We Don't Understand the Role of Ritual | Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg

[@kaylenehousego8929]

I commend the full conversation . It was very helpful to me as I continue to learn our history......its never too late . Blessings from Sydney Australia .

[@photohounds]

Ooh, another JRM interview. I never tire of hearing this intelligent, articulate chap.

[@Ozgipsy]

Good to see Jacob on podcasts. He’s built for long form.

[@cagirl2220]

Constitutional monarchy by far is the best form of the government.

[@angelozachos8777]

You listen to Curtis Yarvin too much

[@cagirl2220]

@@angelozachos8777 I don’t even know who he is. But thanks, I will listen to him. You can also check out the best countries in the world and by chance they are all constitutional monarchy.

[@awesomesurfer6358]

The coronation was important because it followed pretty closely how the old testament says it should be done, it's biblical, becoming a king or having a king is part of the gospel, and as king of the Saxon tribe, few others nations in chrisondom actually crown a king.

[@nickmiller4814]

We were taught, until very recently, that Britain is our Mother Country. (Wokesim forbid that we use the term "Mother Country" today!) I will never forget being in an American History class in high school during a discussion of attempts to prevent the Revolution as late as 1775. Our teacher looked out at a class of old stock kids and the children and grandchildren of immigrants and said, "Gentlemen! Remember, we were fighting for our rights as Englishmen." I knew at that moment that I, whose roots were in a tiny East European country very far away, had those "rights as Englishmen." The Common Law, Magna Carta, King Arthur, Shakespeare, I was their heir. THAT is why we interrupted programming to announce the death of the queen. We are also a part of the glorious Anglosphere which has done more for human progress than any other human entity in history.

[@soulpowerful]

This is incredibly interesting.

[@martaamance4545]

The British Monarchy under Elizabeth did two great principles, the first was the continuity of the realm, meaning the United Kingdom is still an important cultural and social model, and the second is setting the moral standard for all citizens to look to and follow. She was the heart and soul of her country. It remains whether Charles the what ever will even remorely come close to that example. My guess is no.

[@robertholland7558]

No guessing required. Charles or any of his subsequent followers will come close to the reign of Elizabeth!

[@steelcrown7130]

Whether the King comes personally close to the devotion and respect for duty his mother demonstrated is utterly beside the point. He is unlikely to be able to grow into the role as she did because she started at 25 and had 70 years to do it. He is 74 already. Kings and queens have their own individual personalities, gifts, lengths of reign and zeitgeists to work with, and there have been some utterly shocking examples: Charles I, Queen Mary II and Queen Anne were no great successes, Edward VIII was an utter disaster, George IV and William IV were preludes to Victoria and not much more. The point is that it doesn't matter. The system they powerlessly preside over keeps developing and adapting and their personal qualities don't matter all that much. The role of the monarchy is indeed to provide continuity, but to suggest that it must also set a moral standard for all citizens to look to and follow is complete tosh. The idea of the Royal Family as the "model" for harmonious family life dates only from the later reign of George V, and saved their skin after so many thrones toppled after WWI, but it was badly shaken by Edward VIII, the antics of George Duke of Kent and Princess Margaret, Fergie and her unpleasant husband, Megxit, the Diana Debacle.... Personal abilities are what politicians trade in: what they do and what they think is meant to matter. What they ARE is what is important to the Royal Family: the continuity, stability and living symbolism of the nation's history and its constitution.

[@robertholland7558]

@@steelcrown7130 stability? You just provided every argument against it, and yet you still believe the royal is “stability “? Either you are completely delusional or you’re talking double Dutch! Get rid of them! If you wish the have a completely symbolic irrelevant royal for “ stability “, make Kylie Minogue queen of Australia. And if she is not your preferred choice, feel free to make another, after all as you stated the person is not important.

[@steelcrown7130]

@@robertholland7558 Feel better?

[@matthewcook9404]

Thank goodness.

[@tomhamilton7726]

I was raised in the Church of England, and I love the rituals with which I was raised. I mourn their passing. I was a Royalist as a boy. I cannot abide the current iteration. Both of these institutions have been destroyed by woke ideology and by the exposure of the perversions of those in charge. Cultural Marxism has triumphed.

[@banta-pd8zj]

Really? You do talk rubbish. Australia is a monarchy. Woke is just the current label for political correctness which has become meaningless, hence the name change. It simply means changing norms, a given as society changes over time.

[@tomhamilton7726]

@@banta-pd8zj um, nope.

[@banta-pd8zj]

Well Tom, woke won't be around long as it too becomes recognised as equally as meaningless as all it's previous incarnations and then the right will be fishing around for the next pejorative to rant and rail against. It's like night follows day. Meaningless drivel.

[@Muhammad_Sausage]

Same here. Brought up in the Church of England school and Cub Scouts. Sad what’s happening now in the UK.

[@oliverjamito9902]

God for the living knows HIS OWN AND HIS OWN KNOWS HIM? Yes, sitting upon the NEW Table made from a hand without blood stains upon HIS hand. Crown of life unto all the HEIRS. According to God's Will. FOR GOD'S GRACE HAVE BROUGHT ME HERE.

[@bodgitscarper5353]

Question: If the British Constitution is so important (and I think it is), then why are the politicians constantly trying to re-right the very meaning of it. If in the constitution common law is the law of the people (and it it supposed to be) then how does any party, limit freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom to travel.? All in this British Constitution. Where are the defenders?. Is it not the Governments job to make sure that this constitution is being upheld?.

[@mademoiselledusfonctionell1609]

Living in a monarchy as I do (Sweden), I see the American republic as terrifying. It is everything from Watergate to George W Bush's (undignified and imbecile) way of expressing himself as a cowboy rather than as a statesman to the fact that a lout like Trump ever had a chance to be elected (elected!!! - because the first time he was) president. Our politicians are not very savvy (look at the way they negotiated with TURKEY instead of Nato), nor intellectual (Annie Lööf made a fine spectacle of herself on a talkshow where she just didn't understand what Jordan B Peterson said) or statesmanlike (I can again refer to the negotiation with Turkey), but we do not let them represent us in the world. In a way, it is the institution of our country itself that represents us - as expressed in the succession of monarchs. The continuity that a monarchy through its monarchs can bring to a nation is more valuable than being able to elect the nation's foremost representative, even if (in the US, that is a big if) the person elected aren't obviously uncouth.

[@voz805]

Snotty, ignorant POV to say the least.

[@mn5499]

Couldn't agree more

[@curtisloftis6003]

There was a time that I valued Rees-Mogg...but now, after he has had his time in power, I see he is just a talker. He talks and talks and I agree with his words. But his actions have resulted in nothing to advance the cause of freedom. He is like American conservatives...they simply talk.

[@mogznwaz]

You don’t know what you’re talking about

[@curtisloftis6003]

@@mogznwaz If I am wrong about this, please tell me how. What has he accomplished for the conservative movement, other than talking? (BTW, I like and respect the guy...but what has he accomplished?) I am in America and we have the same type of fellow; one that speaks well, is very intelligent and amusing. But their list of accomplishments is very, very small. Thanks

[@WaterhenBloa14]

A national figurehead needs a country, values, a tribe and to be honest I'm not sure if those binding things the monarchy represents that make us connect to them on an emotional level still exist to put it bluntly. I feel as the years go on it's all going to feel increasingly out of kilter with modern Britian, I don't know where we go from here.

[@alsoascot02]

The real points being made are that only stable countries can prosper. And that we need to understand the basis of our governance./government. While I am personally a republicam I recognise that the post Commonwealth (post Civil War) UK model of monarchy had multiple advantages over the truly repellent absolutist Monarchies of the rest of Europe at the time As JRM himself points out ritual for the sake of ritual is pointless. For me to much of the ritual still around the modern UK is just that. And the expectation of deference and residual feudalism that are associated with its continued exisysnce etc still contain to much that hints at absurd ideas like the Divine right of Kings etc. It may have had its place in the past but it is definitely no longer a needed, relevant or necessary part of effective democratic future focused government.

[@NPC-bs3pm]

I DISAGREE (as a Right-winger) with the following⬇ 1:03 "now where that head of state is a Monarch; is a Governor General - doesn't particularly matter. It matters...." The Governor General is to be APPOINTED by the crown. In 🍁Canada we have a joke of a Governor General appointed by the very unpopular Prime Minister. If 👑King Charles wants to appoint a more green-energy climate cultists Governor General, I'd be good with that as long as it is HIS authority showing through with HIM as the the target of my criticism (SIDE NOTE: I do not blame the crown institution itself)

[@davidhawley1132]

I think that there is more to the monarchy than continuity with the founding of the state. I am reminded that the Bible has a king at the top of the body politic, all the way into eternity with Jesus the Christ (Christ = King) taking that role reconstrued. All monarchs in rhe West then are reflections of the archetype Christ defines.

[@chriscunningham8807]

Exactly. We forget that the British monarch also represents The Church of England. The Royal Family epitomised service to the people. Despite being wealthy their primary rolevwas to support and provide service to the people. The funeral and coronation were spectacular and rarely experienced rituals, which confirmed the dignity, hisorical significance and splendour of England.

[@David-tt2mt]

Q. Why is c111 so deeply allied/involved with the "Forum". Is he controlling this or being used as a useful shareholder. And what of his subjects (?objects) the useless eaters?

[@UsedBrain4U]

King Up-Chuck is not the solution to our lack of appreciation for ritual.

[@nickryder9669]

Gosh a 45% pay rise to dress up poor lad will only be on £126 million ! Not bad when millions of his subjects are told to eat 💩use food banks see someone else if you can’t see a dentist ( car mechanics use drills and pliers) while JRM holds his hands as if to pray no one notices !

[@larrygerry985]

Rees-Mogg is a 60 year old man with a nanny...... enough said.

[@gracecollins8415]

Context needed: Rees-Mogg and his wife are raising six children, the eldest has turned 14. They are very rich. He needed a nanny and his old nanny needed a job.

[@g.pmoore4293]

He is in his 50s actually and never done anything for the country and people preferring to serve himself and Mammon.

[@noblevictory2200]

Answer : Totally 🙄🤦

[@MaxPayne-fi1mz]

Catholic supporting monarchy 😮😮

[@kingcrazymani4133]

Someone wants Crazyman to comment on this hot potato (for the cognoscenti) topic? Nice try. I won’t discuss this topic because there is a 3 metre pole between the hot potato and Us. The potato does not even have Our leave to be this close.

[@RealHooksy]

No

[@samrc8350]

The monarchy is out of touch and irrelevant, just like the person getting interviewed.

[@Muhammad_Sausage]

Why is it out of touch?

[@nickryder9669]

Well mr Mogg can you send me a copy of the constitution? Didn’t they just build a brand new state of the art for 17 century England ?

[@uberwayz]

Charles is the death rattle of the British monarchy

[@judithcressey1682]

Charles iii is WEF. A devotee of the cult of climate 'crisis' and of 'diversity'. No Defender of the Faith and crowned by an Archbishop who has been kicked off GAFCON and Global South Anglican Churches and called to repent.

[@NickHewlettTHATCHIT]

the ritual should be ditched. "NOW"

[@mogznwaz]

It’s not up to you

[@NickHewlettTHATCHIT]

@@mogznwaz Exactly.. 😀

[@mogznwaz]

@@NickHewlettTHATCHIT Do you think your opinions should take precedence over everyone else’s?? Very arrogant

[@chriscunningham8807]

Why? How could anybody not be impressed by the solemnity and significance of both the funeral and coronation of the heads of The British Monarchy?

[@emperorsean1]

Yes the monarchy is irrelevant

[@Muhammad_Sausage]

Reasons?

[@ArielBerdugo]

The King's English.

[@daniellesomerfield8799]

King Charles has no authority over the church, just like the Pope has no authority over the Catholic Church. Neither are Apostles. There are 2 places in the NT where it speaks of anointing with oil; James 5:14 and Mark 6:13. Oil is symbolic of The Holy Spirit. Apostle James was writing to "the twelve tribes which are scattered among the nations" (James 1:1). Apostle Mark was recounting the sending of the 12 (disciples) authorised by Jesus to "cast out vile spirits" (v7) and to "preach that they should return to God" (v12). Both were for the purpose of healing. The anointing with oil of kings was a practise of the OT. (1 Sam. 16:12) Jews from every nation under Heaven were in Jerusalem when The Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost. (Acts 2:5; 8-11) And if one is ill, let him call The Elders of the church, and let them pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of Our Lord. James 5:14 Aramaic And they were casting out many evil spirits, and they were anointing the many sick with oil and they were healing them. Mark 6:13 Aramaic 12And he sent and he brought him, and he was ruddy and his eyes were beautiful and his appearance beautiful, and LORD JEHOVAH said to Shemueil [Prophet Samuel]: “Arise, anoint him, for this is he!” 13And Shemueil took the horn of oil, and he anointed him in the midst of his brothers, and The Spirit of LORD JEHOVAH opened up upon David from that day, and Shemueil arose and he went on to Ramtha to his house 1 Sam. 16:12,13 Aramaic But there were men dwelling in Jerusalem who were worshipers of God, Jews from every nation under Heaven. Acts 2:5 Aramaic “How are we hearing, everyone, his own dialect in which we were born?” 9“Parthians and Medes and Elanites, and those who dwell in Bayth- Nahrayn, Judeans and Qapodoqians and those who are from the regions of Pontus and of Asia,” 10“And from the regions of Phrygia and of Pamphylia and of Egypt and of the countries of Libya which are near to Cyrene and those who came from Rome, Jews and proselytes”, 11“And who are from Crete, and Arabians, behold, we are hearing from those who are speaking in our own dialects, the wonders of God.” Acts 2:8-11 Aramaic

[@elizabeth2416]

The ritual of the Monarchy has absolutely no relevance to Australia. We are not governed by the KIng, he is a figure head of an old caste system which was replaced by a parliamentary system. Let's be honest, if any one believes that this Royal family's bloodline links them to God in a more direct, precious, special way than anyone else's, then they believe in a caste system. This is archaic. Aboriginal rituals are not about one family being so much better that all other families and therefore entitled to more of everything. Lastly, I am an Australian of European descent, but not English, and I don't see these German Monarchs as Royals.

[@merrick2752]

Australia is a Constitutional Monarchy and while the King has no role in the Australian parliamentary system, as you say, a figure head, he is the supreme commander of the Australian Army, through his Governer General, whose title is commander in chief. A rather unfortunate and disconcerting legacy. As is also that ministers of the crown and judges are sworn in by the Kings representative, the Governer General. As you mention, archaic and problematic. While the rituals of coronation have no relevance for Australia, the above-mentioned Monarchial powers however archaic are relevant, as Australia has enjoyed so far, benign Monarchs. Yet we seem quite stupidly happy with this arrangement.

[@Muhammad_Sausage]

‘German monarchs’! 😂😂😂😂😂😂 That descended from the Stuarts who were, what?

[@merrick2752]

@@Muhammad_Sausage As i knew it William took it from Harold at the battle of Hastings. 1066.

[@paulkerridge6001]

The ritual that projects your inner king onto a degenerate old man. Never. I’m my king. I don’t need my king ‘out there’ .

[@edweb2006]

As long they need royalty we will think of them as greatest thieves and murderers.