Rules of Succession

I have been thinking lately about the various rules of succession, both historically and presently within monarchies. Some monarchies allow only legitimate male heirs to ascend the throne, while others allow legitimate females as well. Some of the monarchies that allow female heirs do so only if there is no male heir, while others dictate that the eldest child regardless of gender ascend the throne. The common thread among the different rules of succession is succession by blood, but what about adoption?

I must confess that I have been thinking about adoption and succession for a very selfish reason: my wife and I have been unable to conceive and are in the process of adopting a baby. What if I were born a royal and unable to have a biological child? There are certainly enough historical examples of childless royals to make one think about the possibility of adopted heirs. Perhaps many succession disputes (even armed disputes) could have been avoided had a royal couple been allowed to adopt a child and name that child the heir to the throne. It was done in ancient Rome (although the emperor usually adopted a nephew and named him heir), so there is some historical precedent.

I am not one to pay attention to gossip magazines or the tabloids, but when I am in the check-out stand at the grocery store it is hard not to notice them (especially due the the fact that I am an Archie comics fan, and the great Archie Double Digest is often sold right next to the tabloids). I have noticed several tabloids since the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge got married alluding to the royal couple having fertility problems. All these rumours may be false, but it does make one think about the topic of royal succession.

So I ask you, my readers, what do you think about royal succession by adoption?

Congratulations!

I would like to wish the their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge a very happy and life-long marriage! May God bless them with many wonderful children, and may God bless them and guide them throughout their marriage and eventual reign.

The State of Europe

I recently read a couple of articles about the political climate in Europe. One article describes how the Swiss are increasingly becoming weary of foreigners in their nation, especially Muslims. The other article tells us that thirteen per cent of modern Germans would welcome a Führer (no, not a return of Hitler but rather a strong leader who can and will stop the Muslim tide from overtaking Germany). And then I found this video (insert hyperlink) of an Austrian MP criticizing Turkey for its inaction over the murder of a Catholic archbishop in Turkey at the hands of a Turkish Muslim. The common theme within these article and video is an increasing hostility among Europeans towards Islam, non-Western culture, and status quo of modern European tolerance.

I am not a fan, nor have I ever been a fan of the European Union. It is my opinion that the EU breaks down national sovereignty and destroys a sense of ethnic and cultural cohesiveness at the national level. It also makes it harder for the various monarchies of Europe (those that still exist that is) to reassert their sovereign power and overcome the anti-monarchical democratic trend spreading throughout Europe. The EU also makes it harder for former monarchies, in my opinion, to resurrect themselves.

Europe seems to be on the brink of continental wide bankruptcy. The Euro no longer seems to be as indestructible as it used to, and the people of Europe are beginning to wake up to what forty years of increasing tolerance to non Christian and non European thought and culture has done to their homelands. I hope that the theme common within these articles and video continue and multiply.

Willing Heirs?

A reader recently asked me (specifically about Germany) if the solution to the problem of non-reigning monarchies truly lies in the past, i.e. are current legitimate heirs willing to assume the thrones of their ancestors should the occasion arise. While I am loyal to the legitimate heir to the German Empire, HIRH Georg Friedrich von Preußen, I would not necessarily be opposed to someone else ascending the throne of a new German Empire if the restoration of the old one was impossible.

I find it most prudent to restore legitimate reigns with legitimate heirs, but far too often in Europe the "pretenders" to various thrones have little to no support from the populace, or even have no desire to work towards a restoration of the monarchy. If heirs do not work for a restoration of monarchy, and some charismatic figure should come along and do it himself, I see no reason to deny that individual the opportunity to found a new Christian monarchy in place of an old one.

A Royal Wedding

I would like to offer my congratulations to Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden and her new husband Prince Daniel, Duke of Västergötland on their recent marriage (the wedding took place on June 19). From an American monarchist, I offer the royal couple a happy and long marriage!

The Future King of England

I read about Prince Charles giving a speech about Islam last week. I have had a hard time finding anything but much abbreviated articles on the speech, but you can read a fairly good article from Father Zuhlsdorf's blog here.

Basically the Prince touts Islam as a religion that is one with nature, a religion that can help us save the planet. While I am concerned about how we treat the plante that God has entrusted us with, I do not see the heretical religion of Islam as the answer to our environmental problems, and I find it disturbing that the future King of England does. This is one more example of why I think the Prince of Wales will make an awful King of England. As a monarchist, I will show him respect and honor, but I am not looking forward to the day when his mother, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II dies.

Usury

Having two college degrees cost me a lot of money. I had to take out several student loans to finance my education. College tuition (and the related costs and fees) are quite expensive, but coupled with interest on those loans compounded daily the amount owed at the end of a college education becomes exorbitant. I am no expert on the Church's teaching regarding usury (mainly due to the fact that no priests or bishops seem to preach on this matter any longer, and I have found it extremely hard to find good, definitive infomation regarding this matter), but I know in my heart that it is wrong to penalize responsible new college graduates with student loans bloated beyond reasonableness with interest.

After paying my student loan payments, rent, and utilities, I have almost no money left from my monthly salary. If it were not for the fact that my wife is a full-time college student receiving financial aid (some of which we will have to start paying back in a year's time), we would not have enough money to buy groceries or gas. What is the solution to my situation, a situation that millions of other new college graduates face? I don't think the solution can be found in a government program, tax breaks, public service breaks, etc. I truly believe the only solution can be found in creating a new society guided by the econimic principles of the Catholic Church, a society in which usury is illegal. The older I get the more convinced I am that a truly Catholic monarchy must be established or re-established in order for justice to reign in the world.

Catholic Heritage

Something struck me today at Mass. Although I attend an FSSP chapel, sometimes time constraints necessitate my attendance at a diocesan affiliated Traditional Latin Mass held at a Novus Ordo parish. While the diocesan TLM has its regular attendees, it also has a certain percentage of drop-ins.

I observed three unrelated elderly women at today's Mass. One woman asked another "Is this a Spanish Mass?" The second woman responded that it was a high Mass, but I don't think she understood that it was a high Mass of the Extraordinary Form. The first woman took her place in a pew. During the early parts of the Mass the second woman got up and talked to a third elderly woman. While I could not understand what they were saying, I observed a prevailing sense of confusion in both the second and third women's demeanor. The second woman took a seat next to the third woman. Half way through the Mass both the second and third women were gone. The first woman, while obviously not knowing when to sit, stand, and kneel, at least made it through most of the Mass, leaving immediately after receiving Communion.

What struck me observing these three elderly women is something I have observed several times in the past--the greatest source of opposition towards the Traditional Latin Mass within the lay world comes from the elderly. They seem to have become so attached to the Novus Ordo Mass that they refuse to even try the Extraordinary Form. Indeed, the very Mass they once knew and loved in their youth has become a remnant of the past, all but forgotten--they have forgotten their own Catholic heritage. It is the young that are flocking to the TLM, and it is the young that shall perpetuate devotion to the Mass of the Ages.

Her Majesty's Displeasure

I read an article by the Telegraph recently describing the Queen's displeasure with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown over the situation in Afghanistan regarding the funding of British troops. Her Majesty's specific concern involves her troops' lack of proper equipment. While it is not within the scope of this posting to delve into matters of this particular war, I wanted to comment on the situation.

Queen Elizabeth is the head of the British Armed Forces, but in practice British troops seem to go wherever Parliament sends them. It is entirely the Queen's prerogative to make her positions known regarding her troops, but this happens rarely rather than often. I understand that there is an established relationship between the British monarch and Parliament and that modern monarchs seldom make public statements regarding their views on matters of state, but I do wish the Queen was in a position of more power and was able to publicly voice her opinions regularly. Even more I wish the Queen was in a position where she was able to say yea or nay to sending her troops abroad rather than rubber stamping Parliament's military wishes; if Her Majesty did not believe British involvement in a particular war was in the best interests of her nation, she should be able to deny the wishes of Parliament and keep her troops out of involvement.

Before I get any comments on how my wishes would provoke a constitutional crisis and do damage to the monarchy, let me say that I understand the tenuous situation Her Majesty is in with her Parliament; I simply wish and look for the day when the British monarch has the ability to properly exercise his or her constitutional powers.