The 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta was celebrated 15 June 2015. The initial agreement of 1215 didn't last long and the king fought the Barons over the unresloved issues. The document was revived in a modified form after October 1216, but it wasn't established until the 11 September 1217 when the document was first called the 'Magna Carta' to distinguish from the smaller 'charter of the forest'. Thus the real 800th aniversary is not until 11 September 2017.
There is great misunderstanding about the Magna Carta, mostly because it was written in Latin and the only parts translated and extolled were excerpts taken out of context. Most acknowledge that the modern heritage is a later invention and the significance symbolic. Some of it was adopted later in 1225 as law but what it meant in practice in later king's reigns might be hard to determine, other than expressing a desire to formalise the justice system, which would have been a logical outcome as the population grew: after all Moses was advised to appoint delegated judges in the wilderness!
So let us understand some of the context. Kings in that era were one step up from their barons, and required the loyalty of their barons and nobles. The Earls and nobles maintained their subject serfs as both labour on their land and as an army. The serfs of the nobility were also the king's army.
King John was an unexpected king. He had fought his elder brother for the kingship and lost. In addition it is likely he murdered his elder brother's son, to maintain his power. His power in France was challenged. The king was a significant part of the justice system, and from contemporary documents it seems John took his role seriously often trying minor cases. This would work for the subjects who might have grievances against the Earls and nobles, but was not working for the Earls who might suffer unduly harsh treatment at the hands of King John's uncertain temper. Perhaps some of the harsh treatment was his attempt to reduce their power, as any one of them could take his throne. William the Conqueror, who rose from obscurity, was an example of how that was done.
In this context the famous passages of freedom of the Magna Carta, are actually about who had power. Power allowed freedom. It worked like this, those who held power made sure they were free to do what they wished, by the application of laws that would restrict others. There is no such thing as total freedom, but the closest is where there is total power for one person. The Magna Carta is the negotiated bargain of laws and restrictions between three powerful groups: a cluster of nobles, the Roman church and King John.
The Magna Carta begins,
:by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs in perpetuity, that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired. That we wish this so to be observed, appears from the fact that of our own free will, before the outbreak of the present dispute between us and our barons, we granted and confirmed by charter the freedom of the Church's elections - a right reckoned to be of the greatest necessity and importance to it - and caused this to be confirmed by Pope Innocent III.”MagnaCarta
Firstly, at this time the extensive power of the papacy and its restrictions on people's ability to worship Yahweh in sincerity and truth was resulting in the death of many people who dissented. There was no 'freedom of religion'. The English church was not free from Rome. If it is read correctly and in context if re-affirms the power of Rome, as opposed to the nobles appointing their own! King John was so desperate to maintain power that, despite a dispute with the papacy, he called on it to back him up. The papacy kindly, later, condemned the Magna Carta.
The so called freedoms of the charter were granted to only noble men (not the serfs) and consisted of property rights, laws of inheritance, knightly privilege and getting out of debts to the Jews. Two examples are
6) Heirs may be given in marriage, but not to someone of lower social standing. Before a marriage takes place, it shall be made known to the heir's next-of-kin. And
* (10) If anyone who has borrowed a sum of money from Jews dies before the debt has been repaid, his heir shall pay no interest on the debt for so long as he remains under age....
And for all the 'equality', the documents established the rights of Earls and Barons, and in at least one case reduced the power of females!
The translators admit that the document was less than ideal, writing, “The text of Magna Carta of 1215 bears many traces of haste, and is the product of much bargaining.” For example the Magna Carta says,
All forests that have been created in our reign shall at once be dis afforested. River-banks that have been enclosed in our reign shall be treated similarly.
There was a dispute about land claimed by the King by foresting it, as this 'law' was environmental vandalism. Compare the wisdom of the Law of the Bible, also at that time available in Latin, if they cared to read it! Even in the event of a siege where they needed the trees to take the city, they were advised to consider that the tree of the field is man's life.
When thou shall besiege a city a long time.. thou shall not destroy the trees thereof by forcing an axe against them: for you may eat of them, and you shall not cut them down (for the tree of the field is man's life) to employ them in the siege: (Deut. 20:19)
The Bible establishes that God considers the trees,
I will plant in the wilderness the cedar, the shittah tree, and the myrtle, and the oil tree; I will set in the desert the fir tree, and the pine, and the box tree together: (Isaiah 41:19)
The feast of Booths was connected to use of trees.
And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the LORD your God seven days. (Leviticus 23:40)
In the matters of justice, the Magna Carta may be praised for establishing that,
(38) In future no official shall place a man on trial upon his own unsupported statement, without producing credible witnesses to the truth of it.
However the law of the Bible established this as a principle over 2,500 years before! The Bible ought to have been well known, as it was also available in Latin! In addition it goes further than the nobles of King John's day dared to go!
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sins: At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and has testified falsely against his brother; Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shall thou put the evil away from among you. (Deut. 19:15-19)
The English legal system may have finally, belatedly, adopted the a right Law of the Bible, but they never went so far as to adopt what the Apostle James calls the 'Royal Law' of the Bible (James2:8).
One of the main claims for the Magna Carta was that it made the king subject to the law. It says volumes for the wild wilful mob that the Anglo Saxon Norman kings were. Compare the Royal law of the Bible and note that it plumbs the depths of human nature, and had the solution long, long before the Magna Carta!
Thou shall in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren..: thou may not set a stranger over thee, which is not your brother. But he shall not multiply horses to himself, ...Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.
It shall be, when he sits upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel. (Deut. 17:15-20)
The problem with the kings of that era, including King John was that 'their hearts were lifted up', They didn't fear any God, but they did fear losing their power. King John's failure was that he didn't consider that he needed to be equally just in all judgement. He failed to take notice of some very powerful advice.
Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgement: thou shall not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shall thou judge thy neighbour. (Lev. 19:14-15)
Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: (Deut 1:17)
King John's failure was that treated the nobles he feared roughly. In this he failed. This failure was the reason for the Magna Carta, and the subsequent war.
The more that people read the Royal Law and are familiar with it, the more they will love justice, and avoid the kind of bloodshed evident in British politics until the time the Bible was belatedly translated in English, and had an effect on the people. I say 'belatedly' as the Bible had been translated in Gothic as early as the 300's AD, which brought new ecclesiastical words into German. By 1389 the Bible was available in vernacular German of that era (which might explain why the Reformation was so strong there, before it took effect in Britain). John Wycliffe and followers translated the Bible into English in the late 14th century, but it was not accessible. Luther began his work in 1518 in Wittenberg and had produced his full German Bible for printing in 1534. It was in Wittenberg in 1524 that Tyndale thought to begin his translation into vernacular English. Whereas Luther's Bible was in circulation in Germany, Tyndale's translation printed at Worms in 1526 was collected and burnt in Britain. Britain finally obtained a translation under King Henry VIII in 1539, but Tyndale's brilliant work to make the language of the Bible accessible to the plough boy was not incorporated until 1611.
The Magna Carta might be a milestone to democracy, but if it was, it was a few thousand years late, and bore little result lasting at that time. The argument of Divine Right and the ultimate power of kings returned with King James. Our Lord captures the essence of the issues of the Manga Carta when he said,
“The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.” (Luke 22:25)
The Magna Carta, however, can more rightly be seen as a work of the wild northern people who gave the world the 'Thing' and the word 'Law', who were well known for governing collectively, with power vested in a collection of nobles. As in the days of the judges, when there was no king, in those days every man did that which was right in his own eyes. (Jdg 17:6). If an issue fitted with a majority interest, they could unite.
This is the state of the modern democratic world. Not many say as Gideon did,
“I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you: the LORD shall rule over you.” (Jdg 8:23)
When the nations chose their kings, they did not chose Yahweh as their king. Even Israel made this mistake, as Samuel pointed out.
“ Ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto him, 'Nay, but set a king over us.'” (1Sam. 10:19)
And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto you: for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. (1Sam 8:7)
Yet it was God's intention to give Israel and the world a king. There is a promise of truly just rule,
Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgement. (Isa 32:1).
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgement and justice in the earth. (Jer 23:5)
He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. (Luk 1:32-33)
For more see What is freedom?
The Bible is confronting, as it very rarely matches human thinking on any matter. If we wish to think as a human, we can never rise above that level. Would you never want any challenge to your thinking from a child? If we wish to grow we need challenge. The Bible lifts us beyond the ordinary – and on the matter of Discrimination, it is no different.
The Bible suggests in prophecy that the most outrageous things would occur in world poltics: alliances would end abruptly and the world would plunge into an unstable time. We are today in the day of political upheaval, not seen in a generation.
25 May 2018 Britain awakes and moves back into the gulf
Open letter to the Australian Government Canberra on Labor's bill to 'protect' homosexual students in religious schools which would prevent freedom of religious conscience.
Events, are moving at such a pace that we don't have time to analyse those with significance in depth.
Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it? Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:6-7)
We hear 'Trump', and we associate it with 'Trumpet', which is the likely origin of the surname which was given to a Trumpeter or Drummer in the Army. The trumpet in the Bible speaks also of a call to war as Amos points out. Amos also says that when the trumpet of war is blown, Yahweh has done it. We are told that what is done is revealed to his servants.
