A Character of King Charles the Second: And Political, Moral and Miscellaneous Thoughts and ReflectionsHalifax, George Savile, Marquis of
History
A Character of King Charles the Second: And Political, Moral and Miscellaneous Thoughts and Reflections
Halifax, George Savile, Marquis of
Charles II, King of England, 1630-1685 -- Early works to 1800
What private Man will throw Stones at him because he _loved_? Or what
Prince, because he _dissembled_?
If he either _trusted_, or _forgave_ his _Enemies_, or in some Cases
_neglected_ his _Friends_, more than could in Strictness be allowed; let
not those Errors be so arraigned as take away the Privilege that seemeth
to be due to Princely Frailties. If Princes are under the Misfortune of
being accused to govern ill, their Subjects have the less right to fall
hard upon them, since they generally so little deserve to be governed
well.
The truth is, the Calling of a King, with all its glittering, hath such an
unreasonable weight upon it, that they may rather expect to be lamented,
than to be envied; for being set upon a Pinacle, where they are exposed to
Censure, if they do not do more to answer Mens Expectations, than
corrupted Nature will allow.
It is but Justice therefore to this Prince, to give all due Softenings to
the less shining Parts of his Life; to offer Flowers and Leaves to hide,
instead of using Aggravations to expose them.
Let his Royal Allies than lie soft upon him, and cover him from harsh and
unkind Censures; which though they should not be unjust, can never clear
themselves from being indecent.
Political, Moral and Miscellaneous
Thoughts _and_ Reflections,
_By the Marquis of_ HALIFAX.
POLITICAL THOUGHTS AND REFLECTIONS.
_Of Fundamentals._
Every Party, when they find a Maxim for their turn, they presently call it
a Fundamental, they think they nail it with a Peg of Iron, whereas in
truth they only tie it with a wisp of Straw.
The word soundeth so well that the Impropriety of it hath been the less
observed. But as weighty as the word appeareth, no Feather hath been more
blown about in the World than this word, _Fundamental_.
It is one of those Mistakes that at sometimes may be of use, but it is a
Mistake still.
Fundamental is used as Men use their Friends; commend them when they have
need of them, and when they fall out, find a hundred Objections to them.
Fundamental is a Pedestal that Men set every thing upon that they would
not have broken. It is a Nail every body would use to fix that which is
good for them: for all Men would have that Principle to be immoveable,
that serves their use at the time.
Every thing that is created is Mortal, _ergo_ all Fundamentals of human
Creation will die.
A true Fundamental must be like the Foundation of a House; if it is
undermined the whole House falleth.
The Fundamentals in Divinity have been changed in several Ages of the
World.
They have made no difficulty in the several Councils, to destroy and
excommunicate Men for asserting Things that at other Times were called
Fundamentals.
Philosophy, Astronomy, _&c._ have changed their Fundamentals as the Men of
Art no doubt called them at the time. Motion of the Earth, _&c._
Even in Morality one may more properly say, There _should be_ Fundamentals
allowed, than that there _are_ any which in Strictness can be maintained.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account