Editor: We try as best we can to grieve with Catholic Spain at the loss of one of its sons, whose troubled history has come to an end as he goes to his particular judgement like all men must.
The Duke is a claimant to the throne of Spain now held by King Juan Carlos. Like Prince Norodom Sihanouk, he was one of those quixotic legitimist leaders who sided with the Communists. After reading his life story, you can come to understand the grudge that is held by many Traditionalists against Franco for choosing a man for King who had neither the legitimate birth-rite, nor the requisite devotion to Dios, Fueros, Patria y Rey! (God, Property, Country and King)
After Franco rejected his claims to the Spanish Throne and instead chose Juan Carlos as his successor, he then sided with the Titois Maoists and broke away from the Traditional Carlism supported by his mother and brother, Don Henry Sixto.
His funeral Mass will be at the Basilica Magistrale Costantiniana della Steccata in Parma
Here is the official statement of the Traditionalist Communion (from which he split by joining with the Communists) courtesy of Embajador as follows:
1. Don Carlos Hugo became, in the 60s, a real hope for many Spanish Carlist. But that hope was thwarted when Don Carlos Hugo, adopting a political position incompatible with orthodoxy Carlist condensed in the motto "God - Country - Charters - King, led a major ideological shift that he never wanted to rectify. This fact, together with others who would be complex to summarize, provoked a serious crisis in the Carlismo that began to be surpassed in 1986, thanks to the reconstitution of the Carlist Traditionalist Communion. At present there is no political link between the Carlist Communion and organized in this family Bourbon Parma.
2. At the time of death there is no opponents. The political distance as described above does not prevent the Carlist, personally, and under some emotional, join the Bourbon-Parma family in pain for this loss by raising prayers for the repose of the deceased.
3. Being responsible for the Traditionalist Communion reaffirm, once again, our beliefs monarchical and loyalists. We believe that the traditional Catholic monarchy is the political regime is best for Spain. But we can not recognize the legitimacy of those who have manipulated the institution of monarchy by putting it in the service of revolution. Consequently, the current dynastic orphans suffer along with all the Spanish does not relieve us of the duty to work for a traditional society, so that one day, when God wills, it is possible a traditional king. A social and political task call all the Spanish of goodwill.
Facade and belfry of Parma Cathedral. Photo Creative Commons License poluz.
Photo of Hugo Bourbon, Embajador en El Enfierno.
8 comments:
How is it again that Juan Carlos did not have a legitimate birthright to the throne of Spain? The last I looked, after the Duke of Segovia, grandfather of French legitimist claimant Louis-Alphonse, duc d'Anjou, renounced his and his descendants' claim to the Spanish throne, that made Infante Juan, the Count of Barcelona and father of the present king, first in the succession, and he renounced the throne in favour of his son. That any member of the house of Bourbon-Parma should put forward a claim to Spain, especially while there are lines other lines descended from earlier kings of Spain agnatically senior to they (the dukes of Seville and the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies), bespeaks a movement of Carlism away from a monarchism based on legal and traditional legitimacy and towards one based on ideology, as democratic republics are, instead.
I say this in spite of repugnance at certain of the late duke's associations and of questioning regarding certain of His Catholic Majesty's actions or inactions. However, monarchy is the defense of laws (which are always based upon tradition) and is likewise also subject to those laws. Were it not, one would then have hereditary dictatorship.
Thus, as there is no precedent in Spanish law for the last of Don Carlos' line, the Duke of San Jaime, designating Xavier, Duke of Parma (Don Carlos Hugo's and Don Sixtus Henry's father), as his successor, without reference to laws of succession, one must consider his designation illegal, untraditional, and unconstitutional. The legitimate claim to the throne of Spain passed to Alfonso XIII, agnatic senior of the Spanish Bourbons and indeed of the whole Capetian dynasty, upon Don Alfonso Carlos' death in 1936.
As regards ideology, Alfonso Carlos' successor in the Carlist claim, Don Jaime, Duke of Madrid, was just as red as Don Carlos Hugo, if not more so. Nonetheless, that did not prevent Carlists and French legitimists from supporting his right to rule, even despite repugnance toward his Communism. Although, had he ever reigned and shown lack of respect for and defense of the traditional law of the land, that would have delegitimized him.
If King Juan Carlos weren't so fit in the image of Isabella II, especially in the compromises he has so far made with the Liberal Government of Spain, there wouldn't be such an issue, but as it was, Franco made an unfortunate decision, and this poor decision was compounded by Duke Hugo's own betrayal of the principles of Carlismo. It is interesting that, generally speaking, the question of right of succession favoring morganatic lines, have also tended to favor the cause of the progressives and the gradual destruction on Spanish society.
We can't make concessions to these people. If we've learned anything from the last three centuries, it should be that. The message of legitimist Carlismo embodied by Henri Sixto is a fight worth fighting, and the restoration of those traditions are worth preparing for.
http://romanchristendom.blogspot.com/2007/10/dios-fueros-patria-y-rey-spanish.html
I agree with you completely regarding the principles of traditional Carlism as eminently worthy of being upheld, Tancred, but tradition cannot and should not be upheld by untraditional means. To do so is hypocrisy, doing the same thing as Louis-Philippe in France or William and Mary in England and Scotland, and then saying that it is not unjust only when our faction does so. Juan Carlos may be an appeaser, and he may judge that he must be an appeaser in order to keep his coronation oath to preserve the peace of the realm. Frankly, I should prefer that to ideologues of all stripes sharpening their knives for a Second Spanish Civil War. The first one was horrid enough, and, moreover, in these days when the Politburo now calls itself the EU, we would lose this round, Spain would become a republic, and the reprisals against Catholics worldwide would no doubt be dreadful.
Prudence would thus dictate that we fight for these traditions in our own homes, our own families, and our own parishes, which are all too often in disarray, before we should even think about grand conflicts of state. Liberalism may be at the knell of its power now, but it thus has only one direction to go. Let us be prepared, lest some other faction (Bonapartists, or worse yet, Muslims) take the opportunity heaven has created for us.
The lines of succession don't matter. What matters is orthodoxy. Henry IV of France was deemed unfit to hold the throne of France until he renounced his heresy and embraced the true religion.
On paper, the Isabelline line may well have the superior claim. However, in the eyes of God, perhaps not. If providence would provide the Carlist claimants with the means to seize the throne, they would be justified in taking it. The quibble of Carlist vs. Isabelline is merely a pretext for "orthodox vs. liberal," which is the real question at hand.
Concerning the basis of the Salic Law, Juan Carlos was yet anther departure from the legitimate claims of the Carlists under Duke Hugo. Hugo, as a result, betrayed the Carlist cause and so the true leader of the cause is now Prince Henry Sixto Bourbon-Parma.
As you can see, the Carlist cause is still alive in Spain and we share this aspiration and pray that it succeeds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salic_law
Tancred- Thanks very much, once again, for the link.
We've had long discussions at the CTC about the correct translation of "Fueros" into English. The person responsible for international relations (Rafael de la Vega)insists it should be "Charter". My opinion is that it should be "self-rule". I'll keep you abreast of any new development in the discussions which are likely to continue for years . In any case, I do not think "property" is a correct translation.
As for Juan Carlos well, I honestly do not think he cares the least about "his" people. He does care a lot about the financial well-being of his inmediate family. He lived through financial hardship of his own parents and that marked him. He willingly renounced any real government power in exchange for a peaceful and hedonistic life. It all really boils down to that. Spain is in all practical purposes a Republic, with a nominal "head of state", since at least 1975.
Franco did not ever have the slightest interest in giving Carlismo a chance. He was a devoted follower of Alphonse (the grandfather of Juan Carlos) and a conservative liberal (in the European sense). As all Spanish conservatives before him (who as Balmes said, just fight to "conserve" the Revolution), he did his utmost to wipe Carlismo off the face of Spain. And he did a bloody good job at that. D. Carlos Hugo's socialist stance was a most welcomed help, as was D. Sixto's rightist stance. Neither of them has been able to preserve Carlismo as an esentially counter-revolutionary movement.
I should note for the sake of clarification that when I state that the present line of Spanish kings hold a Salic claim to the throne of Spain, it is not by merit of Isabella II, for female lines cannot succeed according to the Salic law. Rather, the claim comes through Don Francisco de Paula, youngest son of Charles IV, and thus brother of Fernando VII and Don Carlos. His son, the Duke of Cadiz, was the consort of Isabella and thus ancestor of the present line of kings. This, and not the Isabelline sanction, is the legal argument for the Isabelline/Alfonsine line, which will nonetheless end with the Prince of Asturias, if Don Jaime Enrique's renunciation is considered valid. Thereafter Salic seniority may pass into the ducal house of Seville, descended from Don Francisco de Paula's younger son; however, he married morganatically, and I am not certain what the Spanish law regarding morganatic marriages is. If that disqualifies the Seville line, then the eligible Salic senior would be the claimant to the throne of the Two Sicilies, and thus the head of the House of Borbon-Dos Sicilias.
My apologies if I was vague regarding that small legal detail aforehand.
Aside, I am aware that Don Sixtus Henry is childless; is anyone aware if he has designated a successor as head of the Traditionalist Communion?
@Mr. Pallardy, thank you for that informative clarification, and to Embajador for his explanation of the present trials of the Carlist cause.
I toll would like to know who will succeed the Carlist cause after Don Sixtus Henry.
Post a Comment