A57975:172
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.
Answ. Begin with the Law, but end not with Traditions. If God by himself prescribed the essentials of piety and worship, the other ⟨p. 22⟩part of your distinction is, that God not by himself, but by his Prelates, appointed the whole Romish Rites, as accidentals of piety. This is the Jesuits doctrine. 2. This place is so far from proving the King to be independent, and that it totally is Gods to appoint a King, that it expressly giveth the people power to appoint a King: for the setting of a King over themselves, such a one, and not such a one, makes the people to appoint the King, and the King to be less and dependent on the people, seeing God intendeth the King for the peoples good, and not the people for the Kings good. This text shameth the Prelate, who also confessed, P. 22. That remotely and unproperly succession, election, and conquest maketh the King, and so its lawful for men remotely and improperly to invade Gods chair.
Answ. Begin with the Law, but end not with Traditions. If God by himselfe prescribed the essentialls of pietie and worship, the other ⟨p. 22⟩part of your distinction is, that God not by himself, but by his Prelates, appointed the whole Romish Rites, as accidentalls of pietie. This is the Iesuites doctrine. 2. This place is so far from proving the King to be independent, and that it totally is Gods to appoint a King, that it expresly giveth the people power to appoint a King: for the setting of a King over themselves, such a one, and not such a one, makes the people to appoint the King, and the King to be lesse and dependent on the people, seeing God intendeth the King for the peoples good, and not the people for the Kings good. This text shameth the Prelate, who also confessed, P. 22. That remotely and unproperly succession, election, and conquest maketh the King, and so its lawfull for men remotely and improperly to invade Gods chaire.
P. Prelate: Jesuits and Puritans say, it was a privilege of the Jews that God chose their King. So Suarez, Soto, Navarra.