Question

Which statement best explains an Enlightenment position on the divine right to rule? If only one person has the authority to rule, then no one else, even members of government, may have authority, so divine right undermines civil society. If only one person has the authority to rule, there should be no confusion about how to follow the law, so divine right supports the goals of civil society. If only one person has the authority to rule, the people will always eventually conflict with that ruler, so divine right undermines civil society. If only one person has the authority to rule, all of the public servants they appoint will act in good faith, so divine right supports the goals of civil society.

Answer 1

Answer:

If only one person has the authority to rule, then no one else, even members of government, may have authority, so divine right undermines civil society.

Explanation:

The Divine Right to Rule was the kingship theory developed sometime between 16th to 18th century. This idea suggested that Kings and Queens were chosen by the divine call from God. This theory was a fallacy developed to justify the monarchy. This right to rule formalized absolute monarch, which means no intereference from parliament or members of government. The proponent of the Divine Right to Rule in England was James 1.

The tyrannical rule of monarch in the name of Divine Right to Rule made people think of new idea to govern. This age of new ideas was called Enlightenment. The Enlightenment thinkers were in oppose of this rule and believed that if only one person would have the authority to rule, then it would be injustice to the civil society.

Thus the correct answer is option First.

Answer 2

If only one person has the authority to rule, then no one else, even members of government, may have authority, so divine right undermines civil society.