The title for this post comes from Shakespeare’s Henry IV: Part II (Act 3, scene 1).
Canst thou, O partial sleep, give thy repose
To the wet sea-boy in an hour so rude;
And in the calmest and most stillest night,
With all appliances and means to boot,
Deny it to a king? Then, happy low, lie down!
Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.
Henry’s lament was based on the fact that as king, all responsibility rested on his shoulders. In our own time, an American president would say that “the buck stopped here” (i.e. at his desk).
So why am I waxing Shakespearian?
I’ll tell you why: as you all may know, as a service to our readers, Gail and I watch a lot of podcasts spanning a range of different subjects. Personally, I like to take the pulse of the broader Christian world (at least that part that is conservative and/or traditional). That includes the Tradcats as well as a few Evangelical ones, at least those that have a greater understanding of history and patristics.
One particular podcast I’ve been following every now and then is Catholic Unscripted. It’s a British podcast dedicated to Catholicism. One of its moderators is Gavin Aschenden, formerly an Anglican bishop and at one time a chaplain to the royal household.
As to why he left the royal household, it was because he took umbrage at some Anglican vicar in Scotland reading from the Koran. He couldn’t take it anymore and he and the “men in the grey suits” (i.e. the men who run the royal household) had a falling out.
Aschenden gives an interesting brief about the monarchy, its Christian roots and its inability to be understood without recourse to the Church. It’s an interesting topic and I learned quite a bit. You will too.
That’s all well and good but it’s tangential. He then gets to the meat of the matter; that would be the personal religiosity of King Charles III (and parenthetically, about his father, the Prince Philip). What prompted this topic was a private letter that Charles, then the Prince of Wales, had written to a close friend. In this letter, we get a glimpse into Charles’ personal admiration for Eastern Orthodoxy.
Aschenden for his part, speaks very highly about Orthodox Christianity as well.
I think you will enjoy it. Consider it an early Christmas gift if you will.
Loni Gertulas says
Your chum, Stumble Ducki of Harlotiscope, keeps bemoaning the supposed genoacide of American Indians. But Joseph Mede wrote in 162 that the American Indians were Magog. Constantine Rafinesque, born in Constantinople, told Thomas Jefferson the Indians were Turks. Now, Hugh Pope’s Sons of COnquerors shows the northern American Indian languages are 2/3 Turk. When Asian Greeks came to America, they could speak with the Indians, which led Americans to change their mind and say Turks are Greeks are cousins who need to get along better.
Brendan says
In 162?
BC, AD or AUC?
Brendan says
(1) The Divine Right of Kings
* James Bovard | “The King James Test for American Democracy” *
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/12/james-bovard/the-king-james-test-for-american-democracy/
‘ On December 1, President Joe Biden announced that he was pardoning his son Hunter for all the crimes he committed from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024. President Biden absolved all of his son’s felonies because of his “serious addictions” and because Hunter was purportedly mistreated by Biden’s own appointees at the Justice Department. But going back 40 years to his time as chairman of Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Joe Biden favored vociferously and mercilessly prosecuting hapless individuals for the same offenses for which he absolved his son.
Biden’s pardon of his son epitomizes how presidents and their families are now above the law. It also illustrates how the “King James Test for American Democracy” could become the death of the Constitution.
The American Revolution was heavily influenced by a political backlash that began across the ocean in the early 1600s. King James I claimed a “divine right” to unlimited power in England, sparking fierce clashes with Parliament. Since the 9/11 attacks, some of the same moral and legal principles have been advanced in this nation, but few people recognize the historical roots.
The divine right of kings
Before he became king of England in 1604, James was king of Scotland. He cemented his claims to absolute power there by launching witch panics and burning hundreds of Scottish women alive to sanctify his power. Harsh methods were not a problem because James insisted that God would never allow an innocent person to be accused of witchcraft. “While James’s assertion of his [Scottish] royal authority is evident in his highly unorthodox act of taking control of the pre-trial examinations, it is his absolutism which is most apparent in his advocating the use of torture to force confessions during the investigations,” according to the University of Texas’s Allegra Geller, author of “Daemonologie and Divine Right: The Politics of Witchcraft in Late Sixteenth-Century Scotland.” Torture produced “confessions” that spurred further panic and the destruction of far more victims. England did not have similar witch panics because officials were almost entirely prevented from using torture to generate false confessions. James justified the illicit torture, “asserting his belief that as an anointed king, he was above the law,” and similar rationales emitted from the Bush administration from 2002 onward in the name of the 9/11 attacks.
After Queen Elizabeth died and James became king, he vowed that he had no obligation to respect the rights of the English people: “A good king will frame his actions according to the law, yet he is not bound thereto but of his own goodwill.” And “law” was whatever James decreed. Nor did he flatter the men elected to the House of Commons: “In the Parliament (which is nothing else but the head court of the king and his vassals) the laws are but craved by his subjects and only made by him at their rogation.” James proclaimed that God intended for the English to live at his mercy: “It is certain that patience, earnest prayers to God, and amendment of their lives are the only lawful means to move God to relieve them of their heavy curse” of oppression. And there was no way for Parliament to subpoena God to confirm his blanket endorsement of King James. … ‘
(2) The Constitutional Right Of Presidents
* Nixon says, “…but when the President does it, that means it is not illegal…” *
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMt8qCl5fPk
[Video – 00:07]
Misha says
Monarchy divorced from the Church is fascism.
Now, I won’t dispute there have been bad kings and emperors. Julian the Apostate comes to mind. But, of course, he was opposed by the Church. If the Church is not doing its job, all bets are off.
Seraphim says
Brendan,
I would be interested to hear your take on Charles, and the current monarchy in general. I struggle sometimes because I have those stereotypical Jacobite sympathies and want to say “Not my Charles!” Is that fair? I’m not sure. But you’re an actual native Scot. What are your thoughts?
Misha says
Speaking of monarchy, this is quite good. Dugin’s making some points in the section “Postmodernism and Monarchy” that I’ve made for several years now:
https://katehon.com/en/article/liberal-moment
Ronda Wintheiser says
Thank you for this! Reminds me so much of when I was going to Chesterton Society Meetings and reading Tolkien and Lewis and actually being rather attracted to this sort of British Catholicism… It looked so wholesome, so family oriented, so cozy…
Very enjoyable! Thank you so much! Merry Christmas!
And may God have mercy on King Charles III… may he find his way into the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church.
Brendan says
* Portrait of last Byzantine Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos discovered in Greece! *
https://greekcitytimes.com/2024/12/13/portrait-constantine-xi-palaiologos/
* Two layers of high-artistic-quality frescoes from the late Byzantine period, reflecting the aesthetic trends of Constantinople, were discovered in the Monastery of Taxiarches of Aigialeia, just 15 kilometres from Aigio. *
‘ An exciting discovery was made at the Monastery of Taxiarches: a portrait of Constantine XI Palaiologos, believed to be the only portrait of the last emperor of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire.
Archaeologist Dr Anastasia Koumousi, Director of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Achaia, identified the second layer of frescoes, which, based on stylistic criteria, is safely dated to the mid-15th century,
“The work carried out by the Ephorates of Antiquities of the Ministry of Culture,” stated Minister Lina Mendoni, in the context of “the conservation and restoration of monuments, proves, once again, to be extremely important, as it brings to light unique archaeological testimonies linked to historical figures.”
“The scientific staff of the Ephorates of the Ministry of Culture, with extensive experience, high training and comprehensive knowledge of historical events and archaeological data, can document, after thorough study, every find that comes to light.
“In this case, the portrait is linked to the last Byzantine emperor and involves his only living portrait.
“The painter must have rendered the portrait features … from his own perception, meaning that his model was not an official imperial portrait, as was customary, but the emperor himself.”
The fresco depicts the figure of a mature man wearing imperial insignia and holding a cruciform sceptre.
His gold-embroidered purple cloak is decorated with medallions, on which are inscribed double-headed eagles with a crown between their heads, the insignia of the ruling Palaiologos family.
The presence of the double-headed eagles on the figure’s garment, in combination with the other insignia, identifies the man in the image as the emperor.
Constantine XI Palaiologos’ brothers, the despotes Demetrios and Thomas, were the sponsors of the Monastery’s renovation.
The newly discovered portrait is the last chronologically surviving portrait of an emperor in Byzantine monumental painting and the only portrait of Constantine XI Palaiologos during his brief reign (6 January 1449 – 29 May 1453).
It is not idealistic or standardised as a portrait. It is authentic and accurately renders the physiognomic features of the last Eastern Roman emperor.
Constantine XI Palaiologos lived for five years in Mystras, where the painter probably came from, as a despot before being crowned emperor.
The imperial portrait is associated with his brothers’ generous sponsorship of the Monastery, known from written sources, after the end of the first civil war between them (1449–1450). ‘
See the portrait @
https://greekcitytimes.com/2024/12/13/portrait-constantine-xi-palaiologos/
George Michalopulos says
This is a good insight from Maj Gen Paul Vallely (hat tip to Dolly): https://paulevallely.substack.com/p/rejecting-historical-revisionism?r=qtj2o&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true