Queen Elizabeth II is now ninety - what will happen when she dies?
Most people would say 'nothing much' - and that would seem to be the result of rational and evidential analysis.
But it may be that the Queen - over a period of more than 60 years and in many nations - is much more deeply woven into the world's destiny (for ill and for good) than we realise. It may be that the removal of this continuity (including psychologically) will have very great effects; not least because there are profound uncertainties about what will happen in terms of succession.
Nearly everybody assumes that her son will seamlessly take-over; but the transition cannot be seamless since Charles is (in various ways) ineligible for the throne by traditional standards, due to the Monarch's position at the head of the Anglican Communion* - and if Charles does, or does not, become King, then either way there will certainly be major implications and consequences in many areas. It has been quite usual in history for stable and solid monarchies to be followed by bitter, ramifying and spreading succession disputes**.
Since we have little reliable knowledge about the realities of high politics, and continually underestimate the degree of corruption and evil at the highest levels, it is almost impossible for someone like me to know what has been going-on and what would happen on the Queen's death (and the people in a position to 'know' are, inevitably it seems, part of the corruption and therefore blinded by their own lack of discernment). We don't know what truly is the role of the monarch here and now - we don't know of the compromises and sordid deals that have been struck.
The Queen personally seems to be a sincere and devout Christian - yet she has presided over (and barely if ever criticised) one of the most appalling and complete moral and spiritual degenerations of national public life in the history of the known world: such that the United Kingdom is now a hollow shell of evasion, pretence, lies and indulgence; with no positive role, purpose or meaning whatsoever.
Either the Queen is herself an intrinsic part of the systematic corruption - or else her situation has been one of 'Shakespearian' tragedy of a kind seldom seen: the isolation of a single good woman surrounded by overwhelming demonic forces. I don't know which, and probably this will only be apparent as it happens or in retrospect.
England has a destiny, which takes the shape of a national story; and I feel that a sensitive and informed individual may be able to sense where this story is taking-us.
It may be that when the Queen dies, we will very suddenly realise that we are in the grip of an almost irresistible narrative which will sweep and tumble us into some very different situation than now - whether we like it or not. But, at present, I cannot intuit it.
Notes:
*I know this from someone who is deeply - and appropriately - knowledgeable on the subject. From his perspective, Charles's ineligibility to inherit the throne is clear-cut and definite.
**At least four plausibly strong/ influential sides in such a dispute spring to mind: 1. Supporters of Charles; 2. Supporters of Charles's son William; 3. Those who propose radical 'reform' or 'modernisation' of the constitution before making a decision; 4. Those who wish to abolish the monarchy.
6 comments:
From time to time one hears comments to the effect that the Royal Family is "secretly conservative" and "doesn't like what's happening in the UK". Frankly I am skeptical. At the very least, one must conclude that the Royal Family has done nothing to retard Britain's slide into degeneracy and destruction. One can certainly point to conspicuous members of that family who are totally unsound, i.e., active promoters of destructive tendencies, and prime exemplars of the phenomenon of Western "elites" who are at war with their own people. Thus I do not put much hope in the idea that the Queen's successors will somehow "save England" and restore sanity.
@JP - Thinking perhaps "mythologically" though, we must not despair. The monarchy perhaps still has forgotten or hidden powers. The return of a king may be a significant event, and traditionally the fate of a nation is tied to that of its rulers (invisible, or supernatural threads as implied in the post). The enemy desires for us to despair, or think things are hopeless. Perhaps just our remembrance of that reality and those powers, our faith in God, is good and helpful?
Charles is ineligible because he has divorced and remarried, right? Are there other reasons?
@Wm JAs - There are a umber of issues related to that - also he is not a Christian in terms of personal belief, specifically not a believer in the doctrines of the C of E.
What proof do you have that he isn't Christian?
@ZR - What a strange question - proof? It is pretty well known in the UK that The Prince is an adherent of The Perennial Philosophy - i.e. the mystical tradition drawn from all religions (including Christianity) and no religion - you can see him talking about this on YouTube, and he is patron of the Temenos Academy (for example).
Post a Comment