Being formed by men,(democracy) vs being formed by a man( a monarchy) is the difference.They are no different in that they are formed by man and have limited attributes. Of course they are different forms of government. Neither, being created by man, is or can be perfect.
Yes. Still, no monarch can rule without the support of his subjects. More than one king has learned that lesson the hard way. A good king with a properly run government is no better or worse than a democracy as far as the general happiness of the people is concerned. Although democracies are usually more supportive of the individual and his ambitions. However, for the sake of our salvation, neither form is better or worse that I can see.
You’ve pretty much admitted there is one dealbreaker (see below) that kept the democratic process alive past its roots in Ancient Greece and is not an obsolete relic that monarchy now is.
Aaaaand that’s the dealbreaker. Quoting a favorite fictional character of mine:
Here is Christ.
Yep, and thus it tangled itself with the abuses of kings, emperors, and the wonderful oppression of local natives such as my ancestors.
If it’s a monarchy, no wonder Satan has more votes these days.
Charles X, a Catholic, was overthrown, and for France Catholicism was no longer the religion of the state. Once the revolution in France started, it stimulated revolts in Belgium, Italy, Germany, and Poland, and more reforms in Britain. Austria then put down the Germany and Italian uprisings. And Czar Nicholas I put down the Polish rebellion. Belgium became independent in 1831.
I have absolutely no idea why you think I prefer monarcy over demoracy or any other form of government. Nowhere did I make such a statement. All your efforts were for nothing if you were trying to unconvince me of a point I never made.
As if he were running for a human made office. Our Christian duty is to be loyal (within proper bounds) to whatever form of government we have, be it a king or democracy, because it is ultimately God who gives authority to leaders to rule men until he comes again. So, let’s not be so simplistic about these things, nor go against Church teaching that supports us electing government leaders as is our right and duty as citizens of our country. I don’t say you are one of these people, but I thought the point needed to be made for those who do think that way.I’d like to know when the Holy Catholic Church endorsed a president by giving solemnly conferring graces of a coronation rite, or any prayers from the Pontifical, on him. You don’t think it matters that there were very specific prayers in the Roman Pontifical to do with monarchies? Or do you even believe in grace at all? The Church has supported the institution for over 12 years, and for many different reasons, one of them being that it is Thy Will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.*
Scripture says to honour the king. Latin regem, Greek, basileus. This certainly does not mean a democratically elected ruler, like it or not. But I am not saying that republics are intrinsically illegitimate. I simply follow the wisdom(and humility) of the Church over the past 1200 years(in terms of its endorsement of monarchy), instead of the supposed wisdom of the past 200 years, which is anomalous.This is why I despair when I hear people say they won’t vote in elections because only Jesus is their ruler.
This image is blasphemous! Not a very good example.
Actually looks like a real man, not an effeminate loser.
And you have something better than monarchy? Where do you live? Chances are, that abortion is legal in your country. Have fun endorsing unborn child murder. A monarch would have absolutely none of it, and would execute justice on all child murderers, but it’s ok, 'cause we have Obama, etc., and we don’t really like children anyway. Besides, banning abortion would of course hinder a woman’s right to choose. And we all know how horrible it would be if she was denied access to safe, rare, abortion!
Again, St. Thomas Aquinas said it was the best form of government. He argued very well for that, in fact, in De Regno ad Regem Cypri.
This is a very arrogant statement.
You’ve got to be joking! These are two of the most ignorant statements I have ever read.
I don’t.
Didn’t say you did.
You might want go back to my post. I responded to more than one person. It’s just seems efficient that way.All your efforts were for nothing if you were trying to unconvince me of a point I never made.
You don’t need God to declare a smartphone is better than its brick-sized ancestor. Same goes for humans and neanderthals, modern governments and old monarchies.
Exactly! This is the three-point shot of today’s democracy (and by that, I use the word very loosely as many governments use a democratic process) that cost monarchy its game.
But the fact is, federal law isn’t exactly something you’d break everyday. On the other hand, I do so much as not kneel before a king and it’s off with my head. This is really my point. I’m free to watch, write, and produce without fear of some pompous royal using his lineage as an excuse to boss me around. You’d make a slightly better case if you tell me that whatever it is I’m doing is a matter of national (or even just corporate interest).
I have really no reason to argue with this. I just think it’s stupid that Catholics use the death of an obsolete, oppressive political system as a prophesied evil. Secularism isn’t as bad as you think, seeing as how the term itself is as loose as the term democracy. Much of the anti-clerical behavior during these revolutions weren’t 100% unwarranted.
I got it from Googling Sacred Heart of Jesus. I’m not really reverent myself but this says a lot about you dude.
Pff… you know what they say about men with big swords?
Really? I see someone who’s about to lose a powdered wig and his gold purse.
Yep. It’s called modern government.
Nope.
Right. Because I refuse to bow down to a man wearing a fancy hat made of gold means I’m all for murdering unborn children. Where’s my dark lord costume? I have some villages to burn.
I’m more of a fan of lesbian romance but that’s another topic.
I’m not a victim. My country was though. A victim of monarchy. Try living in a Third World dump whose national identity’s been scarred by a power-drunk Spanish frailocracy. Graces indeed.
If history is such a fairy tale to monarchy, it’d still be standing. But no. It’s dead. I’m happy it is. Deal with it.
Give the actual citation. All I’m seeing is a political handbook. Heck, several of the statements with king can easily be replaced with president. Or mayor. Or governor. Or prime minister.
Why thank you. You demonstrate why my arrogance is the best response to someone who thinks they can have me executed because their Daddy was crowned by some voice in the clouds.
That is interesting, I had not thought of the opposition to immaculate conception. The thought at the time was that immaculate conception definition was necessary to complement the definition on original sin, and to counter semi-pelagianism.