A media business of millions, perhaps billions of dollars, photos of all newspapers and thousands of international magazines, millions of people watching television, or live on the web and instagram to follow the 'royal wedding'. Why? If it was the son of United States President getting married or Luigino di Maio, would not have been so important such as Harry's marriage. Why is this such a case of state?
Monarchy it is and it remains a fascinating entity to everyone.
Monarchy is the oldest form of government. The people of Israel asked the Lord for a king 'as all other peoples have'. And the Lord gave them Saul and then David. The monarchy gives historical continuity, it is the living symbol of the tradition and history of a country. Looking at the monarchical family there is a trace of a secular path, of one's roots, of one's own identity. The monarchy has the family as a model and stability as a goal. The image of the royal family must be that rock on which everyone can support. How can we not think of the force that Queen Elizabeth is emanating at ninety-two?
The monarchy is still made of protocols, of form, of a ritual that fascinates. An ancient ritual ... fascinates! It is something sacred because it has its roots in the centuries. The rite then refers to order, to composure. If in our hyperliberal age we are still attracted to the monarchy it means that it is the most natural institution. A president, a prime minister, what charm does he have? Little or nothing. They come and go like the winds. The monarchy remains.
Since ancient times the king was considered a demigod or a true god. For the Jewish people and for Christians, the king is not a god but he receives, yes, a mandate from God to govern. The Bible clearly states that kings and rulers will be asked to account for what they have done. In the Middle Ages it was believed that the king had some kind of powers, certainly there is a long trail of saints who left examples of government and splendid works. Saint Louis King of France, Saint Ferdinand King of Spain, Saint Stephen King of Hungary, Saint Edmundo King of England, Saint Brigid Queen of Sweden and Saint Catherine his daughter, Saint Elisabeth Princess of Hungary, who left everything to serve the poor as a Franciscan tertiary, St. Margaret of Scotland, queen and mother. It is wonderful to read the lives and writings left by these holy kings. They used power as a service not as a right.
The British monarchy, even if Protestant, still has a strong link with religion. The queen or king of England are also the supreme heads of the national church.
A prince is educated as a child to the role he will have to play, so it is for the prince's wife. Clearly it is not all roses and flowers and they are not all saints, but in general the monarchy, if surrounded by an even better prestige, leaves a positive track in a country, strengthens its identity, which the politician on duty at government will never do.
The politician has a short-term perspective, five or ten years. The politician probably comes from nowhere, from an inadequate formation, to get to where he must ingratiate himself with the powerful and then return the 'favors'. The monarch instead can only thank God for what he has, his vision is long-term and the prestige of the nation goes to his honor. The politician is often a jackal, but the monarch has interest in the prosperity of his country. Of course today these monarchies are powerless to count for little or nothing. In the past, thanks to the kings and nobles, our cities have grown in splendor, in the beauty of art and music. A monarchy tempered by a chosen chamber would remain the ideal form of government. Think of the beauties of Italy ... maybe we owe it to the time of 'democracy', which democracy is not?