Divine right of kings

"The American Revolution began with certain latent hopes that it might turn into a genuine break with the State ideal. The Declaration of Independence announced doctrines that were utterly incompatible not only with the century-old conception of the Divine Right of Kings, but also with the Divine Right of the State. … If revolution is justifiable a State may even be criminal sometimes in resisting its own extinction."

"For a long time there have been no true sovereigns, monarchs by divine right capable of wielding sword and scepter, and symbols of a higher human ideal. More than a century ago, Juan Donoso Cortés stated that no kings existed capable of proclaiming themselves as such except "by the will of the nation," adding that, even if any had existed, they would not have been recognized. The few monarchies still surviving are notoriously impotent and empty, while the traditional nobility has lost its essential character as a political class and any existential prestige and rank along with it. Its current representatives may still interest our contemporaries when put on the same plane as film actors and actresses, sport heroes and opera stars, and when through some private, sentimental, or scandalous chance, they serve as fodder for magazine articles."

"In order to subsist, then, temporal power needs a consecration that comes from spiritual authority; it is this consecration that confers upon it legitimacy, that is to say conformity with the very order of things. Such was the raison d'être of the 'royal initiation' […] and it is in this that the 'divine right' of kings properly consists, what the Far-Eastern tradition calls the 'mandate of Heaven'."

"The state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth, for kings are not only God's lieutenants upon earth and sit upon God's throne, but even by God himself they are called gods. There be three principal [comparisons] that illustrate the state of monarchy: one taken out of the word of God, and the two other out of the grounds of policy and philosophy. In the Scriptures kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to the Divine power. Kings are also compared to fathers of families; for a king is truly parens patriae [parent of the country], the politic father of his people. And lastly, kings are compared to the head of this microcosm of the body of man."

"10Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?So Pilate said to him, "Do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you and I have power to crucify you?""

"15Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.Then the Pharisees went off and plotted how they might entrap him in speech."

"Si l’on s’avise, en effet, de penser que les conducteurs de peuples ne reçoivent pas directement leurs inspirations de la Providence même, qu’ils obéissent à des impulsions purement humaines, le prestige qui les environne disparaîtra, et l’on résistera irrévérencieusement à leurs décisions souveraines, comme on résiste à tout ce qui vient des hommes, à moins que l’utilité n’en soit clairement démontrée."

"Le libre examen a démonétisé la fiction du droit divin, à ce point que les sujets des monarques ou des aristocraties de droit divin ne leur obéissent plus qu’autant qu’ils croient avoir intérêt à leur obéir."

"1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God."

"13Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;Be subject to every human institution for the Lord’s sake, whether it be to the king as supreme"

"Anarchists hold that morality must be upheld in all cases, and not abandoned whenever State actions are involved. Men have long since rejected the Divine Right of Kings; surely it is now past time to do the same with all claims that the State is Extra-Human or Extra-Moral. The State must be judged on the same level and by the same principles as all other human actions and institutions; one rule applies to all."

"Meyer begins with the complaint that libertarians are really "libertines" (hedonists? sex-fiends?) because we "reject" the "reality" of five thousand years of Western civilization, and propose to substitute an abstract construction. Very true; in other words, we, like Lord Acton, propose to weight the growth of encrusted tradition and institutions in the light of man's natural reason, and of course we find these often despotic institutions wanting. To Meyer, we propose to replace God's creation of this multifarious, complex world . . . and substitute for it their own creation". Very neat. The world as it is, in short the status quo of statism and tyranny, is, in the oldest theocratic trick in history, stamped with the approval of being "God's creation", while any radical change from that tyranny is sneered at as "man's creation". Meyer, the self-proclaimed fusionist and "conservative libertarian", thus stamps himself as simply another incarnation of Sir Robert Fillmer and Bishop Bossuet, another intellectual apologist for the divine right of kings."