A57975:332
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.
3 Arg. If the people as Gods instruments,1 bestow the benefit of a Crown on their King, upon condition that he will rule them according to Gods word; then is the King made King by the people conditionally: but the former is true; Ergo, so is the latter. The assumption is proved thus: because to be a King, is to be an adopted father, tutor, a Politic servant and Royal watchman of the State; and the Royal honour, and Royal maintenance given to him, is a reward of his labours, and a Kingly hire. And this is the Apostles argument, Rom. 13.6. For this cause pay you tribute also; (there is the wages) for they are Gods ministers, attending continually upon this very thing; There is the work. Qui non implet conditionem à see promissam, cadit beneficio. It is confirmed thus. The people either maketh the man their Prince conditionally, that he rule according to Law; or absolutely, so that he rule according to will or lust: or, 3. without any vocal transactions at all, but only brevi manu, say, Reign thou over us, and, (God save the King.) And so there be no conditions spoken on either side; Or, 4. The King is obliged to God for the condition which he promiseth by oath to perform toward the people; but he is to make no reckoning to the people, whether he perform his promise or no; for the people being inferior ⟨p. 106⟩to him, and he, solo Deo minor, only next and immediate to God, the people can have no jus, no law over him by virtue of any covenant. But the first standing, we have what we seek; The second is contrary to Scripture. He is not Deut. 17.15, 16. made absolutely a King to rule according to his will and lust; for, [Reign thou over us] should have this meaning; Come thou and play the Tyrant over us, and let thy lust and will be a law to us: which is against natural sense: nor can the sense and meaning be according to the third, That the people without any express, vocal, and positive covenant, give a Throne to their King to rule as he pleaseth; because, 1. it is a vain thing for the Prelate and other Mancipia Aulae, Court-bellies, to say Scotland and England must produce a written authentic covenant betwixt the first King and their People, because, say they, its the Laws word, De non apparentibus & non existentibus eadem lex; that covenant which appeareth not, it is not.