[Note: Some spelling from James' Workes has been modernized for ease of reading. Learn about Jacobean spelling and typeset here at a summary for King James' Workes. A facsimile copy of the Workes is also available at that link.]

KING JAMES WAS NEVER ROMAN CATHOLIC
James I, Great Britian, king, Protestant, Roman Catholic, bishop, Fordham

A strange thing can be heard today--that King James was Roman Catholic...but King James said himself that he was NEVER Roman Catholic. In fact, he labored to prove that he had never been Roman Catholic.

I read a modern children's book about King James and, as I recall, THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE said something like this, "King James was a Roman Catholic." I can see in my website logs people trying to find out if King James was Catholic.

A perusal of King James' Workes (spanning his works written over decades of time) indicates that he was not Roman Catholic. Not only that, he actually identified the Rome as MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH (see James' Paraphrase upon the Revelation (chapter 17 argument ("The Angel expounded to John this vision of the Pope") and verses, Workes pp. 53-56)). In James' "Meditation Upon Revelation 20:7-10", he identified the Pope as antichrist (Workes, p. 78 see margin).

The masses today have been deprived of basic important information about history and have been made reliant on the words of textbook authors, lecturers, etc. who are in positions of great power--they move people's beliefs--whether towards the truth or towards falsehood.

As of 5/24/2014, the Fordham University website (Fordham is a Jesuit university) had what looks like an extremely misleading excerpt from James' A Premonition to All Most Mighty Monarchs (found at www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1616James1.asp). It emphasizes where King James says that he is "a Catholic Christian". The page put that in all caps--

I will never be ashamed to render an accompt of my profession and that hope that is in me, as the Apostle prescribeth. I am such a CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN as believeth the three Creeds, that of the Apostles, that of the Council of Nice, and that of Athanius, the two latter being paraphrases to the former. . . . [see Workes, 301-302]

But what they do not include is the immediately preceding paragraph. In that paragraph, King James labors to prove that he has NEVER been Roman Catholic (more on this further down). Those reading this quote (as well as the rest of it) as found on the fordham.edu page, might understandably conclude that King James was Roman Catholic, this, however, is not the case.

"But the excerpt does not say that King James was ROMAN Catholic. It was a faithful excerpt." Oh, I see. I forgot about the tricky, crafty people. How many people would read "I am such a CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN" and not assume King James was Roman Catholic? How many would read that excerpt and say, "King James proved that he was NEVER Roman Catholic (Workes p. 301) and furthermore, in the subject document (his Premonition (Warning)) he was showing the errors of the Roman Catholic institution"?

* * * What did king James mean when he said that he was a Catholic Christian? * * *

When King James uses the word, "Catholic," he is referring to the primitive use of the word "Catholic" meaning universal, speaking of the universal church--God's church all over the world, which consists of all Christians. In saying that he is a Catholic Christian, King James is declaring himself to be part of the church of God, wherever it may be found. This is confirmed in other places, e.g., in his 1603 speech WHEN REFERRING TO ROMAN CATHOLICS he comments, ". . .FALSELY CALLED CATHOLIKES, but trewly Papists..." (Workes, p. 490). CATHOLIC, a. Universal or general, Originally this epithet was given to the Christian Church in general, but is now appropriated to the Romish church... (Webster's 1828).

The following, excerpted from "Summary and Highlights of the Workes. . ." (kjworkes.htm) gives another example of king James identifying himself as a Catholic Christian (he is identifying himself as a member of God's church wherever it may be found)--

A PREMONITION TO ALL MOST MIGHTIE MONARCHES, KINGS, FREE PRINCES, AND STATES OF CHRISTENDOME [Workes pp. 287-338]
James warns his fellow princes of the papal threat to royal authority. He refers to them as, "loving brethren and cosins," and himself as, "Iames...Professour, Maintainer and Defender of the Trew, Christian, Catholique8 and Apostolique Faith...."

* * * Back to the Fordham website excerpt. In the paragraph IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING the Catholic Christian quote, King James labors to prove that he NEVER WAS A ROMAN CATHOLIC. * * *

The subject quote portion on the fordham.edu website runs from the bottom of page 301 to page 302 of the Workes. In the paragraph right before it (also on page 301), King James emphasizes that he NEVER WAS A ROMAN CATHOLIC and that even though his mother was a Catholic, she would not let the "Popish Archbishop" baptize king James according to all the popish rights. King James labors in that preceding paragraph to prove that he was NOT Roman Catholic. The following is the preceding paragraph down through part of the beginning paragraph found on the fordham.edu website (modernized spelling, emphases ours, italices theirs):

For first, I am no Apostate, as the Cardinal would make me; not only having ever been brought up in that Religion which I presently profess, but even my Father and Grandfather on that side professing the same: and so cannot be properly an Heretick, by their own doctrine, since I NEVER WAS OF THEIR CHURCH. And as for the Queen my Mother of worthy memory; although she continued in that Religion wherein she was nourished, yet was she so far from being supertitious or Jesuited therein, that at my Baptism (although I was baptized by a Popish Archbishop) she sent him word to forbear to use the spittle in my Baptism*; which was obeyed, being indeed a filthy and an apish trick, rather in scorn than in imitation of CHRIST. And her own very words were, That she would not have a pockie priest to spit in her childs mouth. As also the Font wherein I was Christened, was sent from the late Queen here of famous memory, who was my Godmother; and what her Religion was, Pius V. was not ignorant. And for further proof, that that renowned Queen MY MOTHER was not superstitious; as in all her Letters (whereof I received many) she NEVER MADE MENTION OF RELIGION, NOR LABOURED TO PERSUADE ME IN IT; so at her last words, she commanded her Master-household, a Scottish Gentleman my servant and yet alive, she commanded him (I say) to tell me; That although she WAS OF ANOTHER RELIGION than that wherein I was brought up; YET SHE WOULD NOT PRESS ME TO CHANGE, except my own Conscience forced me to it: For so that I led a good life, and were careful to do Justice and govern well; she doubted not but I would be in good case with the profession of MY OWN RELIGION. Thus am I no Apostate, nor yet a deborder from that Religion which one part of my Parents professed, and an other part gave me good allowance of. Neither can my Baptistism in the rites of their Religion make me an Apostate, or Heretic in respect of my present profession, since we all agree in the substance thereof, being all Baptized In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost: upon which head there is no variance amongst us.

And now for the point of Heretic; I will never be ashamed to render an accompt of my profession and that hope that is in me, as the Apostle prescribeth. I am such a CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN as believeth the three Creeds, that of the Apostles, that of the Council of Nice, and that of Athanius, the two latter being paraphrases to the former. . . .(Workes, 301-302)

* * * The editor of this misleading excerpt had a PhD in History and is compiling excerpts that can be used in teaching * * *

At the bottom of the subject webpage is © Paul Halsall, July 1998. According to fordham.edu/halsall/cv.asp, Paul Halsall is the editor and originator of Internet Modern History Sourcebook and received his PhD in History from Fordham University, a Jesuit university.

According to Mr. Halsall's Curriculum vitae (found at fordham.edu/halsall/cv.asp - a CV is like an extended resume), he has been a Senior Teaching Fellow, Adjunct Lecturer, etc. at Fordham and held positions at other locations as well. Mr. Halsall's CV has the following section and entries(emphases ours)

World Wide WEB [their capitalization and bold] Sites

Editor and originator, The Internet Ancient History Sourcebook, a collection of translated primary source documents FOR TEACHING.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/asbook.html

Editor and originator, The Internet Medieval Sourcebook, a widely used collection of over a thousand translated primary source documents FOR TEACHING.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook.html

Editor and originator, Byzantine Studies on the Internet, the most comprehensive site FOR Byzantine STUDIES on the World Wide Web. It also contains pages commissioned by the International Congress on Byzantine Studies and the Australian Association for Byzantine Studies.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/byzantium.html

Contributing editor, Byzantium section, ORB: Online Reference Book for Medieval Studies, an online textbook of original articles DIRECTED AT UNDERGRADUATES [undergraduates are students pursuing a lower level college degree].

http://www.the-orb.rhodes.net

Editor and originator, The Internet Modern History Sourcebook, a collection of over five hundred translated primary source documents FOR TEACHING.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/modsbook.html

It looks like a focal point for Mr. Halall's websites is to provide information for teaching. This being the case, if a student glanced at the subject excerpt and saw a quote by King James saying, "I am such a CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN as believeth the three Creeds. . .", what do you think the student's assumption would be--

* * * The Jesuit "way of proceeding"? * * *

The University of Scranton (a Jesuit university) website mentions that the "Society of Jesus" [the Jesuit order] has its own way of proceeding. An excerpt from, "Jesuit Tradition" at www.scranton.edu/about/jesuit-tradition/index.shtml (emphases ours)--

Our Mission

The University of Scranton is a Catholic and Jesuit university animated by the spiritual vision and the tradition of excellence characteristic of the Society of Jesus* and those who share its way of proceeding. . . . (as of 5-24-2014)

*The Roman Catholic Jesuit order is known, of all things, as the "Society of Jesus" (a misnomer if ever there were one)

The subject excerpt found on the fordham.edu website, written by a Fordham graduate and educator and is to be used for teaching. Is this type of misleading presentation an example of the Jesuit "way of proceeding" mentioned on the Scranton website?

More could be said about the subject article found on the Fordham website, including its very title, "Modern History Sourcebook: James I and VI: from Anglicanism, 1611." The subject article as ACTUALLY excerpted from King James' Workes, but one does not see that until AFTER the excerpt--and even that is not extremely clear, King James' name is not even associated with the Workes. The end of the subject excerpt it reads--

Source:

From A Premonition to All Most Mighty Monarchs, Kings, Free Princes, and States of Christendom
Works, ed. James Montague, Bp. of Wint hester (1616), pp. 301-308.

Where does it say that it was King James' Workes? It does not. And look at "ed. James Montague, Bp. of Wint hester (1616)." According to the title page of the Workes, it was

Published by Iames (James), Bishop of Winton, and Deane of his Majesties Chappel Royall

Compare--

Is this part of the Jesuit way of proceeding? How many would be able to look at the excerpt on the Fordham page and know that something was not right or to look for a collection of King James' Workes? The emphasis in the excerpt can lead people to a wrong conclusion, It is strangely entitled (even down to King James I & VI verses VI & I (he was King James VI of Scotland first (1567), then King James I of England second (1603).)) The excerpt was taken from James' Workes, but the page does not really let a person see that. "Works" is mentioned at the bottom of the excerpt, King James' name is no where to be seen there.

Is this an example of putting "learning against learning"--a phrase attributed to Cardinal Thomas Wolsey by F. Tupper Saussy* in his book Rulers of Evil on page 23 (Mr. Saussy's book has some strange ways itself, e.g., the date and season that Martin Luther posted his 95 theses to the church doors in Wittenberg (p. 22). Let us skip over his wrong date; the actual date was October 31, 1517)?

One of his "favorite cousins" is a Jesuit (p. xvii)

Chapter ten of Mr. Saussy's book is entitled, "Definitions." Here he shows us some dictionary terms that have been used to describe the Jesuits (see pp. 78-79). Just reading older books about the Jesuits one encounters words like these. A whole new vocabulary is needed to describe such depths of Satan--

Ordinary people hardly know that these things exist, much less that a group would actuallly hold them as doctrines of their so-called "moral theology"--which is actually "wiles of the devil". The devil is a liar and the father of it (John 8:44). He is also a deceiver (Revelation 12:9; 20:12).

Our Notes and Quotes page contains links to articles that show some of the items in the devil's toolkit, e.g., (strategems 1) calumniator, lampooning, prevarication, obfuscate, enervating, (strategems 2) fake love and concern, (strategems 3) priestcraft, pervaricator, prevarication, (strategems 4) bully, invective, rail, reproach, insolent, contempt, censure, opprobrious, scurrilous, (strategems 5) roadmaps. There are plenty of more words and ideas to add to these lists.

Home Page for hundreds of articles