A57975:533
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.
4. That which is the garland and proper flower of the King of Kings, as he is absolute above his creatures, and not tied to any law,1 without himself, that regulateth his will; That must be given to no mortal man, or King, except we would communicate that which is Gods proper due, to a sinful man; which must be idolatry. But to do Royal acts out of an absolute power above Law and Reason, is such a power as agreeth to God, as is evident in positive laws, and in acts of Gods mere pleasure, where we see no reason without the Almighty, for the one side, rather than for the other; as Gods forbidding the eating of the tree of knowledge, maketh the eating, sin, and contrary to reason;2 but there is no reason in the object: for if God should command eating of that tree, not to eat, should be also sin. So Gods choosing Peter to glory, and his refusing Judas, is a good and a wise act, but not good or wise from the object of the act, but from the sole wise pleasure of God; because, if God had chosen Judas to glory, and rejected Peter, that act had been no less a good and a wise act, then the former. For when there ⟨p. 194⟩is no law in the object, but only Gods will, the act i• good and wise, seeing infinite wisdom cannot be separated from the perfect will of God: but no act of a mortal King, having sole and only will, and neither law nor reason in it, can be a lawful, a wise, or a good act.
4. That which is the garland and proper flower of the King of Kings, as he is absolute above his creatures, and not tyed to any law,1 without himselfe, that regulateth his will; That must be given to no mortall man, or King, except we would communicate that which is Gods proper due, to a sinfull man; which must be idolatrie. But to doe Royall acts out of an absolute power above Law and Reason, is such a power as agreeth to God, as is evident in positive lawes, and in acts of Gods meere pleasure, where we see no reason without the Almightie, for the one side, rather than for the other; as Gods forbidding the eating of the tree of knowledge, maketh the eating, sinne, and contrary to reason;