The Estates General in America

Prior to the French Revolution, the government of France was an absolute monarchy…or so we’ve been led to believe. True, the French state was represented by a succession of Kings and Queens, some of whom had power that could almost be called absolute…but not all.

In fact, the power of the monarch varied widely as a function of (1) the monarch’s personal charisma, (2) the immediate political, economic and technological state-of-affairs, and (3) the monarch’s degree of control over the levers of public power. 

According to Hegel, it is proper for every state to have a Head, the ‘Crown’ (Keter) so to speak. The Crown always represents the nation symbolically if not always politically. Hegel’s politics is reflective of his Christian theology. God, the universal Father and the Creator of heaven and earth, does not necessarily restrict in any way the free agency of his creatures. Hegel thought to model his Ideal State after the ‘Judeo-Christian Cosmos’. 

To the extent that all political power is concentrated in the ‘Crown’, the society is question does not have a constitution. The constitution of a nation begins with the circumscription (not necessarily the decapitation) of its Head. A constitution, written or oral, is a schematic illustrating the distribution of political power in a particular society.  

In England, for example, the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 confirmed limits on the authority of the Crown and set that nation on the path to Constitutional Monarchy.  Likewise, the first public exercise of the constitution of the Ancien Regime in France occurred in 1302 when Philip IV (Philip the Fair) convened the first ever session of the Estates General. This body included representatives of the clergy (First Estate), the nobility (Second Estate), and a very limited number of folks culled out of gen pop (Third Estate).

The 14th century turned out to be the heyday of the Estates General in France, meeting 30 times over 100 years. As European culture transitioned from Medieval (14th century, Savonarola) to Renaissance (15th century, Machiavelli), France’s monarchs became more powerful, and they relied less on the Estates. Ultimately the institution was abolished as part of the French Revolution and replaced over time by a variety of marginally successful consultative and legislative bodies.

Were the interests of the French people better represented by these later deliberative bodies than they were by the 14th century Estates General?

It is tempting to think of the Declaration of Independence as an American version of England’s Magna Carta. Perhaps that would be on point had George III not refused to accept its terms. “I knew King John (at least from stage and screen) and you, George, are no King John!” and that’s saying something.

Extending the analogy, the U.S. Constitution of 1789 with its justly famous ‘balance of powers’ can be viewed in the light of France’s Estates General. Recall that those Estates included representatives of the clergy, the nobility, and the people. Can we find vestigial organs of the Ancien Regime concealed in the U.S. Constitution?

Imagine the President as Constitutional Monarch, Keter. A President’s power is partly structural and partly a function of personal charisma, but it is carefully circumscribed by three other institutions: the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the Judiciary.

The many members of the House, elected to relatively brief 2 year terms, were expected to represent the immediate thoughts and interests of the broader citizenry. 

Members of the Senate, fewer in number and elected to longer 6 year terms, were expected to represent an American version of nobility. This is where the voices of the socially and economically powerful could be heard and taken into consideration. Ideally, the Senate would temper the enthusiasm of the House and/or the hubris of the Executive in the light of social and economic reality: “That simply won’t work!”

Finally, the Judiciary. Like the First Estate (clergy) in France, the Judicial Branch is meant to reach beyond social, economic, and political trends, ensuring the nation will stay on course, remaining true to its founding principles.

Just as the clergy, and ultimately the Pope (RCC), is responsible for keeping the Church grounded in Scripture and Tradition, so the Judiciary according to the Constitution. This suggests that ‘1776 and all that’ is a secular version of the ‘founding mythology’ that is at the heart of most religions.  

Justices are appointed for life according to a deliberative process that involves both the executive and the legislative branches. They are unelected and only subject to removal in cases of serious personal misconduct. 

This independence is essential if our judges are to perform their ‘undemocratic’ duties. Frequently, they are called upon to insert themselves between the immediate ‘will’ of the Executive and/or Legislative branches and the enduring ‘principles of the Republic’. 

We are reminded, of course, of Sophocles’ great tragedy, Antigone. Oedipus’ brother, Creon, has become ruler in Thebes following the former’s exile and ensuing civil war between his sons. Both are killed (by each other) in battle.

Creon orders one brother’s body to be buried with the full trappings of a state funeral. The other brother, left unburied, is to be consumed by dogs in violation of the religious beliefs and cultural norms of the people of Thebes.

Antigone, Oedipus’ daughter, betrothed to Creon’s son, Haemon, defies Creon and covers her brother’s unburied body after reciting the traditional funeral liturgy; for this act of sedition she is sentenced to a cruel death, despite her royal lineage. 

In reaching her decision, Antigone sweeps aside various arguments based on practicality, proportionality, and personal consequences. Right is right! The order of the Universe requires her to proceed according to divine will and local custom; she buries her brother and pays the ultimate price for her ‘treachery against the state’.

Antigone suggests that Thebes has a constitution, i.e. the will of the gods and the traditions of the city, that places limits on the authority of its tyrant du jour.  As with many characters from Greek tragedy, Antigone is not just a mythical figure out of the mists of 2nd millennium (BCE) Greece. She represents the principle of constitutional law (vs. despotism). 

Sophocles anticipates the political ideology of the Christian Era. According to the Church the will of God, revealed through Scripture and Tradition, is the ultimate source of all political power, imposing strict limits on the caprice of ad hoc rulers. According to this social philosophy, all societies are ‘constitutional’ whether or not they like it, embrace it, or even acknowledge it. 

According to a steady stream of Christian commentators, especially Thomas Aquinas and Pope Leo XIII, the ‘form’ of secular government (e.g. constitutional monarchy, democratic republic, or dictatorship of the proletariat) is less important than its ‘substance’, i.e. its recognition that all political power is subordinate to the Will of God and its willingness to govern within the constitutional limits imposed as a result.    

And what is the Will of God? Beauty, Truth, and Justice. 

Keep the conversation going.

1. Click here to comment on this TWS.

2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link.

3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers; click here to view out Writers’ Specs.