Is it true that Charles I believed in the Divine Right of Kings and attempted to govern without the Parliament?

Charles I's reign in the 17th century was marked by a clash between the monarchy and Parliament, largely stemming from his firm belief in the Divine Right of Kings. This wasn't a new idea, but Charles took it to an extreme. The Divine Right essentially meant he believed God had chosen him to rule, making him answerable only to God, not to his subjects or Parliament. This conviction led him to frequently clash with Parliament, especially over money. He needed funds for wars and his lavish lifestyle, but Parliament was reluctant to grant them without concessions. This tension culminated in Charles attempting to rule without Parliament altogether for eleven years, from 1629 to 1640. He raised money through unpopular means, further alienating the public and Parliament. This period of personal rule ultimately failed and contributed to the outbreak of the English Civil War, which eventually led to his execution. So, the statement is true because Charles I genuinely believed in his divinely ordained authority and actively tried to govern without parliamentary consent, setting the stage for a tumultuous period in British history.