A57975:323
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.
and therefore there is no need of an earthly Ruler higher then both, to compel both.
and therefore there is no need of an earthly Ruler higher then both, to compell both.
3 Assert. We shall hereafter prove the power of the people above the King, God willing. And so it is false that there is not mutual coactive power on each side.
3 Assert. We shall hereafter prove the power of the people above the King, God willing. And so it is false that there is not mutuall coactive power on each side.
4 Assert. The obligation of the King in this covenant, floweth from the peculiar obligation national betwixt the King and the Estates, and it bindeth the King, as King, 1and not simply as he is a man. 1. Because it is a covenant betwixt the people and David, not as he is the son of Jesse, for then it should oblige Eliab, or any other of Davids brethren; yea, it should oblige any man, if it oblige David as a man: but it obligeth David as a King, or as he is to be their King, because it is the specifice act of a King, that he is obliged unto, to wit, to govern the people in Righteousness and Religion with his Royal power. And so it is false that Arnisaeus saith, that the King, as a man, is obliged to God by this covenant, not as a King. 2. He saith, by covenant the King is bound to God as a Man, not as a King. But so the man will have the King, as King, under no law of God, and so he must either be above God, as King, or coequal with God; which are manifest blasphemies: for I thought ever, the Royalists had not denied, but the King, as King, had been obliged to keep his oath to his subjects, in relation to God, and in regard of natural obligation; so as he sinneth before God, if he break his covenant with his people: