The King James Bible: More of a Political Power Grab by King James than Anything Else - Research Paper Example

?The King James Bible was more of a political power grab by King James than anything else. He was displeased with how the Geneva Bible made the nobles look and understood that a “noble friendly” Bible would help solidify his power. In many ways King James the sixth of Scotland and first of England inherited a difficult situation. The debacle which Henry VIII had started over his desire to divorce and remarry had destabilized relationships with Rome, and had added to emerging religious tensions within the British Isles. Elizabeth managed to maintain a mutually beneficial symbiosis between the top echelons of Church and State, but these matters were all being hotly discussed up and down the land. The Puritans and the Presbyterians were agitating for structures more akin to those in Geneva, which was the home of the Calvinist wing of the Reformation. It took all of King James’ political skill and leadership ability to find a way of keeping Christians seated around a table and discussing their differences, rather than embarking on harmful doctrinal schisms. It is no coincidence that James is best known for his achievement of first creating and then establishing the Bible translation that bears his name: the King James Bible. At the time, the Latin Bible was standard fare for formal occasions, and the Geneva Bible was the most popular version in vernacular English. Printing was still in its infancy, and Bibles were expensive commodities, treasured by their owners and passed down from generation to generation. It was no easy feat to oust the Geneva Bible from its position of popularity, and there have been several studies exploring why James made this such a priority in his reign, and how he managed to supplant the Geneva version of the Bible so quickly and so thoroughly. Benson considers the personal advantages that the translation project would bring to the new King James VI of Scotland and I of England. “But now James was on the throne of England, and the notion of directing in his own royal person a great national enterprise such as the translation would be was both flattering to his vanity and in accord with his desires. It also gave him a change to show off his biblical learning….”1 James was a scholarly young man, who thought of himself as a wise and serious king, and he no doubt wanted to imprint his own style on the monarchy in contrast to the long and illustrious reign of his predecessor. The authority of the English monarch over the Anglican Church had already been firmly defended by Queen Elizabeth, in spite of severe opposition from the Roman Catholic branch of Christianity, so that when James took over the role of monarch there was already a strong precedent for him to become involved of matters to do with the running of the Anglican Church. He modelled himself on the biblical ideal of kingship, as represented by Old Testament heroes like David and Solomon, combining religious and secular authority. The book-loving king tried not to make the split with the Roman Church worse than it was when he took over the throne. Some of his theological and poetic writings were clear provocations which denied the role of the Pope in religious life, and elevated his own position to that of a prophet king. His supporters went even further: “Many anticipated that James would be a godly king, possibly even a Protestant emperor, and prophesied along these lines, frequently drawing on the book of Revelation.”2 As the king grew older, however, he realized the value of constructive exploration of differences, and his Bible translation project brought men of different theological persuasion together for a common purpose. James did have an antipathy towards the Geneva Bible, but according to McGrath: this may well have had something to do with his perception of its town of origin as well as a few matter of linguistic exactitude. “James believed that Presbyterianism was linked with egalitarianism and republicanism – after all, had not the city of Geneva declared itself to be a republic after overthrowing its former rulers? He preferred an episcopal system, not least because of its more positive associations with the monarchy.”3 According to this line of reasoning, James was no ally of the Presbyterians and Puritans, even though he appeared to be working towards their agenda. He also was concerned to maintain the loyalty of the nobility, because since the dissolution of the monasteries, the monarch relied heavily on the wealth and support of this layer of society. In short, he needed a project that would keep religious dissenters occupied, and enhance the image of the aristocracy and the monarchy. His dislike of the Geneva Bible was provoked by the translation itself and also by the explanatory notes which, in his view, introduced new interpretations to the scriptures which he found objectionable. McGrath cites the example of the way that monarchs are translated into English in the Geneva bible (either as “kings” if they are god fearing, or alternatively as “tyrants” if they are not) while the King James Version never once uses the word “tyrant.”4 The notes compound the insult to the institution of the monarchy by implying that tyrants are in power by the will of God, as a temporary measure to punish the sins of the faithful. Given the religious tensions in both England and Scotland at this time, it is not surprising that King James was worried about the implications of these translations and notes, in case they might encourage rebellion against him. If people believed that the king was only to reign temporarily, and that the commandments of God had precedence over the commandments of the king, or possibly tyrant, then the door was open for insurrection and great danger for the monarchy. Clearly it was in the interests of King James to promote interpretations of Scripture that shored up his belief in the divine right of kings to rule, and the special anointed status (along with priests) that biblical kings had enjoyed. The position of Rome and of the Puritan/Presbyterian branches of British Christianity happened to coincide on a challenge of this point, and so it was essential that he find ways of countering this corroding influence on his power. James’s idea to draw together Puritans and High Church scholars to work together on a new Bible translation was an effective way of bringing them together, and at the same time refocusing the attention of the people on a version of the scriptures more conducive to a strong monarch as head of both church and state. The Hampton Court Conference of 1604 gathered together Church leaders of different persuasions and started off a process of reworking existing Bible translations into a single unified text that was to become the basis for worship across his area of influence. The outcome of this effort, which has been called “perhaps the only significant work of art produced by a committee,” 5 was the King James Version of the Bible. It has proved its worth in the centuries which followed, capturing the imagination of the people and gradually gaining in popularity, no doubt because it carefully reproduced the idiom of natural English in the beginning of the seventeenth century. It was one of the most widely printed books in the world, and has influenced the language and culture of English speaking peoples ever since. In this venture James consolidated his influence on Church affairs, and in so doing made the split from Rome irreversible. A certain amount of variation in practice across his territories was negociated, but overall he maintained control of innovations and stamped his authority on the key texts used in worship, such as scripture, and prayer book. The translation project therefore succeeded in its manifest aim, to provide a better translation, and in the secondary aspiration of the King, to bolster support for him and the nobility. [1374 words] References Bobrick, Benson. Wide as the Waters: The Story of the English Bible and the Revolution It inspired. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2000. Bourdin, Bernard and Pickford, Susan. The Theological-Political Origins of the Modern State: The Controversy between James I of England and Cardinal Bellarmine. Catholic Universities of America Press, 2010. Doelman, James. King James I and the Religious Culture of England. Rochester, New York: D.S. Brewer. 2000. McGrath, Alister. In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How it Changed a Nation, a Language and a Culture. New York: Doubleday, 2000. Merrill-Smith, Charles and Bennet, James W. How the Bible was Built.Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2005. Read More