What Compelled the Puritans to Put a King on Trial for His Life and Execute Him Judicially for Treason?

source: Early Christian America

The reasons were many but the evidence was clear.  The licentious King Charles I of England was brought to trial on multiple charges.  1) He was charged with treason and the evidence showed many counts of contacts with foreign powers, asking for their armed invasion of his own country.  2) He had stirred enmity within the realm, subverting the Scots and bringing them to war against his own England.  3) He had violated the laws of England, especially Magna Charta, and had been responsible for the deaths, robberies and violence done to many people of the British Isles.  4) He had stirred up war against Parliament so as to pirogue its rights and authority.

On January 30, 1649, King Charles I of England was put to death legally.  The Puritans would not stand for such methods as assassination or other acts of anarchy. They brought him to trial and he was found guilty.  Justification for this –and other –acts of interposition were used throughout the era.  Below is one justification.

Throughout Scripture, officers of the church instinctively confronted "wolves, bears and lions" as a function of their office.  In fact, David was dear to the Lord because he was faithful, risking his very life to rid his people of a dangerous oppressor, Goliath by name, who was there at the valley of Elah to enforce Philistine tyranny.  And what was it that compelled David to act?  Was it not that compulsion of spirit which the church has long called "faith"?

David said to the Philistine, "You come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the LORD Almighty, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied.  - l Sam.17:45

David became the shepherd of Israel for his willingness to confront a "wolf."  In his courage to be faithful to perform his duty, David exemplified the character trait which must distinguish any officer of Christ...love.  That being present in heart, duty will then characterize the individual.  That being absent, all the preaching in the world will not produce an adequate substitute.

All throughout Holy Writ, God's officers were men compelled from the heart to confront and expose evil. Moses saved his brethren from the harsh taskmaster as a function of his love and identification with them in their plight Acts 7:24-251.  Unfortunately, his brethren turned him in to the Egyptian police for his actions on their behalf.  Later, he confronted Pharaoh in the Egyptian court as a service of love and faithfulness in the war for righteousness and liberty.

Samuel grieved over the corruption of King Saul, but such grief did not stop at prayer.

Samuel would go forward to rebuke and shame the King of Israel, instructing him as every king and ruler must be instructed, if he is to serve faithfully in the capacity of leadership:

For rebellion is like the sin of witchcraft, and arrogance like the evil of idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has rejected you as king. - 1 Samuel 15:23

Rulers are not accustomed to mandates requiring obedience.  Yet, that is precisely the message Samuel delivered to Saul.  He said, in essence, you have only derived authority, and you have exceeded that authority. Having said this, Samuel characterized the ruler's disobedience as occultic.  Rulers simply do not have the authority to act contrary to the Higher Law with which they are entrusted as rulers...the Law of God.

Lest we are tempted to relegate this responsibility to the kings of Israel and Judah only, we are reminded by the apostle Paul, in Romans 1 3, that civil authorities in general are called ministers of God.  Paul makes the point that any and every ruler, judge, legislator, soldier and politician is responsible to implement just and upright rule despite his own feelings in a given matter.  If he remains heedless to this mandate, then, by his actions, he enters the world of the occult.  When Theodosius entered upon his secret and depraved ruse to gather the people of Thessalonica in one place, his vengeful actions were devilish - both literally and figuratively.  Therefore, Ambrose confronted such actions and helped change the course of law and history.

All throughout history, when the church has courageously acted to expose and reprove the unfruitful works of darkness", God has been pleased to cause people who live under the oppressive black boot of tyranny to look to the God of the church for hope.  This follows from the natural expectation that since the church claims to represent the God of truth, mercy and righteousness, it cannot coexist with such evil.  Such courage becomes a means of fulfilling the Great Commission.  But, to say or do nothing in the face of oppressive, tyrannical rule is a sign of a lack of conviction that the God of the Bible is the Just and Holy One, the glorious Judge of all the earth.  Lacking this conviction in the power and character of our God Omnipotent, the church will degenerate into the church impotent.

Some things were made to be obvious.  Take, for instance, the heroic preaching of the renowned pastor of the early church, Athanasius.  He recaptured the attention of the church at large to the biblical truth that Christ was both Divine and human: two natures embodied in One Person.  Such preaching opened an era which was to have dramatic results in the ethics of the Roman empire.  Ancient idols fell into disuse. Morality changed rapidly as more people embraced the Law of God.  The first Roman emperor formally to embrace Christianity was the Emperor Constantine of this very era.  He did so because Christians were law-abiding, clean, productive citizens, Thus, Constantine became favorable to the claims of Christ.

With the church and its pastors on his side, so to speak, the horrible tyranny established by the former emperor, Diocletian, was brought to an end.  Unfortunately, some things which are obvious become "dark" to those who should understand.  The heroic preaching which inaugurated the age of liberty fell into disfavor with- you guessed it- the new Emperor Constantine.  He did not mind the preaching of Athanasius concerning the twofold nature of the Christ...as long as it remained only theology for preacher-boys to ponder.

But Athanasius did a strange thing with biblical truth.  He applied it...to Constantine, You see, if Christ is the only Divine Being to be human also, then the Emperor was not.  More importantly, government is not, It has derived status, nothing more.  The correct ethical application was then made by the wise pastor.  If rulers are not divine (a commonly held notion of government at that time), then they have a subordinate role to the One who is.

Suddenly, Constantine couldn't see the obvious.  The pastor instructed the people that the role of the emperor was to break with past Roman emperors who held rule as being divinely inspired from the gods (in other words, that they could do as they pleased.)  As such, Constantine had no more authority to break the Law of God than had Diocletian or any other ruler.

---