The Liberal Catholic Apostolic Church
An independent Catholic church in the liberal tradition

There is absolutely no doubt that Mar Georgius regarded himself as an authentic fons honorum and bestowed both titles of nobility up to the rank of Duke and grades of knighthood in a number of Orders of Chivalry. Further, he chartered both religious orders of knighthood, and universities, academies and the like on behalf of his church and under the terms of its canon law.

What was the basis for his standing? As Sixth British Patriarch, Mar Georgius was not a temporal sovereign, but rather the spiritual head of an autocephalous church that was in direct Apostolic Succession from the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate. As such, just as the other Eastern Patriarchs and the Roman Catholic Pope, his basis to award distinctions within his church was established through ample precedent. Indeed, It must be remembered that within Orthodoxy, not all autocephalous churches are led by a Patriarch, with some under the leadership instead of Metropolitans and Archbishops.

It has on many occasions been argued that only temporal sovereignty establishes validity as a fons honorum. Yet although the reigning Roman Catholic Pope maintains temporal sovereignty over the Vatican, this is not the case in respect of his Eastern counterparts, who are not temporal sovereigns yet continue to bestow honours which enjoy recognition both within their communions and beyond, where they are justly regarded with esteem by their recipients (including Heads of State). In reality, the argument that temporal authority is of a higher order than religious authority is likely to meet with immediate rejection from the head of any church, who would both claim sovereignty over religious matters as far as his communion is concerned, and assert that such sovereignty is of a superior standing to mere temporal power. Thus the primary authority of the Roman Catholic Pope derives not from his sovereignty over the Vatican City, but from his ecclesiastical position as Supreme Head of the Roman Catholic Church.

Professor G.A. Pensavalle de Cristofaro dell'Ingegno, in "Questions being examined by the Magistracy" (“Secolo d’Italia” 28 February 1959), offers the following insight,

“Internationally “sovereignty” is not attributed exclusively to the State, no matter what its form. There are significant examples of this, the most illustrious and convincing been that of the Roman Pope, Head of the Catholic Church. If the figure of the Roman Pope were reduced to Head of the State of the Vatican City, it would not only belittle his existence but would deny it altogether, which would mean supporting an inexact situation at international level. The Roman Pope, as Head of the Catholic Church, has the maximum sovereign power in His person: to the extent that, when the Apostolic Seat is vacant no-one could succeed to the supreme power, which is passed directly onto the Pope’s heir through moral continuity. It is evident in this case that the “sovereignty” belongs to the person and accompanies the person everywhere, and is not restricted to the territory, which for a State is a fundamental element. No matter where he is, the Pope maintains all his powers which are recognised as such, not only by millions of believers throughout the world, but also by numerous different foreign powers, as is shown by the historic period from 1870 to 1929 when, even though He had lost the territory of the State, he maintained intact His great prestige in international relationships. Even Italy, after being annexed to Rome, recognised the special position by issuing Law no. 214 on 13 May 1871 called the “Guarentigie”.

Prior to 1870, the Pope had the dual function of Head of the Papal States and Head of the Catholic Church, thus becoming the representative of two different bodies with other States: religious relationships as Head of the church and legal and political relationships as Head of the Papal States. Therefore in his dual function, he was the source of the Nobility he created .

“In 1870, the Pope was deprived of his temporal power and only in 1871 was he returned his Sovereign honours in the Kingdom by the Italian Government, maintaining the prominence of honour recognised him by the Catholic Sovereigns, granted all the honorary prerogatives of sovereignty and all the immunity he needed to carry out his High Ministry. However among these honorary prerogatives, one of the most important, because it integrates one of the highest attributes of Sovereignty – that of granting noble titles and knighthoods, no mention is made in the law, giving rise to the problem as to whether the Pope had the faculty to confer noble titles, even after the temporal power had lapsed.

Here we should remember that, even before 1870, the Pope did not always grant honours and noble titles as Head of his States, because even when he granted concessions to foreigners, He acted in his position of Spiritual Leader of the Church, and rewarded good actions towards the Church”.

Nor do the Patriarchs of the Eastern churches merely derive their status as fons from their communion with Rome (where this is the case), since Rome was at most acknowledged as primus inter pares of the five ancient and autonomous Patriarchates (the Pentarchy), not ruler of all. The repeated historical claims by Rome that the Orthodox Churches are subject to its authority have been rejected outright by the Orthodox (citing the 28th Canon of the Council of Chalcedon), and indeed it was this false claim, along with the filioque, that formed the primary cause of the Great Schism between Rome and the East in 1054. Indeed, the primary See of St Peter was and is at Antioch, not at Rome, which was the See of St Linus.

In fact, the history of Orthodox church awards is now extensive, with most of the autocephalous churches maintaining some form of merit award and the Syrian and Greek Melkite Patriarchates bestowing orders that are of a chivalric nature. We may mention the Order of Saint Andrew of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Patriarchal Order of the Holy Cross of Jerusalem of the Greek Melkite Patriarchate of Jerusalem as examples of indigenously Orthodox Orders. In addition, the protection of the Military and Hospitaller Order of St Lazarus of Jerusalem by the Melkite Patriarch has been asserted by those connected with that Order to date from the mid-nineteenth-century. The Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem H.H. Diodoros I, in the presence of other recognised Orthodox Patriarchs, bestowed knighthood in the Order of the Holy Sepulchre upon the late Boris Yeltsin and other Heads of State in 2000.

The historic institution of knighthood borrows its structures and professions from those of monastic communities - whether organised in Orders under a common rule, as in the West, or cenobitic and thus governed by an Abbot, as in the East. It was this religious structure that was to acquire the form of secular knighthood when adapted to military purposes, and which formed the basis of the historic Western Orders of Chivalry.

The nature of those of such Orthodox awards that are claimed as chivalric must therefore depend on a concept of chivalry that is religious rather than purely secular in nature. Such a concept is promulgated by the Orthodox churches today and has much to commend it in spiritual terms. Viewed from a Christian perspective, defence and service to the church is an innately superior basis for merit than defence and service to the state and its secular aims and offices.

Nor is the concept of a "religious order of knighthood" confined to the churches of the East. In 1990, the British Government determined (after contact with the Papal Legate) that the Papal Orders of St Gregory the Great, Pius IX and St Sylvester were church awards and did not rank as secular orders of chivalry. Such awards for merit are also not unknown within the Protestant churches, and include the Order of St Augustine bestowed by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

There is a another aspect entirely to the concept of religious chivalry and it is well expressed by Archbishop Richard, Duc de Palatine, in his article "Spiritual Nobility". Here, he explains that the concept of chivalry has an important Gnostic element and is a means of transmission of the wisdom of the esoteric Mystery Schools:

"When the period of the Crusades began and many Knights came into contact with the various Gnostic streams of the Levant and were initiated into the Hidden Schools, they formed what is known as the "Chivalric Orders" to be used as a vehicle for the perpetuation of their Wisdom gained in those Schools.

Many occult and metaphysical writers have ignored these orders and have considered them of no importance to the Wisdom tradition but these Chivalric orders were dual in their functions, they were formed to help the sick and needy and conformed to the Catholic Faith and secondly, they embodied yet another aspect which was unsuspected by the Church authorities, they had a secret system of initiations or stages of progress in their mysteries, the names of their degrees were: Sovereign Prince or Grand Master; Knight Grand Cross or Prince; Knight Commander or Duke; Knight or Count; Knight Banneret or Baron and then Squire.

These titles were designations given to the candidates according to the stage he had reached in the Chivalric Mysteries, but when the rulers of the nations of Europe desired to honor those who had fought for the ruler in time of war, they usurped the ancient rights of the Orders and began to confer these titles upon secular men, thus degenerating the once holy titles into purely secular titles of rank and social standing, we all know the results of the secularization of the spiritual titles. Hence you have what is known as Personal or Spiritual Titles and Regional or Secular Titles, this is to mean a title of a place, holding lands, etc. The title of Duc de Palatine is personal and a spiritual title."

The Chivalric Orders are yet another link in the chain of the Wisdom Religion, from these Orders spring the Orders of the Quest: Albigenses, the Guilds, Knights Templar, Troubadours, Holy Grail. Then we had the Orders of the Great Work: the Alchemists; the Orders of Universal Reformation: such as the Rosae Crucis, the Unknown Philosophers, the Royal Society and the Pansophic College and then came the Masonic Orders of Fraternity including Freemasonry, the Illuminati, Martinism, the French Transcendentalists, Fratres Lucis and Luxor, all stemmed from the Chivalric link between the Gnostic Schools and the beginning of the Orders of the Quest."

The titles of nobility held by Mar Georgius

These preliminary matters being understood, let us turn to those titles of nobility held by Mar Georgius himself. The source of most of these titles was unimpeachable, being the Archduke Otto of Austria. In a publication of the Royalist League issued in 1930 these titles and the documentation relating to them were discussed "in order that the true position may be placed before the public". This publication was deposited in the British Library and a public advertisement attesting to its contents previously placed in the Bowes Park Weekly News of 27 November 1925.

In recognition of services to the Austrian Imperialistic Cause, a Warrant was granted on 19 August 1925 granting to Hugh George Newman of London the honour of Grand Chevalier of the Most Exalted Order of Saint Louis. Newman was at that time aged twenty and active in politics, particularly Jacobitism and the restoration of monarchism in the wake of the First World War. He was invested with the insignia of the Order by L.S. Krantzburg, Commissary Extraordinary in England of His Imperial and Apostolic Majesty the Emperor of Austria.

Letters Patent in French were then issued by Otto, Emperor of Austria and Apostolic King of Hungary, on 11 November 1925, by which the previous patent was extinguished and Newman was created a Prince of the Holy Roman Empire with the titles of Duke of Saxe-Noricum, Margrave of Ardath, Count Neumann and Baron Willmott (Willmott being Newman's mother's maiden name), the last title in the Kingdom of Hungary, and further awarded the Order of the Golden Fleece (Austrian).

The Archduke Otto was at that time under the Regency of his mother, the Dowager Empress Zita, since he would not attain his legal majority until 1928. In a legalised declaration, the precise position regarding the Empire of Austria and Kingdom of Hungary regarding its governance and position on granting titles of nobility was set out.

A letter is included to the Dowager Empress from Pietro, Cardinal Gaspari, then Secretary of State to His Holiness PP Pius XI, dated 6 May 1926. This states in part, "His Holiness has given careful consideration to the question of the four persons upon whom the Order of the Golden Fleece has recently been conferred...In the case of...the Duke of Saxe-Noricum who is a member of "The Catholic Apostolic Church" which in essential doctrine does not contradict Catholic principles, there is also no objection...His Holiness Pope Pius XI accordingly commands me to announce to Your Majesty His formal Consent to the bestowal of the Austrian Order of the Golden Fleece upon...The Duke of Saxe-Noricum. "

The letter continues, "The Holy Father is deeply sensible of the devotion of the House of Habsburg-Lorraine to the Holy See, but sympathetic though He is to the cause of its Restoration, He is not permitted to take an active part in its re-establishment. During the course of His consideration of this matter, His Holiness has come to the conclusion that the granting of His consent to the bestowal of the Order of the Golden Fleece might by some be construed as active participation in the Restoration, and He therefore desires that you do not again take advantage of the Bull of 6th March 1922 at least until His Imperial and Apostolic Majesty is actually on the Throne of St Stephen de facto."

A further Schedule dated 11 June 1926 states the consent of a number of persons to the granting of the aforesaid titles upon the Duke of Saxe-Noricum, these including Mgr. Gustavus Piffi, the Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna, four Archdukes of the Austrian Imperial Family, four Nobles of the Austrian Empire and three Subjects thereof.

This is followed by a Schedule concerning the Hungarian Barony bearing the consent of Regent Admiral Horthy, Archduke Josef, four Nobles of Hungary, two Subjects and the Roman Catholic Titular Bishop of Scopodalmatico.

Newman responded to these events in a Deed Poll of 12 October 1926 by which his name was changed to Hugh George de Willmott Newman Duke of Saxe-Noricum. A hand-drawn blazon of his Arms follows and is reproduced below.


Mar Georgius continued to be actively involved in chivalric affairs. He was Grand Master of the Orders of St Thomas Acon, St Gregory of Sarkis and the Spiritual Christian Nation, Prelat Commandeur of the Order of the Crown of Thorns and Chevalier Grand Officier of the Order of the Lion and Black Cross. He held the honours of Knight Commander of the Imperial Order of Constantine the Great, and Chevalier of the Honourable and Chivalric Order of the Crown of Stuart. He chartered a number of Orders, including the Healing, Teaching and Chivalric Order of St Raphael on 1 January 1953, and enrolled others (such as the Orders of the Ancient Catholic Church) into the archives of the Catholicate of the West.

Not having been blessed with children, his heir presumptive in his Austrian and Hungarian titles (as of the publication of the Silver Jubilee Souvenir of 1963) was his nephew Lt. John Cattell.