So did the Knights Templar really give each other rimjobs?

See, the story goes that it was part of their initiation ritual - the osculum obscenum is the Latin euphemism I’ve heard for it. It was supposed to prepare them for possibly suffering the worst tortures and humiliations imaginable (though given medieval Europe’s ingenuity at developing new tortures, I’m sure things generally got much worse than that for the folks the Knights were waging war against . . . .) The story as I’ve heard it has them deliberately commiting blasphemy during their initiations as well, in order to be able to lie about their beliefs in potential times of need later on.

I don’t know enough about them to evaluate these old ideas. My assumption tends to be that these claims were probably just slander designed to stir up opposition to them. But I have to be curious if there’s any truth to it - or even if there’s any historicity to the claims, rather than their being some sort of modern invention.

All the accusations against them were almost certainly conjured up by King Philip IV in his greed for the Templar coffers and with the help of ‘his’ Pope, Clement V.

The Templars were willing to risk their lives in the holy land in the name of ‘holy mother church’ and Chrisitanity, that is the measure of their zeal. Why would they turn their backs on their faith?

I’m doubting it.

No, no, no, it was all just a misunderstanding.

See, they used to have these amateur comedy stand-up nights, and if a fellow told a joke that didn’t go over too well, they had a guy on drums who would give him a rim-shot.

Perhaps I wasn’t clear - the blasphemy was to prepare them in case they were forced to conceal their faith when held captive by Muslims. Both those legends have justifications that make a certain (limited) amount of sense within the context of what they were doing. The idea was not that the Knights Templar were not Christians (though of course that notion existed as well) but that they were able to hide their religion when necessary.

No, this doesn’t make sense either. Templars would not, in fact in most cases COULD NOT hide their religion, what with the big cross on their tunics and all.

There are a few accounts where the Templars refused to convert to Islam or renounce Christianity and were executed, by the hundreds.

These guys aren’t like the local minister down the block. They were the Zealots of their time, and that’s saying a lot when we’re talking about the middle ages!

Of course this is all oversimplifying a bit, considering the story of the Templars in the holy land covers some 2 centuries during which many templars gre to understand and even respect the ‘infidels’.

So back to your question: Did the Templars give initiates blow jobs in order to prepare them for torture at the hands of their enemies in the middle east?

The answer is no.

So why DID they do it then? :wink:

For the pure fun of it, of course!

Practically all of the accusations against the Templars were stock charges that wre used against “witches.”

Eg: That they carried a cat with them that they consulted. (Or that “Baphomet” was a cat-headed god that they worshipped.) Keeping a familiar animal – especially a cat.

The “osculum infame” charge was levelled against “witches,” too – by the same name. It’s just slander.

The one unique thing in the charges is the accusation of the worship of “Baphomet.” It’s most likely that this is a corruption of “Muhamet” (Mohammad,) and amounts to “They’ve accepted heretical musselman beliefs!”

:: Rim-Shot ::

I found this page addressing accusations against the Templars. It sounds like it was all pretty much bogus, stuff that was either tortured out of people, or distorted or just plain made up.

I think I read somewhere that it was part of the Templar’s practice of Kundalini. They were awakening the fire serpent- kissing the snake who was thought to originate at the base of the spine.

I’m not too sure of the details.

This is pretty much the case.

Saladin had all the Templars he captured killed. He knew that even if they swore not to fight him again, they would later consider the oath null and void since it was mde to an infidel. Besides, the Templars were the badass panzer corps of their day. Taking some of them out of action permanently was a real long-term victory.

When the church was bringing charges against the Order, they listed about everything they could think of: witchcraft, homosexuality, treason, colluding with the infidels, heresy, devil worship… Specific acts included the pucker-sucker that the OP asks about, spitting on the cross and/or denying Christ during initiation, worshiping an idol of “Baphomet,” etc, etc… After a few weeks in the care of the inquisition, many of the knights would be glad to confess to anything. So confessions are pretty much worthless for this subject. It is unlikely that the Templars did anything that didn’t occur at non-fighting monastic orders.

Excalibre, where did you hear/read this particular accusation? Searching the web the only hits I’m getting for osculum obscenum and the Knights Templar is in the lyrics of a Brazilian death-metal band called Mystifier.

Actually the activity in question was a rimjob.

Ahh . . . makes sense, I guess. The way I heard it, it sounded like they considered themselves free to blaspheme with the mouth but not with the heart if it saved their lives. But I guess they weren’t interested in their lives being saved.

It was rimjobs, not blowjobs. And I think the initiates were supposed to be doing it to the higher-ups, not vice versa.

Damn. Kinda a hot idea, in a way. Like frat hazing only more hardcore.

Please tell me you’re joking. The Templars practicing Indian misticism? :rolleyes:

I just have to say I never expected to see the phrases “Knights Templar” and “rimjobs” used in the same sentence.

This particular piece of fiction is from Umberto Eco’s wonderful novel Foucault’s Pendulum, which I highly recommend. To quote from the Publisher’s Weekly description on Amazon:

Fun stuff, but a fictional story within the context of fictional story.

It’s the generally accepted stance, but not completely undisputed. Some serious historians believe that some of the accuations levied against the templars were truthful. Don’t ask me which ones, I’ve read/heard so often about them that I don’t remember what was said by reliables/unreliables sources. I just remember haing read some serious texts that supported the idea that the templars were guilty of X or Y.

By the way, the “osculum obscenum” is (literally) ass-kissing, not a blowjob…

I would note by the way that by the time of their trial the templars didn’t fight anymore, being present only on a couple mediterranean islands after the reconquest of the holy land by the muslims. So, we may not be talking anymore about the same “super-zealot fighters” some posters refered to.