augustine, however, this changed in 1129 with the direct influence of the Cistercian abbot St. Bernard of Clairvaux.’...

The Rule itself describes procedures that the Templar brothers should adhere to on a day-today basis. The description of procedures- in particular clause three, which relate to clothing resonates the tone of both the Cistercian ‘Charter of Charity’ and also the Rule of St Benedict. In fact much of the Rule appears to have strong monastic overtones, rather than a military aspect and the detail that is given to food and drink is very similar to that of the Cistercians. "

For the original Latin Rule (in French) as well as the additional rules Rules visit templiers.org.free.fr

Thursday, May 12, 2016

The early Cistercians: back to strict observance of the Rule of St Benedict

Illustration from "the Bible of Etienne (Stephan) Harding",
3rd abbot of Citeaux source
This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here. References in the source.

"The ‘Exordium Parvum’ is a 12th century Cistercian document that includes the early history of Cîteaux, incorporating official letters and documents with narrative. While this source illustrates to us that the monks left Molesme to pursue a more rigorous devotion to the Rule of St Benedict, yet there is contrary evidence within the ‘Exordium Cistercii’ that tells us that the monks left for a new way of life because Molesme placed too much emphasis on materialistic wealth and possessions.

Why would the later Cistercians change the reasoning behind the monks leaving Molesme this way? If they left Molesme because they did not agree with the luxuries that Molesme had, then surely this would tie in perfectly with the Cistercian devotion to living a life of poverty. The Cistercians are perhaps giving a stronger argument for the legitimacy of their founding fathers abandoning another monastic house by changing the reasoning to a stricter adherence of the Rule of St Benedict.

This links in with theme of authenticity which is apparent throughout the source. It makes the legitimacy of the founding of the Order difficult to argue against if they had such a solid basis for the formation of the new order. ‘The insistence on the strict observance of the Rule linked the early Cistercians with the most powerful written monument in the monastic tradition. The Rule of St Benedict is implicitly apparent throughout the source; every mention of the limitations the Cistercians place upon themselves, down to their food, clothing, and the sense of humility they attempt to embody is showing their intrinsic commitment to the Rule."

Sunday, May 8, 2016

Gregorian reform at the root of Cistercian monasticism

Pope Gregory VII source
This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here. References in this source.


"The Gregorian Reforms, (initiated by Pope Gregory VII and the circle he formed in the papal curia, c. 1050–80, dealt with the moral integrity and independence of the clergy, TN). This reform inspired others to seek a monastic life far from the secular world and all its excesses and greed, to a life based around control of desire, and the strict discipline of the rules of the desert fathers.

Many new orders were formed, namely Benedictine and Augustinian. Of these new orders, it was the Cluniacs that dominated in the monastic aspect of the Church (which in the medieval period was much more significant). The Cluniacs sought to follow the Rule of St Benedict, taking vows of obedience and poverty. The importance of the Cluniacs in this innovative period cannot be understated; ‘At the end of the eleventh century, at the height of its magnificence, Cluny was the head of a huge monastic empire containing many hundreds of dependencies and associated houses spread throughout western Europe....

The Cistercian Order finds its origins in the Cluniac monastery. It was from the abbey of Molesme, that Robert of Molesme with other monks, including Stephen Harding, left in search of a monastic life of stricter poverty than had been seen hitherto by the Cluniacs....The Cistercian, though he lived a communal life, had his salvation very much in his own hands than his Cluniac cousin: he was expected to do more to eradicate his own sins than to pray for the forgiveness of others. This illustrates some other differences between the two reformist orders.

The early Cistercians sought an isolated place, rejecting the world, to pursue this vocation.... The history of the Cistercian Order is integral to the history of western monasticism....Indeed, the history of the Cistercian Order is so intertwined with the history of medieval Europe as a whole, that it is hard to identify which
influenced the other more."

Knights Templar and Papal bulls: Omne datum optimum (1139)

Detail from a mosaic in the church
Santa Maria in Trastevere,
showing Pope Innocent II holding
a model of the church in his arms,
with Sts. Laurentius (left) and Calixtus
source
This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here

"To confirm the Order’s legitimacy in the Roman Catholic Church, three papal bulls (Omne datum optimum, Milites Templi and Militea Dei) were issued between 1139 and 1145.

The first of these bulls, ‘Omne datum optimum’ issued in 1139 by Pope Innocent II allowed the Order many privileges when it came to gaining resources for itself. The bull, issued by Innocent II, exempted the Knight Templar from the payment of tithes, which was criticised by many, perhaps due to jealousy. Prior to this the only other order to gain this exemption was the Cistercians. The Templars were also given permission to gain wealth and support for their order’s growth from the plundering in battles.

Although the Templar brothers were not permitted to hold money for themselves (which is another similarity to the Cistercians) the Templars rules seem to be far more lax than the Cistercians when it came to wealth. This brings into question the supposed Templar ideal of poverty that was made apparent in the Latin Rule.

Another feature of this papal bull was that priests were added to the Knights Templar which shows that the Order was growing quickly and that a hierarchical structure was coming into place. Much like the hierarchical structure of the Cistercians in which the Abbot of Cîteaux was the leader, the Master in the Knights Templar was the head of the Order. This makes the document similar again to ‘The Charter of Charity’ in the way that it sets out the Order’s structure.

Perhaps the most important aspect of ‘Omne datum optimum’ was that ‘This effectively made the Order answerable only to the pope, and therefore free from all other ecclesiastical and secular demands.’ This was the fullest approval the Order could hope to achieve from the papacy and as a result the Order gained an independence from local authorities that must have caused discontent with other orders, not dissimilar to
the issues the Cistercians faced with the Cluniacs. Piers Paul Read suggests that this authorisation and sanction for the Knights Templar may not have been borne completely out of the pope feeling passionate about the Templar cause; Read argues that St Bernard’s support of Innocent II during his contested election secured the papal seat for Innocent, and crudely asks ‘Was Omne Datum Optimum Bernard’s reward for his support?’ If this is the case then it shows yet again that the influence of St Bernard and the Cistercians was absolutely pivotal in the growth and popularity of the military order."

Monday, May 2, 2016

The origin of the Cistercian Order by its own account: Exordium Parvum

The daughter Houses of Citeaux source
This blog quotes freely from the thesis by Lori Firth, Hull University (2012):  "A Comparison of the Cistercian and Knights Templar Orders, And the Personal Influence of Bernard of Clairvaux", to be found here. References in this source.

"Exordium Parvum’ is a source written by the Cistercians themselves and appears to be a simple and reliable retelling of the formation of the order, thought to have been written before 1119.

W. A. Parker Mason says; ‘the account is so bald and straightforward that it is transparently truthful, its very conciseness being in its favour, while the documents also must be accepted as genuine’. The purpose of this source not only seems to be a basic history of the foundation of the order, but also as a document that legitimises the origins of the Cistercian order.

The source illustrates this in its first sentence; ‘We monks of Cîteaux, the first founders of this church, inform our successors by this present text through whose agency and in what circumstances the monastery and our way of life came into being, and on what canonical authority they rest’. The use of the words ‘canonical authority’ suggest that the author(s) is keen to portray the foundation of the abbey in accordance with the church at the time. This is reinforced by the source’s description of the founders seeking approval from Hugh, Archbishop of Lyons and Hugh’s letter of authority.

Furthermore, the source shows that the early Cistercians gained ‘the agreement of the lord Odo, Duke of Burgundy, to whom the place belonged.’ This recurrence of illustrating the order being in accordance with the authority of the church shows that the early Cistercians held their legitimate origins in high esteem."

Download Exordium Parvum in English here. Versions in other languages can be found here.

Sunday, May 1, 2016

The Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem - contemporary to the Knights Templar

Crusader graffiti, Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem,
source, author:  Guillaume Paumier, CC-BY

The history of the "Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem", is quoted form this webpage. This source clearly indicates that this order was the direct decendent, after dissolution in 1489 and amalgamation, of both the Order of the Holy Sepulchre and the Order of Lazarus.

"The Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem owes its origins to Godfrey de Bouillon of the first Crusade, who gathered around him a group of Knights who were entrusted with the protection of the religious Chapter of Canons at the Holy Sepulchre of Christ in 1100. Godfrey had been elected leader of the victorious Crusaders, but refused the title of King. Instead he took on the title "Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri" - "Defender of the Holy Sepulchre".

During the period of the Christian Kingdom, in Jerusalem, the Knights appointed by Godfrey, and those who came to join their number, protected the Christian presence at the Holy Sepulchre, taking as their banner the red Jerusalem Cross popularised by the crusading knights. In 1112, they were officially recognised by Pope Paschal II. In 1122 Pope Callistus II issued a Bull establishing the Knights as a lay religious community with the responsibility of guarding the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre and the city of Jerusalem against Muslim attack.

After the Muslims regained Jerusalem in 1187 the Knights assisted in the re-capture of the city of Acre. They remained there until the great fortress fell to the Muslims in 1291, ending the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. A diaspora then took place among the Christians in Palestine. Many of the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre remained in the Mediterranean basin; others fled as far as France and Spain. The works of the Order continued as far away as Poland, where Knights had settled and later their descendants continued in the spirit of the defence of Christianity.

The activity of the Order and its identity, in Palestine shifted from the Knights, who returned to their own countries, to the religious Order of St. Francis, which had custody of the monastery of Mount Zion. 1330, Pope John XXII appointed the Prior of the Franciscan house Custodian of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre.

The Custodian served as vicar to the Pope, who was the governing authority of the Order. The Custodian was responsible for all aspects of the Order's growth and governance, including the dubbing of new Knights.

In 1489, Pope Innocent VIII, took a review of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre and the Order of Lazarus, both founded in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem following the first Crusade. The Pope suppressed both Orders and amalgamated them with the Order of St. John of Jerusalem. However the name of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre was allowed to continue as an appendage to the name of St. John; "Holy Order of the Hospital of Saint John of Jerusalem and of the Sepulchre of Christ"

This blog quotes freely from this webpage on www.orderstjohn.org.. Further research will focus on the difference between this Order and the Order with the same name, but with the adjective "equestrian" added.