The King’s Funeral

Today, His Royal Majesty, Constantine II, King of the Hellenes, was laid to rest at Tatoi, the former royal estate of his dynasty.

The funeral was attended by royalty and performed at the Metropolitan Cathedral of the Annunciation, in Athens.  You can view these historic events below.

Rather than comment further, and at a loss for words myself, I wish to paraphrase the following words from our friend, Nick Stamatakis (which we published last week):

“In the case of the always troubled relationship of the Greek people with the institution of the monarchy, the cliche ‘hindsight is always 20/20’ fits more than any other evaluation…had the Greeks known what kind of mediocre politicians would be elected to the presidency of their republic…they would much instead prefer the vastly more symbolic and unifying presence of he King.”

Very well said, Nick.  As an American who views the present landscape of “republicanism” in this land in all its degenerate state, I too, must heartily concur.

Aionia tou he mneme.

And if I may add:  the King is dead, God save the King!

Comments

  1. “Commentary of the Department for External Church Relations of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church regarding the intention of the representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations to raise the issues regarding the situation around the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

    “It became known from mass media that the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN Vasily Nebenzya initiated a separate meeting of the UN Security Council on January 17, 2023 regarding the situation that is taking place around the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

    “In this regard, we would like to inform that at the moment the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has not appealed to any state for assistance in protecting its rights, and even more so to the state that has perpetrated a treacherous armed attack on our country. Also, we did not authorize anyone from the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate to speak on our behalf at the United Nations.

    “We are concerned that the issue on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church are being raised by the structures that have nothing to do with us. We call on the Russian state authorities not to speak on behalf of our Church on international platforms and not to use the religious factor for their own political purposes.

    • Solidarity Priest says

      And this relates to King Constantine’s death, how? Any Orthodox Christian in the world has the right to speak out against persecution of the canonical church. We don’t need any bloody authorization from the Zelensky government or any other government for that matter.
      Tell us, what right the Ukrainian Catholic minority has the authorization to speak for the Orthodox majority of Ukrainians? What are the charges against the canonical church? One otherwise serious Ukrainian lady actually posted elsewhere that some of monks in Kyiv had pictures of Putin in their cells. First of all, that seems doubtful. Even if it were true, is that a crime? I think it more likely that the monks had icons of the Royal Martyrs. And to some Ukrainians, the Royal Martyrs might be considered worse than Putin.
      If pictures of Putin and the Royal Martyrs outrages you, are you equally upset by Ukrainian “monastics” posting pictures and videos praising Hitler…? Anyone reading my posts here knows that while I have been vocal in condemning praise of Hitler, I have equally condemned praise of Stalin. As Christians, shouldn’t we condemn evil across the board, no matter who perpetrates it?

    • Solidarity Priest says

      George and Gail:
      To amend what I posted earlier, the statement which Mike posted above IS from the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox church headed by Metroplitan Onufry. Obviously, you may or may not publish what I wrote before. I weary of arguing; I remember Metropolitan Onufry at every liturgy at the great entrance in my OCA parish; right after my own hierarchs and our civil authority.

      • Fr, I think all OCA priests should do so as well. The man is a walking saint.

        • Solidarity Priest says

          Slight correction, George, we can’t really call any living person a saint. But Metropolitan Onuphry certainly is a confessor. He reminds me of Metropolitan Laurus who ordained me many years ago.
          Which brings me to this: Metropolitan Laurus served with Greek Old Calendar bishops, Petros of Astoria comes to mind. To those who say that the Old Calendar Greeks must be outside the church, I don’t believe Metropolitan Laurus felt himself outside the church during such concelebrations. His Eminence is no longer with us, but Archbishop Peter of Chicago was his cell attendant and with him on such occasions. Perhaps those interested could ask him…

  2. Memory Eternal ☦️

  3. May King Constantine II’s memory be eternal!

  4. Αιώνια η μνήμη – Memory eternal

    May monarchical government return to the Greek people someday.

    In other news, yet more evidence that the western cultural/political elites are a totally degenerate and depraved and likely even diabolical bunch:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11643585/Prostitutes-gather-Davos-annual-meeting-global-elite-demand-skyrockets.html

    • Perhaps a royal… whatever that means these days. But in the case of Greece the monarchy is a flawed institution from its inception in 1832. Installed by the western powers, the Roman Catholic Otto, aka Otto von Wittelsbach of Austria-Germany was neither Greek not was he a Hellenophile… quite the contrary…but you can look all that up…So Constantine II Glucksberg the hapless bon vivant deserves neither honor nor mention. In the absence of a legitimate line to the Greek throne (there isn’t unless we search long and hard for obscure Byzantine lineages) the best Greece could do is to recognize the need for a powerful single patriotic and populist and Orthodox ruler/s who can maintain power for decades while the globalists fade into obscurity…right now the spectacle of atheists and globalist puppets fill the vacuum left by the Byzantines in 1453. A chaotic circus.

      • Eleni J, I must disagree in all points.

        First of all, the monarchy was “imposed” because the Greek republican experiment failed. President John Antony, Capo d’Istria, was assassinated by a rival political faction. (As for his Greek blood, he was of Italian descent.)

        Therefore, Otto von Wittlesbach was installed as king. Though he refused to apostatize from Catholicism, both he and his wife were devoted and avid philhellenes.

        Third, in saying that the late king was a “bon vivant,” I’m not sure what you’re implying. I imagine a wastrel and playboy. I can assure you, he was neither. I encourage you to read this recent piece by Taki Theodoracopoulos: https://www.takimag.com/article/long-live-the-king/ . Long story short: he was a gentleman, a scholar and a true Christian, one who never uttered a word against his enemies. The latter being moral cretins who deserve the opprobrium of history.

        Fourth, as for a “legitimate line to the Greek throne,” that is a red herring. Greece did not exist until 1830. Before then, stretching back into early antiquity, Greece was a civilization, never a polity, so there never was a Greek “dynasty.” On the other hand, Greece was part of the Byzantine state and within that state (which lasted over a millennium), there were several dynasties, among them the Comnenoi and the Paleologoi. There were also the Laskaris line of nobility. All three of these dynasties were ancestral to the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburgh-Glucksburg.

        The devotion of the Glucksburg dynasty to Greece, the Greek people and the Orthodox Church stand out on its own merits. The testament to this king and his dynasty was palpable on many different levels: not just the crowned heads which showed up at his funeral but the thousands of people who lined the streets as his hearse took his body to his final resting place, on the estate which the Greek “republic” stole from him. I for one, choked up a little when upon his exit from the cathedral, his name was spoken as a loud cheer, followed by the name of his son Pavlos.

        So will the monarchy come back? Who knows? But the Greek people have suffered horribly under the “republic” which replaced him. For now, I can say that there is more than a whiff of nostalgia for the late king and his family’s place in the history of the Greek state. As for his son, it is also apparent to me that he may have a future in Greece as well.

        The Greeks could do a lot worse. And they have.

  5. 1 Samuel 8
    Israel Asks for a King

    8 When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as Israel’s leaders.[a] 2 The name of his firstborn was Joel and the name of his second was Abijah, and they served at Beersheba. 3 But his sons did not follow his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice.

    4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead[b] us, such as all the other nations have.”

    6 But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”

    10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

    19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”

    21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the Lord. 22 The Lord answered, “Listen to them and give them a king.”

    • People who reject monarchism (against the counsel of the Fathers) often misrepresent this passage as a judgment on monarchism in general. There are several things to bear in mind. First, the government from which Israel was transitioning was theocratic. The prophet Samuel’s sons were judges and the judges were in effect princes over the respective tribes. So there was no democracy and no republic on the scene from the beginning.

      Second, the prophecies regarding the corruption of the new king were specific to Saul, not to all kings. Basically, Samuel told them that the new king would simply be a consolidated version of the corruption which manifested under his sons’ judgeships. And we all know how Saul turned out.

      Yet David was a different story and from that time on, despite the admitted flaws of David and Solomon and their heirs, monarchy was the rule in Israel as in Christendom up until very recently. What the Lord was warning Israel is that there is no escape from the consequences of the Fall of Man in monarchy as opposed to judgeship. All human government is flawed. However, as the Fathers pointed out, some forms are better than others and democracy inevitably leads to anarchy and a consequent despotism.

    • Lina, this is perplexing, isn’t it?

      Yet how is this different than what we have now in our “republic”? If anything, we are less free. Benjamin Franklin, when asked what kind of a govt the Founding Fathers gave us said: “A republic, if you can keep it.”

      • George Michalopulos says

        In the meantime, please take the time to read this thoughtful piece on monarchy by Ryan Hunter: https://russian-faith.com/history-shows-monarchy-better-christians-democracy-n1429

      • Michael Bauman says

        … and we lost the Republic a long time ago. Take your pick when: certainly by Jackson, arguably by John Quincy, if we ever actually had one.
        What we have now is tribalism ruled by technocrats and a cabal of the wealthy who manipulate us with ideological BS: Democrat, Socialist, Libertarian, Anti-humanism.
        Even if we are called to an age of martyrdom, it will have to be massive because it will be done in secret otherwise through corruption and discrediting leaders by seduction of the World. Public knowledge of killings suppressed.

        The seduction has always been there but the tools of the world are much more effective than they used to be.

        Pornography, financial inducements, even ways of impairing and killing through “medicine”. COVID ring a bell? (See http://www.lewrockwell. com)

        Whole families including children not just monastics and Bishops. Unlikely to count on the Bishops anyway. A Holocaust of Christians and Jews both–families (including infants) and congregations including leveling of parish buildings.

        Politics as usual will not help–in fact politics as usual is preparation.

Speak Your Mind

*