It posed the question, not for the first time, what kind of
monarchist I am. That question needs putting in context. Like every Church of England priest, I am
required to take the oath of allegiance to the Sovereign every time I am
appointed to a new post. I have twice been appointed to cathedral deaneries by
the Crown, and am also a deputy lieutenant of the County. So it’s a natural presumption that I am
committed to the idea of monarchy and recognise that the constitutional Sovereign
has a part to play in the life of both state and church.
I believe I now know where the seat of my loyalty to and
affection for the Sovereign lies. It is not so much intellectual as emotional
and spiritual. With my mind, I recognise that monarchy is not the only, and not
the most obvious, constitutional arrangement for a modern democratic nation-state.
Other successful nations are not monarchies. I also recognise the abuses of
power perpetrated in the past by absolute monarchs, especially when undergirded
by religion under some such rubric as the divine right of kings. And I am sensitive about the risks of
deference, where too high a doctrine of subject-hood and obedience can
undermine true citizenship where all participate for the common good.
But the heart has its reasons….
At last year’s Diamond Jubilee, and again today, I have felt
a deep sense of attachment to the British monarchy and of gratitude for the way
in which our Queen has expressed it over six decades. I don’t need to
recapitulate the virtues of dignity, wisdom and Christian faith that have
characterised her reign. I said this morning: ‘On this anniversary, we give
thanks once again for the faithfulness with which as a Christian queen, Elizabeth
has consecrated herself to live her coronation vow. We celebrate her obedience
to this vocation: unlooked for, unwanted, thrust upon her by history, yet embodied
with dignity and wisdom. Leadership wedded to humane discipleship is a gift to
any people’.
The point is, I think, that the reign of a particular king
or queen usually happens over a longer time span than any political administration. This allows a nation’s loyalties to be built
up and tested over many years. Perhaps (lots of maybes here) this sense of
tradition (= ‘what is handed on’) and continuity helps a nation retain its hold
on a sense of history that reaches further back than the last few years. Perhaps it also helps inculcate the ability (on
a good day) to avoid short-termism and take a longer view of the future. Who
knows? It’s important not to claim too
much here, but the questions are worth asking.
But most of all, a long reign helps bond sovereign and
people together in an almost mystical relationship that is affective rather
than cognitive – felt in the heart and spirit rather than simply known in the
mind. Of course, that relationship (to which many would give the name of reciprocated
love) will itself be subject to fluctuations – like any other. But I think we
can say that there is a personal dimension to this relationship of Sovereign to
people which draws out our affection, and possibly more, whether we have met
her physically or not. And this is where the particular and unique way the Sovereign
inhabits (I almost wrote ‘incarnates’) the office is everything.
Elizabeth the Second is the only monarch most of us have
known. Who is to say that her example hasn’t helped shape the way my post-war generation
came to understand the virtues of duty and responsibility, loyalty and trust,
not to say Christian discipleship? As we
honour her today for her consecration to her Coronation Oath, we thank her for what
she has embodied for us with dedication for so many years. We thank God. And if some of us were a little moved at what
we saw and heard today, should that surprise us? Perhaps quite a lot of us are emotional
monarchists, in one sense or another.
Today’s sermon is at http://deanstalks.blogspot.co.uk/
No comments:
Post a Comment