A Blueprint for a Monarchy in America

A reader recently sent me a constitution he drew up for a monarchy that would be applicable for the United States, where no one religion stands in the majority. I found his hypothetical constitution intriguing, and was impressed by the depth he went into. While I do not necessarily endorse his proposal in its entirety, I did want to post it for my readers to look over and to comment upon it. (Note: the author of this constitution wished to remain anonymous due to "the current political situation.")

The People

Recognized Churches Must Adhere to the Following Precepts:

Belief in a single God, the Father Almighty, who is eternal and unchanging, the sole creator and master of the universe
Belief in Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, who is co-eternal with the Father, partaking fully in both the human and divine essence
Profession of the Trinity: belief that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit exist as three separate and distinct persons while sharing a single essence
Belief that salvation comes only through the redemptive sacrifice of Christ
Belief in the literal existence of Heaven and Hell
Belief in the Revealed Truth of Scripture
Promotion of Proper Morality: condemnation of abortion, euthanasia, fornication, polygamy, homosexuality, bestiality and artificial birth control
Rejection of Modern Heresies: condemnation of Marxism, racism and/or ethnocentricism, dispensationalism, relativism, pantheism, and pacifism
Recognition that the mandate to rule comes from God, not popular acclamation
Possession of 10 million adherents within imperial domains

Subjects

While the constitution allows for complete freedom of religion for all inhabitants of the imperial domains, not all religions are equal in the eyes of the state. Subjects are those people who do not belong to Recognized Churches; they are divided into those with religion (Moral Theists) and those without it (Heathens), both groups are free to practice their belief systems in privacy and without interference from imperial authorities. Moral Theists may vote for and hold the office of Tribune of Subjects, an officer who represents them in the Senate. Both Moral Theists and Heathens are barred from all other elections and elected offices, the military officer corps, teaching positions at government schools and the practice of law.

Those Without Religion (Heathens)
Atheists
Those Apathetic to Religion
Pagans, Muslims, Wiccans, New Age Spiritualists, Satanists
Reformed/Progressive Jews
Heretics: Pseudo-Christians not conforming to any one the first nine precepts

Those With Religion (Moral Theists)
Monotheists/Deists: must conform to seventh, eighth, and ninth precepts
Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Zoroastrians
Theravadin and Mahayana Buddhists
Orthodox/Traditional Jews
Independent Christians: Christian sects with less than 10 million adherents
Citizens

Citizens are those people who belong to Recognized Churches; the constitution recognizes two classes of citizens: plebeians and patricians. Though all inhabitants of the imperial domains stand equal before the law, the extent to which one can participate in political life is determined partly by one’s social standing. Citizens, however, possess rights that Subjects do not: these include the freedom of assembly, the right to imperial petition, freedom of the press and freedom of speech. Children born to Citizen Families attain citizenship with a proclamation of faith and featly on their 18th birthday in the presence of the County Magistrate; those who decline to make this statement are demoted to Heathen Status.

Plebeians

Plebeians, or commoners, are citizens who hold no official titles; they are divided into two classes: Proletarians and Equestrians. Citizenship is a gift, not a right, and is awarded to those who conform to certain moral standards. As such, Plebeians may be stripped of their status by judgment of the Country Magistrate should they engage in manifest public sin.

Proletarians

Proletarians are Plebeians who hold taxable assets whose net worth is less than $500,000; they are barred from all elected offices and may only vote for one official: the Tribune of Plebeians, who must be a member of the Equestrian class.

Equestrians

Equestrians are Plebeians who hold taxable assets whose net worth is more than $500,000; they may vote in any election and hold any elected office. One may be born to the Equestrian class if one’s father is also an Equestrian but this status may be lost if they fail to accumulate $300,000 worth of taxable assets before their 35th birthday. All officers in the military automatically attain Equestrian status upon their commission which cannot be lost regardless of the value of their assets.

Patricians

Patricians, or nobles, are Catholic citizens whose families have been endowed with titles and estates by the Emperor or higher orders of nobility; they are divided into three classes: Dominates, Magnates and the Imperial Family. Both the imperial and provincial governments include appointed offices which are reserved exclusively for Patricians. To be born into the Patrician class, one’s father or grandfather must also have been a Patrician; one’s status as a Dominate or Magnate is inherited from their father or grandfather as well. As with Plebeians, one can also lose Patrician status if they engage in manifest public sin; this demotion results in automatic Heathen status with the loss of all endowed property and inheritance rights.

Dominates (Lords)

Dominates, or lesser lords, are Patricians who have been ennobled by individual Magnates; these appointments must be ratified by the provincial Council of Magnates. Certain positions at the provincial and imperial levels of government are reserved exclusively for Dominates; among these are those of Censor, Legate and Lictor. Dominate status may be revoked, along with all hereditary titles and property rites, should the individual be found guilty of manifest public sin by the regional Council of Magnates.

Magnates (Great Lords)

Magnates, or great lords, are Patricians who have been ennobled by the Emperor in recognition of their extraordinary achievements or exemplary service to the state. Certain positions at the imperial level of government are reserved exclusively for Magnates; they alone are permitted to assume the offices of Aedile, Dux, Quaestor, Senator and Princeps Senatus. All senior Magnates in a province also belong to the Council of Magnates, responsible for electing Senators to represent them in the Comitia Magnus; the leader of this body is given the honorary title of Dux. Magnate status may be revoked, along with all hereditary titles and property rites, should the individual be found guilty of manifest public sin by judgment of the Emperor.

Imperial Family

The Imperial Family consists of the Emperor, his wife, his children and grandchildren, his siblings and their spouses, and their children and grandchildren. These people possess Magnate status at birth and may be appointed to any position normally reserved for members of that class. Upon his ascension to the throne, the Emperor designates his own successor from among his sons, brothers, nephews, uncles or male cousins over the age of 25; a new successor may be chosen at any time when circumstances demand it. This choice must be verified by the Council of Duxi and the consent of the Papal Tribune.

The Government

The imperial government operates at five levels: municipalities, counties, provinces, eparchies, and the imperial government; with the exception of eparchies, at every level there are both elected and appointed offices open to members of the Plebeian or Patrician class. Any official may be removed from office should he be found guilty of manifest public sin, which could also result in the loss of his citizen status; the court which tries him is dependent on the status of his elected or appointed office. With the exception of Tribunes, only Equestrians and Patricians may vote in elections or hold elected offices; the particulars are listed below.

Municipal Offices

Mayor

The Mayor acts as the municipal executive and may be a member of the Equestrian or Patrician class; terms of service, executive powers, age restrictions, and election particulars are determined by individual provinces and municipalities.


Municipal Councilor

Municipal Councilors act as advisors to the Mayor and may be members of the Equestrian or Patrician class; terms of service, councilor powers, numbers, age restrictions and election particulars are determined by individual provinces and municipalities.

Prefect

The Prefect acts as the municipal judge and may be a member of the Equestrian or Patrician class; he is appointed by the county Magistrate and has the power to appoint further municipal judges beneath him if necessity demands it. The Prefect serves for a term of five years and may be reappointed indefinitely though the associate judges he creates may be dismissed at any time. Prefects must be at least 35 years of age at the time of their first appointment.

County Offices

Magistrate

The Magistrate acts as both the county executive and judge and may be a member of the Equestrian or Patrician class. He is responsible for appointing municipal Prefects, approving mayoral appointments, overseeing public services and facilities and hearing appeals from municipal courts, deciding which cases will be heard by higher courts. The Magistrate is appointed by the Governor with the approval of the Censor and serves for a term of five years; he must be at least 35 years of age at the time of his first appointment and may be reappointed indefinitely. Other powers and duties are determined by individual provinces.

Provincial Offices

Governor

The Governor acts as the provincial executive and may be a member of the Equestrian or Patrician class; he is elected by popular vote and must have held county or municipal offices prior to his election as Governor. His primary duties are to appoint county Magistrates and oversee public facilities and services. Other terms of service, powers, age restrictions and election particulars are determined by individual provinces.

Provincial Councilors

Provincial Councilors act as provincial legislative officials and belong to a body called the Provincial Council; they may be members of the Equestrian or Patrician class and are elected by popular vote in proportion to the population of individual counties within the state. The powers of the Provincial Council, numbers of councilors, age restrictions and election particulars are determined by individual provinces.

Praetor

Praetors act as the provincial judges and may be a member of the Equestrian or Patrician class; they are appointed by the Censor to a ten year term and must have held county or municipal offices prior to their appointment to Praetor. Three Praetors sit on the High Court of each province and are responsible for hearing appeals from lower courts.

Censor

The Censor acts as the eparchial representative in each province and must be a member of the Dominate class; he is appointed to a life term by the Viceroy and is subject to no age restrictions. Censors have the power to appoint Praetors and Dominate Triumviri and veto any law passed by the Provincial Council or any decree from the Governor; their decisions may be appealed to and overturned by the Viceroy.

Eparchial Offices

Viceroy

The Viceroy acts as the imperial representative in each eparchy; he must be a member of the Magnate class and is appointed by the Emperor with the approval of the Senate. The Viceroy holds the position for life and has the power overturn the decision of any Censor in his eparchy and recommend cases for the Legate Court to hear. He presides over meetings of the Provincial Councils within his eparchy and has the responsibility of appointing Legates and Censors.

Legate

Legates act as eparchial judges and must be members of the Dominate class; they are appointed by the Viceroy and serve for life. The five Legates serving on each eparchial Supreme Court are subject to no age restrictions and have the responsibility of hearing appeals from lower courts; they are not obligated to accept every case.

Dux

The Dux is the mostly honorary position held by the leader of each of the eparchial Councils of Magnates according to their own parliamentary rules. The position is held for life; each Dux is also a de facto member of the Council of Duxi, responsible for electing the Princeps Senatus, approving Quaestor appointments and determining imperial succession.

Imperial Offices

Quaestor

Seven Quaestors, or judges, are appointed by the Emperor to officiate on the Imperial Court; all seven must be chosen from among the Magnate class and are subject to no age restrictions. It is their duty to hear appeals from lower courts, though they are not obligated to hear every case; Quaestor appointments, however, must be ratified by the Papal Tribune and the Council of Duxi. Quaestors serve for life and the longest-serving member of the Imperial Court is granted the honorary rank of Quaestor Magnus; at official functions, the Quaestor Magnus carries the Hand of Justice, symbolizing the triumph of law over chaos and the subservience of human law to the divine order.

Triumvir

Three Triumviri represent each province in the Comitia Minor; of these three representatives, two must be Equestrians and one must be a Dominate. All Triumviri must be at least 25 years of age. Equestrian Triumviri are elected by a majority vote of the provincial legislature with the approval of the Viceroy while Dominate Triumviri are appointed by the Censor of each province; they occupy their office for a term of five years and may be reelected or reappointed indefinitely.

Lictor

Elected by the Dominate Triumviri of the Comitia Minor; those holding the rank of Lictor must be Dominates themselves and at least 35 years of age. In this largely ceremonial role, the Lictor presides over all meetings of the Comitia Minor and carries the Fasces of State, symbolizing imperial power, at all official functions.

Senator

Two Senators are elected by each Council of Magnates according to their own parliamentary rules. Those holding the rank of Senator must be Magnates themselves and at least 35 years of age. Senators are barred from holding any other governmental office and serve in the Comitia Major for life.

Princeps Senatus

Elected by the Council of Duxi according to their own parliamentary rules; the one holding this office must be a Magnate himself and a Dux. The Princeps Senatus is subject to no age restrictions and holds the title for life. It is his duty to preside over all meetings of the Comitia Major and to cast the deciding vote in the event of a tie. At official functions, the Princeps Senatus is granted the honor of carrying the Sword of State, representing the duty of government to protect its people.

Tribune of Subjects

Elected by a popular vote of Moral Theists over the age of 18; the one holding this office must be a Moral Theist himself and be at least 35 years of age. To attain the position, candidates for this office must gain a simple majority of votes; in the event that one of the candidates fails to achieve a majority, another election will be held between the two leading contenders. The Tribune of Subjects serves a term of five years and may be reelected indefinitely; he has the power to veto any legislation he feels is detrimental to his constituents, but this veto can be overridden by a two-thirds majority vote in the Comitia Major or by imperial proclamation.

Tribune of Plebeians

Elected by a popular vote of all Plebeians, both Proletarians and Equestrians, over the age of 18; the one holding this office must be an Equestrian himself and at least 35 years of age. To attain the position, candidates for this office must gain a simple majority of votes; in the event that one of the candidates fails to achieve a majority, another election will be held between the two leading contenders. The Tribune of Plebeians serves a term of five years and may be reelected indefinitely; he has the power to veto any legislation he feels is detrimental to his constituents, but this veto can be overridden by a four-fifths majority vote in the Comitia Major or by imperial proclamation.

Papal Tribune

The Papal Tribune is appointed by the Supreme Pontiff and holds the position for life; the one holding this office must be a Catholic clergyman holding the rank of bishop. The Papal Tribune has the power to veto any legislation that betrays the principles of Christian morality; this veto is final and may only be overturned by imperial decree.

Imperator (Emperor)

The Emperor acts as the chief executive; his succession must be ratified by the previous Emperor, the Council of Duxi, and the Papal Tribune. It is his responsibility to defend the rule of law and Christian Civilization from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Though his power to declare war, appoint certain officials, and use state monies is abrogated by the Senate or the nobility, the Emperor may overrule the decision of any court, create new Magnates and preside over all meetings of the full Senate.

The author of this also gave these additional disclaimers:

I have divided the people living in any hypothetical imperial realm into subjects and citizens, based on their religious creed. Basically anyone adhering to the seventh, eighth and ninth precepts is considered a moral theist, as are Christian groups which conform to all the other nine precepts but have less than 10 million members. Only state-recognized churches receive tax-free status; by requiring 10 million members for this I hope to force the myriad of independent Protestant churches to combine into larger organizations with a more strict emphasis on doctrinal orthodoxy. Catholics of course get preeminent status in the government. As you can see, people may lose their citizen status or office should they be found guilty of manifest public sin.

Upon their 18th birthday, young people from citizen families will be required to take an oath in which they adhere to the first nine precepts; those converting to one of the Recognized Churches can apply for citizenship and, after a period of political and spiritual instruction, will be administered the same oath. Young people from citizen families who refuse to take the oath will be demoted to heathen status, as are people who leave one of the Recognized Churches; this may be appealed only after 10 years and the testimony of credible witnesses attesting to that person's conversion.

The government operates on five levels: municipalities, counties, provinces, eparchies, and the imperial government. The day to day governance is mostly conducted at the municipal/county/province level by elected officials. The eparchies are mostly judicial units consisting of several provinces designed to provide direct imperial oversight of lower offices. This system tries to allow people to run their own affairs as much as possible with limited interference but nonetheless has safeguards to ensure that new laws passed do not conflict with Christian morality. Hence the division between citizens and subjects/nobles and commoners. You'll also notice a distinction between Proletarians and Equestrians based on wealth; I do not hate the poor, but I do recognize that people without wealth and education tend to support destructive policies, hence the reason they are banned from all but one election.

The Imperial Senate is the legislative body of the Empire and is divided into an upper house (Comitia Major) and a lower house (Comitia Minor). The latter is at least 1/3 noble at all times, limiting the power of commoners to make direct policy at the highest level of government. The Tribunes exist to ensure that the people's voice is at least heard, but they can still be overruled by the Comitia Major. Basically the Comitia Major has the powers we Americans would associate with the Senate while the Comitia Minor is comperable to the House of Representatives.

Officially the Emperor's powers are comparable to that of a US President insofar as his ablility to declare war, raise taxes, and appoint certain officials is concerned; but he is capable of exerting far more influence over the government should he have the backing of the Church or other circumstances demand it.

A Monarch of Conscience

Grand Duke Henri of Luxembourg recently made it known that he would refuse to sign into law a law passed by his parliament that would legalize euthanasia due to "reasons of conscience." This move may result in His Royal Highness losing some of his powers and popularity, but in the end he is doing what he must: put his Catholic faith before his throne. The Grand Duke is doing what is just and right, even if his people refuse to acknowledge it. His Royal Highness' actions are a model for all monarchs. (Read more about this event here.)

Comments

I've recently had a slew of comments from an anonymous poster. I've resorted to deleting these comments from my blog and changing my settings so that all comments must be approved by me before being posted. I hate to do this, but one person can ruin it for everyone.

I don't mind opposing views being posted on my blog, but when a person insults me, bullies me, and questions my faith, I draw the line in the sand. If you disagree with me and want to say so, by all means do, but do it in an intellectual, respectful, and charitable manner. If you are incapable of this, don't bother wasting your time or mine, for your comments will be deleted!

Musings On Election Eve

On this, the eve of the 2008 U.S. general election, I thought I would offer my views. What is a monarchist to do in the world's "greatest" democracy?

Americans have but two choices before them: Barack Obama or John McCain. Yes, yes, I know there are other candidates running for president, but everyone knows that only the candidates put before us by the two major political parties have any chance of winning. For Catholics we have an abortion-on-demand proponent with a "Catholic" heretic as a running mate, or a war-mongering neo-con whose "pro-life" voting history is spotty at best. So what's a Catholic to do (no less a Catholic monarchist)?

Personally I'm voting for the Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin for president. He has absolutely no chance of winning, but at least I can vote for him and maintain my self respect. He is not only 100% pro-life on abortion and other life issues, but also is against the Iraq War and same-sex marriage. But why throw my vote away and let the really pro-abortion candidate possibly win? I remind you that one can never commit an evil so that good may come from it (i.e. vote for the lesser of two evils).

Whether McCain or Obama wins tomorrow, this monarchist will go to bed in the same position he was before: in a world that values so much that he abhors.

The Financial Crisis

When the $700 billion bailout package was before the U.S. Congress, I was very much opposed to its passage. My view was that banks got greedy in lending outrageous sums of money in the form of mortgages to people who couldn't afford them in the first place. The banks were dying, and should be left to die. But as time went on and I read more about the financial crisis, I think the bailout may just have been a good thing.

In keeping with the Catholic Church's teaching that usury (the charging of interest on loans) is sinful, I believe that profit should be taken out of banking. Part of the bailout involved the government buying shares in bank stocks, thus making the federal government part owners in some of our largest national banks. This I think to be a good thing. In my perfect monarchy, there would exist a state bank owned wholly by the crown. Usury would have no place in the lending of money (a small amount of interest could be charged to cover the expenses of bank employees as well as to compensate for inflation). The bailout plan is a far cry from the royal bank I dream of, but at least it will get government involvement in banking and hopefully prevent greediness to the degree we have recently seen.

Evolving Views

I gave an overview of what I thought was the perfect monarchy in my post My Ideal Monarchy. I stated in the post that my views were subject to change based on age and/or wisdom, and I would like to amend part of my hypothetical monarchy.

I stated that the high council that would act as an advisory board to the king would be elected. I think it best for members of the council to be nobles, passing their seats on the council to their sons (an hereditary council).

Now I would like to speak on a rather more important matter, at least in my view. I stated that the monarchy would be a Catholic monarchy, and that I hold to. But what I no longer believe is that the king and members of the royal family must marry Catholics or face being stripped of their royal prerogatives. As long as the king or any other member of the royal family maintain his Catholic identity and raise all children from a mixed marriage as Catholic, no punitive measures should be taken. If the Holy Catholic Church does not forbid mixed marriages, who am I (or in this case who is the hypothetical monarchy) to forbid what the Church permits?

My views on marriage have changed because I fell in love with a non-Catholic girl. I cannot imagine my life without her, and if I were king and faced with the choice of the crown and her I would gladly pick her. Some things are more important than the crown, in this case love. Edward VIII of England knew that, and now so do I.

SP One Year Later

Last Monday, July 7th marked the on-year anniversary of the Holy Father's Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum. With that in mind, I thought I'd make a long over due post on some liturgical experiences I've had recently.

After a late afternoon school function a few weeks ago I was looking for a place to get my daily prayers said. I was on a bit of a deadline (I had a date with my girlfriend), so I couldn't leisurely take my time. I went to the chapel in the priests' residence at my Alma mater but couldn't get all my prayers said due to a funeral. The near-by church was locked, so I went to the student chapel on campus. What I found disturbed me. People were in the chapel talking and visiting very loudly--which immensely annoyed me due to the fact that we were in the presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament--a band complete with guitars and drums, and an overhead projector and screen with the "hymns" displayed so people could sing along, which they did complete with upraised arms and swinging bodies. But I made do because it was the only place I had to pray. So I proceeded to pray my breviary, which wasn't particularly easy in my surroundings. In the middle of my praying of Vespers a priest in the Roman collar and jeans walked up to me and asked "Who's this guy praying up a storm?" I introduced myself and said I was just looking for a place to pray. He responded that I had found the right place. He informed me when I asked what was going on that the monthly "charismatic Mass and fellowship" was going on. When I found out who he was (he was known to me as the charismatic renewal priest of the diocese who happens to reside in the next-diocese-over--the same next-diocese-over where I attend an FSSP chapel), I informed him that I attend the FSSP chapel. His demeanor changed when he found that out, but it's a bit hard to describe in words just how. He didn't treat me like a second class citizen as some Novus Ordo priests would but rather treated me in a more formal manner, like the fact that I was a Traditionalist demanded a greater sense of formality than the others present. He invited me to stay if I wished, but said that I "might be a bit frazzled" (i.e. by the way Mass would be celebrated). I thanked him, and went back to my prayers. He proceeded to great others present, complete with large hugs. It goes without saying that I did not stay.

The other weekend I was out of town and wasn't able to get to the near-by Latin Mass for personal reasons, so I had to go to the local NO Mass. I knew I would be in for a show, but prayed I could just concentrate on the sacrificial nature of the Mass, not the liturgical shenanigans I would shortly view. We were greeted by the band (which just happened to stand next to the raised sanctuary in a particularly ugly church--nothing particularly Catholic about it), and were asked to say good morning to those around us. I stood rigidly and tried to ignore those around me until I was forced to acknowledge them by outstretched hands. The Mass itself was uninspiring with an altar girl, a "feel good" sermon that lacked anything touching real spirituality, numerous lay extraordinary Eucharistic ministers, and a very annoying old woman who went to the tabernacle (which happened to be stuck in an alcove at the backside of the church) both before and during the Mass with no genuflections, just a slight head bow. When asked how Mass was I said "My mother taught me that if I didn't have anything nice to say, not to say anything at all." I broke that admonition, and told all about my experience. I told the story of a parishioner at my chapel who's mother at one point had to work Sunday mornings and was not able to attend the TLM. She thus had to attend an NO Mass and said that she felt like she needed to go to confession after Mass because it made her so angry to see all the liturgical abuses. I felt much the same after my NO experience.

With these experiences in mind, might the Church need the TLM to mitigate all the liturgical chaos that happens nowadays? Just yesterday I was not able to attend my chapel for Mass due to personal reasons, but instead went to a much under-advertised TLM offered in an NO parish in my domiciled diocese. My diocese has for years been led by a bishop who resolutely refused permission for the indult Mass. It was so refreshing to have recourse to a beautifully celebrated TLM in the liturgical desert that is my home diocese, complete with cassock-wearing priest and transitional deacons! A portent of change perhaps?

One year later after SP much has been done, yet much has still to be done. Pray for our Holy Father Benedict XVI and for the success of Summorum Pontificum!

On Being a Monarchist

I thought I would post an entry on being a monarchist, or rather on letting others know that I am a monarchist. Monarchists are such a rare breed here in America and hearing the experiences of another would perhaps have helped me admit to myself that I was a monarchist, that it was okay to think the way I did and that I didn't have to fear others' reactions.

When I first felt my faith in this Republic failing and my interest in monarchy as a more viable form of government, I was still in the military. I was deathly afraid to let anyone know lest I be persecuted by my fellow soldiers at the least, and at the worst be discharged (in retrospect my fears at the worst were rather unfounded but nonetheless truly felt). I let a few select friends and classmates know of my monarchist leanings, and of course found the blogosphere as an outlet for my beliefs. As time passed--and I was eventually discharged from the military due to a line-of-duty injury I incurred during a drill weekend--I began to let more people know of my beliefs.

As more time passed, I found that no one thought I was a freak, a lunatic, or crazy. In fact, to this day when I tell people that I am a monarchist the most common response is "What's that?" Most Americans simply don't know anything about monarchy as a working form of government. I explain my exact beliefs. They think it's unusual, different, interesting, even eccentric (but I must admit I can be rather eccentric at times), but no one has taken offense at my beliefs. Even with this blog (with the exception of a few uncharitable--and down-right jerk lunatics) I have not come across anyone who intellectually disagrees with me that does not respect my beliefs--they may disagree with my views, but they respect me for taking the time and effort to express those beliefs.

I don't know if any other monarchists here in America or any where else that monarchy is treated in a less-than-enthusiastic manner have experienced the same fears of expressing monarchist beliefs, but if so take courage. Letting the world know you are a monarchist isn't nearly as hard as it may seem (but I do advise you to be prudent in what you say and to whom you say it lest it hurt your current or future employment options). Don't be afraid to be yourself. If monarchy is to see a resurgence in this world, monarchists like you and I must be willing to let the world know that we are out there!

Monarchy and Modern Europe

A reader recently suggested that I write a post on the prospects of a European-wide monarchy. I can't say that I see the prospects of one either likely or a positive thing for Europe.

Whether we monarchists like it or not (and this monarchist definitely does not like it!) Europe exists under the bureaucracy of the European Union, that democratic behemoth that seeks to spread it's flag over ever increasing territories. I don't see the prospects of the current ruling monarchies of Europe as rosy under the EU as it is: any monarchy that is a member nation of the EU will likely see further stripping of monarchical powers, more so than is already present. Under such conditions, how would one monarchy hope to gain power (real or otherwise) over the entire continent?

If a continental-wide monarchy were to exist, either the present monarchies would either have to be abolished or would see much of their already limited powers passed on to the European monarch. In addition, in those countries where the monarchy enjoys a modicum of popularity (such as the United Kingdom), the people would have to either give up their monarch or see him become even more of a figurehead than he already is. Can you imagine the British giving up their Queen for some continental monarch? I certainly cannot.

Many Catholic monarchists want to see the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire, stretching its fingers of power across the entire European continent. I must remind my readers that I am not an Austrian monarchist, but a German monarchist. I advocate the restoration of the German Empire (the Kaiserreich), not the HRE. While I would certainly like to see the restoration of the Austrian Empire in some form, I would not want this to include Germany proper. I, along with many German monarchists, would not want to see the Fatherland once again under the finger of an Austrian. The Hohenzollerns fought too hard in the past to thrust off the heavy hand of Austrian dominance to accept it once again.

In summary, while I certainly advocate the return of monarchy as the dominant form of government in Europe, I would not want such a return to include a European-wide monarchy. Let us monarchists set our goals along more small and reasonable lines.

Welcome Your Holiness!

The Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI started his visit to the United States today. It makes this Catholic feel a great deal of pride and security knowing that the Supreme Pontiff walks upon the same soil as I do. I hope his visit is a safe one and spiritually edifying for his flock.

Even before his arrival a few minutes ago (at the time of this writing), the protesters came out of the woodwork. I've read the articles and seen the news reports of those protesting the Holy Father's arrival for one reason (or should I say agenda?) or another. Some protest because of the pedophile scandal that has plagued the Church. Others protest over doctrinal issues--some "ninja nun" (as my chaplain would say) was bitching about the Church's doctrine on male only priesthood. Some protest because they don't have any thing better to do. But to you, my readers (especially my Catholic readers), I encourage you to look beyond the protesters, shut your ears to the inane political commentary proffered by the news anchors, and listen to the words of the Vicar of Christ. When Peter speaks, we listen.

Religion and Politics in the United Kingdom

There is a proposal before the British Parliament to abolish the Act of Settlement of 1701 that prevents any Catholic from ascending the throne or marrying a Catholic (read the article here). The topic of the Act of Settlement comes up often in monarchist circles, especially in those with a large number of Catholics.

At face value the Act of Settlement is an anti-Catholic law that restricts the rights of individuals who are in the line of royal succession to either convert to the one true Faith or from marrying a member of the one true Faith. It is a law based in political realities that are not now extant (i.e. the very influential nature of the Church in the political world), and at face vale seems rather bigoted and antiquated. It is, however, not that clear cut.

As I stated in my post on my ideal monarchy, my idea of a Catholic monarchy would be Catholic only, i.e. only Catholics would be able to ascend the throne, and no monarch or heir to the throne would be able to marry a non-Catholic. But I go even further than that. I make the stipulation that any member of the royal family who leaves the Catholic Church or marries a non-Catholic would be stripped of all royal titles and privileges. This is, admittedly, a biased piece of "law" against all non-Catholics. My reasoning for this is that I want a Catholic monarchy in perpetuity, not a monarchy that could lose it's Catholic identity due to the heretical influences of a non-Catholic monarch or non-Catholic in-law within the royal family. So while I do not agree with the anti-Catholic restrictions in the Act of Settlement, I certainly understand why those restrictions are there. The British monarchy is--unfortunately--a Protestant one, and it is entirely understandable that the powers that be within Britain want to keep it that way.

It is uncertain whether or not this proposal will go anywhere in Parliament. If I remember correctly, a similar proposal was before Parliament a few years ago and failed. There are also varying political implications with the abolition of the Act of Settlement (as described in the aforementioned article) that may complicate its repeal. Regardless of what happens the reality remains thus: if any heir to the British Crown sincerely wants to convert to Catholicism or marry a Catholic, he must make the decision whether his faith or lover means more to him than his crown. If such were or ever becomes the case in the British royal family, I hope that that member would choose his faith over his crown.

Election 2008

The clock ticks ever closer to the Presidential Election of 2008. The candidates have debated, they have slung accusations and claims at one another (both within and without the respective parties), millions of dollars have been spent, and many have already thrown in the towel and called it quits. So where do I stand, you ask? Some think that a monarchist would have no interest in a democratic election. Others think that, while I may have an interest, I would not take part in a process of government in which I have no belief. So, here's what I've got to say.

First of all, for a country that values democracy so much, we have a very undemocratic way of electing our presidents. I'm not talking about the Electoral College (although that too is a very undemocratic body, as the members of the College are allowed to ignore the will of their constituencies and vote as they please), but I'm talking about the primary process. Firstly, let's face it: only the rich can run for office. In order to get your party's nomination, you have to run a very aggressive campaign filled with television, radio, and print advertisements. You have to have money to travel to the fifty states to give speeches. Secondly, the media to a great degree determines which candidates are the front runners. If the media doesn't think a candidate has a chance, they simply don't cover that candidate in their coverage, or even worse dissallow that candidate from televised debates. Do you know that Alan Keyes is running under the Republican ticket? I didn't until quite recently--he's never talked about on the news and as been forbidden from the big debates on TV. Then factor in the fact that each state has different caucus/primary schedules. The result is that people in those states with later caucuses/primaries don't have the chance to vote for several candidates simply becuase by the time they get to vote said candidates have already dropped out. To some it up, if we truly believe in democracy and egalitarianism in this country, then why don't we have a truly democratic and egalitarian way of electing our leaders?

Now on to my own views regarding the candidates. I won't vote for any Democrat, since each and every one is a hands-down supporter of abortion. But the Republicans aren't much better. The Republican candidates are either pro-abortion to one degree or another, or claim to be pro-life but say that they woud "leave it up to the states" to decide if Roe v. Wade would be the law in their respective states. That's neo-con code for "I'll do nothing to stop abortion." Abortion is the worst, most terrible crime ever known to man. I don't care if Roe v. Wade is overturned by illegal or unconstitutional means. Heck, I don't even care if it's overturned by a military coup (as long as said coup is bloodless), I just want innocent babies to live! I'll have nothing to do with any candidate who supports it under any circumstance, and you know what? No self respecting Catholic should either. I will not choose the "lesser of two evils" by choosing a candidate who "would do less damage to the pro-life cause" than the opponent. We as Catholics can never do evil so that good may come from it. Since it's evil to vote for a pro-abortion candidate, I will not vote for the one who I think will do the least damage to unborn babies. I'd rather stay home with my conscious intact.

So in conclusion, if I had to make my decision now (which, by the way, Washington state doesn't vote until the 19th of this month), I'd have to say that I will vote, in the words of Richard Pryor's candidate in the movie Brewster's Millions, for "None of the Above!"