"Guilty Until Proven Innocent"
BY: STEPHEN A. COSTON SR.
"K I N G J A M E S
The VI Of Scotland & I Of England
Vice President of KonigsWort Inc.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is the maxim upon which American jurisprudence is founded, and a principle which all courts and citizens must obey, that is, IF one is truly interested in the pursuit and application of justice on equal and consistent terms. This concept is foundational to American Law, and in the hierarchy of law finds no less succor than concepts embodied in the United States Constitution.
Regrettably, critics of James have twisted it in their zeal to malign good old King James into "Guilty Until Proven Innocent." After so many years of researching the life and reign of His Majesty with reference to the myriad accusations leveled against him I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that this is the basic philosophical premise which embodies virtually all accusations of His Majesty. So far none of James' critics are willing to allow themselves to be convicted upon such faulty reasoning, a fact which only serves to underscore the contradictory tenants of their case. Often James' opponents with great histrionic flare will make claims that simply are not substantiated by the factual objective evidence of record. Concomitantly this is the case with the claims below.
If you would like to know more about this subject, look for an in-depth Publication forthcoming in February 1998 entitled "KönigsWort Information Series - Equity In Argument - An Answer To Bob L. Ross" which will fully document the conclusions drawn in this report. Check this web site again for information on how to order it. Or write KonigsWort Inc. at 7245 34th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, FL 33710 for more information about this publication or the New Book "KING JAMES VI Of Scotland & I Of England Unjustly Accused?" the latest evidence supporting the Godly Character of King James.
It has been claimed by certain zealous sectarian opponents of His Majesty King James VI & I that he "… ordered Christians burned at the stake and 'chased' the non-conformists out of England." It is further opined specifically that King James burned "Baptists" and the reason he did so was because he had an obvious attachment for the "smell" of their "burning flesh." James' detractors have thus far offered only two examples of such; namely, Bartholomew Legate and Edward Wightman.
The question the cautious reader must ask is, "Are these claims true?"
It is not true that King James ever articulated that he "loved" the smell of any person's burning flesh. In fact, in the two cases cited James went to great lengths in order to prevent such an occurrence by all but pleading with Legate and Wightman to recant.
It is not true that Bartholomew Legate or Edward Wightman were "Christians" in the orthodox sense of the word. The truth is they espoused the blasphemous and pernicious heresy of Arianism, and denied the Deity of Christ amongst other sacrilegious doctrines.
It is not true that Legate or Wightman were "Baptists" in the orthodox sense of the word. In reality, virtually all Baptists today would find they would have to repudiate the practices and beliefs of Legate and Wightman. In addition to this there is ample historical evidence that these men never considered themselves Baptists, nor did their contemporaries! These facts are borne out in the Commission and Warrant For The Execution Of Bartholomew Legate & Edward Wightman provided in the section of this report entitled "The Law."
The doctrines and beliefs of Bartholomew Legate were (as drawn from the Commission & Warrant for his execution):
- That the Nicene creed, and Athanasius creed, contain not a profession of the true Christian faith.
- That Christ is not God of God begotten, not made; but begotten, and made.
- That there are no persons in the Godhead.
- That Christ was not God from everlasting, but began to be God, when he took flesh of the Virgin Mary.
- That the world was not made by Christ.
- That the Apostles teach, Christ to be man only.
- That there is no generation in God, but of creatures.
- That this assertion, God to be made man, is contrary to the rule of faith, and monstrous blasphemy.
- That Christ was not before the fullness of time, except by promise.
- Christ was not God, otherwise than an anointed God.
- Christ was not in the form of God equal with God, that is, in substance of God, but in righteousness, and giving salvation.
- Christ by his Godhead wrought no miracle.
- That Christ is not to be prayed unto.
For maintaining these opinions, Legate had long been in prison in Newgate, yet with liberty allowed him to go abroad; not contented wherewith he openly boasted, and often threatened to sue the court, which committed him, for reparations for false imprisonment; so that his own indiscretion in this kind, hastened his execution." According to British law lawfully convicted heretics such as this were to be burned (see Fleta and Briton). Legate was finally sent to the consistory court and convicted as an "… obdurate, contumacious, and incorrigible heretic." For the listing of these laws in detail please request the forthcoming Publication available February 1998 "KönigsWort Information Series - Equity In Argument - An Answer To Bob L. Ross."
The doctrines and beliefs of Edward Wightman were (as drawn from the Commission & Warrant for his execution):
- That there is not the trinity of persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, in the unity of the Deity.
- That Jesus Christ is not the true natural Son of God, perfect God, and of the same substance, eternity and majesty with the Father in respect of his Godhead.
- That Jesus Christ is only man and a mere creature, and not both God and man in one person.
- That Christ, our Savior, took not human flesh of the substance of the Virgin Mary his Mother; and that, that Promise, 'The Seed of the Woman shall break the serpent's head,' was not fulfilled in Christ.
- That the person of the Holy Ghost is not God coequal, coeternal, and coessential with the Father and the Son.
- That the three creeds, The Apostles Creed, The Nicene Creed, and Athanasius's Creed, are the heresies of the Nicolaitanes.
- That he the said Edward Wightman is that prophet spoken of in the eighteenth of Deuteronomy in these words, 'I will raise them up a prophet,' &c. And that, that place of Isaiah, 'I alone, have trodden the winepress;' and that place, 'Whose fan is in his hand,' are proper and personal to him, the said Edward Wightman.
- And that he the said Wightman is that person of the Holy Ghost spoken of in the Scriptures; and the Comforter spoken of in the 16th of St. John's Gospel.
- And that those words of our Savior Christ of the Sin of Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, are meant of his person.
- And that, that place, the fourth of Malachi, of Elias to come, is likewise meant of his person.
- That the soul doth sleep in the sleep of the first death, as well as the body, and is mortal as touching the sleep of the first death, as the body is; and that the soul of our Savior Jesus Christ did sleep in that sleep of death as well as his body.
- That the souls of the elect saints departed, are not members possessed of the triumphant Church in Heaven.
- That the baptizing of infants is an abominable custom.
- That there ought not to be in the church the use of the Lord's Supper to be celebrated in the Elements of breath and Wine; and the use of Baptism to be celebrated in the Element of Water; as they are now practiced in the Church of England; but that the u se of Baptism is to be administered in water, only to converts of sufficient age of understanding, converted from infidelity to the faith.
- That God hath ordained and sent him, the said Edward Wightman, to perform his part in the work of the Salvation of the world, to deliver it by his teaching, or admonition, from the heresy of the Nicolaitanes; as Christ was ordained and sent to save the world, and by his death to deliver it from sin, and to reconcile it to God.
- And that Christianity is not wholly professed and preached in the Church of England, but only in part.
- For maintaining these opinions, Wightman lawfully convicted as an heretic, under the appropriate laws governing same, and subsequently sentenced by the court to be burned (see Fleta and Briton). Once again, for the listing of these laws in detail please consult the Publication "KönigsWort Information Series - Equity In Argument- An Answer To Bob L. Ross."
The facts are clear, and lead to the following conclusions:
- His Majesty King James VI & I did not ever claim to "love" the smell of any person's burning flesh. The simple fact is that in the two cases offered us we see that James went to extraordinary lengths in order to prevent such an occurrence. He used the tools available to him, Scripture, reason and logic. His main concern was the obstinate Anti-Trinitarianism of these two men who willful persisted in their heresy, and if they had been released would have sent many souls to hell with their proselytizing. They left no other option for James but to set an example by a remedy prescribed by British law, and by all accounts it worked.
- It is not true that Bartholomew Legate or Edward Wightman were "Christians" in any orthodox sense of the word. The reality is they advocated the blasphemous and pernicious heresy of Arianism, and denied the Deity of Christ amongst other sacrilegious doctrines. After reading their stated views can any orthodox Christian seriously claim such men were "Christians?"
- Furthermore, it is not true that Legate or Wightman were "Baptists" in the orthodox definition of the word. Virtually all classes of Baptists today would find they would have to repudiate the practices and beliefs of Legate and Wightman. The evidence of record clearly reveals that these men never considered themselves to be Baptists, nor did their contemporaries think they were such (except according to Mr. Ross via his citation of Crosby)! The Commissions and Warrants For The Execution Of Bartholomew Legate & Wightman establish these deductions beyond a reasonable doubt.
If you would like to receive the complete report which refutes the claims of Mr. Ross relative to this topic along with some other associated issues please request the Publication entitled "KönigsWort Information Series - Equity In Argument - An Answer To Bob L. Ross." Check this Web Site again for ordering information of this forthcoming Publication or write KonigsWort Inc. at 7245 34th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, FL. 33710. In the aforementioned answer to Bob Ross' claims all the recent allegations surrounding these and other issues are documented, and refuted. Mr. Ross' slurs on the Anglican Church are also investigated in light of the historical evidence of record.
Slowly, but surely, James critics are being deprived of their reasons for unjustly accusing King James. First the accusations of sodomy were disproved with the publication of the New Book "KING JAMES VI Of Scotland & I Of England Unjustly Accused?", now these. Any credibility James critics had is now gone. Will they repent or not - Only time will tell. With as many times as James has now been rescued and vindicated from unjust criticism, before we ever take seriously another rumor about him we should all consider him "Innocent Until Proven Guilty!"
© 1996 Stephen A. Coston, SR. All rights reserved . No part of this shall be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission from the Author and Publisher. KonigsWort Inc. 7245 34th Ave. N. St. Petersburg, FL. 33710
Note: More questions about this great King? Let's get the facts straight! I highly suggest, "King James, Unjustly Accused?" by Stephen A. Coston, Sr. You can get it from A.V. Publications Corp., P.O. Box 280, Ararat, VA 24053, 1-800-435-4535 OR call 1-800-659-1478. You can write Mr. Coston at 7245 34th Ave. N. St. Petersburg, FL 33710.
To learn more about King James VI & I check out:
His Majesty King James VI & I Page