A57975:448
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.
2. The power of a part, and the power of the whole is not alike. Royalty never advanceth the King above the place of a member: And Lawyers say, The King is above the subjects, in sensu diviso, in a divisive sense he is above this or that subject: but he is inferior to all the subjects collectively taken, because he is for the whole Kingdom, as a mean for the end. Object. If this be a good reason, that he is a mean for the whole Kingdom, as for the end; that he is therefore inferior to the whole Kingdom: then is he also inferior to any one subject; for he is a mean for the safety of every subject, as for the whole Kingdom. Answ. Every mean is inferior to its complete, adequate and whole end: and such an end is the whole Kingdom ⟨p. 158⟩in relation to the King: but every man is not always inferior to its incomplete, inadequate and partial end. This or that subject is not adequate, but the inadequate and incomplete end in relation to the King. The Prelate saith, Kings are Dii Elohim, Gods; and the manner of their propagation is by filiation, 1by adoption, sons of the most high, and Gods first borne. Now the first borne is not above every brother severally: 2but if there were thousands, millions, numberless numbers, he is above all in precedency and power. Answ. Not only Kings, but all inferior Judges are Gods, Psal. 82. God standeth in the congregation of the Gods, that is not a congregation of Kings. So Exo. 22.8. the master of the house shall be brought, [Greek or Hebrew] to the Gods, or to the Judges. And that there were more Judges then one, is clear by vers. 9. and if they shall condemn [Greek or Hebrew] jarshignur, condemnarint, Joh. 10.35. [Greek or Hebrew], He called them Gods. Exod. 4.16. Thou shalt be to Aaron [Greek or Hebrew] as a God. They are Gods analogically only. God is infinite, not so the King. 2. Gods will is a law, not so the Kings. 3. God is an end to himself, not so the King.