From Slaves to Sovereigns: The Gospel of Royal Responsibility
We the Sovereigns: Why “No Kings” Is a Fallacy
On June 14, 2025, protesters gathered under the slogan “No Kings,” denouncing what they viewed as authoritarian overreach by President Trump. But in crying “No Kings,” they unknowingly revealed something deeper: a profound misunderstanding of American government, ancient philosophy, and even Christian theology.
In ancient Rome, the word for king (rex) was a pejorative. It went against the very fiber of their civic spirit, which was, ideally, one pointed towards self-rule. But even that wasn’t true. Although the rex would be replaced with a consul (actually, two), and regnum replaced by imperium, Rome, for all her republican (res publica) banter and idealism, still regarded her people as subjects. The plebeians were dependent on the patricians; the clientes in service to their patronus.
[Appropriate that on Father’s Day, we address the idea of patricians as the Latin etymology comes from pater, or father - but I digress…]
King? Didn’t we fight a revolution in this country to remove ourselves from such monarchical tyranny? The C-student smiles and looks around the room as if to assert historical dominance. Sure. We did. But we didn’t replace that system with a far more dangerous one - democracy.
Don’t believe me? Let’s test this. No deep knowledge of history or intellectual movements is required. Something practical and well within your reach. In fact, go ahead and stand up and put your hand over your heart. Say the Pledge of Allegiance. Stop when you say the word “democracy.”
In truth, the United States was never intended to be a democracy. Nor was it a monarchy tossed aside only to be replaced by mob rule. Recall what happened to France in 1789. What was established through our revolution was not a rejection of kingship, but a radical distribution of it—a nation of sovereigns, not subjects.
Let’s be clear: America is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic of kings—and that is not just a poetic flourish. It’s foundational.
A Revolution to Crown the People
In overthrowing the British monarchy, the Founders were not trying to eliminate authority. They were relocating it.
Thomas Paine, in Common Sense, made this clear:
“But where, say some, is the King of America? I’ll tell you, friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute of Great Britain.
Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honours, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the Charter; let it be brought forth placed on the Divine Law, the Word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king.
For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other. But lest any ill use should afterwards arise, let the Crown at the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, and scattered among the people whose right it is.”
If there were to be a king in America, Paine declared it would have to be the rule of law and not the subjective arbitration of a man or monarch. Yet, even Paine was casting a finger up towards the heavens - something we will revisit later.
For now, let’s stay on the ground - but not entirely. John Adams believed the true revolution had already occurred in the hearts and minds of the people long before the war began.
The U.S. Constitution begins with “We the People”—a phrase that makes explicit that sovereignty does not descend from a monarch. Instead, it radiates outward from each individual. You are not governed by permission—you are governed by consent, because you yourself are a sovereign. You outsource legislation by choice, not by compulsion.
The American experiment was built on the belief that each citizen is a king or queen, entrusted with the responsibility of self-governance. The Constitution is not a cage for citizens—it is a chain around the government, forged by the people it serves. The Constitution was created to limit what the government can do, not its sovereigns.
The Democracy Delusion
But what of democracy, you may ask? “Democracy” has become dogma in modern discourse, but the Founders were deeply skeptical of it.
James Madison warned against the dangers of pure democracy, fearing it would dissolve into factions and mob rule:
“Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property…” — Federalist Papers, 10
Plato, through the voice of Socrates in The Republic, described democracy as the penultimate step before tyranny, where every whim becomes a right, and virtue is cast aside in favor of appetite.
In Timeless Wisdom, I explore Polybius’ theory of anacyclosis—a political cycle that predicts democracy’s eventual corruption into ochlocracy, or mob rule. This model, known to the Founders, helps explain why America was deliberately structured as a republic, with built-in restraints to protect against the very kind of emotional populism we’re seeing today.
So, democracy is where 51% tell 49% what they are having for lunch. Democracy, therefore, can only be made legitimate through the threat of force. It is mob rule. This is what many protestors today seem to miss: their appeals to “democracy” are often veiled cries for unaccountable power, so long as it reflects their will.
By the way, what killed Socrates?
The Constitution Protects Kings—That Means You
The genius of the U.S. Constitution is that it does not grant you rights—it recognizes that you already have them. It is not a permission slip. You are not a servant of the state. The state exists at your pleasure.
Consider that the Bill of Rights serves as a barrier against government overreach. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments make clear that powers not explicitly given to the government remain with you, the sovereign.
In the American order, the citizen is not subject to law, but a participant in its authorship and guardian of its restraint. To misunderstand this is to miss the entire purpose of our American experiment. The protesters are woefully uninformed about this concept.
Theological Confirmation: King, Prophet, Priest
This vision of personal sovereignty isn’t just civic—it’s sacred.
“He has made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father.” — Revelation 1:6
In Catholic theology, every baptized person is called to share in the mission of Christ as king, prophet, and priest.
“You are a royal priesthood, a holy nation.” — 1 Peter 2:9
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (§786), a Christian exercises kingship through self-mastery, service, and justice. This is not tyranny. This is not mob rule. This is rulership rooted in virtue. This is true freedom.
God did not call us to be a crowd. He called us to be autonomous and in alignment with His reign, governing our homes, communities, and nations in truth and justice. Adam and Eve were given the keys, but they lost them. We’ve been trying to recover them ever since - with God’s divine assistance.
St. Paul in Galatians reminds us of this inheritance:
“So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God.” — Galatians 4:7
This isn’t just spiritual encouragement—it’s a blueprint for identity. The baptized Christian is not a passive bystander in the moral and civic order of the world. He or she is an heir, a co-ruler under divine kingship. To be an heir is to inherit both responsibility and authority. This isn’t about dominance—it’s about self-governance, stewardship, and moral leadership.
As sons and daughters of God, we are not meant to be ruled by every passing political storm or cultural frenzy. We are meant to reign—in our homes, in our habits, and in our commitment to truth and in alignment with God.
In Timeless Wisdom, I unpack the Roman virtue of gravitas—seriousness and moral responsibility. It’s a virtue sorely lacking in modern civic discourse. Gravitas means understanding the weight of your responsibilities and living up to the standards of someone worthy of the trust given to a ruler. This is the true call of the sovereign citizen, and although it originates from a secular context, it still aligns with Christian teachings.
“No Kings” Reveals a Crisis of Education
The protest slogan “No Kings” is not revolutionary—it is reactionary. It betrays a deep ignorance of American civics, classical wisdom, and Christian identity.
It rejects the responsibilities of sovereignty.
It confuses virtue with emotion, justice with popularity, and authority with tyranny.
What these protesters fear in the president is not monarchy—it is the enforcement of the law. And without law—without restraint—we lose not just freedom, but our claim to be sovereigns at all.
As I write in Timeless Wisdom, Cicero’s model of ethos, logos, and pathos reminds us that persuasion depends on credibility, logic, and emotional resonance. But when society loses its logical compass and replaces reason with raw emotion, public debate collapses—and democracy with it. Which is why democracy as mob rule is being exposed, and what the Founders were trying to prevent.
Reclaim the Crown
We are not a nation of serfs. We are not a mob ruled by our impulses. The American Revolution didn’t remove the crown. It gave it to you.
We are a nation of sovereigns—called by conscience, informed by reason, and governed under law, not passion.
The Constitution wasn’t written to empower rulers—it was written to empower citizens.
The Gospel doesn’t tell you to bow to mobs—it tells you to rule yourself, serve your neighbor, and follow your King.
If we are to reclaim our culture, we must first reclaim the truth: We are not shouting “No Kings”—we are remembering that we are kings (and queens).
If this essay resonated with you, share it. Subscribe for more reflections at the intersection of classical education, American civic thought, and Catholic tradition.