Search This Blog

Friday 21 May 2010

Of Riches and Royals

Commonly-enough asked of monarchists is exactly why should there be a monarchy when it is so expensive to keep? Of course many of you can already answer this question in your sleep by this point in time especially given that this is basically a loaded question which is more often then not asked in rhetoric were Republican opponents don't really care if you can answer it or not. Here's a hint: make a game out of it, when asked, respond in kind and ask 'Why have a presidency when it is so expensive to run elections and to maintain it every so-and-so years?'

The difference here is that monarchists don't think of the monarchy's financial burden on society, (which is laughably small compared to the splendiferous waste of money and time Legislatures use tax payer's money on to begin with), but also of the splendour and magnificence the Monarchy represents, the sheer majesty and pageantry all symbolic of the nation's own power and prestige, they are living symbols of the Nation itself, history and its future. They are living culture, and this is true wealth of nations, where even the most financially insecure nation can stand proud amidst her neighbours. Look to Tonga, who's relatively recently crowned King was criticised for the lavish coronation ceremonies and celebrations, but who's splendour and wealth was spent so that the whole country could enjoy the momentous occasion.

But then again we cant really expect republicans and their ilk to respect this, because they do not value this aspect of humanity, (just look to the secularisation of culture here in the west, lovely, isnt it?) this is a rant I do suppose, and one you've likely heard from a thousand other blogs a thousand times but it still needs to be said. And really, that is the problem isn't it? Why are they deaf to our words and arguments? Why do our opponents consider us childish, old-fashioned, or fascistic? Why do they fear us?

Probably because unlike them we want a restoration of the souls of western society, so that our nations can once again, for better or worse economic weather, remain rich in spirit, in culture. Its no wonder Republicans grumble and grime about money in that sense, because in the end, they are in fact, writhing in spiritual poverty.

Wednesday 5 May 2010

An Irish Pope

This was a rather amusing idea that a friend of mine made aware to me, certain Journalists are speculating the likelihood of one Arch Bishop Diarmuid Martin could very well be in the Running to be the next Pope.

Now far be it from me to point out the outrageous, yet hilarious Irony it would be that the College of Cardinals should select the next Pope after His Holiness has gone to his reward, to be from Ireland of all places based on his clean record in terms of dealing with Clerical abuses.

But thats not really the point of this blog post, the point is really what the content of that article reveals about the intentions and bias of many journalists, especially ones that arent just outrightly hostile to the Catholic Church. That of them wanting to reform the Church to suit modern tastes.

If you take a gander at several instances in the article it is actually quite clear that the author wishes for ''a new ecclesiology'' of the Church and a more ''inclusive'' and ''transparent'' then the ''current royal model'', essentially speaking he would want a more democratic Church. Now this is what outrages me most about a lot of liberal Catholics, never mind their ambiguity on Abortion, that's a rant for later, but their disliking of what the Church is.

I have heard it in numerous places, if they don't hate all of the Church, the attack the Pope, and when they get tired of attacking the Pope, the attack the Church's hierarchical nature in general. It bloody sickens me. The mask this all under the pretence of 'wanting minimal reform' when what the want is a repeat of Vatican II in which liberal priests and theologians took the opportunity to run rampant and cause immeasurable damage to the Church and the Faithful. And yes I am cynical and bitter enough to notice that alot of the current sexual abuses happened in the period after Vatican II more then the period before and promptly call Liberal Catholics out on their almighty bullshit.
Rinse, wash, repeat, these arguments and demands for democratisation of the Church, just so they can ruin it and protestant-ise it, have been around for a good while, but it just annoys me at their leech-like opportunism to attack now.

Don't get me wrong, I still think the idea of an Irish Pope would be beautifully Ironic, especially if it is the Arch Bishop and pulls a fast one on everyone and be just as Conservative as His Holiness is, but not now, not with these liberals heaping their expectations and influence on anyone they think might be the next Pope. Still, it was fun to joke about, self depreciatingly, about a Pope who was no stranger to beer-wait a minute...

Never mind then.