Thursday, 2 February 2012

What does it mean to be an orthosphere monarchist?


Not that all monarchies are better than all non-monarchies - that would be silly.

Not that nations should be ruled according to the hereditary principle - the position of Byzantine Emperor was not hereditary, and that empire lasted 1000 years.

Certainly not that monarchy makes people wealthier, more powerful, freer, more secure or any other worldly thing - who knows?


Simply, that divinely-ordained monarchy is the proper form of Christian government; rulership by a monarch who explicitly rules by the will of God and in His name.

That this is potentially the best form of government from a Christian perspective, from the perspective of salvation.

This does not mean that (somehow or another) putting a Tsar in place to rule a secular, materialist, hedonic society such as our own would necessarily work well; it means, rather, that the kind of society which is wanted would resemble that of Byzantium or Holy Russia in that it would be primarily Christian: Christianity would permeate Life - and such a society would and should be a monarchy.


How to we get from here to there, given that the mass of the population in modern worlds simply want to live the life of the barnyard - wants to live in a state of 24/7 pleasure or distraction?

Who knows? - I certainly have no plans.

Quite likely it won't happen.

If it does happen, it will be due to prayer and providence, not to plans and theories.


But Christian monarchy is not pie in the sky - such societies have existed.

They were not worldly utopias, they were not the kind of life that modern people seem to want.

They were simply the best form of Christian government attainable in this fallen world - very far from perfect, but much better than the alternatives.


Some links to previous entries on monarchy:



Anonymous said...

Just a thought. Monarchy is probably the best form of government because the structure of Reality is hierarchical, and a King is the expression the fact of hierarchy. Although nobody wants a tyrant, (which is the main risk of monarchy ) monarchy maintains a structure that is true whoever is in the place of power.

Bruce Charlton said...

Yes - and authority is personal. It is un-Christian for authority to be based on an arbitrary group or a vote. A group cannot be moral - except under very restrictive conditions when the groups is explicitly a prayer-group seeking divine guidance - and the judgement of such a group would never let itself be decided (only guided) by vote or any other formal committee procedure.

JP said...

It is un-Christian for authority to be based on an arbitrary group or a vote.

A quick look at the list of Byzantine Emperors shows that many of them were assassinated or deposed by the Army or deposed and executed by their successor. The rulers were Christian, but were these "Christian methods"?

Bruce Charlton said...

@JP - on the whole, presumably, yes. Who are we to judge?

Bruce Charlton said...

@JP - to be more explicit, we must beware of judging our betters.

Modern society exceeds all previous societies in terms of its kindness - it is the least-cruel society ever. Naturally - if we focus on this single virtue to the neglect of all other virtues and sins, then we can regard ourselves as more virtuous than anybody else.

Yet in all other respects we are inferior - in courage, prudence, justice, faith, hope, charity; and the seven deadly sins.

JP said...

Modern society exceeds all previous societies in terms of its kindness - it is the least-cruel society ever.

Not if we judge by actual outcome rather than mere aspiration and stated intention.

Bruce Charlton said...

@JP - Well, I am echoing CS Lewis on this, and I stand by it. The morals of a society can be seen in terms of what it advocates, rules, prosecutes etc. - and on this ground there is a kind of monomaniacal zero tolerance about cruelty. Even our extreme and vicious cruelties (e.g. the state taking children away from their natural parents) is always justified in terms of minimizing the risk of cruelty, or something similar. This society is so crazed with anti-cruelty that it is the main excuse for cruelty!