Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
death_n charles_n king_n son_n 5,345 5 5.4847 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A30478 A vindication of the authority, constitution, and laws of the church and state of Scotland in four conferences, wherein the answer to the dialogues betwixt the Conformist and Non-conformist is examined / by Gilbert Burnet ... Burnet, Gilbert, 1643-1715. 1673 (1673) Wing B5938; ESTC R32528 166,631 359

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

deposed him as appears by their Decree St. tom 2. lib. 4. By these indications it is apparent that the Prince of the Netherlands was not Sovereign of these Provinces since they could cognosce upon him and shake off his authority But I shall next make out that Religion was not the ground upon which these Wars were raised The Reformation came unto the Provinces in Charles the V. his time who cruelly persecuted all who received it so that these who were butchered in his time are reckoned not to be under 100000. Gr. Annal. lib. 1. All this Cruelty did neither provoke them to Arms nor quench the Spirit of Reformation whereupon Philip designed to introduce the Inquisition among them as an assured mean of extinguishing that Light But that Court was every where so odious and proceeded so illegally that many of the Nobility among whom divers were Papists entered in a Confederacy against it promising to defend one another if endangered Upon this there were first petitions and after that tumults but it went no further till the Duke of Alva came and proceeded at the rate of the highest Tyranny imaginable both against their Lives and Fortunes particularly against the Counts of Egment and Horn suspect of favoring the former disord●●s But it being needle●s to make a vain shew of reading in a thing which every boy may know after the Duke of Alva had so transgressed all Limits the Nobility and Deputies of the Towns of Holland who were the Depositaries of the Laws and Privileges of that State met at Dort anno 1572. Gr. de Ant. Bat. cap. ● and on Iuly 19 decreed a War against the Duke of Alva and made the Prince of Orange their Captain which was done upon his e●●cting the twentieth penny of their Rents and the tenth of their moveables in all their transactions and merchandises Yet all this while the power was in the hands of Papists Gr. An●al lib. 3. No● wa● the Protestant Religion permitted till the year 1578. that in Amster●●● Utrecht and Harlem the Magistrats who were addicted to the Roman Religion were tu●ne● out which gave great offence to some of then Confederates who adhered to Poperv And upon this the Protestants petitioned the A●c● Duke Matthias whom the States had chosen for their Prince that since it was known that they were the chief object of the Spanish hatred and so might look for the hardest measure it they prevailed it was therefore just they who were in the chief danger might now enjoy some share of the Liberty with the rest wherefore they desired they might have Ch●rch●s allowed them and might not be barred from publick trust which after some debate was granted And let this declare whether the War was managed upon the grounds of Religion or not The year after this the States of Holland Geldres Zeland Utrecht and Friesland met at Utrecht and entred in that Union which continues to this day by which it was provided that the Reformed Religion should be received in Holland and Zeland but the rest were at liberty either to chuse it or another or both as they pleased So we see they did not confederate against Spain upon the account of Religion it not being the ground of thei●●eague but in opposition to the Spanish Tyranny and Pride And in their Letters to the Emperor Ian. 8 1578. Str. tom 2. lib. 2. they declared that they never were nor ever should be of another mind but that the Catholick Religion should be still observed in Holland and in the end of the year 1581. they decreed that Philip had forfeited his Title to the Principality of Belgium by his violating their Privileges which he had sworn to observe whereupon they were according to their compact with him at his inauguration free from their obedience to him and therefore they chus●● the Duke of Alenson to be their Prince And now review all this and see if you can stand to your former assertion or believe these Wars to have proceeded upon the grounds of subjects resisting their Sovereign when he persecutes them upon the a●count of Religion and you will be made to acknowledge that the States of Holland were not subjects and that their quarrel was not Religion Isot. All this will perhaps be answered in due time but from this let me lead you to France where we find a long Tract of Civil Wars upon the account of Religion and here you cannot pretend the King is a limited Sovereign neither was this War managed by the whole States of France but by the Princes of the Blood with the Nobility of some of the Provinces and these began under Francis the Second then about sixteen years of Age so that he was not under Non-age and tho they were prosecuted under the Minority of Charles the Ninth yet the King of Navarre who was Regent and so bore the King's Authority was resisted and after Charles was of age the Wars continued both during his Reign and much of his Brother's and did again break out in the last King's Reign The Protestants were also owned and assisted in these Wars not only by the Princes of Germany but by the three last Princes who reigned in Britain So here we have an undeniable instance of Subjects defending Religion by Arms. See pag. 454. Poly. I must again put my self and the company to a new penance by this ill understood piece of History which you have alledged and tell you how upon Henry the Second's death Francis his Son was under age by the French Law for which see Thuan. lib. 16. which appointed the Regents power to continue till the King was 22 years of age at least as had been done in the case of Charles the 6. which yet the History of that time saith was a rare privilege granted him because of his Gracefulness and the love was generally born him whereas the year wherein the Kings were judged capable of the Government was 25. But Francis tho under age being every way a Child did for away both the Princes of the Blood the Constable and the Admiral from the Government which he committed to his Mother the Cardinal of Lorrain and the Duke of Guise Upon this the Princes of the Blood met and sent the King of Navarre who was the first Prince of the Blood to the King to complain of their ill usage but tho he was much neglected at Court yet his simplicity was such that he was easily whedled out of his pretensions Upon this the Prince of Conde having a greater spirit and being poor thought upon other Courses and as it is related by Davila lib. 1. gathered a meeting at Ferté where he p●●posed the injury done the Princes of the Blood who in the minority of their King were now excluded the Government which contrary to the Salick law was put in a womans hand and trusted to Strangers wherefore he moved that according to the practices of other Princes of the Blood in the like Cases which
yet they were ordained of GOD and not to be resisted but submitted to under the hazard of resisting the Ordinance of GOD and receiving of damnation p. 2. And it is like the sacredness of the Magistrates power was a part of the traditional Religion conveyed from Noah to his posterity as was the practice of extraordinary Sacrifices Basil. It is not to be denied but a people may chase their own form of Government and the persons in whose hands it shall be deposited and the Sovereignty is in their hands of whom they do thus freely make choice so that if they expressly agree that any Administrators of the power by what name soever designed Kings Lords or whatever else shall be accountable to them in that case the Sovereignty lies in the major part of the people and these Administrators are subject to them as to the Supreme But when it is agreed in whose hands the Sovereign power lies and that it is not with the people then if the people pretend to the sword they invade GODS right and that which he hath devolved on his Vicegerent And as in marriage either of the parties make a free choice but the Marriage-bond is of GOD neither is it free for them afterwards to refile upon pretence of injuries till that which GOD hath declared to be a breach of the bond be committed by either party so though the election of the Sovereign may be of the people yet the tie of subjection is of GOD and therefore is not to be shaken off without we have express warrant from him And according to your reasoning one that hath made a bad choice in his marriage may argue that marriage was intended for a help and comfort to man and for propagation therefore when these things are missed in a marriage that voluntary contract may be refiled from and all this will conclude as well to unty an ill chosen marriage as to shake off a Sovereign Philarch. To this reasoning I shall add what seems from rational conjectures and such hints as we can expect of things at so great a distance from us to have been the rise of Magistracy We find no warrant to kill no not for murder before the Floud as appears from the instances of Cain and Lamech so no Magistracy appears to have been then Yet from what GOD said to Cain Gen. 4.7 we see the elder brother was to rule over the younger But the want of Magistracy before the Flood was perhaps none of the least occasions of the wickedness which was great upon earth but to Noah was the Law first given of punishing murder by death Gen. 9.6 and he was undoubtedly cloathed with that power So his eldest Son coming in his place by the right of representation and being by the right of primogeniture asserted before the Flood to be over his Brethren was cloathed with the same power and so it should have descended by the order of Nature still to the first-born But afterwards Families divided and went over the world to people it whereby the single jurisdiction of one Emperor could not serve the end of Government especially in that rude time in which none of these ways of correspondence which after Ages have invented were fallen upon These Families did then or at least by that Law of GOD of the elder Brothers power ought to have been subject to the eldest of their several Families And another rise of Magistracy was the poverty of many who sold themselves to others that were Richer and were in all Nations sub●ect to them both they and their children and this was very early begun for Abraham's family consisted of 318. persons and the many little Kings at that time seem to have risen out of these Families for the posterity of these servants were likewise under the Masters Authority and these servants were by their Masters pleasure to live or lie nor had they any right to resist this unjust force But afterwards emancipation was used some dominion being still reserved and it is highly probable that from these numerous Families did most of the little Kingdoms then in the world spring up afterwards the more aspiring came to pretend over others and so great Empires rose by their Conquests Crit. I know it is strongly pretended that the state of servitude or such a surrender of ones life or liberty as subjects it to the tyranny of another is not lawful but this will be found groundless for though even the Law of GOD counted the servants a Man's money so that he was not to be punished though he had smitten them with a rod so that they died provided they lived a day or two after it Exod. 21.20 21. Yet in that dispensation it was not unlawful to be a servant nay nor unlawful to continue in that state for ever and not accept of the emancipation which was provided to them in the year of Iubily Neither is this state declared unlawful under the Gospel since S. Paul saith 1 Cor. 7.21 Art thou called being a servant care not for it but if thou mayst be free use it rather By which we see the Gospel doth not emancipate servants but placeth that state among things which may be lawfully submitted to though liberty be preferable Basil. From this it may be well inferred that if a Society have so intirely surrendred themselves that they are in no better case than were the servants among the Romans or Hebrews the thing is not unlawful nor can they make it void or resume the freedom without his consent whose servants they are and as S. Peter tells 1 Pet. 2.18 The servants to submit to their Masters tho punishing them wrongfully By whom all know that he means not of hired but of bought servants so if a people be under any degrees of that state they ought to submit not only to the good but to the froward and still it appears that the Sword is only in the Magistrates hand and that the people have no claim to it It is true in case the Magistrate be furious or desert his right or expose his Kingdoms to the fury of others the Laws and Sense of all Nations agree that the States of the Land are to be the Administrators of the power till he recover himself But the instance of Nebuchadn●zzar Dan. 4.26 shews that still the Kingdom should be sure to him when he recovers I●●t Now you begin to yield to truth and confess that a Magistrate when he grosly abuseth his Power may be coërced this then shews that the People are not slaves Basil. The Case varies very much when the abuse is such that it tends to a total Subversion which may be called justly a Phrensie since no man is capable of it till he be under some lesion of his mind in which case the Power is to be administred by others for the Prince and his Peoples safety But this will never prove that a Magistrate governing by Law though there be great errors in his