Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	crown_n	king_n	richard_n	3,753	5	8.8517	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34208	Concubinage and poligamy disprov'd, or, The divine institution of marriage betwixt one man, and one woman only, asserted in answer to a book, writ by John Butler, B.D. for which he was presented as follows : We the grand jury, sworn to enquire for the body of the city of London, on Wednesday, the first day of December, 1697, present one John Butler, for writing and publishing a wicked pamphlet : wherein he maintains concubinage to be lawful, and which may prove very destructive to divers families, if not timely suppress'd.		1698 (1698)	Wing C5714; ESTC R1558	49,472	113

that numerous Family afterward And because our Author reckons this one of the happiest Instances that can be to advance Concubinage I shall trespass upon the Reader 's Patience a little to demonstrate the contrary In the first place our Author asserts falsly that this Concubinage was advised by the Parliament whereas it is plain that if she was his Concubine at all it was when a private Man For Buchanan says he married her after Queen Eupham's Death so that then she was no Concubine In the next place he falsly belies the Family of the Stuarts in saying that this Concubinage gave Birth to them for both Cambden and Buchanan derive their Original from Bancho Thane of Loqhuaber of the Blood-Royal of Scotland who being murder'd by Mackbeth the Tyrant about the Year of our Lord 1050. his Son Fleanchus fled into North-Wales where he married the Daughter of Griffith Lewellin Prince of the Country and by her had a Son call'd Walter who being a Valiant Man and Favourite to King Malcolm III. that kill'd Mackbeth he was for defeating the Galloway Rebels and killing their General created Lord Steward of Scotland whence the Family took Sirname and Robert whom we now treat of being Son to another Walter Stuart by King Robert Bruce's Daughter was the first of 'em who enjoy'd the Crown So that Mr. Butler wrongs the Royal Family both as to the Honour of their Original which was Lawful and not Spurious and also as to their Antiquity by 320 Years for so long had they been call'd by the Name of Stuart before they came to the Crown But then as to the Effects of this Concubinage they were the most direful that almost any History gives an Account of For John the Eldest Son by Elizabeth Moor who when he came to the Crown was call'd Robert the III. because of the Hatred the Scots had to the Name of John on the Account of John Baliol who betray'd their Liberty to our Edward I. and the ill Fate of King John of France and King John of England This Robert I say had nothing of the Spirit of Government so that he was tyranniz'd over by his Brother Robert the second Son of Elizabeth Moor who starved his eldest ●on Prince David to Death in the Castle of Falkland and forc'd the younger call'd James afterwards James the I. of Scotland to flee the Kingdom and he was taken by the English as bound to France Alexander the youngest of Elizabeth Moor's Sons was a bloody cruel Man and besides other Inhumane Acts burnt the famous Cathedral of Elgin the finest in all Scotland because he could not find the Bishop of Murray whom he design'd to have murder'd And his Son Alexander was as barbarous as the Father and Plunder'd and Murder'd his Neighbours The Misfortune of Prince James afflicted his Father King Robert so sensibly that he refused to be comforted and starv'd himself to Death After which his Brother the Inhumane Robert Reign'd under the Title of Governour and not only kept his Nephew James from the Crown during his Life but left the Government to his own Son Murdo who also kept it in his own Hands till being disoblig'd by the Rebellious Temper of his own Sons he summoned a Parliament and by their Advice call'd home King James I. from England who after his Return made a terrible Havock among the other Princes of the Blood cut off Murdo Stuart Duke of Albany and his two Sons and banished others of the Name Upon which James Duke Murdo's youngest Son surpriz'd and kill'd the King's Uncle and fled into Ireland The Historian observes that all this Disorder and Discord in the Royal Family was fomented by Walter Earl of Athol eldest Son to King Robert Stuart by Queen Euphaim his Lawful Wife his Design being to have all the Posterity of Elizabeth Moor the Concubine extinguish'd that so the Crown might devolve upon himself which he thought might be easily effected if he could but have got King James the I. taken off which he likewise compassed having procured him to be murther'd in his Bed Chamber as he lodg'd in the Dominicans Cloyster near Perth on a Journey Upon which the Nobility assembling from all parts of the Kingdom they pursued the Murderers with so much Vigor that all the Conspirators were put to Death in 40 Days And Walter Earl of Athol who was the Author of the Conspiracy and Robert Graham who actually murder'd the King were put to death in such a cruel manner that the Reader will not think his time lost to peruse the Account of it as follows Walter 's Execution took up three Days on the first he was put into a Cart to which there was an Engine fastned that hoisted him up by Ropes and Pullies and let him down again to the Ground which rack'd and loosened all his Joints and put him to incredible Pain then he was set on a Pillory with a Red-hot Iron Crown on his Head and this Motto The King of all Traytors which was reckon'd the Accomplishment of what had been foretold him by Witches whom he had Consulted to know whether he should come to the Crown or not viz. That he should be crown'd in a great Concourse of People The second Day he was bound upon a Hurdle and dragg'd at a Horses Tail through Edinburgh On the third he was bound to a Plank ript up alive and had his Bowels first and afterwards his Heart thrown into the Fire his Head was fixed on a Pole and his Quarters distributed into the chief Towns of the Kingdom Robert Graham his Kinsman was carried through the City in a Cart with his Hand nail'd to a Gallows the Executioner in the mean time running burning Irons into all the fleshy Parts of his Body and then he was quarter'd as the former says Buchanan All this was the effect of that Concubinage which Mr. Butler tells us was so happy so that instead of Concubinages preventing the Ruine of Royal Families I have his own Instance upon him to prove that it well nigh endanger'd the Ruin of our own Royal Family which is the most antient in the Western World or perhaps for what 's known in the whole Universe And so far is our Author's Assertion from being true that all Histories Sacred and Prophane abound with Instances of Families and Nations being ruin'd by Concubinage and other sorts of Whoredom For the Proof of which I must again refer the Reader to that Book call'd God's Judgments upon Whoring where the Instances are none of 'em taken from Romances as those in the Book call'd God's Revenge against Adultery and Murder but from approved Histories and may be of very good use to be read by the Youth of this Debauch'd Age. His Proposal of Concubinage as a Remedy against Whoredome and Adultery is wholly ridiculous and contrary to the Experience of all Eyes The Jews were as guilty of those Crimes as any People in the World notwithstanding their Use of Concubines Nay David

to what our Author says is allowed at Rome and in some Reform'd States tho there be none of the latter charg'd with any such thing but Holland it 's no warrant for any Mans Conscience For the Sixty Sixth of those called the Apostolical Canons Ordering that any Person who destour'd a Virgin should either Marry her or have no other Wife during her Life It is nothing to his purpose but rather against Poligamy and Concubinage As to his Instances of Constantinus Chlorus and Constantine the Greats having Concubines and being receiv'd by the Christians into places of Authority notwithstanding It 's Forreign to his purpose the Christians were Subject to former Emperours who were the worst and lendest of Men it not being i● their Power to hinder or advance them at that time and whatever was the Practice of the Christians then If they either committed Fornication themselves or Countenanc'd it in others they did thereby Act contrary to the truly Apostolical Canons Act. 15. Commanding them to abstain from Fornication and the repeated Injunctions of the Apostles to flee Fornication which properly signifies as has been already prov'd uncleanness us'd by unmarried Persons and as for Adultery or defiling the Marriage Bed which the said Princes must have been guilty of by their Concubinage it 's every where Condemned by God and Man tho the Christians in those times might perhaps neither have Power nor think it prudent to quarrel with those Emperours that were but just then beginning to see the Dawn of the Gospel Light which utterly Condemns all such things Nor can our Author make it appear but they reprov'd them as well as one of our Bishops did Henry VIII and yet the Protestants did not think fit neither to quarrel with his own Title to the Crown nor those of his Successors tho perhaps there might have been good Reason to Question Queen Marys Legittimacy and yet our Author knows that the Church of England neither approves of Concubinage Incest nor Adultery So false and inconcludent is his Argument Besides our Author Conceals that Constantius Chlorus was no declared Christian tho a Great Favourer of 'em and that he was forc'd to abandon Helena and Marry Theodora Step Daughter to the Emperor Maximianus Hercules who thereupon made him Caesar Nor does he take any notice of Constantine the Greats being Married very young to Minervina when it is not certain that he made profession of the Christian Religion nor yet when he Married Fausta Daughter to the Emperour Maximian one of the Greatest haters of the Christians that ever was Neither does he take notice of the Plague that this wretch'd Woman Fausta was to him for being enamoured on his Son Crispus by Minervina and not obtaining her end she accus'd him of a design to Debauch her for which his Father put him to Death but understanding the Falsehood of the Accusation afterwards he put her to Death too so disastrous were the effects of his Poligamy As to Valentinian the Emperor he was passionate in anger even to Madness and probably as Extravagant in his Amours the Story is very well known that his passion to see the Empire Insulted by such an ugly deform'd Barbarous People as the Quadi made him fall into such a fit of anger as that it kill'd him so that he is no very commendable Pattern to be followed Neither does Mr. Butler take any notice that God did not bless the Marriage of Valentinian with Justina his Wifes Maid for she became a Cursed Arrian and his Grandson Valentinian by Galla her Daughter became a cruel Persecutor of the Orthodox Valentinian did also make a Law in Imitation of his own Practice as Mr. Butler Writes in Defence of his that any Man might Marry two Wives but succeeding Emperors would not allow it the Honour of being put into the Code Nor do I believe the Universities will Honour Mr. Butlers Pamphlet with a place in any of their Libraries As to his false pretence of Concubinage or Poligamies being allowed by the Primitive Church it is so gross it needs no Confutation Any Man that has read the Apologies of Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Origen against Celsus or any thing of Ecclesiastical History will find the contrary and for such as cannot have the opportunity of perusing those Authors themselves I refer them to the Account of what they said on that Head given by the Author of Gods Judgments against Whoring at the End of that Book Our Authors last effort is p. 34. Where he proposes a Reformed Concubinage to these Realms for preventing the Ruine of Royal Noble and Generous Families and as an honest help to destroy those foul and crying Sins of Whoredom and Adultery which Ruine Kingdoms as well as Families His Arguments to back this Proposal are that had it not been for Concubinage King Solomon had utterly fail'd of that Royal Raco whence Jesus Christ Lineally descended That if Alexander the Scot had used a Concubin an Heir of his Body might have prevented those dreadful Wars betwixt Bruce and Baliol for that Crown That if Richard the II. had been allowed an Heir by a Concubine the War betwixt the Houses of Lancaster and York had been prevented which at last was not ended but by a Son sprung from a Bed of Concubinage He concludes thus Happy was that Concubinage of Robert the II. of Scotland which advised to by a Parliament of that Nation gave Birth to that Family of the Stuarts which have made both England and Scotland exceeding happy and being grafted into the Family of the Welch Teudors of the Royal Blood of England another Family sprang from a Bed of Concubinage are to this day reigning over both Kingdoms Which if so let no Man by Corrupt and Vnlawful Customs go about to stain the Legitimacy of such a Race of Princes as both England and Scotland have Reason to remember with Praise and Thanksgiving to God especially for Charles the I. of Blessed and Never-dying Memory the Gracious Gift of God for whose blessed sake Good Things may justly be expected in time both unto his Royal Race and these his Kingdoms And thus much may serve in Vindication of this Respondent for Bedding with Mary Tomkins Our Author here as every where else hath discover'd himself to be a Physitian of no Value for if they may be call'd so who prescribe a Remedy worse than the Disease then certainly he deserves that Title Suffering is always preferable to Sin and it 's better that Ten Thousand Families should be Extinguish'd than that any one Man should run the risk of his Soul to keep them up Mr. Butler's Passion for Concubinage doth so effectually blind him that he can't see an Inch b●fore his Nose for had he but look'd into that very Instance of Robert Stuart's Concubinage he might havd seen what Buchanan the Scotch Historian says concerning it viz. Quae res postea tam numerosam familiam prope Extinxit i. e. Which Affair had well-nigh extinguish'd

Concubinage And that does not at all import any thing of God's allowing of Concubinage more than he does of Adultery and Incest which he hath expresly forbid as I have shew'd already But besides I shall turn his Instance against himself thus That had not Solomon exhausted his Strength by Concubinage he might have left Lawful Issue enough behind him and therefore it was his Concubinage that endanger'd the failure of the Royal Line And thus Saul had four Sons by Ahinoam one Wife when Solomon of a Thousand Wives and Concubines had but one Son His Instance of Alexander King of Scotland is false for he left a Grandchild behind him who was Heiress to his Crown but she dying before Marriage the Competition betwixt the next Heirs happen'd who would never have yielded to the Son of a Concubine And the Parliament of Scotland afterwards found out a better and more honourable Expedient than Mr Butler's viz. that any future Controversie about the Succession should be determin'd by themselves as may be seen in Buchanan's History and it is not very long since the Parliaments of both Nations had a blessed Opportunity of settling a disputed Succession without Mr. Butler's Expedient Then as to his Instance of Richard the II. any Body that has read that History knows that the War began in his own time not because he wanted Issue but because he unjustly seiz'd the Duke of Lancaster's Estate and design'd to banish his Son for ever who landed in England when Richard was in Ireland and left the Duke of York his Uncle to govern in his Absence But the Nation was so much displeas'd with Richard that the Duke of York was not able to resist the Duke of Lancaster so that the Nation in Parliament charg'd Richard with the Breach of his Coronation Oath in 32 Articles oblig'd him to resign the Crown to the Duke of Lancaster who came to the Possession of the Throne that way before Richard was murder'd So that it was not his want of Issue which began that War nor the want of Lineal Heirs the Posterity of Lionel Duke of Clarence having a Right precedent to that of the Duke of Lancaster But the Parliament laid their Claim aside as in all probability they would have done that of his Son 's if he had left any considering the prevailing Interest and Victorious Arms of the Duke of Lancaster but Mr. Butler is much such another Historian as he is a Divine And now let him see to it whether he hath sufficiently vindicated his Bedding with Mary Tomkins or Concubinage in general by those or any other Instances But because Mr. Butler shall have all the fair Dealing imaginable I shall take Notice of a Text quoted by those of his Opinion to prove their Point which it's like he has forgot viz. Deut. 21. 15. If a Man have two Wives one beloved and another hated and they have born him Children both the beloved and the hated and if the first-born Son be hers that was hated He may not make the Son of the beloved first-born before the Son of the hated which is indeed first born This I quote now lest it should be applied by him or others afterwards against what I have already said and the Answer is as follows 1. Moses here acts the part of a Political Law-giver but not of a Spiritual Doctor And Poligamy being conniv'd at in the Jews at that time He lays down Rules to prevent Injustice to the Children of the least-beloved Wife 2. It 's plain from hence that Poligamy distracts the Affections of the Husband and naturally occasions Injustice to some of his Offspring which must needs cause Hatred Contention and all manner of Confusion in a Family else Moses would not have here provided against it 3. That the Words the Son of her that was hated would seem to imply that both the Wives were not alive together and then it makes nothing for Poligamy 4. This cannot be supposed to be any thing at most but a meer Permission of the thing because it is contrary to the Law against taking two Wives Levit. 18. 18. which the Karaei or Jews that adhere to the Scriptures understand to be clearly prohibited by that Text. 5. Our Saviour and his Apostles Mat. 19. and 15 and 1 Cor. 6. 16. and 7. 2. which I have taken Notice of already say that Poligamy was forbidden and seeing they say Let every Man have his own Wife and every Woman her own Husband all that Liberty which was granted to or assumed by the Patriarchs is taken away 6. The Chaldee Paraphrast understands that Text Levit. 18. 18. to be against Poligamy and says that was the Reason why Ruth's Kinsman Ruth 4. 6. refused to marry Ruth because he had a Wife before and that to marry another would break the Peace of his Family divide his Estate and occasion Discords amongst the Children of the two Wives 7. It is not like that God would allow two Wives to the Israelites by a Law which some of the better Heathens disapprov'd as may be seen in Phocylides and Euripides and Dioclesian made a Law against it as may be seen Cod. Lib. 5. Tit. 5. Leg. 2. 8. Poligamy or Concubinage is against the Apostle's Prohibition of Married Persons defrauding one another it being impossible for one Man ordinarily to satisfie more than one Woman so that to marry more than one exposes them to the Danger of Satan's Tentation for their Incontinence of which Bilhah and David's Concubines c. are sad Instances 9. The Apostle could not say Let every Woman have her own or proper Husband 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if he allowed Concubinage for then he should be common to two or more 10. That which is made one Flesh with the Body cannot be made a Member of another Body therefore a Man who is one Flesh with his Wife cannot be one Flesh also with another in a Lawful Sense for there can be no Union where there is a Division as in this Case there must be 11. If Concubinage were allow'd Marriage could be no proper Resemblance of the Union betwixt Christ his Church for Christ has but one Church whereas in that Case a Man should have more than one Wife Some again object that seeing the Apostle prescribes that he who was to be chosen Bishop should be the Husband of one Wife 1 Tim. 3. 2. Poligamy was allowed in others To which 't is answer'd that many of the Jews and Gentiles in those times had two Wives And therefore it 's supposed they were tolerated to keep them during Life or at least till they were confirm'd in the Faith but it would have been scandalous to have had such for Ministers or Bishops 2 The Law of Monogamy being reviv'd by Christ and Preach'd up by this same Apostle elsewhere he cannot be imagin'd to allow it here 3. Another Reason of this Injunction is suppos'd to be that it would have been accounted scandalous in Christian Bishops to come short of the Heathen Priests in Continency who were forbid to have two Wives as may be seen in Plutarch and other Authors 4. It cannot be thought that any such thing was allow'd in the ancient Church when to marry twice was by them so much scrupled that some think the Apostle forbids such Persons here to be ●hosen Bishops 5. Beza on the Place tells us that not only Bigamy and Poligamy were forbid by the Ancient Canons but likewise the Marriage of such Persons as had rashly divorc'd their Wives And Dr. Hammond on the Place quotes Theophilact and Athenagoras for it That Marriage after Divorce was forbidden to the Antient Christians So falsly has Mr. Butler alledged the Customs of the Primitive Church to defend his Practice I shall conclude with what Willet says on 1 Sam. 25. that if it seems strange that the Patriarchs should so long continue in an Error unreform'd The like Instance is given Nehem. 8. 17. where the People of Israel are said not to have kept the Feast of Tabernacles from Joshua's time till then by the space almost of 1000 Years But tho God winked at those times of Ignorance he now calleth all Men to repent and the worst I wish Mr. Butler is that he would glorifie God by confessing his Sin and taking Shame upon himself and not add Fuel to those Flames of Uncleanness which have well-nigh ruin'd the Nation already and will bring down the Flames of Divine Vengeance upon us if we don't Repent and Reform FINIS ADVERTISEMENTS 1. GOD's Judgments against Whoring Being an Essay to a General History of it from the Creation of the World to the Reign of Augustulus which according to common Computation is 5190 Years and from thence down to the present Year 1697. Being a Collection of the most Remarkable Instances of Uncleanness that are to be found in Sacred or Prophane History during that time with Observations thereon Pr. 3s 6d 2. The Secrer History of White-Hall from the Restoration of King Charles II. down to the Abdication of the late King James Writ at the Request of a Noble Lord and Convey'd to him in Letters by late Secretary Interpreter to the Marquis of Louvois who by that Means had the Perusal of all the Private Minutes between England and France for many Years The whole consisting of Secret Memoirs which have hitherto lain conceal'd as not being discoverable by any other Hand Published from the Original Papers by D. Jones Gent. Price 5s 3. By the same Author A Continuation of the Secret History of White-Hall from the Abdication of the late King James in 1688. to the year 1696. Together with the Tragical History of the Stuarts from the first Rise of that Family in the Year 1068. down to the Death of her Late Majesty Queen Mary of Blessed Memory Price 5s All Sold by R. Baldwin in Warwick-Lane