.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

The New Crusade

A Blog dedicated to the promotion of the Traditional Roman Catholic Faith in union with HH Benedict XVI, to the preservation of our Traditional Græco-Roman Catholic Civilisation and to the New Crusade against Islam. This Blog is under the Patronage of the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts of Christ our King and His Holy Mother, our Queen and of Santiago Matamoros (St James the Moor-slayer) and the Crusader King, St Louis IX of France.

13 août 2006

An Evil Trad, Yes, But A French Legitimist????

When I posted on my journey to Traditionalsm, (You can read the posts here: Part One and Part Two) I promissed that I might post on how I became a French Legitimist. Here it is!

How does a reasonably sane man, born in the mid-twentith century in the United States of America, end up as a supporter of the Legitimate claimant to the Throne of France?

I suppose the journey really began at birth! My mother was born a subject of His Brittanic Majesty, King George V. Her mother had been born in the reign of Queen Victoria and had actually been kissed by Her Majesty as a baby. My great-grandfather, Henry Brown, was a shipbuilder in the Royal Dockyards, Portsmouth and HM had come to launch a ship. It was a great fete, with the families of the workers in attendance and the Queen kissed many of the babies!

On the other side, my father's mother was born a subject of Karl XV, King of the Swedes, the Goths and the Wends, so that I came of loyal monarchist stock on both sides. In fact, I often say that I was 9 or 10 before I figured out that Elizabeth II did not rule the US!

I spent the rest of my formative years nursing a sentimental attachment to the British Throne, always tempered by Jacobitism. In fact as a young man, I wrote to Albrecht v. Bayern, the Heir in the Legitimate line to the British Throne, only to be told that he had no desire to disturb his cousin Elizabeth in her claims to that Throne. However, my tendency towards Legitimism was already showing!

As I grew older my interest in history intensified and I read more and more English, Scottish and European history.

As my monarchist opinions solidified, I was in contact with HIRH Otto v. Habsburg u. Lothringen on matters dealing with European Unification. In fact in 1985 when my youngest daughter, Dominique Maureen Anne Elizabeth, was born, he and his gracious consort, HIRH Regina, did me the honour of standing Godparents (by proxy) for my newborn child. After a great deal of thought, I offered him my oath of allegiance only to be told to "renew my committment" to an unified Europe.

Stymied, I looked around for an alternative. Still enamoured of the Empire, I settled on Liechtenstein, the only surviving Princely State of the Empire. I wrote to His Serene Highness, Franz-Joseph II, Prince of Liechtenstein, explaining my problem. He replied, saying that as long as I understood that such an oath gave me no right to Liechtensteiner nationality, he would be happy to receive it and accept me as a subject. From then until 1989, when he died, I was fortunate enogh to be the subject of Franz Joseph Maria Aloys Alfred Karl Johannes Heinrich Michael Georg Ignaz Benediktus Gerhardus Majella, Fürst von und zu Liechtenstein, Duke von Troppau und Jägerndorf, Count zu Rietberg.

When he died, I wrote immediately to his successor, HSH Hans-Adam to renew my allegiance. He replied that he was not interested, so once again, I was "princeless". In the meantime, my deepening Traditionalism had brought me closer and closer to a full Counter Revolutionary position in politics and with this I began reading the History of France, the homeland of the Revolution. I became more and more convinced that to defeat the Revolution worldwide, it must first be defeated in its homeland. Obviously, that defeat would entail the Restoration of Christ's Lieutenant, the King of France.

Convinced of this, it became necessary to decide who is the King of France. As in many countries, this is a disputed question. At the time of my researches there were four "Royalist" groups in France, plus the Bonapartist followers of the "Imperial Revolutionary". They were the Legitimists, followers of the Senior Heir of the House of France, Mons. le prince Louis, le duc d'Anjou, the Orleanists, supporters of le comte de Paris, Henri d'Orleans, the "Naundorffists", who claimed that the Dauphin, son of the martyred King, survived and had issue, and the Providentialists who say, "Yes, France is a Kingdom and God will show us who is King."

I dismissed the Providentialists out of hand. God will show the rightful King by descent, not by some miracle! The Naundorffists based their claims on patently false history. The Dauphin died in the Temple Prison as a boy. All historians agree on this and only a deranged person would support the claims of the imposters of the Naundorff line. More recently, DNA evidence has totally exploded their claim, though certain insane people still support them.

This left a choice between the Legitimists and the Orleanists. My natural inclination was to the Legitimists, even before I researched it and actually thought about it. Why? Because the House of Orleans' claims to the Throne came through the Freemasonic Lodge, the Revolution and usurpation. See my post More on de Gaulle which discusses the background of the House of Orleans at some length.

However, I did a great deal of research and came to a conclusion. For those who might be interested in following my research, here are some links:

First, an overview of the problem, by Guy Stair-Sainty, The French Legitimist Case.

And second, also by Stair-Sainty, two articles going into much deeper detail regarding the legal reasons why the House of Orleans has no legitimate claim to the Throne: The French Succession: The Renunciations of 1712, the Treaties of Utrecht and their aftermath in international affairs, Part One and The French Succession: The Renunciations of 1712, the Treaties of Utrecht and their aftermath in international affairs, Part Two.

As a result of this research and a great deal of thought and prayer, I came to the absolute belief that Monseigneur le prince Louis-Alfonse, le duc d'Anjou, is the Legitimate King of France and Navarre and that his Restoration to the Throne of his forefathers is essential to the defeat of the Revolution. Given that, on 16 July 1992, I went before a notary and swore an oath of allegiance to Monseigneur. So from a sentimentally monarchist young boy to the sworn liegeman of His Most Christian Majesty, the King of France and Navarre in just under 40 years!


At 14/8/06 15:13, Blogger W said...

I take it that, unlike some of the others you approached, that le prince Louis-Alfonse accepted your alliegance?

It seems to me that the most difficult barrier to overcome in restoring the monarchies of Europe is that the monarchs themselves have bought into the Revolution and do not press their claims because they don't even believe in monarchism anymore.

At 14/8/06 18:23, Anonymous Supporter of Louis XX said...

Bravo. Wonderful story. It is indeed a grace from God to be a monarchist in these insane days we live.
I do believe, as I am sure you do as well, that in God's good time, He will indeed restore the sacred throne of France under the line of St.Louis IX; and it is for this we pray.
Thank you for sharing your story; very enjoyable reading.
And what a grace to have the son of Blessed Karl von Hapsburg as your daughter's god-father.
Look forward to further installments of your faith travels.

At 14/8/06 21:58, Anonymous Supporter of Louis XX said...

Yes, I agree with "W" that the modern monarchs have been castrated by their own will and have caved to the 'revolution'; mere puppets of the democratic demi-god. But gratefully the prophecies speak that 'the' Monarch will overthrow these republics and this insane rule of the mob in due time. radical thought, politically incorrect thought, but there it is........

At 15/8/06 16:40, Blogger Jovan-Marya Weismiller, T.O.Carm. said...

Yes, I did write to Monseigneur when I took the Oath. He was, however, still a very young man and I received an answer from his "Chancery" saying that he would be told of my action when he was older. Whether he was or not, I don't know, because I took the letter as an acceptance on the part of his advisers and never followed up.

However, if there are others out there who want to take the oath, I would suggest that we make copies and send them to him as a group. Any takers?


Enregistrer un commentaire

Links to this post:

Créer un lien

<< Home