King James I and the Defense of the Right of Kings

It is often mentioned that King James VI & I spoke about the divine right of kings, but many do not know why he did this. They may think that they know, but they have not read the king's workes for themselves--what they "know" is what somebody told them. They just accepted the interpretation of a professor, textbook author, etc.

James I waged a powerful and effective defense of the right of kings to rule their own kingdoms.

The idea of kings having the right to rule their own kingdoms may seem like a self-evident fact--
but not so under the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.
According to her doctrines her pope is supposed to be the ultimate supreme spiritual and temporal ruler of the world.

For centuries on end, if a ruler was out of favor with Rome, that ruler could be penalized in various ways
or even killed (King James called the king-killing "parricide").

By the times of King James, the Popes of Rome had been usurping the rights of kings for centuries on end, placing them under interdict and causing many troubles, e.g., releasing Catholics from obeying the laws of the land, AND TELLING THEM THAT IT IS A "MERITORIOUS" THING TO KILL A HERETICK KING. IN FACT, JESUITS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS TRIED TO KILL KING JAMES IN THE GUNPOWDER PLOT OF 1605. King James wrote forcefully about the Roman Catholic church's tendency to usurp power, kill kings, and disrupt kingdoms. The following is excerpted from, "King James has a message that Rome does not want you to hear."


As a result of the king's writings, Catholics were converted to the gospel of Jesus Christ. According to The Workes, in some countries, Roman Catholic books were burned. Kings across the land began to stand up and assert their right to rule their own kingdoms without papal interference. In this context, a new truth comes to light. King James' now-scorned defense of the divine right of kings was a loud, staunch, effective battering ram against long-standing papal power wielded over kings and kingdoms through Roman Catholic recusancy.


King James was a Christian, but he was not Roman Catholic. The Jesuits that goaded on the Catholics in the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 gave the Catholics various reasons as to why the king should be killed (trial excerpts farther down). But they were not content to simply murder the king, they sought to also kill the king's wife, his male heirs, and the entire British Parliament in the Gunpowder Plot [aside: the plot is still remembered every November 5]. The king had treated the Catholics fairly before the plot and even in the aftermath of the discovery of the plot, King James, in speaking to Parliament, said that he "would be sorry that any [Catholic] being innocent of this practice, either domestic or foreign, should receive blame or harm for the same. For although it cannot be denied, That it was the only blind superstition of their errors in religion, that led them to this desperate devise; yet does it not follow, that all professing that Romish religion were guilty of the same."

By and large, people today do not know the truth about the history of the Roman Catholic "church", the blood she has shed, and the things that she has done through the centuries; it has not been told to us. They just believe whatever they read in a book, see on a docu-drama, or learn in a classroom. I was one of those people. I thought that every dictionary was good and that every textbook "official." How dangerous that thinking is. What it means is that whatever slop is published will be instantly believed by most people. These days, revisionist historians are having an easy time of obfuscating and lying--because the people are ignorant and believe in "the experts." We have been mis-educated and under-educated.


The following excerpt is the last paragraph of James' A Remonstrance For The Right of Kings, and the Independance of their Crownes, Against an Oration Of The Most Illvstriovs Card. of Perron, Pronovnced In The Chamber Of the Third Estate. Ian. 15 1615 (Workes pp. 381-484). In it, King James is concluding his comments to his fellow princes who have so long lain under the oppressions of the Pope of Rome (helps for those unfamiliar with Jacobean spelling and typography are available at this link)--

This pestilent mischiefe hath now a long time taken roote, and is growne to a great head in the Christian world, through the secret, but iust iudgement of God; by whom Christian Kings haue been smitten with a spirit of dizzinesse: Christian Kings, who for many aages past haue liued in ignorance, without any sound instruction, without any trew sense and right feeling of their owne right and power, whilest vnder a shadow of Religion and false cloake of pietie, their Kingdomes haue beene ouer-burdened, yea ouer-borne with tributes, and their Crownes made to stoope euen to miserable bondage. That God in whose hand the hearts of Kings are poised, and at his pleasure turned as the water-courses; that mighty God alone, in his good time, is able to rouze them out of so deepe a slumber, and to take order (their drowzy fits once ouer and shaken off with heroicall spirits) that Popes hereafter shall play no more vpon their patience, nor presume to put bits and snaffles in their noble mouthes, to the binding vp of their power with weake scruples, like mighty buls lead about by litle children with a small twisted thred. To that God, that King of Kings I deuote my scepter; at his feet in all humblenes I lay downe my Crowne; to his holy decrees and commaunds I will euer be a faithfull seruant, and in his battels a faithfull champion. To conclude; in this iust cause and quarrell, I dare send the challenge, and will require no second, to maintaine as a defendant of honour, that my brother-Princes and my selfe, whom God hath aduanced vpon the Throne of Soueraigne Maiestie and supreame dignity, doe hold the Royall dignite of his Maiestie alone; to whose seruice, as a most humble homager and vassall, I consecrate all the glory, honour, splendor, and lustre of my earthly Kingdomes. (Workes 484)

The following summary of the above-excerpted Remonstrace includes a quote revealing James "exceeding sorrow for the most detestable parricide" of Henry IV. He also reveals to us that he, through his writings, is alerting the people as to what is happening (instead of listening to whatever a textbook or teacher says about King James, people need to look at what he was saying. The people who write and approve the textbooks may very well have something to do with this situation.)--

James refutes an oration given by the Lord Cardinall of Perron who seeks to, "...draw that doctrine into all hatred and infamie, which teacheth Kings to be indeposeable by the Pope."

          THE PREFACE
James says he is bestirred to comment on French matters due to, " late entire affection to K. Henry IV...and my exceeding sorrow for the most detestable parricide acted upon the sacred person of a also the remembrance of my owne dangers, incurred by the practice of conspiracies flowing from the same source....[I]n case the power and vertue of my aduertisements be not able effectually to worke, at least many millions of children and people yet unborne shall beare me witnesse, that in these dangers of the highest nature and straine, I have not bene defective: and that neither the subuersions of States, nor the murthers of Kings, which may unhappily betide hereafter, shall have so free passage in the world for want of timely advertisement before."

James inveighs against the doctrine of the Cardinall of Perron and comments on what he perceives to be the root of France's political troubles, "Now, haue not all the calamities, which the third Estate haue sought providently to preuent; haue they not all sprung from the Clergie, as from their proper and naturall fountaine? From whence did the last ciuill warres, wherein a world of blood was not more profusely then prodigiously and vnnaturally spilt, and wherein the parricide [father/king killing] of King Henrie III. was impiously and abominably committed: from whence did those bloodie warres proceed, but from the deposing of the said King by the Head of the Church? Were they not Prelats, Curats, and Confessours; were they not Ecclesiastics, who partly by seditious preachments, and partly by secret confessions, powred many a iarre of oyle vpon this flame? Was not he that killed the forenamed King, was not he one of the Clergie? Was not Guignard a Iesuite? ...Did not Rauaillac that monster of men, vpon interrogatories made at his examination...referre his examiners to the Sermons made the Lent next before, where they might be satisfied concerning the causes of his abominable vndertaking and execution? Are not Bellarmine, Eudaemonoiohannes, Suarez, Becanus, Mariana, with such other monsters, who TEACH the doctrine of parricides...are they not all Clerics? are not all their bookes approoued and allowed...? What were the heads, the chiefe promoters, the complices of the powder-conspiracie in my Kingdome? were they not Ecclesiastics?" (Taken from Summaries and highlights of The Workes of the Most High and Mightie Prince, Iames, by the grace of God, King of Great Britaine, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c.)


King James is often vilified for his defense of the divine right of kings, but his point was right and valid--kings should be able to rule their own countries without having to bow to the dictates of a foreign power, in this case, specifically, the Pope of Rome. In the following excerpt concerning the Gunpowder Plot, one can see an example of the horrible type of logic used to move Roman Catholics to kill the kings in whose realms they lived when those kings were out of favor with the pope.

THAT whereas our Sovereign Lord the King had, by the Advice and Assent of his Council, for divers weighty and urgent Occasions concerning, his Majesty, the State, and Defence of the Church and Kingdom of England, appointed a Parliament to be holden at his City of Westminster; That Henry Garnet, Superior of the Jesuits within the Realm of England, (called also by the several names of Wally, Darcy, Roberts, Farmer, and Henry Philips) Oswald Tesmond Jesuit, otherwise called Oswald Greenwell, John Gerrard Jesuit, (called also by the several names of Lee and Brooke) Robert Winter, Thomas Winter, Gentlemen, Guy Fawkes Gent. otherwise called Guy Johnson, Robert Keyes Gent. and Thomas Bates Yeoman, late Servant to Robert Catesby Esquire; together with the said Robert Catesby and Thomas Percy Esquires, John Wright and Christopher Wright Gentlemen, in open Rebellion and Insurrection against his Majesty, lately slain, and Francis Tresham Esq; lately dead; as false Traitors against our said Sovereign Lord the King, did traitorously meet and assemble themselves together; and being so met, the said Henry Garnet, Oswald Tesmond, John Gerrard, and other Jesuits, did maliciously, falsly, and traitorously move and persuade as well the said Thomas Winter, Guy Fawkes, Robert Keyes, and Thomas Bates, as the said Robert Catesby, Thomas Percy, John Wright, Christopher Wright, and Francis Tresham, That our said Sovereign Lord the King, the Nobility, Clergy, and whole Commonalty of the Realm of England, (Papists [followers of the pope] excepted) were Hereticks; and that all Hereticks were accursed and excommunicate; and that none Heretick could be a King; but that it was lawful and meritorious to kill our said Sovereign Lord the King, and all other Hereticks within this Realm of England, for the Advancing and Enlargement of the pretended and usurped Authority and Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, and for the restoring of the superstitious Romish Religion within this Realm of England. To which traitorous Persuasions, the said Thomas Winter, Guy Fawkes, Robert Keyes, Thomas Bates, Robert Catesby, Thomas Percy, John Wright, Christopher Wright, and Francis Tresham, traitorously did yield their Assents: And that thereupon the said Henry Garnet, Oswald Tesmond, John Gerrard, and divers other Jesuits; Thomas Winter, Guy Fawkes, Robert Keyes, and Thomas Bates, as also the said Robert Catesby, Thomas Percy, John Wright, Christopher Wright and Francis Tresham, traitorously amongst themselves did conclude and agree, with Gunpowder, as it were with one Blast, suddenly, traitorously and barbarously to blow up and tear in pieces our said Sovereign Lord the King, the excellent, virtuous and gracious Queen Anne, his dearest Wife, the most noble Prince Henry, their eldest Son, and future Hope and Joy of England; and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, the Reverend Judges of the Realm, the Knights, Citizens and Burgesses of Parliament, and divers other faithful Subjects and Servants of the King in the said Parliament, for the Causes aforesaid, to be assembled in the House of Parliament; and all them, without any respect of Majesty, Dignity, Degree, Sex, Age or Place, most barbarously, and more than beastly, traitorously and suddenly to destroy and swallow up. And further did most traitorously conspire and conclude among themselves, That not only the whole Royal Issue-Male of our said Sovereign Lord the King should be destroyed and rooted out; but that the Persons aforesaid, together with divers other false Traitors, traitorously with them to be assembled, should surprize the Persons of the most noble Ladies Elizabeth and Mary, Daughters of our said Sovereign Lord the King, and falsly and traitorously should proclaim the said Lady Elizabeth to be Queen of this Realm: And thereupon should publish a Proclamation in the name of the said Lady Elizabeth; wherein, as it was especially agreed by and between the said Conspirators, That no mention should be made at the first, of the alteration of Religion established within within this Realm of England; neither would the said false Traitors therein acknowledge themselves to be Authors, or Actors, or Devisers of the aforesaid most wicked and horrible Treasons, until they had got sufficient Power and Strength for the assured Execution and Accomplishment of their said Conspiracy and Treason; and that then they would avow and justify the said most wicked and horrible Treasons, as Actions that were in the number of those, Quae non laudantur, nisi peracta, which be not to be commended before they be done: but by the said feign'd and traitorous Proclamation they would publish, That all and singular Abuses and Grievances within this Realm of England, should, for satisfying of the People, be reform'd.

[ * * * ]

...the Matter conspired; it was,

First, To deprive the King of his Crown.
Secondly, To murder the King, the Queen, and the Prince.
Thirdly, To stir Rebellion and Sedition in the Kingdom.
Fourthly, To bring a miserable Destruction amongst the Subjects.
Fifthly, To change, alter, and subvert the Religion here established.
Sixthly, To ruinate the State of the Commonwealth, and to bring in Strangers to invade it.

As concerning the third, which is the Mean and Manner how to compass and execute the same; they did all conclude,

First, That the King, and his People (the Papists [followers of the pope] excepted) were Hereticks.
Secondly, That they were all cursed, and excommunicated by the Pope.
Thirdly, That no Heretick could be King.
Fourthly, That it was lawful and meritorious to kill and destroy the King, and all the said Hereticks.


The powers that be are ordained of God (see Romans 13:1-7). A ruler is a minister to his people for good. He rewards those that do well and punishes those that do evil--not too many people are sad that we have police to help us when a murderer or robber is on the loose. Kings are supposed to keep us safe (notwithstanding rise of the modern dictator/tyrant who, not impossibly, is on the payroll of a foreign master and does whatever he is told. During such a regime, these pretenders to the throne sometimes kill their own people by the millions--this is not normal for a king to do).

For many years, kings endured seemingly insufferable burdens, threats, and indignities from the Popes of Rome. The Popes would have hordes of Catholic subjects in a king's country and then use them as leverage. The king knew that if he fell out of favor with the Pope, the Pope could release the Roman Catholic ultramontanes ("over the mountains" whose primary allegiance is to the decrees of the pope) from loyalty to their king and his decrees. Not only that, the kings knew that their lives could be in danger.

The Roman Catholic institution claims to be a Christian institution, but it is not, it contradicts the scriptures. The Bible says of itself that if any speak not according this word, there is no light in him (Isaiah 8:20). God hath magnified his word above all his name (Psalm 138:2)--this makes it clear that saying "God" is not enough, a person must abide by God's word be accepted of him. The Bible says that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him (1 John 3:15), but the Roman Catholic "church" has long taught of "meritorious" uses for murder--whether in her Crusades, her Inquisitions, parricides/king-killings, etc.


In his A Paraphrase Upon the Revelation King James identified the popery as MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. He noted that the time would come that

"...the kings of the earth shall become his [the pope's] slaues [slaves] and subalterne* Magistrates, whereas the subiects were onely the power of that Monarchie before: so as the hornes or powers of this beast, were but of subiects before it was wounded, but after the healing of it, the worldly kings and rulers shall become the powers and hornes of it. These shall have one counsell, and shall give their strength and power to the beast, to wit, these kings shal all willingly yeeld obedience to Babylon, and shall employ their whole forces for the maintenance of that Monarchie, and the persecution of the Saints..." (Workes, page 55)
*SUBALTERNE, a. "subordinate" or "both inferior and superior" e.g. subalterne magistrate as a ruler/president inferior to the pope but superior over his nation. (based on definitions from Webster's 1828 Dictionary)

According to the preface of his Workes, King James was not yet 20 years old when he wrote the Paraphrase, so it would not have been written past the year 1586. It was over 400 years ago when King James could assuredly say that Rome would be still be around and active in the end times--here we are in the end times and, as we can see from the pictures she takes, lo and behold, she is very much involved with the kings of the earth, e.g.

  • Look at the Red Mass
  • John Paul II with U.S. Presidents such as Jimmy Carter; Bill Clinton; George Bush, Sr.; George Bush, Jr.; and, Ronald Reagan.
  • John Paul II also with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat; Fidel Castro (Cuba), Boris Yeltsin (Russia), Jean Chretien (Canada), Nelson Mandela (South Africa), Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos (Philipines), and Iraq Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.
  • Pope Benedict XVI with U.S. President Barak Obama.
  • Pope Benedict XVI also with President of the United Nations General Assembly Srgjan Kerim; Central African Republic President Francois Bozize; Japanese Ambassador to the Holy See Kagefumi Ueno; Iceland Prime Minister Geir Haarde; Polish Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski; Former Prime Minister of Great Britain Tony Blair; Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker; Prime Minister of the German State of Thuringa Dieter Althaus; Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert; Prime ministers from Australia, Turkey, and Russia.

[Note: This is not to mention "Holy See" (seat) as a nation. It basically looks like the pope is positioned as a one-man nation (who has ever heard of that) representing the Catholic Church and having Vatican City like his micro, administrative territory and basically exchanging ambassadors with other nations, including the United States. "Holy See" is: sitting in the United Nations; signing concordats; calling together an ecumenical prayer meeting to include even witchdoctors and fire worshippers (Global Peace by Dave Hunt page 156 [not recommending the book]); signing the Montreal Protocol Treaty, etc.]


Notes and Quotes Index

Deception Series and Email Archives

Home Page

Keywords: Divine right of kings, James I, Great Britain, King James VI & I, Authorized Version, Bible, 1611, Stuart, England, A defense of the right of kings