A57975:156
Lex, Rex
Lex, rex The law and the prince : a dispute for the just prerogative of king and people : containing the reasons and causes of the most necessary defensive wars of the kingdom of Scotland and of their expedition for the aid and help of their dear brethren of England : in which their innocency is asserted and a full answer is given to a seditious pamphlet entitled Sacro-sancta regum majestas, or, The sacred and royal prerogative of Christian kings, under the name of J. A. but penned by Jo. Maxwell the excommunicate P. Prelate. : with a scriptural confutation of the ruinous grounds of W. Barclay, H. Grotius, H. Arnisœus, Ant. de Domi P. Bishop of Spalata, and of other late anti-magistratical royalists, as the author of Ossorianum, D. Fern, E. Symmons, the doctors of Aberdeen, &c. : in XLIV questions.Lex, rex The law and the prince : a dispute for the just prerogative of king and people : containing the reasons and causes of the most necessary defensive wars of the kingdom of Scotland and of their expedition for the ayd and help of their dear brethren of England : in which their innocency is asserted and a full answer is given to a seditious pamphlet intituled Sacro-sancta regum majestas, or, The sacred and royall prerogative of Christian kings, under the name of J. A. but penned by Jo. Maxwell the excommunicate P. Prelat. : with a scripturall confutation of the ruinous grounds of W. Barclay, H. Grotius, H. Arnisœus, Ant. de Domi P. Bishop of Spalata, and of other late anti-magistratical royalists, as the author of Ossorianum, D. Fern, E. Symmons, the doctors of Aberdeen, &c. : in XLIV questions.
London: printed for John Field, 1644London: printed for Iohn Field, 1644
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
I see no reason why (b)Barclaius should here distinguish a power of choosing a King, which he granteth the people hath, and a power of making a King, which he saith is only proper to God. Answ. Choosing of a King is either a comparative crowning of this man,2 not this man; and if the people have this, its a creating of a King under God ▪ who principally disposeth of Kings and Kingdoms: and this is enough for us. The want of this, made Zimri no King: and those whom the Rulers of Jezreel at Samaria, 2 King. 10. refused to make Kings, no Kings. This election of the people made Athaliah a Princess: the removal of it, and translation of the crown by the people ⟨p. 14⟩to Joash, made her no Princess: for I beseech you, what other calling of God hath a race of a family, and a person to the crown, but only the election of the States? There is now no voice from heaven, no immediately inspired Prophets, such as Samuel and Elisha, to anoint David, not Eliab; Solomon, not Adoniah. The [Greek or Hebrew] or the heroic spirit of a Royal faculty of governing, is, I grant, from God only, not from the people: but I suppose that maketh not a King; for then many sitting on the throne this day, should be no Kings; and many private persons should be Kings. If he mean by the peoples choosing, nothing but the peoples approbative consent, posterior to Gods act of creating a King; let them show us an act of God making Kings, and establishing royal power in such a family, rather then in such a family; which is prior to the peoples consent, distinct from the peoples consent, I believe there is none at all.
I see no reason why (b)Barclaius should here distinguish a power of choosing a King, which he granteth the people hath, and a power of making a King, which he saith is only proper to God. Answ. Choosing of a King is either a comparative crowning of this man,2