Divine right of kings

We will preserve the sacred right of the king, the political doctrine of the monarchy, and claim that the king gained power from God, therefore he can not be held responsible for any actions of the Earth authorities like the National Assembly. The theory of sacred right derived from Europe can be traced back to the concept of temporal power God has given to medieval political rulers where the church complements the spiritual power of the church. But by the 16 th and 17 th centuries, the new state monarch proved their authority in both the church and the state. King James I of England (governed from 1603 to 25 years) was the most important representative of the king's sacred right, but after the glorious revolution (1688-89) this doctrine came from British politics Almost disappeared. From the late 17th century to the 18th century, the kings like Louis XIV (1643-1715) continued to receive the priestly political benefits, but many of them no longer have true religious beliefs. The American Revolution (1775-83), the French Revolution (1789), and the Napoleonic war deprived much of the remaining trust.

The bishop of Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet (1627-1704), one of France's main rights theorists, claimed that the king's people and authority were sacred, his power was based on the power of his father, It is absolute and comes from God; and he accepts sex (ie, custom and precedent) jurisdiction. In the mid-17th century Robert Fürmer, a homesick of the British royalist group, also believed that the country was a family and the king was a father, but in his interpretation of the Bible Adam was the first king, He claimed to be Charles. I reigned England as the successor of Adam 's elders (who ruled from 1625 to 1849). Antimatterist philosopher John Rock (1632-1704) wrote his first civic government thesis (1689) to counter these arguments.

The doctrine of God's right is dangerous to the church and the state. Whereas the nation shows that secular authority is given and hence can be abolished by the church, the church says that the king has a direct relationship with the god, hence instructing the rulers of the church It means that you can

For many today, the doctrine of the sacred right of the king is closely related to the work of James I of the first king of England. The king 's holy right was to do sincere efforts to outline the responsibility of Scottish James VI for civil servants from 1597 to 1598 before he joined the British throne. But this was the reason to prove the monarchy of Europe and eventually it was used to deprive many monarchies through the operation of NAA and claimed they would dominate. "The true law of free monarchy" is an article on the government written by Scottish James VII.

England 's James I (and Scottish VI) was the defender of the king' s holy right and announced some of his own text on the subject he shared with his son Charles I. According to James, the king can not fall within the authority of the people, and the king will be required to explain his behavior in the final judgment. With this in mind, Christian King is expected to behave in awe with respect to God and act as an "ancestor of God" on the earth. France's Louis XIV is another supporter of the sacred right of the king. He decided to abolish the Nantes Order, which had limited tolerance to French Protestantism, in part to fulfill its duty as a sacred right-wing monarch. He did not want to hear that Jesus said "Rui, why are you allowed to practice false religion?"

This is a very medieval belief that remains essential through fantasy novels. The sacred right of the king insists that the innate right to be in the position of king and his position sacredly appointed by God is not responsible to anyone other than God. Until the genuine king reaffirms his authority to solve it, legitimate king's decision is part of a central confrontation. The story of the monarch's throne recapture is a story style of choice, and the hero must assert that they were born properly. The arc of the chosen person's story always places them in an authoritarian position with others, but this is the most obvious place. It identifies the story of the chosen person as the right to rule others, and for this right insists that their rules will legitimately become better and will prosper the land