Replies

I don’t agree on that. What is the alternative, beg the despot (temporal monarch) to end his depredations?
History has shown that the only way to remove a monarch is by force, or by negotiations under a very strong threat of force.

If some mere mortal claims God has placed him to rule over me, I have a right to reject that. This will involve force unless he goes away. After all, show me a true absolute monarch that did not use force when “subjects” rejected his claim to rule.

The existence of a monarchy is not, in itself, a just cause for war. The Israelite monarchy under Saul is an example: even David, driven to armed resistance by Saul's murderous attacks on him, would not raise his weapon against the anointed King.

Note Romans 13, too, where Paul is requiring obedience to kings:

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities.
For there is no authority except from God,
and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
Therefore whoever resists the authority
resists the ordinance of God,
and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. ... For he is God’s minister to you for good
[and] he does not bear the sword in vain."

Paul here is speaking of "authorities" -- Roman governors and Roman emperors--- who were not anointed by the Prophets of Israel, but quite the contrary, saw their authority as established by pagan gods, and who were at that very hour oppressing the Church.

I don't think this functions as an absolute principle of "divine right of kings," but it does establish a strong prior presumption against rebellion, modified only by extreme circumstances, e.g. as a last resort because of the duty to protect yourself and your neighbors from massacre.

Even if that situation obtains, a war that has a just cause (jus ad bellum) has to be carried out in a just manner (jus in bello) --- not, for instance by carrying our massacres in return.

The American War of Independence is a fairly good example of a revolution carried out without indiscriminate killing. After the Revolution ended in 1783, those who had been loyal to the British Crown were not rounded up and fined, deprived of their property, imprisoned or executed.

For that reason, the American War for Independence was very unlike the French Revolution. The latter was far more similar to the 20th century Communist revolutions.