Selected quad for the lemma: country_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
country_n	call_v	king_n	river_n	3,031	5	7.1028	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B20451	Justice vindicated from the false fucus [i.e. focus] put upon it, by [brace] Thomas White gent., Mr. Thomas Hobbs, and Hugo Grotius as also elements of power & subjection, wherein is demonstrated the cause of all humane, Christian, and legal society : and as a previous introduction to these, is shewed, the method by which men must necessarily attain arts & sciences / by Roger Coke.; Reports. Part 10. French	Coke, Roger, fl. 1696.	1660 (1660)	Wing C4979	450,561	399

this Popes Letter but pleaded the Fundamental Laws and Customs of the Land Consuetudo regni mei est à patre meo instituta ut nullius praeter licentiam Regis appelletur Papae qui consuetudines regni mei tollit potestatem quoque coronam Regis violat It is a Custom of my Kingdom instituted by my Father that no man may appeal to the Pope without the Kings licence He that takes away the Customs of my Kingdom doth violate the Power and Crown of the King And these Laws were no other then the Laws of the Confessor viz. the old Saxon Laws but also in the execution of these things the Bishops of England adhered to the King and Laws and denied their suffrage to their Primate as you may read in the Bishop of Derry's Vindication of the Church of England p. 63 64. 14. After pag. 65. he instances out of Sir Hen Spelman conc an 78. Legations as rare as Appeals before the Conquest that Gregory Bishop of Ostium the Popes Legate did confess that he was the first Roman Priest that was sent into these parts of Britain from the time of Austin and that those Legates were no other then ordinary Messengers or Ambassadors sent from one Neighbour to another Such a thing as Legantine Court or a Nuntio's Court was not known in the British world and long after 15. See Speed in the Life of Stephen para 4. where Stephen having The Pope and all the English Hierarchy conspire with Stephen against Maud the undoubted Heir of Henry the first entred his Government in the year of our Lord 1135. the 2. of December and was crowned at Westminster the 26. of the same moneth being S Stephen's day by William Corbel the Archbishop of Canterbury who with the rest of the Bishops doing him homage and knowing now he would yield to any conditions for performance whereof his brother the Bishop of Winchester did there engage himself for a Pledge they all took their Oath of Allegiance conditionally traiterously I might say to obey him as their King so long as he should preserve their Liberties and the vigor of Discipline And that the Lay-Barons made use also of this policy appeareth by Robert Earl of Gloucester who sware to be true Liegeman to the King as long as the King would preserve to him his dignity and keep all covenants c. And having buried the body of Henry the First he went to Oxford where he acknowledged he attained the Crown by Election only and that the Pope Innocentius confirmed the same 16. The next contest which after Anselm happened between the King The second contest between the King and Pope and from what cause and the Pope was caused by Tho. Becket Archbishop of Canterbury For Stephen the Usurper having made a Law whereby the Temporal Judges might not meddle with Ecclesiastical persons Henry the Second upon many disorders committed by the Clergy did repeal this Law and restored the antient Laws of this Realm commonly called Avitae leges whereby the persons of Priests were not exempted from being judged by the Temporal Judges And though the Archbishop sware to observe the Laws restored by the King yet was he absolved by Pope Alexander 3. Nor could the Archbishop ever after be brought to conform to the Laws called Avitae leges which was the cause of his assassination and of great trouble to the King and Realm And whether this man did deserve to be canonized for his stubborn disobedience to the Laws of his Country which no ways concerned Faith but only Civil and Temporal obedience and those not new neither but a restitution of the antient Laws let any man judge 17. The first occasion of the quarrel between King John and Innocent The quarrel between King John and the Pope the Third was Hubert the Archbishop of Canterbury being dead the Monks of S. Augustine in that City elected without any licence of the King one Rainold and took an oath of him to go to Rome and take his investiture from the Pope The King incensed hereat caused John Gray to be chosen and desired the Pope to ratifie this last choice The Pope notwithstanding confirms the former The King hereupon grows angry and divers of the Monks against their own act refuse to accept him The Pope although Rainold were chosen by the Monks and confirmed by the Pope adviseth the Monks to choose Stephen Langton the Monks do so the King is highly exasperated and forbids all Appeals to Rome and did alleadge that he had Bishops Prelates Nobles and Magistrates of his own who could according to the Laws of the Land decide and determine all Controversies which should arise in Church or Commonweal The Pope insisted upon the election of the Cardinal Stephen Langton was Cardinal of Chirsogone and required the King not only to give him the quiet possession of the See but also to recall all such Monks as were exiled and to restore them to their Goods which were seised on by the King for the last choice and for default to interdict him and the whole Realm The King is so far from obeying that he seised upon the Lands and Goods of those Bishops to whom the Pope had forsooth given the power of Interdiction The Pope constant in his resolutions by Pandulphus and Durant interdicts the King and Kingdom and gives it the French King King John driven into a great strait gives his Crown and Kingdom to the Pope he good man had before given it to the French King Philip the second sirnamed Augustus and his son Lewis had gotten such footing in England that he would not be gotten out The Pope interdicts both father and son but his curses took not such place that they would give over what they had gotten by the first grant nor did these troubles end until the English Nation uniting themselves under Henry 3. did by plain force drive Lewis out of England to such an insufferable height was the Papacy grown in those days 18. Although the stubborn Barons made Henry 3. swear to observe The Bishops in H. 2 his reign conspire against him the Ordinances made in the Mad Parliament at Oxford and the Archbishop of Canterbury and nine other Bishops did denounce a Curse against all those who either by direction arms or otherwise should withstand the Ordinance of the Twelve Peers which gave the exercise of all Regality to them yet did the Pope absolve him from it very easily Addit Matth. Paris 990. 19. How zealous the most noble Prince Edward the first was in the Contests between the Pope and Ed. 2. cause of Christianity and how observant of the Papal power is evident by his victorious Voyage into Holy Land But he afterwards became hated by the Churchmen both in respect of the Statute of Mortmain made in the fourth year of his Reign and also because that by the advice of William Marchyan his chiefest Treasurer he seised into his hands the

saies ver 8 9. 10. If a man dye and have no Son then shall the inheritance pass to the daughter and if he have no daughter then shall the inheritance go to his brethren and if he have no brethren then ye shall give the inheritance unto his fathers brethren c. And that inheriting by the daughter when there is no Son in Britain consonant to the Law of God is as old as any record we can find when Voadicea led the Britans against the Romans it was alwaies a thing observed among them Neque enim sexum in imperiis discernunt Tacit. Lip in vita Agric. 457. Wherein Regality differs in descent from Estates by Civil Laws 9. Although Gynaecocraty be neither against the divine Law of God or Nature yet it is only to be understood that in regality the female shall inherit when she is the eldest sister and lineally descended from the Ancestor which has no Heir male of his body lawfully begotten For in Regality possessio fratris non facit sororem esse haeredem But if a King or Queen by inheritance have issue by several venters or extractions and by the latter a Son who does inherit who dyes without issue yet shall the Heir male descended from the Father although but of half blood to him inherit before his sister and the elder sister descended from the Father shall inherit before his sister although she be of whole blood to him from the reason aforesaid and therefore Queen Mary and Eliz. although but of half blood to Ed. the 6. did inherit before the Queen of Scots or the issue of the Queen Dowager of France by the Duke of Suffolk Charles Brandon although they were of whole blood to him and thus much does Sir Ed. Coke testifie Com. Lit. cap. 1. Sect. 8. p. 15. 10 Before we examine the authority and observance of the Salique Law First Charge let us see the heinous charge which Monsieur Bodin brings against Gynaecocatry Bodins charge and incommodities against Gynaecocatry cap. 5. lib. 6. pag. 738. de rep He says Gynaecocraty is inimicitious to the laws of Nature which gives prudence strength magnanimity of mind force to command to Men takes them away from Women Answ A fine general charge this If I can form an argument out of it this is it All Government wherein prudence strength magnanimity c. do not command is inimicitious to the Laws of Nature But in Gynaecocraty neither prudence c. do command Therefore Gynaecocraty is inimicitious to the Laws of Nature Now the Major proposition requiring strength prudence and magnanimity in command the Conclusion will be as strong against all Government as Gynaecocraty for he hath not defined what strength prudence c. is nor who shall be Judge what it is and so any man who will but deny that there is strength prudence c. in the Governor may by the Laws of Nature not obey nay it is against the Laws of Nature to obey But in what case are all Pupil Kings Sure the man intended to make good Pepins and Hugh Capets Titles from this Proposition against Childerick and Charls of Lorrain But that which is most monstrous and impious is that it is inimicitious to the Laws of Nature for any Child to obey and honor his Mother because she hath not prudence magnanimity and force of command The Law of God not only took from Women the Government of Common-wealths Second charge but also of Families whenas he deservedly subjected them to the command of their Husbands The argument out of this is Whom God hath subjected to the command of their Husbands cannot by the Law of God command in Families But God hath subjected Women to the command of their Husbands Therefore by the Law of God Women cannot command in Families Answ Yes such Women as never were married nor subject to their Husbands may granting the Major proposition But I deny the Major proposition for sure it is no where against the Law of God for a Widow to govern her Family As often as God testifies that he will take terrible vengeance against the enemies Third charge of his Name he threatens them to be subject to commands and laws of Women for this he cites Isa 8. although I cannot find any such thing there as if that were the utmost of evils and extremity of calamities Answ That this is false is evident by Gods miraculous delivery of the children of Israel by the leading and command of Deborah Besides how can God command Women to command and give Laws if it be against the Law of Nature Which is all one to say God does command against the Law of Nature that is his own Law The Roman Laws did seclude Women from all Civil offices and Publique Fourth charge employments Answ But though the Roman Laws did forbid it yet if the Laws of France did not allow it how came Blanch the wife of Lewis the Eighth Katherine de Medici wife of Henry the Second and Mary de Medici wife of Henry the Fourth and Anne the Mother of the present King to manage the Regencie of France as imperiously during the minority of their Sons as if they had been absolute Princes That in Gynarchy the Wife is not subject but superior to her Husband Fifth charge Answ So heavy bodies will against their nature ascend to supply a Vacuity Answ His sixth charge is an Invective against Vasti Joan of Naples called the Sixth charge Wolf Athaliah Cleopatra Zenobia Hirene As indeed telling of stories is usually the greatest part of his reasoning and that he will do so amply that Scaliger justly reprehends him with making not writing Histories Now if I should fall into the commendation of Ruth Hester Judith Deborah c. I am quit with him It is true indeed that 't is a great blessing to any Nation that God gives them a Masculine Heir endued with all those qualities he speaks of But when God doth give a Child which he pronounceth a woe to that Nation Eccles 10. 16. or a Female Subjects must be content and submit themselves to Gods pleasure For in going about to alter what God hath done they will make themselves in a much more woful condition Nor could that be a judgment of God upon a Nation to give Fools and Children or Women for Heirs if Subjects at pleasure might alter them and set up others in their stead 11. The Salique Law took its name either from the Country Salia The etymologie of the Salique Law or the River Sal or from contraction of Si aliqua so often mentioned in the Law 12. There are three things observable in the Salique Law the authority A short view of the authority and observance of the Salique Law of it the eternity of it and the reason of it For the authority of it it was made by the Lord knows whom for the eternity of it it shall end the Lord knows when

that simple and blind obedience should be alwaies given to their Laws as if there were neither Laws of God or any to whom they were given intellectual or reasonable creatures And though no man ought to censure much less to reproach the actions of his superior yet are no mens actions so censured as great mens and so much the more by how much the greater they are for Omne animi vitium tanto conspectius in se Iuvenal Crimen habet quanto major qui peccat habetur And if Sabinianus were so malitious a detractor from the works of St. Gregory if Bonifacius the eight used such undue means for the attaining the Papacy if Gregory the seaventh were so wicked as the Council of Brixia makes him if Alexander the sixt were so wicked a man as Platina makes him if so many decrees of the antecedent Popes have been abrogated by the subsequent Popes if Marcellinus burned Incense to Idols if Liberius consented to the Arrians and gave his suffrage to the condemnation of St. Athanasius if Honorius were condemned for a Monothalite by the sixth general Council if John 22. were condemned by the Divines of Paris for teaching that the soules of the just shall not see God untill the general resurrection then is it not possible but that either contradictions are no contradictions but the same things or the Popes have not alwaies been infallible But it is more then time to return to the question 1. That St. Paul did preach the Gospel here in England is affirmed by By whom Christian Faith was first preached and a Church planted in Britain Lib. 2. cap. 40. Theodo lib. 9. de curandis Graecorum affectibus Paulum è priori captivitate Roma dimissum Britannis aliis in Occidente Evangelium predicasse And Nicephorus saies that Simon Zelotes Doctrinam Evangelii ad Occidentalium oceanum insulasque Britannicas perfert But that ever a Christian Church was planted in this Island before that at the request of King Lucius in the reign of Commodus and not of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus as Beda saies Elutherius sent Fugatius and Damianus I do no where find for not only the superstition of the Druides was publickly professed but after that a Christian Church was planted Lucius converted the three Archiflamines of London York and Carleton into Archbishopricks and the other Flamines Platina in vita St. Eleutherii into Bishopricks Yet that ever after the Bishop of Rome did claim any power or jurisdiction of these British Churches I no where find nay the contrary is very probable for they not only adhered in the observation of Easter to the Eastern Church from St. Johns observation thereof at Ephesus and not according to the determination of Pius Anicetus and Soter Bishops Beda lib. 2. cap. 2. of Rome but also the British Bishops when Augustine was sent by St. Gregory to preach and convert the English Saxons to Christianity did refuse to acknowledg any superiority from him nor by any perswasion or command of him would or could leave their ancient usages without consent of their fellowes as a man may see in Beda Nor were these Bishops in those daies Lib. 2. cap. 2. ever esteemed nay not by Beda himself as much a reverencer as he was of the Church of Rome Hereticks or Schismaticks and out of the Pall of the Lib. 2. cap. 2. Church c. but right Catholick and godly men 2. That the English Saxons after they had driven the antient Britains The conversion of the English Saxons by the Pope Gregory the great not only out of all that part of Britain which is now called England some into Britaigne in France called Britania Aremorica from whence it is supposed that Country took its denomination others into Wales but also Christianity it self and themselves continued Pagan untill they first received the Faith by the preaching of Augustine and Miletus sent by Gregory the great is consonant to all the Histories of the Church nor does to me appear any colour of Reason or Authority to the contrary 3. But that St. Gregory did not at that time arrogate to himself the Neither St. Gregory nor any of his predecessors did assume the title of head of the Church Title either of universal Bishop head of the Catholick Church or any superiority over Temporal Princes is as clear as if it were written with a sun-beam For in the contest between St. Gregory and John Jejunator Bishop of Constantinople about superiority universal Bishop and head of the Church Gregory says in his Epistle to Mauritius Nullus Romanorum Pontificum hoc singularitatis nomen assumpsit nullus Praedecessorum meorum hoc tam profano vocabulo uti consensit None of all the Bishop● of Rome ever took upon him this name of singularity viz. of Universal Bishop none of my Predecessors would ever use this prophane stile Et universa Ecclesia corruit quando is qui appellatur universalis cadit The whole Church falleth when he which is called Universal Bishop falleth Et nos hunc honorem oblatum nolumus recipere We would not accept of this honor offered unto us Epist 80. And in his Epistle to John claiming to himself this title he says Tu quid Christo universalis ecclesiae capiti in extremi judicii dicturus es examine qui cuncta ejus membra tibimet conaris Universalis appellatione supponere What answer wilt thou make to Christ the Head of the universal Church at the trial of the last Judgment which thus by the name of Universal Bishop seekest to make all his members subject unto thee And unto Anastasius Bishop of Antioch he writes Ut de honoris vestri injuria taceam si unus episcopus lib. 6. ep 188. vocatur universalis universa ecclesia corruit si unus universus cadit Not to speak of the injury done to your honor if one Bishop be called universal then if that one universal Bishop goes down the whole Church falleth And afterward Vos eandem causam nullam dicere non debetis quia si hanc aequanimiter portamus universae ecclesiae fidem corrumpimus Ye ought not to say it is a business of no importance for if we patiently abide these things we destroy the faith of the whole Church And comparing the pride of this Name with the pride of Antichrist he says Nunquid non cum se Antichristus veniens Deum dixerit frivolum valde erit sed tamen nimis perniciosum Si quantitatem vocis attendimus duae sunt syllabae si pondus lib. 6. ep 194. iniquitatis universa pernicies And lib. 4. ep 33. he says In isto scelesto vocabulo consentire nihil aliud est quam fidem perdere To consent to this wicked Name is nothing else but to lose the Faith This and much more you may read in lib. 4. ep 80. ep 99. and in S. Gregory's epist to Eulogius Patriarch of Alexandria Howbeit Boniface the