There are very few titles that still hear a faint echo in the modern world, and one of those is Elizabeth Stuart's unofficial titles, which stuck because her demeanor won popular affection wherever she went. She would gain these titles after the marriage to Frederick V, Elector Palatine. Frederick V took up his father's position as head of the Evangelical Union and would briefly become King of Bohemia, and from that short time on the throne Elizabeth Stuart became 'The Winter Queen' or 'Queen of Hearts' to Frederick's status of 'Winter King'. Her son, Charles II, would restore the English throne and she would be seen as the mother of the lines of Kings via her daughter Princess Sophia in England, Scotland and Ireland. It was that brief, extremely brief, reign that would spark off the impending cataclysm known as the 30 Years War, and embroil France, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, Holy Roman Empire and truly all of European Christendom. There were other battles going on, but by shifting this small, but key principality the other great powers would come to find a need to intervene. The sons and daughters of this marriage would help to not only protect the English Crown against Cromwell in the Civil War in England, but to help restore the English Crown afterwards.
Their son Charles I Louis would be re-instated as Elector into the Upper Palatine by the Treaty of Westphalia (Source: The Avalon Project) and it is from that lineage (via the view of Charles I, deposed and beheaded, who claimed guardianship for Frederick and Elizabeth) that England has ties to the entire Treaty. His support of the execution of Stafford during the early part of the English Civil War would also tend to reinforce that tie, as would the restoration via Charles II. In particular it is paragraph XIV of the Treaty that states:
As for what regards the House of Palatine, the Emperor and the Empire, for the benefit of the publick Tranquillity, consent, that by virtue of this present Agreement, there be establish'd an eighth Electorate; which the Lord Charles Lewis, Count Palatine of the Rhine, shall enjoy for the future, and his Heirs, and the Descendants of the Rudolphine Line, pursuant to the Order of Succession, set forth in the Golden Bull; and that by this Investiture, neither the Lord Charles Lewis, nor his Successors shall have any Right to that which has been given with the Electoral Dignity to the Elector of Bavaria, and all the Branch of William.
Amazing stuff, no? While England could not actually sign the Treaty of Westphalia, its line of authority from this would embody it because that line recognizing the Golden Bull of 1356. The Elector system was established to give the prince-electors in various principalities the responsibility of establishing the King of the Romans and, from that, the Head of the Holy Roman Empire. Thus the office that Charles I Louis took up is that of appointed Elector, in this case by reinforcing the lineage through Frederick V and his progenitors, but under a *new* electors office as the old one had been under Papal ban (can't have a Protestant Elector majority in what was supposed to be a Catholic kingdom, now, can you?) which would balance out the system for awhile. Thus the Lower Palatine went to Charles I Louis. Westphalia solidifies the ties between England and the Lower Palatine via this, and those of the line of that succession are tasked with the work of the Treaty. The preamble to the Treaty of Westphalia address *all* of those covered, and I will take the benefit of excerpting that extremely lengthy list, to get to the meat of that preamble:
In the name of the most holy and individual Trinity: Be it known to all, and every one whom it may concern, or to whom in any manner it may belong, That for many Years past, Discords and Civil Divisions being stir'd up in the Roman Empire, which increas'd to such a degree, that not only all Germany, but also the neighbouring Kingdoms, and France particularly, have been involv'd in the Disorders of a long and cruel War:[ lengthy listing excerpted]It has at last happen'd, by the effect of Divine Goodness, seconded by the Endeavours of the most Serene Republick of Venice, who in this sad time, when all Christendom is imbroil'd, has not ceas'd to contribute its Counsels for the publick Welfare and Tranquillity; so that on the side, and the other, they have form'd Thoughts of an universal Peace. And for this purpose, by a mutual Agreement and Covenant of both Partys, in the year of our Lord 1641. the 25th of December, N.S. or the 15th O.S. it was resolv'd at Hamburgh, to hold an Assembly of Plenipotentiary Ambassadors, who should render themselves at Munster and Osnabrug in Westphalia the 11th of July, N.S. or the 1st of the said month O.S. in the year 1643. The Plenipotentiary Ambassadors on the one side, and the other, duly establish'd, appearing at the prefixt time, and on the behalf of his Imperial Majesty,[another lengthy list excerpted] And by the Mediation and Interposition of the most illustrious and most excellent Ambassador and Senator of Venice, Aloysius Contarini Knight, who for the space of five Years, or thereabouts, with great Diligence, and a Spirit intirely impartial, has been inclin'd to be a Mediator in these Affairs. After having implor'd the Divine Assistance, and receiv'd a reciprocal Communication of Letters, Commissions, and full Powers, the Copys of which are inserted at the end of this Treaty, in the presence and with the consent of the Electors of the Sacred Roman Empire, the other Princes and States, to the Glory of God, and the Benefit of the Christian World, the following Articles have been agreed on and consented to, and the same run thus.
Of the things the Treaty of Westphalia does, it establishes the Trinity as the Orthodox for Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists. So, while Christendom would be divided between Catholics and Protestants, they would be united via Orthodoxy. The Ambassador from Venice, was, in theory, from the Doge of Venice, but the Doge was limited as to what the Great Council would allow. Also the temporal leader, chosen via a multiple lot system, was not of necessity an inherited position and by that multiple election system, the Doge would perform closer to something we would think of as a President or Prime Minister. Anyone who could have their estate fined after their death for a poor judgement on their leadership was not in a grand position to assert great authority. Venice, itself, had suffered intrigues against it by the Hapsburgs (Austrian and Spanish), Turks, and others and finally form an alliance with Austria and, later, Russia in 1684. It was that pressing by the various corsairs and pirates of the Ottoman Empire's outskirts (along the Barbary Coast) that made Venice interested in getting the rest of Europe at peace.
It was the work of Cardinal Mazarin, under Louis XIV of France (who was still a child, so Mazarin was running the place), that would win the final battles of exhaustion and bring the 30 Years War to an end. It is interesting that Pope Innocent X was not one offering much in the way of 'Divine Assistance' and actively protested the Treaty, but God does help those that help themselves, and Mazarin's hand seems to have been a bit more important in helping France than that of the Papal representative. Really, ending the thing would have been nearly impossible without Cardian Mazarin and his prior expertise at gambling, but the need of Venice being pressed by Islamic Pirates and getting its sea-based holding ravaged was of no small matter.... to Venice, but soon Austria, Russia, etc. The Ottoman Turks were pressing things hard and the ability to unite anyone was to the benefit of Venice. And for all of Innocent's protesting, Urban VIII had taken a hand in stirring the pot during the 30 Years War. So while Innocent X may protest the Treaty, some of the bloodshed is directly attributable to the Vatican in favoring one line over another in succession which would necessitate a Vatican based Arsenal.
So, the Treaty of Westphalia could not address the Vatican *exactly*: Pope Urban VIII who should have kept his nose out things was dead, Pope Innocent X didn't want the Treaty and Cardinal Mazarin, the de facto leader of France, was key in creating the Treaty by getting some of the last battles to go France's way thus leaving France the least of the exhausted. The English Civil War was well under way with help from the descendants of Elizabeth Stuart, and the Crown would not be re-established until after the Treaty, although by a descendant, Charles II brother of Charles I Louis, of those who had been put under Papal ban. What the Treaty did do was place just about anyone who had been directly involved, and a lot of indirect folks, too, under it.
The part that does address England is by way of what was given to Charles I Louis and the rest of the family, covered in the following paragraphs:
Further, to ease the Lord Charles Lewis, in some measure, of the trouble of providing his Brothers with Appenages, his Imperial Majesty will give order that forty thousand Rixdollars shall be paid to the said Brothers, in the four ensuing Years; the first commencing with the Year 1649. The Payment to be made of ten thousand Rixdollars yearly, with five per Cent Interest.
Further, that all the Palatinate House, with all and each of them, who are, or have in any manner adher'd to it; and above all, the Ministers who have serv'd in this Assembly, or have formerly serv'd this House; as also all those who are banish'd out of the Palatinate, shall enjoy the general Amnesty here above promis'd, with the same Rights as those who are comprehended therein, or of whom a more particular and ampler mention has been made in the Article of Grievance.
Reciprocally the Lord Charles Lewis and his Brothers shall render Obedience, and be faithful to his Imperial Majesty, like the other Electors and Princes of the Empire; and shall renounce their Pretensions to the Upper Palatinate, as well for themselves as their Heirs, whilst any Male, and lawful Heir of the Branch of William shall continue alive.
And upon the mention which has been made, to give a Dowry and a Pension to the Mother Dowager of the said Prince, and to his Sisters; his Sacred Imperial Majesty (according to the Affection he has for the Palatinate House) has promis'd to the said Dowager, for her Maintenance and Subsistence, to pay once for all twenty thousand Rixdollars; and to each of the Sisters of the said Lord Charles Lewis, when they shall marry, ten thousand Rixdollars, the said Prince Charles Lewis being bound to disburse the Overplus.
That the said Lord Charles Lewis shall give no trouble to the Counts of Leiningen and of Daxburg, nor to their Successors in the Lower Palatinate; but he shall let them peaceably enjoy the Rights obtain'd many Ages ago, and confirm'd by the Emperors.
The Mother Dowager is *still* beloved after all those years, but note that all Brothers and Sisters of Charles I Louis, namely the children of Frederick V and Elizabeth Stuart, are covered completely by the Treaty. When Charles II goes to England and restores the Crown he is *still* covered under the Treaty. The movement by Henry VIII to end the idea of State imposed religion would be continued onwards and the Treaty would add to it, even when abridged in specific circumstances, those circumstances would slowly change the view of not only England but all of Europe, but only once a state got stood up that was founded on the Westphalian premise as its basis: the United States.
Beyond just the concept of religious freedom and the slow cessation of State intervention in what is allowed to be worshipped, the Treaty of Westphalia sets standards for post-war reconciliation and manners in which to lawfully accommodate debts of war and then sets limits on what can and cannot be rightfully sought. The basic rule is: pay off your debts, seek leniency for those that cannot do so, for those whose status has suffered wholesale change do forgive those debts, and anything extracted under force is to be paid back. Also restore to those people who had positions either like positions or pensions/dowry/annual payments. For things dealing with lands or objects, bring itemized lists and settle things in court. This goes far beyond *just* the actual governments involved as seen here:
As soon as the Treaty of Peace shall be sign'd and seal'd by the Plenipotentiarys and Ambassadors, all Hostilitys shall cease, and all Partys shall study immediately to put in execution what has been agreed to; and that the same may be the better and quicker accomplish'd, the Peace shall be solemnly publish'd the day after the signing thereof in the usual form at the Cross of the Citys of Munster and of Osnabrug. That when it shall be known that the signing has been made in these two Places, divers Couriers shall presently be sent to the Generals of the Armys, to acquaint them that the Peace is concluded, and take care that the Generals chuse a Day, on which shall be made on all sides a Cessation of Arms and Hostilitys for the publishing of the Peace in the Army; and that command be given to all and each of the chief Officers Military and Civil, and to the Governors of Fortresses, to abstain for the future from all Acts of Hostility: and if it happen that any thing be attempted, or actually innovated after the said Publication, the same shall be forthwith repair'd and restor'd to its former State.
Finally, That all and every one either States, Commonaltys, or private Men, either Ecclesiastical or Secular, who by virtue of this Transaction and its general Articles, or by the express and special Disposition of any of them, are oblig'd to restore, transfer, give, do, or execute any thing, shall be bound forthwith after the Publication of the Emperor's Edicts, and after Notification given, to restore, transfer, give, do, or execute the same, without any Delay or Exception, or evading Clause either general or particular, contain'd in the precedent Amnesty, and without any Exception and Fraud as to what they are oblig'd unto.
Forgive, payoff, forget and end it in a civil way, would you? FROM NOW ONWARDS.
Now comes the truly inspired part that affects us to this very day:
That it never shall be alledg'd, allow'd, or admitted, that any Canonical or Civil Law, any general or particular Decrees of Councils, any Privileges, any Indulgences, any Edicts, any Commissions, Inhibitions, Mandates, Decrees, Rescripts, Suspensions of Law, Judgments pronounc'd at any time, Adjudications, Capitulations of the Emperor, and other Rules and Exceptions of Religious Orders, past or future Protestations, Contradictions, Appeals, Investitures, Transactions, Oaths, Renunciations, Contracts, and much less the Edict of 1629. or the Transaction of Prague, with its Appendixes, or the Concordates with the Popes, or the Interims of the Year 1548. or any other politick Statutes, or Ecclesiastical Decrees, Dispensations, Absolutions, or any other Exceptions, under what pretence or colour they can be invented; shall take place against this Convention, or any of its Clauses and Articles neither shall any inhibitory or other Processes or Commissions be ever allow'd to the Plaintiff or Defendant.
That he who by his Assistance or Counsel shall contravene this Transaction or Publick Peace, or shall oppose its Execution and the abovesaid Restitution, or who shall have endeavour'd, after the Restitution has been lawfully made, and without exceeding the manner agreed on before, without a lawful Cognizance of the Cause, and without the ordinary Course of Justice, to molest those that have been restor'd, whether Ecclesiasticks or Laymen; he shall incur the Punishment of being an Infringer of the publick Peace, and Sentence given against him according to the Constitutions of the Empire, so that the Restitution and Reparation may have its full effect.
That nevertheless the concluded Peace shall remain in force, and all Partys in this Transaction shall be oblig'd to defend and protect all and every Article of this Peace against any one, without distinction of Religion; and if it happens any point shall be violated, the Offended shall before all things exhort the Offender not to come to any Hostility, submitting the Cause to a friendly Composition, or the ordinary Proceedings of Justice.
And that the publick Peace may be so much the better preserv'd intire, the Circles shall be renew'd; and as soon as any Beginnings of Troubles are perceiv'd, that which has been concluded in the Constitutions, of the Empire, touching the Execution and Preservation of the Public Peace, shall be observ'd.
Welcome to 2008!
As Treaties pass on from mother country to colonies and those colonies which take independence upon themselves are still under such Treaties until and unless they are renounced, usually done at such time and specifically for each Treaty, I do say that there is a problem with an Ecclesiastical view that is taking place aimed at two of the descendent nations of the Treaty of Westphalia: Mexico and the United States. To wit the aid from the Vatican into Mexico to aid those seeking to disturb the Peace between Nations and the Tranquility of relations by showing no respect to the sovereignty of the Nations involved. This taken from a USA Today article of 15 APR 2008:
MEXICO CITY — The Vatican donated at least $20,000 to build a shelter for Central American immigrants traveling to the USA, angering immigration control advocates as Pope Benedict XVI begins his first official U.S. visit.
The Pontifical Commission for Latin America, which reports to the pope, sent the money in January to help the Brothers on the Path charity construct a $120,000 shelter in Ixtepec in southern Mexico, the Vatican confirmed Tuesday.
Many Catholic churches in the USA and Mexico have programs to aid immigrants, but few receive direct support from the Vatican, said Alejandro Solalinde, a priest and director of the project.
This, being an enticement and support to break the Law of Nations held between all Nations which includes the Vatican as the Papal State, and encouragement under any pretexts to break this understanding is not only against that most wide view of how Nations are to act, but is a specific abridgement forbidden under the Treaty of Westphalia of 1648. In giving aid the Public Peace is no longer being supported by the Vatican and the sovereignty of the United States and Mexico is being infringed upon by Ecclesiastical support and outlook, via the Vatican. As the United States descends via those encumbered with the perpetuity of peace and that is the same of the people of Mexico, the Vatican by aiding and abetting those breaking the peace between Nations via disregarding them is specifically going against the perpetuity of that decreed peace under which no Ecclesiastical Judgement or Decree or any view that gives aid and sanctuary to those disturbing the public peace is allowed and all citizens of those under the perpetual decree to end the 30 Years War are to uphold that Treaty via their actions, I do note that the Vatican is breaking into that public sphere between Nations and not doing its job to facilitate agreements amongst Nations but, instead, to force its view upon them.
Then there is a matter of those waging Private War upon other Nations who the US has been a target of. During military operations the US has acted under the Geneva Conventions that it has signed up to, which does not include the 1977 amendments as they go against principles established not only in the US Constitution but deriving from the Law of Nations. The Vatican used to understand what it meant to safeguard against those waging Private War without Public support from any Nation but on their own and sole behalf to attack those that they wanted without licence but with great licentiousness. One of the Orders set up by the Roman Catholic church to safeguard the seas and the safety of them, and to counter those waging Private War was the group that would come to be finally known as the Knights of Malta. While this was before the work Law of Nations was written, the general understanding of what law of nations meant had arisen with the first City States of ancient times long before Christianity, Judaism and served as a basic understanding of how to operate such States long before either. Coming from a mixed background that is half-Polish it is very painful to read this brief summary in which the current Pontiff has his views given (Source: AP via Google 15 APR 2008):
It was not the first time on the trip that the pontiff has delicately critiqued his host nation.
Speaking to his American bishops Wednesday, he said the U.S. must be welcoming to immigrants, helping them to flourish in their new homes.
Following a White House visit, a joint statement from the U.S. and the Vatican hinted that Benedict raised concerns with President Bush about punitive immigration laws. It said the leaders discussed "the need for a coordinated policy regarding immigration, especially the humane treatment of immigrants and the well-being of their families."
The statement also said Bush and Benedict "touched on the need to confront terrorism with appropriate means that respect the human person and his or her rights" — an apparent reflection of the Vatican's strong condemnation of the mistreatment of prisoners.
During Thursday's Mass, Benedict worried about divisions among Catholics, and what he called the "troubling realization" that many are not following church teaching.
There used to be a time when the Roman Catholic church recognized a difference between those waging Private War and Public War, and it is painful to see a church so distanced from that viewpoint that it begins to sound like a Leftist group backed by George Soros.
I have looked at the Geneva Conventions as the US understands them to be, and find that we are operating within them, because those waging Private War do not fall under the GC: to do so is to elevate the individual or small group up to the status of Nation, and no Treaty, no doctrine, and no teaching supports that. Looking at illegal immigration, there is one document always touted for human rights and that is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Unfortunately it is limited to Nations and to citizens of Nations who abide by the laws of their Nation and all treaties signed and covering them. Unfortunately both terrorists and illegal immigrants step away from the Universal Declaration by breaking with it in Article 30, the last article of it:
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
That article does not allow you to break the law or do anything contrary to the laws, and note that it is not delimited to Nations but goes all the way down to individuals. The remedy that has been traditional for dealing with those caught waging Private War, all the way up to the founding of the US, was execution on the battlefield or a simple trial to indicate an individual was involved in that activity and death. The United States in its wisdom started to change that outlook for that form of activity falling under Piracy and the penalty is merely life imprisonment if caught on the civil side. On the military side the standard way to deal with those out of uniform, under no Nation, waging war has been simple battlefield execution. What is being done in Guantanamo is far, far more humane than *that*, although, perhaps, less KIND.
By taking up those activities that are anathema to all Nations, these terrorists step outside of the purview of Treaties describing human rights. Further they step away from civilized warfare, and the reciprocity between Nations during conflicts. If bringing up the Knights of Malta and their work to PROTECT civil safety is disquieting, that is *good* as it reminds us that those who forego all form of civilized intercourse, all form of civilized behavior and who set themselves above all Nations and as a law unto themselves are also forgoing the protection of civilized law. They want perfect liberty to act as they will and will not hold themselves responsible to anyone save themselves. The Roman Catholic church used to understand what that meant and why safeguarding commerce and civilians was a *good thing*.
I do admire the Catholic church in many of its works: when it helps to build peace and understanding in communities, it is one of the most powerful and persuasive voices on the planet for peace.
When it forgets that it is also a State and looks to castigate other States for protecting themselves when the Church used to support doing the *exact same thing* and with good reason, I have serious problems. We cannot depend on the good will or good faith of those that have openly disdained *both* towards their fellow man. The Roman Catholic church does extreme good in conducting that understanding of how man is to comport himself in the temporal realm in ways that are lawful and peaceful. Doing more of that might help to get a further understanding to those areas of the planet that don't see law or peace as things to be upheld by ANYONE. Telling Nations to ignore their own fealty to their societies, to ignore their own safety and to start trying to embrace those that have no wish to be embraced and who, instead, seek our end, is an insult to those Nations so castigated. The US cannot take up the doctrines of a tiny land locked State protected by its neighbors, and that is small in population but rich in the wealth of its global following. And in this day in age being land locked is no longer a guarantee of safety nor, as the US has found to its sorrow, are wide and deep oceans.
The United States needs deep help in getting citizens in all Nations to understand their responsibilities to each other, their society and their Nation. The Catholic Church does a lot of heavy lifting in that area.
The US also seeks to protect its citizens, its commerce and its society from those wishing to abuse our good will, our liberty and our freedoms so as to undermine and end them.
It is sad to see that in the universal message being preached that there is no understanding of how tough that is from the Roman Catholic church which used to take that burden up centuries ago.
The freedom of worship does not come free, as the Treaty of Westphalia points out.
Nor does it come from good feelings and dissolving societies which was the *cause* of those wars due to religion.
Human rights have diminutions in liberty so that safety can be established, and when those who seek perfect liberty to put at peril the safety of others without regard to civilized norms attack, the US in taking them in, giving them shelter, giving them good food, ensuring their safety from the elements and making damned sure they can hurt no one else is doing something good: by restricting their liberty we show them the costs of having human rights and while that individual lesson may end with them at the end of their natural lives in prison, the word gets out for the church to work upon.
By our works we gained this from Westphalia:
The Polish Order of St. Benedictus and their "Martyrs of Our Times" campaign(h/t: Gatewaypundit) seem to be willing to call out those doing this.
Perhaps the Pope can look within the Church and find some wisdom there, and see the cost of not supporting those doing the putting up of the cross and only defending those doing the blowing up of the buildings and the worshippers inside.
But getting that cross to that point in Baghdad took supporting something that no one seems to want to do much, these days: support the right of individuals to worship without coercion or fear of death for doing so.
Treaty of Westphalia?
I'm worried more about what it takes to secure society to let those people to worship peaceably than what happens to those looking to kill them for doing so. And that is a very unfair position.