Royal Authority Quotes
The priest had come to the Empress to complain about the debauchery of her Prime Minister and made the error of describing him as the first man of the empire. The story may be apocryphal but it illustrates the character of the Empress. The source of the exact words are given in the historical novel, Luise Muhlbach, Joseph II. and His Court
England had, under Henry VIII, left the Roman Catholic Church where the King replaced the Pope as head of the English Church. Henry’s successors then had to organize and manage the national Christian church. James was discussing the hierarchy of the Church of England and there was a suggestion that Bishops be eliminated and have every priest directly responsible to the crown. Bishops would be powerful figures who might form a power center. (They did later). However, King James I observed that the King is God’s choice and rules by divine right. So there had to be bishops to crown kings. The bishoprics were retained.
This quotation demonstrates that religious persecution of non Muslims was a duty, This has been a characteristic of all religious persecution regardless of religion. The quotation also shows that after 600 years, the original limited tolerance the Prophet had urged for People of the Book (Jews and Christians) was waning. Instead of non-believers being tolerated if they paid the special tax and were second class citizens, leaders were urged to convert or eliminate “infidels.”
His reference was to the continuation of royal rule after French had taken control.
This newspaper was his communications outlet.
The two were cousins. Wilhelm was a very dominant personality and his cousin quite weak. This quotation shows the tyrannical view of the German Kaiser. The letters were secret but after the execution of the Czar, the Russians released the letters to show the dominant and warlike history of Germany under the Kaiser who was furious that the Russians had made such personal and secret letters public. The speech to which the Kaiser referred was one in which the Czar rejected all efforts to reform and limit his power—only driving more Russians to the revolutionary side. See the Czar’s quotation: {614054}
He was captured and executed shortly thereafter by the King’s troops.
At the time there was no concept of serious separation of powers. For all practical purposes, the King ruled and he shared some of his powers with the Parliament. The next centuries in England would see the great battle for governmental power between the monarch and the Parliament. Today, the British monarch has no power but still retains a great deal of influence in England but largely because Queen Elisabeth is so well loved and respected.
In the early 18th century, the succession to the Scottish and English Crowns was unclear. As a safety valve and check, this clause was adopted by the Scottish Parliament. This was one of the most radical and anti monarchy laws ever passed. It took the unilateral power of making war and peace from the king & established the principle of ratification of ALL treaties. The law did not last long. It was nullified by the Union between England & Scotland (1707), and the English Parliament specifically repealed the clause in the “Repeal of Certain Scotch Acts of 1707”. This clause, which only remained in force for 3 years, had a profound effect on the modern democracies. The American founding fathers were totally familiar with the recent English history & this law. So the American’s at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, built the principle into the new Constitution giving the Congress the power to Declare War and the Senate to ratify treaties as a check against Presidential power.
