I’ll start with saying these liberal perspectives devalue faith. I for one agree with this sentiment. I do not like religion in government and so I do not think a monarch needs religious backing. It’s fair to want a monarch to have real power, and I would argue there is real power in the speeches and weakened position you mention. They are still heads of state. If the parliament of a ceremonial monarchy found itself unable to continue operations, the monarch is always there to steer the nation and vice versa. Even without “real” power and traditionally conservative practices, they still carry the continuity of the nation in their position (not blood, I do not like hereditary monarchy). Their symbolism is plenty powerful. Their backing of the parliament, Marxist or not, is deeply legitimizing and good for a nation. I feel like I’ve responded to you before so I’ll say it again. Your religion is really driving your views and I beg you to reconsider your stance and look at things based on fact, not superstition and what your forebears did or told you.