The question of a “Gaydom” of King James I/IV has long been discussed and dismissed. These lies must be set against a the background of a Roman Catholic plot to unseat the King and restore the Satanic power of Rome that did not come to an end until William of Orange defeated James’s son at the Battle of the Boyne and some degree of spiritual sanity was restored to Great Britain.
King James was as godly as they come – hence he was the vessel through which God spoke in response to the prayers of those oppressed by the Whore of Babylon, the Vicar of Rome. These rumors of his “coming in through the cat-flap” are not so different from the fake news broadcast by the liberal media against President Trump.
About 60 years ago, I wrote a short Monograph entitled “King James – Masculine Hero and Spiritual Guide – The 17th Century Prophet.” (The publication is sadly out of print, probably due to what must have been such a huge demand that the printing press broke.)
Fortunately, I recall the details so allow me to apply them and tell the Godly Truth about King James:
At the age ofthirteen James fell madly in love with his male cousin Esmé Stuart whom he made Duke of Lennox. James deferred to Esmé to the consternation of his ministers. In 1582 James was kidnapped and forced to issue a proclamation against his lover and send him back to France.
Any fool can see that “Esmé” is a girl’s name. This is the basic sort of mistake that any foreigner may make with names.
Later, James fell in love with a poor young Scotsman named Robert Carr. “The king leans on his [Carrʼs] arm,pinches his cheeks, smooths his ruffled garment, and when he looks upon Carr,directs his speech to others.”
—Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk, in a letter, 1611
Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk was later burned as a Catholic – he had been a spy and propaganda master for Rome and met the fate he deserved. “Robert Carr” is, in fact, the name of a choirboy whom Howard regularly buggered.
Jamesʼs sexual orientation was so widely known that Sir Walter Raleigh joked about it in public saying “King Elizabeth” had been succeeded by “Queen James.”
—Catherine D. Bowen, The Lion and the Throne
This was written in 20th century and cannot be trusted at all. The other thing to note is that Sir Walter Raleigh lived on a diet of potatoes and smoked 2 ounce of tobacco a day – rendering him famous for being senile of 20 years before his death. He had a pet tortoise called “Fluff”!
A physicalweakling, as an adolescent James had shown himself to be a coward, who liked only to hunt, to read (which he did, prodigiously) and to talk. To protect himself he wore thick quilted doublets, so padded that they provided a kind of armor against any assassin who might attack him with a knife. When he revealed a sexual preference for men, falling in love with his cousin Esmé Stewart and elevating him to a position of authority on the royal council...
As he aged James indulged his preference for handsome men, living apart from his wife. His doting fondness was part paternal, part erotic; he called his favorite George Villiers “sweet child and wife” and referred to himself as “your dear dad and husband.” But to his courtiers, the sight of the aging, paunchy, balding monarch, who according to one court observer had a tendency to drool, leaning on his paramours was utterly repellent.
It is always difficult to argue against personal preferencesbut the author of that piece (i) commits the same error of mistaking “Esmé” fora male name and (ii) has left “James” unidentified. We must ask ourselves
“Of whom does he speak?” “How many people called “James” were there in Britain at the time?”
If, for example, we knew that James fondled Villiers, we can easily imagine Coston responding: “Just because James and Villiers stroked each other’s penises does not mean that James had homosexual tendencies. Skin is only skin, after all,and in James’s time this was just like shaking hands, a common practice in the English court. Moreover, many men in England and Europe did the same. Do you seriously think that they, too, had homosexual tendencies?”
This quote was a central part of my monograph. The proof that all this “Fake News” was “Fake News” lies in [b]
If, for example, we knew that James fondled Villiers, we can easily imagine[/b]
This is a fallacy of the first order – “Begging the question”- it asks us to imagine something were true and then goes on to prove that itis true because we believe it, and thus everything that follows is true.
We can "imagine" anything, yet this does not make it true.
As someone famous once said: "It never happened, folks - it never happened."
_______________________________________________
I suggest that the only way to see King James is through God’sEyes: if God trusted King James, then I would be happy to share a tent withhim.
