God Save The Queen...err...or....wut!

[Enda]

Well, PSPX, you still haven't refuted my claim that monahcry is utopian, so that's my defense and I'm sticking to it!

[Oik]

I think I am slowly moving toward voting for a monarchy, however, this isn't ever going to be a possiblity for government (and the monarchies today aren't really monarchies).

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='crusader1234' date='May 4 2004, 11:12 PM'] depends on the ruler. technically the pope is sort of our earthly king... jusr with papal succession instead of birthright [/quote]
NO. I [i]strongly object[/i] to the Pope being compared to a King. If anything, he is a Prime Minister, but CHRIST is the Church's ONLY King and Lord.

[Aloysius]

yeah, if you wanna get technical. I mean, that was exactly what the keys symbolized, he is definitely the prime of all the ministers the king sends to represent him. Jesus is the King in that sense. But in the sense that the prime minister is sent by the king with authority, he rules over the church on earth as if he was monarch.

I am starting a small Catholic Kingdom. I need to read that Aquinas book, sounds like an awesome read.

I have no problem with republics and such, i just think the entire world has complicated things up big time. In my kingdom it will be a lot simpler, and it is clear to me that the simpler form of government is a monarchy.

[Archbishop 10-K]

[quote]
"They tell us that all Kings are bad; that God never made a King; and that all Kings are very expensive. But, that all Kings are bad cannot be true: because God himself is one of them; he calls himself King of Kings; which not only shows us he is a King, but he has other Kings under him: he is never called King of Republics. The Scripture calls Kings, the Lord’s Anointed; but who ever heard of an anointed Republic?"

Association Papers, London, 1793
[/quote]

[quote]
"A priest who is not a monarchist is not worthy to stand at the altar table. The priest who is a republican is always a man of poor faith. God himself anoints the monarch to be head of the kingdom, while the president is elected by the pride of the people. The king stays in power by implementing God’s commandments, while the president does so by pleasing those who rule. The king brings his faithful subjects to God, while the president takes them away from God."

Neomartyr Vladimir, Metropolitan of Kiev, tortured and killed by Bolsheviks on 7th February 1918
[/quote]


God save the Queen, of course. Really strange for me to say this, since I'm an American, but I'm a monarchist.

I believe that the most "Catholic" form of government is monarchy, since it reflects the hierarchial style of the Church (the Pope is considered the last absolute monarch in the world, and the Curia is Latin for "court", like a king's court), and as I recall from the Bible, Israel was a kingdom, not a republic.

European-style monarchies place a great deal of focus towards God and the divine right, when compared to republics, which tend to be extremely secular and succumbing to public whim, instead of the will of God. Historically speaking, Catholics have supported kings, even if those kings weren't Catholic. For example, the Catholics during the English Revolution (when they overthrew the King temporarily) supported the King. During the American Revolution, many Catholics tended to be loyalists. During the French Revolution, the devout Catholics supported King Louis XVI instead of the Revolution.

I tend to envy the Brits since they have a Queen (even if she's Anglican) and I have a measly politician for my national symbol of power. Especially since I'm half-British/white and my ancestors were former British colonists in America, sometimes I feel as though my ancestors robbed me of my Queen!

I mean, really. I'd rather charge into battle yelling "Long live the King" than "Long live the President." In the election of 2000, less than half the population voted for Bush, so there's no point in falling for the illusion that the President represents the people. In fact, the King represents the people much better since kings are non-partisan. They are neither Democrat nor Republican. They are raised from birth to be the best ruler in the world.

And like the quote at the top of my post said, Jesus is the King of Kings, not the King of Republics. It seems to me that republicanism is for Protestants. Protestant churches seem to be much more "democratic" and have less respect for ordained authorities. Republics also rek of the "Enlightenment", and the ideals of Freemasonry (no kidding!) Freemasons were pro-republics and anti-Church.


And now, I think I'll go make an intro post (I'm a new user.)



edit- Oh, forgot to mention, back in the old days, there was what was called an alliance between "the altar and the throne." I'd like to live in a country like that.

Edited June 13, 2004 by Archbishop 10-K

[amarkich]

I apologize that I do not have time to refute all of the questions made regarding my previous post, and I apologize for the great length of time since I last posted on this thread. In response to those who blindly "simply quote the Catechism", there are two issues that must be recognized. First, the Catechism does not say that Republicanism is better than Monarchy or Kingship. It says (erroneously; we can discuss this point separately if need be) that the form of government is of no concern. This is absurd (seems to be the word of choice in this thread). Even as far as the CCC goes, not placing favor on any system of government, it still does not say "Republicanism is better than Monarchy", so simply quoting that "either is fine" does not suffice as a response to which should be supported. Secondly, as I stated, the CCC does not follow the tradition of the Church in this matter and therefore should not be consulted especially considering the fact that it gives little or no support for its claims. Further, this is a matter of logic; we cannot simply write off the writings of the most brilliant man to live as "ancient customs" or treat it with similar disrespect. I myself have not even read [i]On Kingship[/i] in its entirety, so I will heed the exhortation of Katholish on the matter and read it completely before continuing with my comments. I will have read it by the end of the night. God bless.

EENS,
Adam

Edited June 13, 2004 by amarkich

[Aloysius]

Archbishop 10-K, check out my thread in open mic titled "Athanasia Can be a reality"

I am starting a Catholic Kingdom, you can help us buy an island. It will be small, but it will be an amazing place to live and raise a family

I am by no means a glory-seeker in this endeavour, but in this plan I intend to be the king. It just seems God's will, no matter how crazy people tell me I am. If you believe in the dream and hold out with all optimism and put in your effort, this will be reality. By 2020 we hope to have our own island.

PAX

[RandomProddy]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='May 6 2004, 05:42 PM'] A Republic is what the Church has.

The Pope as the President... the Cardnials as the Senators. [/quote]
Actually, the Church is similar to a monarchy. The Monarch is the Pope (with a triple crown putting him above normal kings), and the Cardinals are "The Princes of the church" (and I quote.)

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='Ellenita' date='May 5 2004, 12:14 PM'] I agree Elizabeth II appears to have a Christian faith and I believe that this has probably influenced the manner in which she has conducted her reign (MI5 please take note if you're listening in    ) however Charles doesn't appear to have the same belief.....and of course none of the British monarchs can be Catholic.  :angry: [/quote]
I like HM Queen Elizabeth II. Whether or not I think the British monarchy is outdated, I haven't made up my mind, but I really admire her fortitude. She seems like a really nice lady, and it smells of elderberries that not too many people appreciate her. She's given her whole life for the service of her country. I think that's pretty cool.

As for Charles, I think he's okay. I don't think he and Diana, Princess of Wales, should ever have married. I hear he's interested in Eastern Orthodoxy as of late, which is cool. (His dad, Prince Philip, was baptized Orthodox, being that he was a Greek prince.) The law forbidding Catholics from marrying members of the British royal family is archaic. I bet either Charles or William will strike it down.

Princess Diana's mom (bless her soul. She passed away recently) converted to Catholicism, as did the current Duchess of Kent and her son.

God bless,

Jen

[Crusader_4]

Further to that i have heard that Catholicsm has kind of crept into the Royal family i forget what princess but one of them converted to Catholicms as well something i picked up on that i doubt very many people did but this years Christmass Address that the Queen gives to UK and the Commonwelath she said a very interesting prayer. St Ignatius Prayer for Genoristy which if one reads it is very very Catholic in nature (is my fav praryer i think). Also to quote from the Saint who formed the Jesuits i think is rather coincednetal consdierng looking back into history the Jesuits like Edward Camipion and the Other Queen Elizabeth I.

[BeenaBobba]

This is what the most ideal form of government is to me:

A non-hereditary Catholic monarchy. Imagine having elected kings (elected by the Catholic Church, that is) who were faithful to the teachings of the Church? That king would have my allegiance in a heartbeat.

God bless,

Jen

[RandomProddy]

There might be interesting points to look at if the Monarch changed to Catholicism. First off, the British Monarch is the only head of state who has a coronation anymore, and the Pope hasn't had one since (i think) Pius X. As it's the Archbishop of Canturbury who currently crowns the Monarch, the Pope could crown the British monarch if it reverted to Catholicism. But would an uncrowned Pope crown a British monarch?

The other salient point is what to do with the Anglican Communion. At the minute the Archbishops of York and Canterbury are the two English primates, both seats are about 1,400 years old. It would be inappropriate and untraditional for the Archbishop of Westminster (catholic, but only 150 years old) to rule over the Chair of saint Augustine. Remember, the Archbishop of York went to the council of Nicaea. The other thing is most of the Catholic buildings are much, much newer and pale in comparison to the frankly stunningly preserved medaeval cathedrals owned by the Church of England. To me, they should outrank the newer Catholic seats on this basis should they all decide to convert.

Of York: "This see has yielded to the Church eight saints, to the Church of Rome three cardinals, to the realm of England twelve Lord Chancellors and two Lord Treasurers, and to the north of England two Lord Presidents." (this was in the 13th century).

If the Vatican dictated that the new catholic churches and provinces took over that would be totally unacceptable to me. If, however, a compromise was reached where the current Anglican sees were integrated and took over in England, it might be acceptable to some.

The other thing is, would the Catholic church wreck the old cathedrals by destroying the sancturaries because if Vatican II? (Remember, we never moved our altars, they have stayed where they were for the last thousand-odd years).

If someone tried to move the altar near the bodies of St. Cuthbert and st. Oswald in Durham:

[img]http://cjwinnit.hopto.org/pictures/durham8.jpg[/img]

I for one would not be happy.

Edited June 13, 2004 by RandomProddy

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='Crusader_4' date='Jun 12 2004, 11:16 PM'] Further to that i have heard that Catholicsm has kind of crept into the Royal family i forget what princess but one of them converted to Catholicms [/quote]
You're probably referring to Katharine, the Duchess of Kent, who is a princess of sorts. The Duke of Kent is one of the royal dukes in that he is a cousin of the present Queen. He's also a prince.

God bless,

Jen

[BeenaBobba]

Hi RP,

You know, many of the old cathedrals in England, I believe, were Catholic prior to England's split from Rome. I think Westminster Abbey was Catholic at one time. The kings and queens of England sit upon the throne of St. Edward the Confessor at their coronation, I think, and he's a Catholic saint.

God bless,

Jen

[RandomProddy]

[quote name='BeenaBobba' date='Jun 13 2004, 04:34 AM'] Hi RP,

You know, many of the old cathedrals in England, I believe, were Catholic prior to England's split from Rome. [/quote]
Almost all of them were catholic. Very few bishoprics were made after the Reformation.