I've got no special affinity for the British monarchy, but I can understand why Queen Elizabeth II has been beloved during her reign. It's not just because of her sheer longevity and age of 93 years. From my perspective and many others, she has placed the purposes of the country and her responsibilities ahead of her self. She has a title, but she hasn't acted and doesn't act entitled. For the monarchy to endure, she looks like she has understood and then submitted to the acquiescence to propriety and conformity to standard. The office and the necessary model are bigger than her self. People have loved that. They cheer her on. She elevates the office, not shrinks it, by the way she carries herself.
With Elizabeth's example of sacrifice, it's painful to see the circus around her, people who don't have the title, yet feel entitled. They receive immense privilege, but do not recognize or acknowledge it. All of the royals I suppose must forfeit something they would rather enjoy. They don't have "normal" lives. I say they are far, far better than normal.
A successful royal role would seem to require understanding that the benefits far outweigh the liabilities. To preserve the monarchy for future descendants and for the sake of its benefits and betterment for the nation, the members of the family must resign themselves to the deprivation of individual desire. They've got to give up personal freedoms for the sake of others.
Of all the factors that could or might end the British monarchy and its twelve hundred year plus history, it is a generation that sees their own desires and ambitions above the bigger or the whole, which would be the family and the nation. Many words could describe it -- narcissism, myopia, monomania -- but let's just say one word, selfishness. If it's two, it's not "me too," although that might be appropriate. It's "me first."
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, better known as Harry and Meghan, announced a few days ago that they will abandon the royal family. From all accounts, they did it without informing the queen first. They talked to Oprah, it seems, then just went public with it. They can see themselves doing better for themselves without the family. The queen is pained. The monarchy looks ugly. A British critic of the two wrote:
I’m afraid their bombshell announcement smacks of millennial self-absorption, of values that prize identity, the expression of emotion and personal happiness above all else. The exact opposite, in fact, of the Queen’s wartime generation which believed that you didn’t throw in the towel, you stuck at things through good and bad.Harry and Meghan weren't getting what they wanted. Many say it's what she wanted and, therefore, what they wanted. They, she, whatever, he's going along with it, see themselves bigger than the entire British monarchy. If it ends, who cares, he wasn't going to be the king anyway, so they seem to be striking while the iron is hot.
In essence, these two lesser royal figures have ghosted the queen. In a multitude of different ways, apparently the queen condescended to these two's desires. As a fiance, she appears at the Christmas party. They get the wedding they want in the best castle. They get to move to Frogmore with the two to three million dollar remodeled estate according to their tastes. Now that the mansion is finished to their like, they will move to Canada. They don't like the way they're being treated. It takes away their freedom.
The royal couple could contend that with their move they now have the independence necessary to promote their woke social justice causes or at least a greater platform for virtue signaling. They can use their notoriety and name as family of the British monarch. This is the hypocrisy. They use the resources gained from parents, grandparents, and the nation without even giving them credit, actually disparaging and then ghosting them, in order to promote themselves and fulfill their own desires.
Rather than Megxit, what about staying? What about communicating? What about reconciliation and working it out? What about being a grown up? What about an acknowledgement of debt and taking responsibility? What about a dedication to doing the right thing? After all that's been done for them, the premier, stunning wedding at St. George's chapel at Windsor Castle. Ungrateful. The person they are most indebted to, the queen, absorbs the greatest shame from this. Their behavior is exceptionally shameful, but she is the one who receives the shame, much like what Proverbs 29:15 callings 'bringing a mother to shame.' The shame they don't feel, she feels exponentially for them, because she can feel it. They show zero sympathy for their elderly grandmother. They are so desensitized by their callous selfishness, that they don't feel the shame of their indifferent, wounding actions.
What is wrong with rolling up the sleeves and staying and working? Nothing. The two aren't doing anything wrong by continuing or persevering. If there is an immorality, it is in leaving. If some evil needed exposing and correcting within the royal house by two righteous family members for the good of everyone, that would be the first step. The misconduct here is two pompous, impetuous self-promoters, whose estimation of self-importance bypasses attempts at mediation or reconciliation. All criticism is unacceptable. Only approval is welcome.
Normal ghosters don't have the queen as their grandmother. They could just ignore her, except she's the British monarch, Her Majesty. The punishment they aim her way returns back on them. That could happen with other ghosters, the normal civilian sort, if the parents and grandparents could receive the support they should. The ghosters should become a pariah and forced into mediation and reconciliation. Their toleration and acceptance marks a breakdown in society, like the inmates running the asylum.
When someone goes back into history, a discredited royal slinks into oblivion without access back. I don't know the future for Harry and Meghan. Perhaps they will receive even greater notoriety for their liberating, thumb-in-the-eye move, that will translate into the investment in them by other progressives. There is an industry to posing as victims or martyrs. Many will feel sorry for them and embrace the fabrication. They will be liked by many too, especially for their audacity and the rejection of the order and tradition.
I call this a case study, because it has all the indicators of this rampant, hateful practice. God requires a Christian, a true, biblical believer to function within God-ordained boundaries, spheres of sovereignty, the family and the church. Separation sometimes is required, but only in instances of disobedience to God, and only after attempts at restoration or reconciliation with a mediator if necessary. In the case of the royals, the family and nation are more important than self. This corresponds to the family and the church taking priority over preferences.
Lust is also a common denominator. People want what they want without accountability and concession to authority. Scripture teaches the forfeiting of our own desires. Scripture doesn't require rock music, immodest clothing, and immoral entertainment. It does require obedience to parents and the church, where there isn't disagreement with scripture. It means not being entitled. It requires thankfulness or gratefulness for provision and sacrifice. It demands change, which calls for humility. No one who does this is either a Christian or at least is growing as a Christian. If he wants to grow, he will need to repent of this behavior. It is never justified.
Harry and Meghan give the opportunity look at a common, contemporary practice and see it for what it is. As many millennials, they are born on third base, then receive a superabundance of incessant help and support over numbers of years, and then they act like they hit a home run.
No comments:
Post a Comment