<\/p>\n
Courtesy | Unsplash<\/em><\/p>\n A member of the British monarchy stands stripped of his ruling titles for the first time since World War I, and the scandalous circumstances leading to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor\u2019s humiliation, as well as the substance of the king\u2019s response, are worth the attention of all Americans.<\/span><\/p>\n King Charles III <\/span>issued<\/span><\/a> a terse statement last month that initiated the formal process of removing\u00a0 \u201c<\/span>the Style, Titles and Honours\u201d of royalty from the disgraced Prince Andrew. Additionally, Andrew will be <\/span>evicted<\/span><\/a> from the Royal Lodge he has occupied essentially for free for two decades.<\/span><\/p>\n The king is responding to more than a decade of sex-abuse allegations lodged against his younger brother. Earlier this year, Andrew\u2019s primary <\/span>accuser<\/span><\/a>, Virginia Giuffre, took her own life. Her memoir, published posthumously this fall, included new details concerning the connection between Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein, and many <\/span>believe<\/span><\/a> it was the final impetus for King Charles\u2019 action.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The weight of the king\u2019s decision is indisputably grave, for it places the entire person and legacy of Andrew into the company of the most reviled men in English culture: those who have betrayed their fatherland. The last time a royal was stripped of his titles was in 1919, when King George V <\/span>dethroned<\/span><\/a> Prince Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, for conspiring with Germany during World War I. Removing the titles from a member of the royal family is a punishment reserved for those few men who not only betray their country and its creed but do so for their own self-interest. <\/span> Charles\u2019 treatment of Andrew underscores a lesson that too many American leaders have either forgotten or are afraid to teach. To maintain a healthy social order, we must laud the virtuous actions that benefit the common good, and simultaneously, firmly and publicly condemn evil actions. As a body of organic communities, every country must by necessity uphold a clearly defined morality, for like any body,\u00a0 it must be governed and judged according to some criteria of moral certainty.<\/span><\/p>\n Charles\u2019 actions remind us that no social order can exist without a mechanism for not just carrying out public punishment, but public disgrace on moral grounds. The burden of initiating such opprobriums weighs upon every government to rule in our imperfect world. To enact such a public reproach, as Charles has done, is not a matter of arbitrary choice \u2014 it is one of sacred duty.<\/span><\/p>\n
<\/span>John of Salisbury, the medieval theologian who gave us the idea of the body politic, writes in his \u201c<\/span>Policraticus<\/span><\/a>\u201d<\/span> that \u201cTo be cast down from honor is to be cast out from the body politic, as a limb severed from its place.\u201d Andrew\u2019s punishment and eviction is a societal amputation, a reminder that transgression of public morality demands a heavy price.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n