Editing Divine right of kings (section)

== Conceptions in the early modern period ==

=== Reformation Era ===
{{Main|Sacred king|Theocracy}}
The divine right of kings, or divine-right theory of kingship, is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, deriving his right to rule directly from the will of God. The king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm, including (in the view of some, especially in Protestant countries) the church.

A weaker or more moderate form of this political theory does hold, however, that the king is subject to the church and the pope, although completely irreproachable in other ways; but according to this doctrine in its strong form, only God can judge an unjust king.

The doctrine implies that any attempt to depose the king or to restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and may constitute a sacrilegious act.

Before the Reformation the anointed [[king]] was, within his [[realm]], the accredited vicar of God for secular purposes (see the [[Investiture Controversy]]); after the Reformation he (or she if [[queen regnant]]) became this in Protestant states for religious purposes also.<ref>{{EB1911|inline=y|last=Phillip|first=Walter Alison|wstitle=King#Divine Right of Kings.|display=King § Divine Right of Kings|volume=15|page=806}}</ref>

==== Kingdom of Scotland ====
{{Main|The True Law of Free Monarchies}}
The [[Scots language|Scots]] textbooks of the divine right of kings were written in 1597–1598 by James VI of Scotland. His ''[[Basilikon Doron]]'', a manual on the powers of a king, was written to edify his four-year-old son [[Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales|Henry Frederick]] that a king "acknowledgeth himself ordained for his people, having received from God a burden of government, whereof he must be countable".

The conception of [[ordination]] brought with it largely unspoken parallels with the [[Anglican]] and [[Priesthood (Catholic Church)|Catholic priesthood]], but the overriding metaphor in James VI's '[[Basilikon Doron]]' was that of a father's relation to his children. "Just as no misconduct on the part of a father can free his children from obedience to the [[Ten Commandments|fifth commandment]]."<ref>that is, the commandment: "Honor your father ..." etc.,... but to be according to the law, yet is he not bound thereto but of his goodwill ..."</ref>

====Kingdom of England====
James, after becoming James I of England, also had printed his ''Defense of the Right of Kings'' in the face of English theories of inalienable popular and clerical rights.

He based his theories in part on his understanding of the Bible, as noted by the following quote from a speech to parliament delivered in 1610 as James I of England:

{{Blockquote|The state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth, for kings are not only God's lieutenants upon earth and sit upon God's throne, but even by God himself, they are called gods. There be three principal [comparisons] that illustrate the state of monarchy: one taken out of the word of God, and the two other out of the grounds of policy and philosophy. In the Scriptures, kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to the Divine power. Kings are also compared to fathers of families; for a king is true ''parens patriae'' [parent of the country], the politic father of his people. And lastly, kings are compared to the head of this microcosm of the body of man.<ref name="A speech to parliament">[http://www.thenagain.info/Classes/Sources/JamesI.html A speech to parliament (1610)].</ref>}}

James's reference to "God's lieutenants" is apparently a reference to the text in Romans 13 where Paul refers to "God's ministers".

{{blockquote|(1) Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. (2) Whosoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. (3) For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: (4) For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. (5) Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath but also for conscience sake. (6) For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. (7) Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.<ref name="Romans 13">{{Bibleverse|Romans|13:1-7|KJV}}</ref>}}

=====Ceremonial conflation=====
Some of the symbolism within the [[Coronation of the British monarch|coronation]] ceremony for British monarchs, in which they are [[anointed]] with [[Chrism|holy oils]] by the [[Archbishop of Canterbury]], thereby ''[[Holy Orders|ordaining]]'' them to monarchy, perpetuates the ancient Roman Catholic monarchical ideas and ceremonial (although few Protestants realize this, the ceremony is nearly entirely based upon that of the Coronation of the Holy Roman Emperor).{{citation needed|date=October 2011}} However, in the UK, the symbolism ends there since the real governing authority of the monarch was all but extinguished by the Whig revolution of 1688–89 (see [[Glorious Revolution]]). The king or queen of the [[United Kingdom]] is one of the last monarchs still to be crowned in the traditional Christian ceremonial, which in most other countries has been replaced by an [[inauguration]] or other declaration.{{citation needed|date=November 2011}}

In England, it is not without significance that the sacerdotal vestments, generally discarded by the clergy – dalmatic, alb and stole – continued to be among the insignia of the sovereign (see [[Coronation of the British monarch]]). Moreover, this sacrosanct character he acquired not by virtue of his "sacring", but by hereditary right; the coronation, anointing and vesting were but the outward and visible symbol of a divine grace adherent in the sovereign by virtue of his title. Even Roman Catholic monarchs, like [[Louis XIV]], would never have admitted that their coronation by the archbishop constituted any part of their title to reign; it was no more than the consecration of their title.{{sfn|Phillip|1911|p=806}}

====Kingdom of France====
[[File:Louis XIV habillé en soleil.jpg|thumb|upright=0.85|[[Louis XIV of France]] depicted as the Sun King.]]
The French prelate [[Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet]] made a classic statement of the doctrine of divine right in a sermon preached before King Louis XIV:<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/sermonschoisisd00maurgoog|page=[https://archive.org/details/sermonschoisisd00maurgoog/page/n230 219]|quote=bossuet sermons royalty.|title=Sermons choisis de Bossuet|year=1845|publisher=Firmin-Didot|author=Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet|author-link=Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet|series=Sur le devoir des rois}}</ref>

{{blockquote|{{lang|fr|Les rois règnent par moi, dit la Sagesse éternelle: 'Per me reges regnant'; et de là nous devons conclure non seulement que les droits de la royauté sont établis par ses lois, mais que le choix des personnes est un effet de sa providence.}}}}
{{blockquote|Kings reign by Me, says Eternal Wisdom: "''Per me reges regnant''" [in Latin]; and from that we must conclude not only that the rights of royalty are established by its laws, but also that the choice of persons [to occupy the throne] is an effect of its providence.}}

The French Huguenot nobles and clergy, having rejected the pope and the Catholic Church, were left only with the supreme power of the king who, they taught, could not be gainsaid or judged by anyone. Since there was no longer the countervailing power of the papacy and since the Church of England was a creature of the state and had become subservient to it, this meant that there was nothing to regulate the powers of the king, and he became an absolute power. In theory, [[Divine law|divine]], [[Natural law|natural]], customary, and [[constitutional law]] still held sway over the king, but, absent a superior spiritual power, it was difficult to see how they could be enforced since the king could not be tried by any of his own courts.

====Holy Roman Empire====
One passage in scripture supporting the idea of the divine right of kings was used by [[Martin Luther]], when urging the secular authorities to crush the [[German Peasants' War|Peasant Rebellion of 1525]] in Germany in his ''[[Against the Murderous, Thieving Hordes of Peasants]]'', basing his argument on Paul's Epistle to the Romans.<ref name="bibleverse||Romans|13:1–7|NKJV"/>

It is related to the ancient Catholic philosophies regarding monarchy, in which the monarch is God's [[vicegerent]] upon the earth and therefore subject to no inferior power.{{citation needed|date=August 2023}}[[File:PapalPolitics2.JPG|upright=1.25|right|thumb|''Antichristus'',<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=NMQ_Ar84DCcC Passional Christi und Antichristi] Full view on Google Books</ref> a woodcut by [[Lucas Cranach the Elder]], of the pope using the temporal power to grant authority to a ruler contributing generously to the Catholic Church]]

=== Religious Opposition ===
In the sixteenth century, both Catholic and Protestant political thinkers alike challenged the idea of a monarch's "divine right".

====Catholic====
The Spanish Catholic historian [[Juan de Mariana]] put forward the argument in his book ''[[De rege et regis institutione]]'' (1598) that since society was formed by a "pact" among all its members, "there can be no doubt that they are able to call a king to account".<ref>Baer, Robert V. ''Power & Freedom: Political Thought and Constitutional Politics in the United States and Argentina'' ProQuest, 2008 {{ISBN|0549745106}} (pp. 70–71)</ref><ref name="p&l">Blumenau, Ralph. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=qjA3upX1E94C&pg=PA198 Philosophy and Living]'' Imprint Academic, 2002 {{ISBN|0907845339}} (pp. 198–199)</ref> Mariana thus challenged divine right theories by stating in certain circumstances, [[tyrannicide]] could be justified.

[[Robert Bellarmine|Cardinal Robert Bellarmine]] also "did not believe that the institute of monarchy had any divine sanction" and shared Mariana's belief that there were times where Catholics could lawfully remove a monarch.<ref name="p&l" />

====Protestant====
Among groups of English [[Protestant]] exiles fleeing from [[Mary I of England|Queen Mary I]], some of the earliest anti-monarchist publications emerged. "Weaned off uncritical royalism by the actions of Queen Mary ... The political thinking of men like [[John Ponet|Ponet]], [[John Knox|Knox]], [[Christopher Goodman|Goodman]] and Hales."<ref>{{cite book|title=The English Reformation|last=Dickens|first=A. G.|year=1978|publisher=Fontana/Collins|location=London & Glasgow|page=399}}</ref>

In 1553, Mary I, a Roman Catholic, succeeded her Protestant half-brother, [[Edward VI of England|Edward VI]], to the English throne. Mary set about trying to restore Roman Catholicism by making sure that: Edward's religious laws were abolished in the Statute of Repeal Act (1553); the Protestant religious laws passed in the time of [[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]] were repealed; and the [[Revival of the Heresy Acts]] were passed in late 1554.

When [[Thomas Wyatt the Younger]] instigated what became known as [[Wyatt's rebellion]] in early 1554, [[John Ponet]], the highest-ranking ecclesiastic among the exiles,<ref name="Dickens391">{{cite book|title=The English Reformation|last=Dickens|first=A. G.|year=1978|publisher=Fontana/Collins|location=London & Glasgow|page=391}}</ref> allegedly participated in the uprising.<ref>{{cite book|title=The English Reformation|last=Dickens|first=A.G.|year=1978|publisher=Fontana/Collins|location=London & Glasgow|page=358}}</ref> He escaped to [[Strasbourg]] after the Rebellion's defeat and, the following year, he published ''A Shorte Treatise of Politike Power'', in which he put forward a theory of justified opposition to secular rulers.

{{blockquote|Ponet's treatise comes first in a new wave of anti-monarchical writings ... It has never been assessed at its true importance, for it antedates by several years those more brilliantly expressed but less radical [[Huguenot]] writings which have usually been taken to represent the [[Tyrannicide]]-theories of the [[Protestant Reformation|Reformation]].|A.G. Dickens<ref name="Dickens391"/>}}
<!-- So what did it actually say??? -->

Ponet's pamphlet was republished on the eve of [[King Charles I of England|King Charles I]]'s [[Execution of Charles I|execution]].{{Citation needed|date=December 2024}}