What in God's Name?

In England, on 30th January 1649, the ultimate rejection was delivered to the notion that the nation's leaders were appointed by God and gave effect to his will, with the execution of Charles I. Across Europe, similar results had been, were being and would be achieved as much of the continent moved from the dictatorship of kings to the democratic representation of the will of the people. Perhaps the greatest flowering of this movement was seen more than 100 years after Charles's death with the Declaration of Independence followed over the next decade or so by the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution.

All this makes the (not altogether surprising) revelation that President Bush believes that God is speaking to him all the sadder, particularly when God is apparently not merely sanctioning but instigating war. And, given all the denials currently leaping from the White House, it's worth pointing out that this isn't the first claim of its kind: in July last yea r the President apparently told some Amish "folks" that 'I trust God speaks through me. Without that I couldn;t do my job'. That kind of thinking would have been more than familiar to Charles I. And, like many of Charles I's subjects, it appears large numbers of Americans are more than willing to support their leader in his belief. Two hundred and more years after its foundation in one of the finest displays of enlightenment thought, much of America has returned to a belief in the divine right of its rulers. And once enough people start to believe that someone is an instrument of God's will rather than merely a man, how can anyone hope to argue rationally against him?