THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS
Copied from the sermon notes of Pastor Don Elmore
January 12, 2020
Scripture Reading: Matthew 13:29, 30:
29) “But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30) Let both grow together until the harvest; and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them; but gather the wheat into My barn.”
There are two competing grains in these two verses: tares and wheat. One is evil, the other is good. The instructions given to the gatherers is to gather the tares first, bind them in bundles and burn them; but the wheat gather them into His barn. But they had to wait until the proper time—the harvest. Why? So, the reapers could tell them apart. Notice, the tares are to be taken first.
Joshua 23:13: “Know for a certainty that the LORD your God will no more drive out any of these nations (seven mighty nations of the Canaanites) from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.”
This was God’s warning to the Israelites through his general Joshua that if they let the Canaanites remain in the land of Palestine, they would no longer be driven out from before them. They would be:
to the Israelites. The enemy would provide the harm that would result from Israel’s disobedience to keep them living in the land that they were promised.
The world is going insane! No, it is already insane. There are two basic sides to almost every question. Take the forest fires in Australia. One side blames it on the climate change. The other side denies that this is the cause. They blame it on the climate change agents, themselves.
But did climate change cause these forest fires? No. What caused these forest fires are three decades of government failure to stand up to the environment terrorists. It is these environmental greenies that caused the forest fires. Three decades of these same greenies that bound the government to stop back burning in the state forest. The same greenies that petitioned the weak government to ban cattle grazing in state forests and high alpine pastures. Reminds me of what President Trump said about the wild fires in the state of California. He was going to withhold money to the state until they fixed the problem that caused the forest fires in the first place. Are the tares and wheat distinguishable here?
SENATE HEARING ON THE IMPEACHMENT
At the senate hearing on the impeachment of President Trump, Mitch McConnell said that Chuck Schumer ran for office saying that he would vote to acquit President Clinton on his upcoming impeachment trial. This was before the trial even started! McConnell said what kind of person is this—that he had his mind made-up before he heard all the evidence. In fact, before he heard any of the evidence. Should he be giving the senate advice today of what is a fair trial? Was that the actions of a tare or wheat?
BIDEN CRIME FAMILY
Here is the summation of the Tea Party’s recent email about Hunter Biden’s terrible escapades in the last few years:
Now, if a regular person was running for president and their son was caught up in:
Contentious paternity cases
Identity theft accusations
Having been paid by a lucrative foreign firm during the time his father had served in office without having any experience,
they’d be ending their campaign in disgrace. But this is an Obama alum we’re talking about. The media won’t touch him.
ENGLISH CIVIL WAR
Who cares about the civil war that was fought in England? Well, I do. Because if the Monarchy was abolished, then what about the words of our LORD God. Was He in error when He made the following?
Jeremiah 33:17: “For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;”
So, we are left with a choice. Either The LORD put his promise of the eternal throne of David on hold for 600 years, before fulfilling His promise to David in Jesus (who never actually took the throne at this time) and then again putting the promise on hold for at least another 2000 years before the return of Jesus, at which time He will somehow claim a throne that nobody remembers and has not existed anywhere since King Zedekiah’s time… OR ... The LORD has remained true to His promise and has actively watched over the throne of David throughout HIStory, keeping it ready for the return of Christ, who will claim His rightful throne and rule over Israel once again.
ENGLAND’S FIRST CIVIL WAR
What about the English King’s fight with the Parliament? The second Stuart King, King Charles I, had a lot of difficulty with the Parliament. Charles I was the King of Scotland, Ireland and England. After a failed attempt to marry him to the Spanish Habsburg princess Maria Anna, he married the Catholic Bourbon princess Henrietta Maria of France.
Why did the marriage between Maria Anna and Charles I fail to take place? Maria Anna wanted to marry only a converted Catholic and Charles I refused to convert to Catholicism. Who did Maria Anna then marry? Ferdinand III, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, King of Hungary and Bohemia. So, Maria Anna became Queen of Hungary and Bohemia. This eventually played a part in the start of World War I.
Charles I believed in the divine right of kings and was determined to govern according to his own conscience. He believed that only God could judge whether his policies were good or bad. He didn’t need a Parliament to tell him what was right or wrong. He was free of any of man’s criticism.
But many of his subjects opposed his policies; for example, the levying of taxes without parliamentary consent, and perceived his actions as those of a tyrannical absolute monarch. Charles I’s religious policies, coupled with his marriage to a Roman Catholic, generated the mistrust of the English Puritans and the Scottish Covenanters, who thought his views were too catholic. His attempts to force the Church of Scotland to adopt high Anglican practices led to the Bishops’ Wars and strengthened the position of the English and Scottish parliaments.
Charles I fought the armies of the English and Scottish parliaments (mainly Puritans and Presbyterians) in the English Civil War. After he was defeated in 1645, he surrendered to a Scottish force that eventually handed him over to the English Parliament. Charles I refused to accept his captors’ demands of a constitutional monarchy, and temporarily escaped captivity in November 1647. Re-imprisoned on the Isle of Wight, Charles I forged an alliance with Scotland, but by the end of 1648 Oliver Cromwell’s New Model Army had consolidated its control over England. Charles I was tried, convicted, and executed for high treason in January 1649. The monarchy was abolished, and the Commonwealth of England was established as a republic.
England was no longer a Monarchy. It was a republic, run by the Protestant Parliament.
Question: What side would you have been on if you had been alive at this time? The Royalty or the Parliament or neither? What side should a Christian be on? The mostly Catholic Royalty or the mostly Protestant Parliament? Oliver Cromwell was a Calvinist, but he allowed the Jews to return to England after 360 years! All the Stuart Kings; James I, Charles I, Charles II and James II were in favor of “the divine right of kings.” They were more Catholic than Protestant. But the Parliament was more Protestant than Catholic, but they allowed the Jews to return.
Which side exhibited the “fruit of the Spirit?” or the “works of the flesh.”
19) “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20) Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21) Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
22) But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23) Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.”
Who was Christian in the action that took place in England during the civil wars?
Charles II beheaded Algernon Sidney in 1683 for being against the “divine right of kings.” Did Charles II act according to the “works of the flesh” or the “works of the Spirit?” Did Algernon Sidney act according to the “works of the flesh” or the “works of the Spirit?”
James II, Charles II brother, was the last English King who operated under “the divine right of kings.” After his reign, King William and Queen Mary initiated a “Bill of Rights” which limited the Monarchy’s power. More about this later.
PARLIAMENT’S NEW MODEL ARMY
England was no longer a Monarchy! Parliament had defeated the King. But what about the descendants of David ruling over the House of Israel? There was no longer any descendant ruling over the House of Israel in the British Isles. Did our LORD God approve of the Protestant Parliament or did He approve of the Catholic Royalty? What was the LORD God’s view in this time of English history?
One of the reasons for Parliament’s victory was Oliver Cromwell and his New Model Army. What was that? The Parliamentarians had a New Model Army. For the first time, lower caste people could become officers in the Parliamentary army being promoted for their skill of leadership and not limited to the leaders of the nation. The New Army contained a larger number of ideologically-committed soldiers and officers than any other army that had taken the field.
In the past, people became officers because they came from powerful and wealthy families. In the New Model Army men were promoted when they showed themselves to be good soldiers. For the first time it became possible for working-class men to become army officers. Oliver Cromwell thought it was very important that soldiers believed strongly in what they were fighting for. Where possible he recruited men who, like him, held strong Puritan views and the New Model Army went into battle singing psalms, convinced that God was on their side.
England, one hundred or so years before the Constitution of the United States was written, had tried to get rid of its Monarchy and succeeded! They didn’t have a king or queen for 11 years. They had only a Parliament in the beginning. But things didn’t go any better, in fact, they became worse:
They continued their war with Ireland, and
They let the Jews, who had been banned for over 360 years, back into their country!
The leaders of Parliament, including Oliver Cromwell, accepted usury loans from the Jews who were living in Amsterdam, Holland. Oliver also let the rabbi ben Israel’s book, the Hope of Israel to be sent to the clergy which promoted the British-Israel doctrine which led to the phrase; “Judeo-Christian” theology in the world today.
SECOND CIVIL WAR
Soon after the first civil war, there was another civil war in England. This time it was the Catholic Confederation of Ireland joined with the English Royalists fighting against the Parliamentary forces.
In the War in Ireland (1649-1653) the Irish Catholic Confederation allied with the English Royalists, who had been defeated by the Protestant Parliamentarians in the English Civil War. By May 1652, Oliver Cromwell’s Parliamentarian army soundly defeated the Confederation and Royalists coalition in Ireland and occupied the country—ending the Irish Confederation Wars. For another year, guerrilla warfare continued. Cromwell passed a series of Penal Laws against Roman Catholics (most of the population) and confiscated large amounts of their land. The majority of Roman Catholics who owned land had it taken away from them.
Are you descended from the Irish Catholics, or from the English Royalists or from the Protestant Parliamentarians? My grandmother (my mother’s mother) married an Irish Catholic whose family had come from Ireland. My grandmother (who was Southern Baptist) refused to marry my grandfather unless he left the Catholic church. He did, and his family disowned him. I wonder if his family had their land taken away from them by Oliver Cromwell? Or maybe they were sold as slaves. No wonder most Catholics hate Oliver Cromwell.
Maybe a few of you are descended from all three! But many of you are descended from at least one of these groups in history. This war was as bad for the Irish as the South experienced in our War between the States. If you are Irish Catholic in ancestry, did Oliver Cromwell take the land from your ancestors and/or send them to another land as slaves, or did he have them killed?
But before we talk about what happened to the defeated Irish, we want to talk about why the English Parliament, victorious in the English Civil War, had several reasons for sending an army to Ireland in 1649.
An alliance was signed in 1649 between the Irish Confederate Catholics, Charles II (the exiled son of the executed Charles I) and the English Royalists. This allowed for Royalist troops to be sent to Ireland and put the Irish Confederate Catholic troops under the command of Royalist officers. Their aim was to invade England and restore the monarchy there. This was a threat which the new English Commonwealth could not afford to ignore.
Even if the Confederates had not allied themselves with the Royalists, it is likely that the English Parliament would have eventually tried to reconquer Ireland. They had sent Parliamentary forces to Ireland throughout the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (England, Scotland and Ireland). They viewed Ireland as part of the territory governed by right by the Kingdom of England and only temporarily out of its control since the Irish Rebellion of 1641.
In addition many Parliamentarians wished to punish the Irish for atrocities against English Protestant settlers during the 1641 Uprising.
Some Irish towns (notably Wexford and Waterford) had acted as bases from which privateers had attacked English shipping during the 1640s.
Parliament had raised loans of £10 million under the Adventurers Act to subdue Ireland since 1640, on the basis that its creditors would be repaid with land confiscated from Irish Catholic rebels. To repay these creditors, it would be necessary to conquer Ireland and confiscate such land.
Who were the creditors that had to be repaid from the loans that they had given to the parliament? It was the Jews from Holland who had put up the money and would be repaid with the land seized from Ireland. The war of 1641-1653 in Ireland produced the greatest population loss in Irish history with the exception of the Great Famine of the 1840s.
The Parliamentarian reconquest of Ireland was brutal. But that isn’t surprising when you consider that Cromwell’s republican revolution was financed by Jewish bankers from Amsterdam. Jews hate the Catholic church and traditional Christian institutions like the monarchy (unless royals grovel before Jews as Prince Charles does today. See my last sermon).
Why do Jews hate the monarchy? Because the LORD God of Israel commanded that the Monarchy would be the form of government for His people after they asked that He abdicate off the throne. James II was the last King or Queen of the British Isles that ruled under “the divine right of Kings.” The Monarchy, since that time, has been limited by the Parliament.
Under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell, in 1649, King Charles I was tried for high treason, convicted and executed. This marked the conclusion of the English Civil War resulting in the Parliament of England overthrowing the English Monarchy, initiating a period of an English republic. The 17th century was the dawn of widespread use of printing presses and changes from improved communication. After eleven years, in 1660, a limited monarchy began to be restored and eventually, after a few decades, was moderated by an independent Parliament.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Organized anti-monarchism, in what is now the United States, developed out of a gradual revolution that began in 1765, as colonists resisted a stamp tax through boycott and condemnation of tax officials. While they were subject to the Parliament of the United Kingdom authority (as the monarchy became a limited monarchy since 1688), the North American citizens enjoyed a level of autonomy that increasingly clashed with the Parliament that did not provide seats for parliamentary representatives. With the Declaration of Independence in 1776, anti-monarchical propaganda resulted in violent protests that systematically removed symbols of monarchy.
Parliamentary loyalists were particularly affected by partisan attacks, with tens of thousands leaving for Canada. Property that remained was confiscated by each of thirteen newly created States through newly passed laws. Artifacts from the colonial period depicting the British monarchy are seldom found in the United States. However, not all sentiment equated to anti-monarchism. A normality of a monarchy at the head of a polity remained, that some Americans saw a presidency in monarchical terms, a Caesar of the republic, was an early debate in the new republic.
The impact of the war on the Irish population was unquestionably severe. The war resulted in famine which was worsened by an outbreak of bubonic plague. The Parliamentarians also transported about 50,000 people as indentured laborers.
Where did these 50,000 Irish Catholics and English Royalist go? Many of the English Royalists went to the English settlement of Virginia and most of the Catholics went to the English Caribbean island of Barbados. Irish Catholic boys and girls were shipped to Barbados and sold to the planters as slaves. Many of the plantation owners were Jews from Holland. Should the Irish seek reparations from the English and Jews?
As a side note, the youths that were sent to Barbados to work in the sugar plantations wore short pants. Their legs were burnt, since Barbados is near the Equator. Their legs didn’t turn black, as many of the universal pastors would tell us, but they turned red. Thus, they were called the “redlegs.” The same name as the professional baseball team in Cincinnati is called, but it was because the baseball team wore red stockings! The Irish slaves were called “redlegs” because that is what they had. There legs had been burnt red from exposure to the sun while they were slaving in the sugar plantations.
Let’s review what Oliver Cromwell had done:
In the 1650s, against public outcry, he opened England’s gates to Jewish international bankers, thereby infecting England with usury for the first time in 400 years.
Cromwell killed thousands of unarmed Catholics who surrendered to his army,
Cromwell’s army looted cities, killed his opponents and their wives and children.
Ships were loaded with thousands of his captives to be sold into slavery in Barbados.
Do you think that Oliver Cromwell was a “good” Christian? Do you think that he was a Christian?
THE KING OF ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, WALES, IRELAND AND THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA AND THE ISLANDS OF BARBADOS AND BURMUDA.
Have you ever thought who the other countries, colonies and islands had their allegiance with when the several civil wars happened in England? The first civil war, Charles I had his problems with the Parliament. Charles was an unconverted Catholic for most of his life and the Parliament was Protestant. Scotland and England were defeated by Oliver Cromwell and the Parliament. Ireland was mostly Catholic and was in favor of the defeated Charles I. Virginia was also on the side of the defeated party as well as the island of Barbados. Remember there were no cell phones available where a person could take a picture or send an email to anywhere in the world in a moment’s notice. Virginia didn’t hear of the beheading of their English King until news got there by boat!
Parliament now passed a series of new laws.
They abolished the monarchy, on the grounds that it was “unnecessary, burdensome and dangerous to the liberty, safety and public interest of the people” and the House of Lords as “it is useless and dangerous to the people of England”. They ignored the holy scriptures that told of their ancestors demanding that God abdicate the throne of Israel and that they be given a king like the other nations.
Lands owned by the royal family and the church were sold and the money was used to pay the parliamentary soldiers.
People were no longer fined for not attending their local church. However, everyone was still expected to attend some form of religious worship on Sundays.
The country was now declared to be a “Commonwealth and Free State” under the rule of Parliament, and the government was entrusted to a Council of State, under the provisional chairmanship of Oliver Cromwell.
Cromwell sent about a dozen ships to blockade Virginia and put pressure on the colony to support the Parliament. It was a terrible time in England. The Protestants sent a few ships to Barbados and they quickly submitted to the rule of the Parliament. But Virginia was more stubborn. The Pilgrims sent to Virginia soon left and went to the Northeast of the country.
The development of a plantation economy and African slavery in Carolina began before English colonists even settled Charles Town (named after King Charles II) in 1670. Carolina were one colony until 1729. Carolina was named to honor Charles IX of France and then Charles I and Charles II of England. In 1663, eight Lords Proprietors in England received land grants in North America from King Charles II for their loyalty to the monarchy during the English Civil War.
The Lords decided to combine their shares to establish a profit-seeking proprietary settlement, Carolina, between the English colony of Virginia and Spanish Florida. To ensure financial success, they sent representatives to study the lucrative sugar plantation system on the Caribbean island of Barbados. They also recruited white settlers from this English West Indian colony to help launch their new North American settlement. These white Barbadians often brought enslaved Africans and African Barbadians with them.
Sugarcane never became a major cash crop in Carolina, but these Barbadians eventually transplanted their West Indian model of plantations and slavery to the new colony. Initially, Lowcountry planters attempted and failed to develop a cash crop from olives, grapes, mulberry trees, and different English-based grains. Carolina settlers also engaged in the fur trade with American Indians, extracted tar and pitch for naval stores, and raised livestock for exporting packed beef to the English West Indies. By 1690, however, Lowcountry planters had successfully applied the West Indian plantation model to rice, and Carolina rapidly developed into a lucrative plantation economy and slave society.
The history of Jews in Charleston, South Carolina, was related to the 1669 charter of the Carolina Colony, drawn up by the 1st Earl of Shaftesbury and his secretary ___?__ ___?___, which granted liberty of conscience to all settlers, and expressly noted “Jews, heathens, and dissenters”. Sephardic Jews from London were among the early settlers in the city and colony and comprised most of its Jewish community into the early 1800s. In 1800 South Carolina had the largest Jewish population of any state of the United States.
By 1800 there were about 2,000 Jews in South Carolina (overwhelmingly Sephardic and settled in Charleston), which was more than in any other United States’ state at that time, and more than any other town, city, or place in North America. Charleston remained the unofficial capital of North American Jewry until about 1830, when the increasing number of Ashkenazi German Jews emigrating to America settled largely in New Orleans, Richmond, Savannah, Baltimore, and the Northeast (particularly in Boston, New York City and Philadelphia). Their numbers, added to by the later immigration of Ashkenazi Jews from eastern Europe to the Northeast and Midwest industrial cities, far surpassed the mostly Sephardic Jewish community in Charleston.
Charles Towne, which was shortened to Charles Town, then Charleston was the headquarters of the Sephardic Jew in North America. The town was named after Charles II, the man who restored the Monarchy in England. Was this the town that the Freemasons had their main headquarters? Was this the town where the war between the states began?
And who was the secretary that drew up the charter that granted liberty of conscience to all settlers, and expressly noted “Jews, heathens, and dissenters” could live there. The man who allowed the antichrist to live in the land of children of God: It was John Locke.
And who had Charles II beheaded? It was Algernon Sidney (Sydney) in 1683 for being against the “divine right of kings.” Who was John Locke and Algernon Sidney?
Algernon Sidney’s influence on political thought in eighteenth-century Britain and Colonial America was probably second only to that of John Locke among seventeenth-century political theorists. In his study of political theory in Britain from 1689 to 1720, J. P. Kenyon said that Sidney's Discourses “were certainly much more influential than Locke’s Two Treatises”.
Hampden-Sydney college is named after the two man who were leaders in the English civil war. The college is in Hampden-Sydney, Virginia. John Hampden (1594 – 1643) was one of the leading Parliamentarians involved in challenging the authority of King Charles I and became a national figure when he stood trial in 1637 for his refusal to be taxed for ship money. He was one of the Five Members whose attempted unconstitutional arrest by King Charles I in the House of Commons in 1642 sparked the English Civil War. And the other man is Sydney, the man who Charles II beheaded for refusing to acknowledge the divine right of kings.
John Locke and Algernon Sydney; the two men whose philosophy led to our present “democratic-republic”. The men who ignored what the Scripture warned us about. Don’t let the antichrists live in your land. If you do, you will worship their gods and not serve Me.
I had American history in the 4th, 7th and 11th grade in school. We were told that the founders; George Washington, James Madison, James Mason, Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, Benjamin Franklin read John Locke and other English philosophers, like Algernon Sydney. They gleaned what they had read and came up with the principles of rulership of the people.
England, one hundred or so years before the Constitution of the United States was written, had tried to get rid of its Monarchy and succeeded! They didn’t have a king or queen for 11 years. They had a Parliament. They continued their war with Ireland and let the Jews who had been banned for over 360 years back into their country! The leaders of Parliament, Oliver Cromwell, accepted loans from the Jews who were living in Amsterdam, Holland. And he let rabbi ben Israel’s book, the Hope of Israel to be sent to the clergy which promoted the British-Israel doctrine which led to the phrase; Judeo-Christian theology in the world today.
American founders read about all the possible governments in the world, past and present. But the majority ignored the Bible. Most historians say that the two most followed writers were:
The works of Algernon Sidney, along with those of contemporary John Locke, are considered a cornerstone of western thought. Discourses Concerning Government cost Sidney his head. However, the ideas it put forth survived and ultimately culminated in the founding of the United States. Sidney directly opposed the divine right of kings political theory by suggesting ideas such as limited government, voluntary consent of the people and the right of citizens to alter or abolish a corrupt government.
Sidney’s Discourses Concerning Government along with Locke's Two Treatises on Government are recognized as critical works in the founding of the United States of America. The founding fathers read and studied these works during their years as students in the early colonial universities. Thomas Jefferson in particular, is known to have heavily studied and researched the works of Locke and Sidney. The Discourses Concerning Government has been called the “textbook of the American Revolution.”
Do you believe that America took the right turn?
To be continued.
Blessed be the LORD God of Israel.