The Monarchy is No Longer Relevant.

The current trendy idea is that hereditary titles are so last century and no longer fit for the modern world.

Blair did it with the House of Lords, ejecting hereditary peers and replacing them with hand-picked replacements.

But are hereditary titles a dead duck? I mean, there's a train of thought that says that hereditary titles provide stability, ignoring the latest trends.

Yes, you can be swayed by the Lefty jealousy-induced indignation, the talk of the old-boys-club, the use of the term landed gentry as a slur. But money brings a certain amount of incorruptibility. 

Small fish with small pockets can be bought for small money or small favours. 

In America, Elon Musk is trampling all before him because he literally can't be bought. He has ALL the money. In order to influence him, you'd have to0 be a fairly substantial government offering up a substantial amount of their GDP.

But here is where I get to the monarchy and especially the intellectual pigmy that is King Charles. I've already blogged elsewhere about his current failure to be protector of the faith (as in the Church of England). Instead Charles seems bent of promoting any faith other than the C of E. Recently we've had a mass Iftar at Windsor Castle. 

Now it may be the media: you know, promoting how inclusive our King is by promoting the mass Iftar and decided to ignore a mass Lent celebration, or maybe there's some upcoming Easter celebration that the King will be hosting and the media aren't going to report on it?

But is the Monarchy relevant if it chases the latest trend, if it chases the multicultural spectrum, if it eschews stability?

After all, isn't that one of the prime requisites of the Monarchy, to provide stability through the ages? To provide that sense of country, that sense of (especially in the UK where the monarch is head of the Church) a sense of Faith? 

Without the stability, without protecting the Faith, what is the British monarchy? What is the monarch?

You cannot "just" abandon the age old traditions and somehow miraculously stay relevant. You actually become irrelevant, slave to the latest trends and fanciful ideas. Relevant only for as long as the trends flow with you.

Already the questions are being asked by the faithful: if the head of the Church no longer believes in the Church, why should we? If the Monarch no longer believes in the country he reigns over, why should we? Has the monarch abandoned Christianity, given he promotes alternative lifestyles and faiths so readily? 

The longer Charles continues with these trendy ideas, and dalliances with alternative lifestyles and religions in direct opposition to his oaths, the more the doubts about his suitability to the post of monarch will be raised.

And the big question should be asked in unison by those called upon to defend this country in times of war: If the Monarch and the government no longer have faith in Britain as a country, or Christianity as a Faith, then why should we lay down our lives for it, or them?