Selected quad for the lemma: prince_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
prince_n	duke_n	king_n	palatine_n	4,111	5	12.5739	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30390	A modest and free conference betwixt a conformist and a non-conformist about the present distempers of Scotland now in seven dialogues / by a lover of peace.	Burnet, Gilbert, 1643-1715.	1669 (1669)	Wing B5834; ESTC R27816	70,730	152

Episcopacy but for your unruly humours and practices make such complaints to God as if heaven and earth were mixed and adapt all the Lamentations of Ieremiah to your sorrie matters as if the overthrow of Presbytery were to be compared to the Babylonish captivity And see if the conclusion of the Apology and all your other writtings run not in this stile Now were your way what you imagine it to be you should rejoyce that you are called to suffer for it and not to make such tragical complaints And I am sure your bitterness against those whom you call your enemies looks nothing like the mildnesse of Christ or the primitive Sufferers who carried with all gentlenesse towards their persecutors in meeknesse instructing those that opposed them And this doth too palpably declare you are strangers to the serene and dove-like spirit of the Gospel N. You alwayes run to the primitive Christians but far fowles have fair feathers and if you examine the practice of the Reformers they universally resisted the Magistrate and carried on the Reformation by Arms and how then dare you charge the Doctrine of resistance with Rebellion since you thereby stain that glorious Work C. I assure you I have a great veneration for the Reformers and look on them as persons sent of God to rescue his Church from the grosse superstition and Idolatry had overspred it but for all that you must pardon me still to prefer the primitive Christians to them As for casting reproaches on them it shall quickly appear whither of us be the more guilty in it I will therefore from undeniable evidence of History convince you of the falshood of that vulgar errour that the Reformation was carried on by restistance and shall begin with the Waldenses who resisted not the King of France as is clear in the History notwithstanding of their unparallelled persecutions when they were destroyed by thousands Belle forrest tells that 60000 were killed in one town of Beziers Spond ad an 1209. tells of seven thousand being murdered at once in one Church It is true there were Wars betwixt the Count of Monfort and the Count of Tholouse but the Count of Tholouse was a Peer of France And the Peers by the Constitution of Hugo Capit were rather vassals then subjects to the King besides he only sought against Monfort So Petrus Vallisarnensis Hist. Albig And in the Counc of Monpellier the Dominions of Tholouse were given to Simon Monfort but not by the King neither was the Legate well pleased that the Kings Son came and took the crosse lest he might thereby pretend some right in these Dominions which the Pope pretended were his Simon Monfort therefore was a bloody Emissary of the Popes and not authorized by Philip August then King of France who gave no other concurrence to the War save that he permitted his Subjects to Arm in it so here was no resistance of Subjects against their Soveraign N. But did not the Bohemians under Zisca fight and resist when the Challice was denied them C. In the general consider that the Crown of Bohem is elective in which case certainly the States of a Kingdom share more largely of the Soveraign power Besides he from whom we have the best account of the Bohemian Churches Comenius in ordine unitatis Bohemicae gives but a slender character of Zisca and his bussinesse extolling him chiefly as a good souldier Besides the justifiers of the late Bohemian Wars never run upon this strain of subjects resisting their Soveraign upon the account of Religion but upon the lawes and liberties of that elective Kingdome Neither were the Protestants too well satisfied with the last Bohemian-bussinesse yea King Iames notwithstanding of his interest in the elected King was no way cordial for it these two I have joined together because the Scene was the same though the interval was great N. But you know there was fighting in Germany upon the account of Religion C. This showes how overly you read History when you bring this as a president When Luther rose the Duke of Saxe being moved of God did receive the Reformation peaceably into his principalities without any force and his example was followed by other Princes and free cities but in the year 1524. and 1525. there arose a War in Germany fomented by some troublesome Preachers as saith the Historian who pretended the liberty of the Gospel for their chief quarrell and this was called the War of the Rusticks And they appealing to Luther's judgement he wrote again and again to them condemning what they did as an execrable and cursed Rebellion He saith indeed it was a great wickednesse in their Princes to force their consciences but that did not at all excuse them and tells how far he himself had been ever from such courses and he calles those that somented the Rebellion vilains and not content with this he stirred up the protestant Princes against them who fought them and broke them And in this I desire you will not consider the tatles of some ignorant persons but read the History it self and those excellent papers of Luther for which I refer you to Sleidan Lib. 5. And he will give you full satisfaction Afterwards the Duke of Brunsuick and some other Princes of Germany did invade their neighbour protestant Princes and combined in a league for the destruction of Lutheranisme whereupon the Duke of Saxe the Langrave of Hessen and other Princes and free cities met at Smalcald to unite among themselves but Luther was dissatisfied with this till their Lawyers shewed him how by the bulla aurea and other constitutions of the German Empire it was lawfull for them to defend themselves whereupon he consenting they entered into that famous League And every one who knowes any thing of that Empire knowes well that the Princes are Soveraigns within themselves and that the Emperour is only the head of the union As for the War that afterwards followed betwixt Charles the 5th and the Duke of Saxe besides that the Duke of Saxe was free to defend himself as I have told Charles the 5th declared it was not for Religion he fought whatever his design was neither did all the Princes of the Religion join against him The Electors of Cullen and Pallatine both Protestants lay neuters and the Elector of Brandenburg and Maurice afterwards Elector of Saxe armed for the Emperour So you may see what pitifull Historians they are who alledge the precedent of Germany In Sweden King Gustavus Anno 1524. with the States of that Kingdom peaceably received the Reformation neither were their any broils about it till about seventy years after that Sigismond King of Polland whom notwithstanding of his being Papist they received for their King he being the son of the former King of Sweden and peaceably obeyed him was by force entring the Kingdom resolving to root out the Protestant Religion Whereupon Vide Decret in comitiis Lincop Anno 1660. they deposed him and choosed his Uncle

Charles King no strange thing in the Swedenish History that being an Elective Crown before the Year 1644. that the States received Gustavus then reigning for their Hereditary King but still the States retained the supream Authority as may appear by all their writs Nor was it any wonder if they who had but a while before crept out of an Elective Kingdom into an Hereditary could not brook Sigismond his tyrannical invasion And if this serve not to vindicat the Swedes at least the Reformation was not introduced by Wars among them neither were ever the actions of that State lookt upon as a precedent to others In Denmark Frederick the first with the States of that Kingdom received the Reformation peaceably nor was there any violence used N. But you cannot deny there was force used in Helvetia and Geneve C. This shews what a superficial Reader of History you are In Switzerland the Reformation was peaceablie received by Zurich the first and chief Canton of that State and other Towns But other Cantons maligning them for this at the instigation of the Pope and his instruments injured them so that at length it broke out into a civil War wherein they of Zurich as they were surprized by them so continued to be purely defenders vide Sleid. lib. 8. But you know Helvetia ill if you know not that the Cantons are no way subject to one another and are free States only united in a League as are the seven Provinces So that in their Treaties with France and other Princes they often Treat sever'dly Vide Siml de Rep. Helv. As for Geneve the Bishop fled from it out of a pannick fear when the Reformation was received but no force was used to drive him out Sleid. lib. 6. And beside Geneve was a free Town neither subject to the Bishop nor the Duke of Savoy Vide Siml de Rep. Helv. lib. 10. de Geneve N. What say you to the War in the Netherlands C. I say still it was not for Religion they sought Papists and Protestants jointly concurring And C. Egmond and C. Horn who were beheaded by the Duke of Alve as the chief instruments in it died both Papists yea the State by a placart declared it scandalous to say they fought for Religion the true ground of the quarrel as you may read in all the Histories was that their Prince was not an absolute Soveraign but limited in his power and that by expresse compact they might use force if he transgressed his limits which he did most notoriously and tirandically and for all this I refer you to Grotius de Antiquitate Bataviae in lib. Ann. who yet is one of the strongest pleaders for subjection to Magistracy N. But nothing of this can be alledged to palliat the French civil Wars C. The first civil Wars were mannaged by the Princes of the blood who by the Laws of that Crown are not ordinarie subjects Besides the Wars were begun in the minority of the King in which case the powers of the Princes is greater I do not for all this deny their following Wars were direct rebellion but consider the fierce spirit of that Nation ready to fight for any thing and you must confesse it was not Religion but their temper that was to be blamed but now many of the eminent men of that Church are fully convinced of the evil of these courses and do ingenuouslie condemn them Yea in the Wars of the last King one of the glories of our Nation Cameron at Mountowban directly preached against their courses and taxed them of Rebellion N. But if that was Rebellion how did the late King of Britain give assistance to the Rochellers in the last Wars C. There was a particular reason in that as appears from the account the illustrious Duke of Rohan gives of it for the King of Britain had interposed in the former pacification and had given surety to the Protestants that the French King should religiously observe the agreement But the King of France violating this the King of Britain thereby receiving so publick an injurie and affront was oblidged in honour to assist them which for his part was most just whatever the Subjects of France their part in it might be And thus I have cleared the Churches abroad of that injurious stain you brand them with And by this let all men judge whether you or I do them the best office But to come to our own Britain you know it is the glory of the English Reformation that it was stained with no blood save that of Martyrs which was its chief ornament Yea though a Popish and persecuting Queen interveened betwixt the first Reformation of King Edward and the second of Queen Elizabeth yet none rebelled For that of Wyat was not upon the account of Religion but in opposition to the matching with King Philip of Spain It is true Scotland hath not that glory but as we were long allyed to France so we have too much of their temper so that it passeth as a common saying of Scots-men praefervida Scotorum ingenia And all that travelled the world can witnesse that we were not approven in our late rebellion abroad I shall not instance what Diodati Spanhem Rivet Salmasius Blondel Amerald de Moulin and many of the greatest and most famed Forreign Divines have publickly expressed against it Some in Print others in publick discourses and Sermons One thing I will not passe by that in the consistory of Charrenton they made an Act that no man should be barred the Communion for the Scots excommunication except it were for a crime and so told the late Bishop of Orkney then of Galloway that the pretended excommunication of Scotland should no way hinder their receiving him to their Communion and this was a loud declaration of their disowning and condemning the Scots practices N. But tell me ingenuously Are there no precedents in History for Subjects fighting upon the account of Religion and have none of the Writters of the Church asserted it C. Yes there have and I will deal ingenously with you upon this head The first I know is Pope Gregory the seventh who armed the subjects of Germany against Henry the fourth Emperour upon the account of Religion because the Emperour laid claime to the investitures of Bishops they being then secular Princes And this prospering so well in the hands of Hildebrand other Popes made no bones upon any displeasure they conceived either against King or Emperour to take his Kingdom from him and free his subjects from their obedience to him alwayes pretending some matter of Religion as you may read particularly in the History of Frederick the first Frederick the second Lewis of Baviere Emperours Philip Le bell and Lewis the 12th of France Henry the second and Iohn of England Conradine of Naples and Charles of Navarre These are the eldest precedents I meet with in History for your bussinesse and the latest is the holy League of France from which our whole matter seems