Queen Fabiola of the Belgians

The death last weekend of Queen Fabiola and her funeral in Brussels yesterday marks the end of a dignified and devout life lived in service to the teaching and principles of the Catholic Faith and, since 1960, to the Kingdom of the Belgians as Queen and as Queen Dowager. Always an elegant figure she clearly strenuously worked for charitable causes and the well-being of her adoptive country. The personal tragedy of her childlessness with King Baudouin led them to an ever greater concern for children's causes.

The Daily Telegraph obituary is a good one, and can be read at Queen Fabiola of the Belgians

The Vatican Insider posts from La Stampa has this account of the unpleasant furore last year over the Queen's private charitable foundation, and who it was indeed who made a fuss in  Queen Fabiola finances Catholic Church with taxpayer's money

There is an online biography of the Queen and details of plans for hr funeral at Queen Fabiola of Belgium, and the Daily Mail has an illustrated account of the funeral at Belgium's royals join European monarchs as they bid farewell to Queen Fabiola.

The BBC account has a number of photographs and can be seen at Belgium dowager Queen Fabiola has state funeral and there are more images from Hello magazine at Royals pay tribute at Queen Fabiola of Belgium's funeral

The absence of a member of the British Royal Family, who were represented by H.M.Ambassador, has been noted by the media. Given the wide-ranging representation of other Royal and Imperial houses, both regnant and non-regnant, at the funeral, and particularly given the fact that The Queen, contrary to precedent, attended the funeral of King Baudouin in 1993, this is to be regretted. I have commented before on the unfortunate tendency of our own Royal Family, or their advisors, to keep other royal houses at something of a distance on too many such occasions. British public opinion would consider itself slighted if other dynasties did not send representatives to London for comparable weddings and funerals. There is a strong argument for what might be termed group solidarity amongst monarchs and monarchies - Queen Victoria and King Edward VII would certainly have agreed with that principle.

Apart from a notice of the Queen's death last weekend there has not, so far, been more about her on the excellent blog The Cross of Laeken, which chronicles the Belgian royal family and their history. There will doubtless be something there soon.

The new King of the Belgians

Today has witnessed the abdication of King Albert II as King of the Belgians and the accession and formal Oath taking of his son and successor, King Philippe I to the Francophone Belgians and King Filip I to the Flemish speakers.

 

 

The King of the Belgians takes the Oath to the Constitution in the three official languages of the realm - Flemish, French and German

Image: Businessweek

Given the delicate balancing act the Belgian monarch is called upon to exercise in seeking  to reconcile the conflicting interests of the Flemish and French language groups in the realm the new King deserves the prayers and support of his people and of all those who support the monarchical principle.

King Philippe can draw upon the conscientious work and precedents set by his uncle King Baudouin and by his father in his new task, and the support of Queen Mathilde and their children, as well as the wider Royal family of Belgium.

Abdication of the King of the Belgians

The announcement yesterday by the King of the Belgians that he will abdicate for reasons due to his health and age - he is 79 - on July 21st, the kingdom's national day, makes this the third voluntary abdication, after those in the Netherlands and Papacy, this year.

King Albert II

Image:crossoflaeken.blogspot

King Albert II, of whom there is an online biography here, has worked faithfully to keep his kingdom together, like his brother and predecessor King Baudouin. He, and the Belgian people, have had to endure the frequent failure of the Belgian political class to find a means of co-operating in government, with long periods with caretaker governments whilst negotiations dragged on behind the scenes. On one occasuion the King refused to sanction the honours list as ameans of drawing attentuion to this paralysis of political life.

The task of being King of the Belgians now falls to Prince Philippe, Duke of Brabant as heir to the throne. It is not an easy inheritance, but he has been able to observe his father and uncle in their discharge of the duties on monarch. There is an online account of him here.

Prince Philippe Duke of Brabant

Image: Wikipedia

The excellent blog Cross of Laeken is a valuable and positive commentary on the Belgian monarchy and its history.

L'Union fait La Force

The continuing inability of Belgian politicians from the two languaphone communities to agree means that the Kingdom of the Belgians continues with a caretaker government. This continuing crisis, or crises, highlights the role of the King in holding the country together, and means that those who want to destroy the country inevitibly attack the monarchy.

The Belgian Royal Arms

Image: Wikipedia

My own suspicion is that the two communities threaten secession in order to get what they want, but if the point was finally reaches of making achoice they would remain together. Despite being created in its present form only in 1830-31 Belgium has amuch longer history as political unit under Austrian and before that Spanish Habsburg rule, and before that as the Duchy of Burgundy. It has always had political tensions from competing communities in association one with another. It is not in the interests of other European counties with lingusitic or other ethnic divisions - the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, even Switzerland - to see it fall apart.

As was demonstrated by the public show of mourning at the death of King Baudouin in 1993 support for the unity of the kingdom is not to be discounted, as well as being a sign of the respect shown to a King who was seen as a faithful steward of the difficult inheritanc ehe had received.

The Cross of Laeken is a blog devoted to supporting the Belgian monarchy, and answering its detractors. I see that it very kindly links to this blog and I have added it to the list at the side as well as the official website of the Belgian Monarchy.

Royal Assent

Tribunus on his excellent and always well-researched Roman Christendom blog has two valuable and related articles answering the argument that The Queen could have refused to sign into law the 1967 Abortion Act.The first is here, and the follow up one here.

In the discussion there is reference to the situation in Belgium when the late King "abdicated" for the day, but that was under a written constitution. More recently we have seen a constitutional crisis and amendment to the powers of the Grand Duke in Luxembourg over the related issue of euthanasia legislation. The Spanish example is worth talking note of- when the King signed into law a liberalisation of the abortion legislation the Spanish bishops issued a statement clearly distinguishing between the King's position as Sovereign, bound by constitutional laws and norms, and his personal position as a Catholic.

They clearly understood something not always understood by people in this country whom I have heard criticize The Queen for not intervening by refusing to sign or exercising a theoretical veto. Understanding the constitutional position is one of the many benefits of reading Ernst Kantorowicz's The King's Two Bodies - it really is a "must read" book.

This post raises a further point - how common was it ever for monarch's to veto legislation? It last happened with a Scottish Militia Bill in 1707. I suspect apart from the occasional pesky bill sent up by Puritans in the time of Elizabeth I and the occasional spats of the Stuarts with recalcitrant Parliaments, it did not happen - and it did not happen because Parliament was managed by the Crown. That is why the Treasury bench is in the Commons. Good government is in part about managing Parliament, and has been since the thirteenth century. Legislation is killed off in Parliament, not by a veto. If you have to use the option of Le Roy or La Reine s'avisera something has gone wrong in managing Parliament. In 1967 the Abortion Act was tacitly backed by the government. Had The Queen sought spiritual advice on the matter she would have found that her Archbishop of Canterbury and many of the bishops had voted for the legislation - so no help there.