Friday, December 19, 2008

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


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)
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 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, 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 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 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, 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


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.


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


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


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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.


Anonymous said...

Council of Duxi?
Is that a place?

If he means to use the Latin word "dux", as in leader, then the plural is "duces".

Or am I missing something?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the correction, Alex; I, alas, am a product of the public school system which shuns classical languages. "Dux" is intended to be an honorary title given to leaders of the most preeminent noble famlies. Linguistic errors aside, what do you think of the constitution itself?

Anonymous said...

"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."

Looking at history, and particularly the state of our country at the present moment, I would have to say it is the other way around. Lack of wealth also does not equal lack of education, and the formally schooled (in terms of college) are often some of the least educated and biggest idiots.

Anonymous said...

I think this guy needs to get a grip. If he wants to live in that kind of state/country go and find one and swear his allegiance to it. This country was based on freedom of religion, or lack there of, and I for one think it should stay that way. Also I don't want anyone telling me what I can or cannot do or be especially if his "ideas" are based on the God of HIS choosing. Control is an illusion and this guy seems to want to regulate everyone and everything. Subjugation breeds rebellion imo and the world goes round and round...

Nick said...

I think you're missing the point. Firstly, this is a Catholic monarchist blog. Most Catholic monarchists want at the least Catholicism to be the dominant religion. Secondly, I'd imagine the reason "this guy" hasn't gone and found "one and swear his allegiance to it" is because none exist presently. That's part of the point of this blog: to promote what we monarchists want.

Anonymous said...

I think a monarchy would tolerate more individual freedoms than we curretnly have under liberal democracy. If nothing else maybe we would have sound money again instead of the evaporating fiat currency we have currently.


May said...

The author of this constitution certainly did go into great depth. Wow. It's rare to find someone taking such care over these matters.

I definitely agree that the state has to abide by moral laws. The rest is interesting, but I must say I think it's hard to imagine the US as a monarchy or empire. Everything American (at least since the country's independence) seems to have such a republican character.

As to constitutions in general, I think it's very hard to find the right one... I know this is a trite comment, but it always strikes me as true. Very hard to strike a balance that will prevent any group within the state from becoming too powerful and, thus, tyrannizing over the whole.

Thanks for your blog. I especially like the new image in the header! Beautiful.

Anonymous said...

I rather like the plan! I wish we had a monarchy.

Old Southern Whig said...

I don't agree with all of this, but it is an interesting outline sketch. I also can't help but note, as a disaffected Anglican considering swimming the Tiber, that under these rules the Episcopal Church would not be a Recognized Church (too few members) and might well end up under Heathen status. My grandparents and their ancestors would roll over in their graves at the thought.

Anonymous said...

Marcus Aemilius, I certainly sympathize with your situation; though I myself am a Catholic, I have Protestant ancestors who are buried in the graveyards of churches that could no longer rightfully be considered Christian. That, in summation, is the point of the Ten Precepts: to force groups on the edge to make the choice between Christian and Heathen. The precepts are based on Christological and moral doctrines universally held by all Christians a hundred years ago; notice obvious Catholic things like transubstantiation, papal infallibility, 73 books in the Biblical canon, etc are left out. I designed them deliberately that way so as to include Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Christians and conservative Protestants equally in the political life of the Empire.

As for the 10 million members, perhaps an exception could made for "historic" Protestant churches to receive state recognition despite their size. I originally put this limit in to destroy the political influence of holy-roller churches, charismatic televangelists and other independent Protestant groups; however, I still stand by this assertion. It was my hope that by requiring 10 million members for state recognition, disparate Protestant groups would unite into larger bodies and more effectively policy heresy within their ranks.

As an aside to the man/woman who said I want to control everyone and everything, this constitution leaves most of the functions of government up to the municipal, county, and provincial offices and their elected officials. The imperial apparatus is meant more to provide oversight and would not be nearly as sprawling, controlling or wasteful as democratic governments today.

Viva Cristo Rey!

Aquilifer said...

Obviously someone had ancient Rome in mind.

Such a constitution might work somewhere in Latin America. The USA would never accept it. Not that I'm opposed to a theoretical monarchy in Anglo-America--difficult though it may be to adapt.

Viva la Casa Habsburg-Iturbide!

Anonymous said...

I just discovered that America has real live monarchists. Thank you for providing me with an evening's entertainment, for I delight in exploring political fetishes of all stripes. I am curious as to how anything resembling this fantasy constitutional monarchy could ever be imposed upon or within the United States; I imagine we heathens and plebes who make up the mob currently electing officials won't vote one in and, and I find the idea of some sort of monarchist revolution even more far-fetched. Where would the monarchists find the people willing to die for them? However fantastic and impossible your dream kingdom is, I thank you again for the entertainment - it is not often one finds a webring consisting in a group who devoutly and openly rejects the enlightenment in favor of the dark ages.

Nick said...

You want amusement? Listen to any American presidential campaign speech.

Anonymous said...

Quote..."Rejection of Modern Heresies: including pacifism"

I could not agree more, pacifists do nothing but cause trouble for Empires and the ruling Monarch!

For example, who remembers that pacifist guy with the long hair, beard and sandals from the Middle East who caused all those problems for Ceasar and Rome a few years back?

Nick said...

That long haired guy you refer to was not a pacifist. He physically drove the money changers from the temple with a whip. Not very pacific to me.

Anonymous said...

Haha... the old "Jesus was a hippie" argument... very cute. Pacifism, like Marxism, is rejected because both assert that human beings can create an earthly paradise by through their own labor without divine grace. In essence, both represent a false messianic vision which is antithetical to authentic Christian teaching. Pacifism also has the added danger of seeking to placate or tolerate evil when it should be destroyed and thus represents a death-wish for any Christian civilization. For these reasons the Ten Precepts force the renunciation of such false, man-made dogmas.

Bartholomew said...

A native monarchy, especially one contrived from thin air (whence the royalty?), is simply not in the American character. I have, however, wondered if we would ever submit ourselves again to the oversight of a (re-evangelized) House of Windsor and if/how that might work.

But to your constitution:

If the author is still around to comment, I'd like to ask him about this phrase:

"Rejection of Modern Heresies: condemnation of Marxism, racism and/or ethnocentricism , dispensationalism, relativism, pantheism, and pacifism" (emphasis mine)

What, exactly, is the heresy? The concept of "racism" is certainly a modern heresy (the first mention, I think, was from du Bois in 1928) and even more "ethnocentricism" but the outlook they presume these days to critique certainly is not.

The Catholic understanding of natio belies the modern "open borders" rhetoric. Race, nation and tribe are simply intermediary, concentric circles between clan and family in the center and all mankind at the margin.

Just as the State still respects unique and distinct roles for the family, so should it (as it used to) for clan, tribe, nation and race. I would remind the author that ethny and race are God's creation from the time of Babel. On what grounds does a traditionalist dispense with them?

Any traditionalist constitution should allow for these time-honored facets of Creation.



Yusuf Abdul Masih Bey said...

I'm not exactly sure if I understood these categorizations properly, but it seemed that Muslims were lumped with those without God. A rather strange taxonomy if so.

It is also a shame that Sara's observation has been rather passed over. Wealth does not a wise person make; nor do the increased opportunities that wealth can afford a person mean that that person will take advantage of them, while those without the means, laboring under all kinds of adversities, may go much further. Establishing such a system may make for good Dungeons and Dragons roleplaying, but I find it highly impractical in terms of America.

The thing about Traditionalism, and traditional social orders, is that they are organic. So while you may be gleaning some things, rightly or wrongly, from actual traditional societies, your desire to establish them is quite artificial in this particular context, and thus will lead to all kinds of non-traditional problems.

Frankly, while I believe in a hierarchy of truth-bearing entities, of which I'd say Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism are pretty much the summit, I have no desire to deprive the others of their civil rights as I think carrying this out and putting the "choice" to them will result in graver danger to my soul than to theirs.

While I deeply want to be a monarchist and support an organically traditional order, I must remain, for the time being, a republican (small "r") of the paleo-conservative variety, with a small dose of anarcho-syndicalism for flavor.



Richard Lane said...

For a more forward looking constitutional monarchy in North America, may I suggest you take a look at

I truly enjoy your discussion of American monarchy.


Anonymous said...

This charter has nothing to do with constitutional monarchy. It only has the power to set back any budding monarchical movement at least 40,000 years. It's definitely not influenced by Thomas Aquinas and it surely isn't influenced by Isadore of Seville. This sounds more like Dungeons and Dragons than monarchy.

The structure in that charter is likened to a pipeline that constricts water, instead of letting it flow. Whoever wrote this is blatantly a product of the public school system and has absolutely no concept of what monarchy is. Leave the job for those of us who actually studied Aquinas, Isadore, and Francis de Sales.

Monarchy means one unified streamline rule. The constitution posted here is a ridiculously oppressive caste system charter which does not flow in one direction. All constitutional monarchies require an inalienable Bill of Rights applicable to every citizen according to each citizen's needs. Rights are to be conferred without penalties or diminution in status.

No status is to be granted according to income or financial assets. Such a thing is, at best, an anti-christian monarchy, being that Christianity has long since taught that a person is capable of only loving God or Mammon and not both. This charter is the love of Mammon. Thus, it promotes the hatred of God. God is the one who establishes government so that mankind can live in dignity and peace, or achieve lost dignity and lost peace.

And what about people who are robbed of their assets by a severe economic injustice; or those who fall victim to natural disasters, thereby loosing their $500,000 worth of assets and becoming destitute? What about people who loose everything in a war? Their legal status changes? No. They are still humans. Some of those destitute people might have been heroic humans who risked it all and lost it all.

The Teachings of the Church require governments, as a moral obligation, to institute in their laws distributive and re-distributive justice. Where is that in this proposed constitution?

The only religious requirements are those elements of a religious doctrine that show proof that a religion, and not a racket, exist. That would mean that a religion needs to prove that its doctrine contains acknowledgment of the four ontological proofs of God. Is such a case, the religions become categorized as natural religions (acknowledging God the Unmoved Mover through natural human reason.)

Serfdom and caste system oppression is entirely different from monarchy. This so-called constitution is merely pompous and suffocating regimentation. The law exists for the people and not the people for the law. Recourse to the law should be readily accessible to the people.

Plus, the law already exists. It is a matter of defining it and enforcing it. Human rights are absolute. Human life is absolute. The purpose of a monarchy is to enforce the justice which already is in existence and not to have a manipulative congress take it away. For example, no one has the power to say that Africans must be white plantation owners' slaves, no matter how many people in congress say it must be so.

This so-called constitution also violates the teachings of Leo XIII. He stated that the purpose for Society is for one brother to uphold the other brother in support. Solidarity is the operative word. This constitution has nothing to do with the purpose of government supporting mankind in his/her frail and vulnerable state.

What we are dealing with here is at least one person who claims to be a monarchist and isn't. That constitution is enough to make a classically educated person cringe and even howl out the window something a serf would scream the moment he got hit on the hand with a hammer.

Anonymous said...

More notes on that proposed "constitution":

1 - Monarchy means One Rule. This constitution involves a cast of a thousand, thereby negating the concept of monarch. It's even too large to constitute an Oligarchy. Too many parts to an engine makes an engine easily break down. A monarchy is a failure if it is not as streamlined as possible. A large aristocracy makes the king look very little. Yet, the king is the master link of the entire structure. Tiny master links break easily.

2 - One NEVER gives a higher class veto power over a lower class without it constituting dictatorship. A political entity of the same level can only have veto power over another entity of the same level. Such entities are known a Peers. The vetoed peers must be given the possibility to override the veto imposed upon them by the other class of peers. When you have an aristocratic class given veto power over a more vulnerable class, that constitutes Tyranny. Thomas Aquinas specifically wrote: "Tyranny is lawlessness." In other words, you do not make a lesser class subject to the whims of an upper class.

3 - The author of that proposed constitution forgot to add the King's Prerogative Court. That element of monarchical law was even used in a major U.S. Supreme Court decision, concerning one's right to choose federal over state court jurisdicition.

4 - The Lord Chancellor post was another pivotal post to put in plane sight in a monarchical constitution, because in the past, a Lord Chancellor would literally judge according to his conscience in certain instances.

5 - Where is there mention on how to apply Common Law amidst Substantive Law and when to apply the Law of Equity into vaguely stated Common Laws? If the laws in force are not the just ones, then it doesn't matter who is in power and what title you give him.

6 - What about Equitable Tolling in the Statute of Limitations law?

7 - This is a windbag constitution that does not cover the elements of law that need to be addressed.

Monarchy is no great mystery. It has been done before. There are records on how monarchies worked. Monarchy has been around for thousands of years.

Anonymous said...

Additional Notes concerning the text called "Blue Print for Monarchy America."

1 - The fatal error in this constitution was the inclusion of the Comitia. For the record, the Comitia was the Roman Assembly. The existence of a Comitia erases the existence of monarchy. One or the other. Not both.
- - -
2- Dominates very closely sound like made men in the Mafia. Plus, the position is a ticket for corruption. Just pay off a magnate, and voila, you are a dominate.

By the way, do you know what a dux actually is? He or she is a valedictorian --- The student at the head of the class.
- - -
3- The author of this blueprint stated that he does not hate the poor, but he does recognize that people without wealth and education tend to support destructive policies, hence the reason they are banned from all but one election.

Response: Saint Bernadette was very poor. Saint Francis Cabrini was the thirteenth child of a poor family. Was she destructive? Schubert died in an attic, poverty stricken. Didn't he write a version of the Ave Maria? Vermeer left his wife and children in debt at his death, yet his paintings are exiquisite. Francis of Assisi, Dominic Guzma, Louis of Montfort, etc., embraced a life of poverty.

Further Response: Then there was this Jewish person who has poverty stricken all his life. He was so poverty stricken that he slept on fishing boats and on the ground. His name was Jesus of Nazareth. His mother was poor, too.

Concluding Response: Financially comfortable judges made abortion happen. Carnegie and Frick were basically slave owners in underpaying steel workers, and Carnegie was the richest man in the world in his day. He let the Homestead Riot happen, and he could have stopped it from happening very easily. There are destructive singers, authors, movie stars, and talk show hosts who are with wealth and education.

Anonymous said...

Important Matters Entirely Missing from this Constitution Include:

1 - The Making of Currency and the Delegation of the Powers of the Treasury.

2 - The Department of Weights and Measures.

3 - Interprovincial Travel, Interprovincial Commerce, and Reparian Water Rights between Provinces.

4 - The Power of Establishing a Universal Commercial Code.

5 - Common Law Structuring in a Restatement of Torts, Judgments, etc.

6 - Immigration and an Immigrant's Right to sue a foreign malfeasor.
In the U.S. Constitution, it is called the Alien Tort Claims Act, found at 28 U.S.C. § 1350.
Its nickname was the Pirate Act, originally for the foreign victims of piracy. Today, its for refugees suing dictators and corporate sponsored thugs, as well as victims of military thugs.

7 - The Delineation of Judicial Jurisdiction and the appeals processes.

8 - The Structure of Militias and/or Standing Armies and/or Regular Armies.

9 - Copyright and Patent Law.

10 - Jurisprudence Code delineating between Treason, Felony, High Misdemeanor, Misdemeanor, Summary Offense, Tort Offense, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Breach of Duty of Loyalty (as is classically defined.)

11 - The Bankruptcy and Liquidation Process.

12 - Statute of Limitations.


The Matter which Requires Emphasis:

The only requirement for a religion to be recognized as a religion is that it be proven to be not a farse or a mere philosopy or a scientific theory. The only test would be to see if its doctrine recognizes the ontological proofs of an Unmoved Mover.

PLUS, the religion must NOT have in its moral code the commission of a crime. Thus, a religion which states the you must sacrifice humans is to be illegal. A religion which provides for bigamy is to be illegal. Etc., etc., etc go the examples.

Religions passing the ontological test are then categorized as natural religions that recognize the existence of God through human reason.

In addition, you don't deny citizenship by cause of religion or the lack thereof. People who live on the same terrain and under the same sky are citizens of the same geographic area. The sun shines on all. Not merely those of a particular religion.

Anonymous said...

If the Minor Comitia is to be 1/3 nobles, then it's not a comitia. A Comitia was the People's Assembly. The author of this blueprint entirely disrepects the common man. Big problem with this:

Commoners were the single most powerful lawmakers throughout pockets of history. This is why we have something called, COMMON LAW. Without the "common man" nothing gets accomplished in society. The common man grows your food, builds your highways, fixes your appliances, keeps your car running, makes your bridges safe, builds the houses you occupy, and puts out your house fires. The common man has something called, COMMON SENSE. The French aristocracy surely didn't have this common sense in 1789.

If a law directly affects a person, that person has a say in the law. Usually, the voicing thereof is described in a Bill of Rights or in a Magna Carta. The famous Magna Carta was extremely personal, even mentioning names and professions. Here is an example of the Magna Carta:

A knight could pay his taxes by either paying the tax collector or performing overtime guard duty at an available castle. He had a choice in the matter. Without a Magna Carta or a Bill of Rights, any constitution is a mockery of justice.

By the way, it is expressly stated in Canon Law that it is absolutely wrong to force anyone to be Catholic. Those "nine precepts" attempt to do it in part. This constitution would guarantee a nation of hardened hearts.

One more thing: Citizenship is naturally endowed. It is a instant right. You do NOT have to jump through a hoop, in order to obtain it. An oppressive aristocracy does NOT have the power to justly keep citizenship away from you in your own homeland. PERIOD.

Government is there to serve the people. When it doesn't, it becomes a dictatorship of thievery.
Christ himself said, "The law was made for man, and not man for the law."

Anonymous said...

I don't believe that short of a nuclear holocaust, another civil war, or the drastic effects of global climate change, you would have much chance of establishing a monarchy in the US.

I do not believe there is a very strong monarchist movement in Germany, and you would have trouble establishing the Roman Catholic Church as a state religion there, in a primarily protestant nation.

France has a very strong monarchist tradition that is usually associated with the nation's Roman Catholic tradition. But as with the US, I don't see that happening without some major crisis.

Probably your best bet would be an impoverished nation that could possibly be successfully fillibustered. Haiti would be a good possibility.

Collect enough resources - both money and experienced soldiers - precipitate a crisis, and take over Haiti's government and establish a monarchy with Catholicism and voudoun as the state religions.