Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	act_n	king_n	lord_n	2,428	5	3.6568	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86287	Extraneus vapulans: or The observator rescued from the violent but vaine assaults of Hamon L'Estrange, Esq. and the back-blows of Dr. Bernard, an Irish-deane. By a well willer to the author of the Observations on the history of the reign of King Charles.	Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662.	1656 (1656)	Wing H1708; Thomason E1641_1; ESTC R202420	142,490	359

by the Observator and those solemn Inaugurations being proved to be very ancient directed by the holy Spirit in the Book of God exemplified not only in David and many other Kings of Judah but also in the Son of David the chief King of all our Author standeth unto it still because saith he it conferreth no one dram of solid Grandure to the Throne Kings being perfect Kings and qualified fully to all intent of Royalty without it Fol. 7. Igrant indeed that Kings are perfect Kings without this solemnity The Case of Clark and Watson in the first year of King James and of many Murderers and Felons in the first year of King Charles make this plain enough all of them being indited for their several Felonies and Treasons committed by them against the peace of those several Kings their Crowns and dignities they neither of them crown'd at the time of those trials so that I shall not trouble my self with looking into the case of the Post-nati as to that particular But yet I cannot yeeld unto him that these solemnities confer not so much as a single dram of solid Grandure to the Throne For certainly the Kings entry into a Cognizance or stipulation with his people to govern them according to their several Lawes and their Atturning Subjects to him or acclaiming him to be their King in our Authors language must needs contribute much to the establishment of the Regal Throne Were it not thus King Charles had been very ill advised in putting himself to such immeasurable charges for receiving the poor Crown of Scotland and the Scots not more advised then he in threatning him that if he long deferred the duty of a Coronation they might perhaps be inclined to make choice of another King For which consult our Author Fol. 125. It seems by this that neither of them did esteem it a serious vanity and that the King conceived it to have somewhat in it of a solid Grandure and this our Author saw at last and therefore is compell'd by the light of Reason and the convicting of his judgement whether by the Observator or not shall not now be questioned to conclude thus with him that there is something of a solid signification in those serious vanities But then he adds withall that all Christian Kings are not concerned in it as is affirmed by the Observator his Catholick Majesty not being touched in it because not Crowned Nor doth this inference hold good by the Rules of Logick that because his Catholick Majesty is not crowned at all therefore the Rites of Coronation are not accompted sacred by him or that he is unconcerned in those scoffs and scornes which are put upon it by our Author Betwixt all Kings there is that sacred correspondence that the violating of the Rites or person of one concerns all the rest and though the Catholick King hath not been Crowned in these last ages yet do they still retain a solemn initiation into Regality as our Author calleth it at their first entrance into State Not Crowned I grant in these latter Ages though they were of old that which our Saviour spake in the case of Marriage between man and woman viz. Non fuit sic ab initio that it was not so from the beginning being true in the Political Marriages of these Kings and Kingdomes For in the History of Spain written by Lewis de Mayerne it is said of Inigo Arista the 6. King of Navarre that he was anointed and crowned after the manner of the Kings of France of which he i● said to have been a Native that custome being afterwards observed in the following Kings And though it be believed by some that this custome came only into Navarre after they had Kings of the House of Champagn yet that will give it the antiquity of Four hundred years and prove withall that Crowning and Anointing was observed by some Kings in that Continent Nor was it thus only in Navarre but in Castile also Alfonso the third of that name King of Castile and Leon fortunate in his wars against his Neighbours causing himself to be Crowned Emperour of Spain in the Cathedral Church at Leon with the solemnities and ceremonies requisite in so great an Act receiving the holy Unction and the Crown from Don Raymond Archbishop of Toledo performed in Leon anno 1134. and afterwards iterated in Castile as some writers say for the Crown of Toledo as a distinct and different Kingdome The chargeable repetition of which solemn Act in so many Kingdomes as now and of long time have been united in the persons of the Catholick Kings may possibly be the reason of the discontinuance of it in these latter daies each Kingdome in that Continent being apt to think it self neglected as the Scots did here in case the King received not a particular Coronation for it Considedering therefore that one Coronation could not serve for all it was the thriftiest way in respect of charges and the way most like to please the particular Nations not to receive the Crowns of any of them in that solemn way which was and is observed to this day in most Christian Kingdomes The Coronation being past the King prepareth for the Parliament approaching also in the way of preparation he thought it fit that some who in the last had been uncivil towards the Duke should be made examples upon which accompt saith our Historian the Lord Keeper Williams fell and his place was disposed of to Sir Thomas Coventry From which what can be possibly concluded by a knowing man but that the displacing of the Lord Keeper Williams must fall between the Coronation and the following Parliament And then our Author will not yeeld that he was out in this Temporality How so because saith he I never intended it to be in that moment of time to which that Paragraph relates Fol. 8 Is not this like to prove a brave historian think you who professeth openly that he writes one thing and intends another Is not the Reader like to be very well edified by such reservations as the Author keeps unto himself and are not to be found either positively or by way of inference in the Book he reads Our Author certainly is put hard to it when he can finde no other way to ev●de the errors of his pen but these silly shifts And yet Solamen miseris as the old verse hath it It is some comfort to him that the Observator should be out himself in saying that the Great Seal was taken from him in October whereas it is said by Mr. Howell that he departed from the Seal in August Fol. 8. But what if Mr. Howels intelligence fail him who though a very honest man pretends not to the Spirit of infallibility as our Author doth then certainly the Observator is not out nor my Author in But that we may not spend more time in tossing this debate like a Tenice Ball from one hand to another the Pamphleter may be pleased to

the Journals of that House that the new Lords were excluded from their suffrage accordingly And this since he hath failed to doe the Observators Arguments remain un-answered and the pretended Order must be thought no Order or of no authority In the businesse of the Levy made upon the Subject Anno 1626. there is little difference the Observator calling it a Loan because required under that name in relation to the Subsidies intended and passed by the Commons in the former Parliament our Author calling it a Tax as being a compulsory tribute imposed upon the Subject at a certain rate and such is this affirmed to be in the following words Fol. 10. And this is no great difference nor much worth our trouble Only the Pamphleter is mistaken in making this Loan or Tax to be imposed upon the Subject at a certain rate Whereas the Commissioners if I remember it aright imposed not any certain rate upon the Subject but scrued them up as high as they could with reference to their Abilities in Estate and Charge of Familie Our Author calling the Members of the House of Commons Anno 1627. not only Petty Lords and Masters but even Petty Kings and finding that the Observator marvelled at this strange expression fitst puts it off upon King James who having said the like before but rather in the way of Jear than otherwise he thinks it no great marvell that a poor Subject should use the same expression also Fol. 11. The difference is that the Pamphleter speaks that in earnest which the King most probably spoke in Jest and proves it by the power which the Commons assumed unto themselves in the late long Parliament of whom he telleth us that they were not Petty Lords but Lords Paramount not Petty Kings but Superiours to Kings themselves Ibid. T is true he hath a kind of Plaister to salve this sore for he would willingly write nothing but saving truths advertising that the Expression above mentioned doth not import what these Gentlemen were de jure but what de facto and what in reputation but then withall he leaves it standing in the Text as a plain Position to serve as a President to the Commons of arrogating the like powers unto themselves in succeeding Parliaments And in this he may be thought the rather to have some design because he makes no Answer to that part of the Observation which declareth out of the very Writs of Summons that they are called only to consent and submit such resolutions and Conclusions as should be then and there agreed on by the Kings great Councill or the great Council of the Kingdom that is to say the Lords Spiritual and Temporal assisted by the Reverend Judges and others learned in the Laws To make this position the more probable our Author telleth us that the House of Commons was then able to buy the House of Peers though 118 thrice over that is to say although there were 354 Lords in the House of Peers For this being called to an accompt by the Observator in regard of the low value which was put upon the Peerage by it he thus proceeds to make it good valuing the estates of each L. in the House of Peers ato more than 3000 l. per annum and each Member in the House of Commons at no lesse than 2124l per annum one with another Whereas unlesse he make the Baronage of England to be very despicable there were but few whose estates could be valued at so mean a rate as on the other side there were not very many members in the House of Commons whose Estates exceeded the proportion which he puts upon them some of them being of mean estates and some of very little or none at all But give him leave to set the members of each House at what rate he pleaseth then he may as well enable the House of Commons to buy the House of peers ten times over as to buy it thrice The Observator having entred into a a Consideration why the Bishops or spiritual Lords should be left out by the Author in this valuation as if they were no members of the House of Peers is answered that if the Bishops were members of the House of Peers then these words of his were turn-key enough to let them in if the Observator say not their exclusion is his own manufacture Fol. 12. Well applyed John Ellis and possibly intelligible enough in a place of manufactures but nothing proper to the true meaniug of the word in the vulgar Idiome But let us take his meaning whatsoever it be and in what Country Dialect soever we may trade the word and yet all will not serve the turn to save our Author from the purpose of excluding the Bishops from the valuation and consequently from being members of the House of Peers my reason is because it is affirmed by the Observator that there were at that time about an hundred and eighteen Temporall Lords in the Upper House and therefore that the Bishops were not reckoned in the calculation This is so plain that the Pamphleters turn-key will not serve to let them in and I have reason to believe that he had as great a mind as any to thrust them out it being one of his positions in the sheets unpublished that the Root of Episcopacie had not sap enough to maintain so spreading and so proud a top as was contended for Fol. 185. Whether the King did well or not in passing a way the Bishops Votes in the late long Parliament hath been considered of already and therefore we shall need to say nothing here as to that particular No Parliament after this till those of the year 1640. Where the first thing that offers it self is the stating of the true time of the charge brought in against the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and his Commitment thereupon The Observator following the accompt of that prelates Diary abbreviated and published by Mr. Prynne Anno 1644. doth state it thus viz. That on Wednesday the 16th day of December a Committy was appointed to draw up a charge against him that on the same day he was named an Incendiary by the Scotch Commissioners who promised to bring in their Complaint on the morrow after and that on Friday morning December 18. Mr. Hollis was sent up with the impeachment and presently came in the charge of the Scotch Commissioners The pamphleter tells us from the Journals if we may believe them that on Thursday December 17. there was a conference between the two Houses at which time the Lord Paget read the Scotch charge against the Archbishop in which charge he was named an Incendiarie Fol. 40. A man would think that the Arch-Bishops own Diary written with his own hand and in a matter which so nearly concerned his life should find as much credit in the world as any thing which the Pamphleter pretends to have found in the Journals especially considering how easie a thing it was as was proved before