Mr
William Federer is fond of repeating lines like these:
"Citizen" is a
Greek word meaning co-ruler.
A representative form of
government is called a republic.
In a republic, the
citizens are the king, ruling through representatives.
Something
is wrong here. As St Paul taught us in
his first letter to the Corinthians, a body is made up of many different parts
performing many different functions. If
every part tried to do the same thing as one single part, the body would
die. We think the same applies to the
political body. If every man is a king,
if every man is giving orders, then who is left to obey them? If I am a king, why should I heed any of the
commands given by my neighbor, who is also a king? The end result of this will eventually be
lawlessness, though the inertia of the virtues accumulated under the hierarchy
and order of previous generations will slow the day of its arrival for a while
yet (that period is now coming to end, it would appear, as the poisonous fruits
of individualism ripen).
But,
going onward, Dr Vladimir Moss has some good insights about the ideas of
democracy, the Fall, and kings that deserve attention:
. . . for many the prime merit of democracy
consists in its prevention of tyranny.
A similar point
of view was expressed by the Anglican writer, C.S. Lewis: "I am a democrat
because I believe in the Fall of Man. I think most people are democrats for the
opposite reason. A great deal of democratic enthusiasm descends from the ideas
of people like Rousseau, who believed in democracy because they thought mankind
so wise and good that everyone deserved a share in government. The danger of defending
democracy on those grounds is that they are not true. And whenever their weakness
is exposed, the people who prefer tyranny make capital out of the exposure. I
find that they're not true without looking further than myself. I don't deserve
a share in governing a henroost, much less a nation. Nor do most people - all
the people who believe in advertisements, and think in catchwords and spread
rumours. The real reason for democracy is just the reverse. Mankind is so
fallen that no man can be trusted with unchecked power over his
fellows..."7
But this argument
is deficient on both logical and historical grounds. Let us agree that Man is
fallen. Why should giving very many fallen men a share in government reverse
that fall? In moral and social life, two minuses do not make a plus. Democratic
institutions may inhibit the rise of tyranny in the short term; but they also
make it almost certain that democratic leaders will be accomplished demagogues
prepared to do almost anything to please the electorate. One man's thymos may
check the full expression of another's; but the combination of many
contradictory wills can only lead to a compromise which is exceedingly unlikely
to be the best decision for society as a whole. In fact, if wisdom in politics,
as in everything else, comes from God, "it is much more natural to
suppose," as Trostnikov says, "that divine enlightenment will descend
upon the chosen soul of an Anointed One of God, as opposed to a million souls
at once".8 The Scripture does not say
vox populi - vox Dei, but: "The heart of the king is in the hand of the
Lord; he turns it wherever He will" (Proverbs 21.1).9
--A Monarchist Theology
of Politics, http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/books/downloads.php?book_id=740, p. 8
In
a nation, everyone has a role to play.
Everyone cannot be the king, just as the body cannot be all an elbow or
all a shoulder. Some must give orders, and
some must obey them. In the same way,
everyone cannot be a general in an army, nor can a family be all co-fathers,
and so on. But the modern American
position is essentially that the opposite of all this is true. However, to turn away from this defective
ideology calls for humility, and the peoples of the States are greatly
deficient in that virtue.
--
Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England,
South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð,
unworthy though we are!
Anathema to the Union!
No comments:
Post a Comment