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
A88579	A cleare and necessary vindication of the principles and practices of me Christopher Love, since my tryall before, and condemnation by, the High Court of Iustice. Whereby it is manifested, that a close prison, a long sword, a High Court, and a bloody scaffold, have not in the least altered my judgment. Whereas also the cruelty of the sentence, the insufficiency of the proofs, and my own innocency, are demonstrated. As also my grounds and reasons of giving in a narrative, and the lawfulness of the matter and titles of my petitions (though to usurpers) manifested and maintained. Together with a declaration of my judgement concerning Cromwells unlawfull invasion of the kingdom of Scotland. Written by me Christopher Love, Master of Arts, minister of Lawrence Iury, London; penned by me the eighth of August, fourteen days before my death.	Love, Christopher, 1618-1651.	1651 (1651)	Wing L3148; Thomason E790_5; ESTC R202748	58,288	49

then the Lawfull King of Israel set over him by God and Absalom only an intruder and made King by the tumults of the People yea David himself did bid Hushai call Absalom that Usurper King 2 Sam. 15. 34. Say to Absalom I will be thy servant O King Yea further David himself did call Absalom King 2 Sam. 15. 19. David said to Hushai returne to thy place and abide with the King that is with Absalom yet he knew himselfe to be the lawfull King and did not acknowledge that his Sonne Absalom had any right to the Kingdom though he did give him the Title of a King So Athaliahs Usurping is called by the Spirit of God reigning yet the spirit of God ownes not her right to reigne but approved of the killing of her and the setting up Ieh●ash the true and lawfull heire in her room Yea Christ himself called the Devill the Prince of this World Iohn 12. 13. and 16. and 11. yet is it imaginable that Christ thought this Title of right belonged to the Divell certainely no Musculus on Iohn 12. 31. well observes non est i●le viz. Satan Princeps mundi legitimus sed per rapinam Paul called the Devills Principalities and power Eph. 6. 12. yet none will be so shamelesse as to say that Paul thought this their Rule Dominion and power of right belonged to them but is meerly usurped and intruded into See Annot. on the Bible on Ephes. 6. 12. 3. Titles are not alwaies approbative but distinctive my meaning is that giving of Titles to persons or things argues not ones approving of a just right to those Titles but seems meerly to distinguish those persons or things from others that are called by other names or Titles as I call them at Whitehall a Councell of State to distinguish them from a Councell of Warre I call those at Westminster the Parliament of the Common-wealth to distinguish them from the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament 4. Titles are giving to things or persons sometimes meerly by allusion not approbation as in Scripture phrase sin is said to reigne and the Devils are said to rule not that either the one or the other hath an approved right to rule over man as a lawfull Prince hath to rule over his Subjects but they are said to reign or rule by way of allusion to the reign of Princes in their Dominions 5. Titles may be given without sin to persons or things though of right they belong not to them where they are generally received or mentioned by such titles by the people where I live About names and titles much indulgence is to be given to the common usages and customes of the people I may call things or persons by such names or titles as I know belongs not of right unto them because they are ordinarily knowne and generally received by such names and titles I could give manifold instances out of Scripture to prove this David called Abs●lom King not that he thought him so of right but because he was commonly known and generally received by that title among the people So Herod was called by the Evangelist King of the Jews so did the Jews generally call him by that title yet none but that sect or sort of people called the Herodians did owne it as Herods right to be the King of the Iews who were so called because they pleaded for Herod to be the lawfull King of the Iews which the Pharises and others withstood because he was not one of the Iewish Nation as he ought to be Deut 17. 15. Yet all the Iews called Herod King though they did not acknowledge him to be their lawfull King t is manifest giving of titles are but titular acknowledgments and no more 6. If names may without sin be given to places and things which belong not to them I see no reason why they may not be given to persons There are names and titles given to many places both upon superstitious and idolatrous grounds yet may without sin be used I speak not of the first imposers when those places are so called and commonly knowne by such names Luke that writ the Acts of the Apostles calls a place in Athens Mars-hill as it was commonly called and this he might do without sin though this name was originally imposed on that place in honour of Mars yet he calls the place as it was commonly called though called so upon an Idolatrous ground Acts 17. 22. So for T●ings also we may without sin call them by those names which others give them though they may deal superstitiously or sinfully in the first imposition of such names Thus Paul mentions a ship of Alexandria whose signe was Cast●r and Pollux names originally imposed by the Gentiles upon an idolatrous ground yet being generally received Paul calls the ship after this name 7. It was a matter of absolute necessity as to my life for me to Petition them I being condemned to dye t is true for a trivial or ordinary occasion I should never Petition them but in an extraordinary case I might lawfully do it David in a case of extreme necessity did eat the Shew-bread which in an ordinary case he might not do T is true indeed Cato would not Petition Caesar for his life he had rather dye than Petition but that I conceive was rather out of some animosity or height of Spirit or petty discontent than out of a rectified judgment for my part I am fully satisfied that I have not sinned in giving them their assumed Titles Names and Titles do not determine rights conveniunt rebus nemina saepe suis it is true sometimes but not alwayes 8. Titles men assume to themselves or are generally given by others may be given them by me without sin or without owning a right to those titles this I may make appear by sundry late instances Henry the eighth had this title given him Defender of the faith yet he had no right to this title for he defended only the Popish Religion he opposed the Faith rather than defended the Faith and the true reason why the Pope gave him this title Defender of the Faith was because he opposed the Doctrine of Luther and wrote against him yet none scrupled to call him and the succeeding Kings of England the Defenders of the Faith So the King of Spaine is called the Catholick King yet he hath no true right to this title for he is not a Catholick or universall Monarch yet our new State have lately sent to the King of Spaine under this title The Catholick King so the King of France is call'd the most Christian King so the Duke of Bavaria having by arms ejected the Palsgrave writes himselfe Prince Elector Palatine of the Rhine so the King of Poland takes this title to himselfe King of Sweden yet hath no right to that Kingdom yet none that ever I heard of scrupled to give these titles to them considering that titles do not determine rights and considering