Dear Editor,
Mr Burke has significantly distorted the history of monarchy in Britain by conflating its origins with an idea that fully emerged about a thousand years later, “the divine right of kings” (“Monarchy in the Bible – and in Britain today”). That latter theory was fully propagated in 16th-century France to justify the new absolutism of its dynasty, and spread to Scotland first, and then to England through the Stuarts.
In its preoccupation with the unaccountable power of kings, this idea diverged greatly from the emphasis on the stewardship and spiritual dependence of kings that was, in fact, at the heart of Christian kingship in Britain, at least from Colmcille’s ordination of the new king of Dal Riata in the 6th century. In England, we can also see – at least as far back as the coronation order for King Edgar (10th century) – that human kingship was understood to specifically acknowledge, highlight, manifest, and serve God’s superior kingship. In this way, Britain’s early medieval kingdoms acted upon the knowledge that human kingship was both designed and inaugurated by God.
Mr Burke quotes from 1 Samuel 8 to make his case, but this was God’s response to Israel’s demand for a king according to the pagan model. God had His own idea for priestly steward-kings that both predated and anticipated Israel’s wrong-headed request, as Deuteronomy 17v14-20 makes clear. That plan was also implicit in God’s covenantal promises – in Genesis 17, for example, God promises blessings on Sarah: “… she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.”
It was God’s model for human kingship that the Christian kingdoms of early medieval Britain had in view as they adapted a form of Christian kingship that would reflect it. And, in particular, the coronation service that developed in England and Great Britain has protected and carried this model through the generations until today.
Yours sincerely,
David A.J. Reynolds
Prague, Czech Republic
