A57975:551
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.
Obj. 2. It seemeth, 1 Pet. 2.18, 19. if well doing be mistaken by the reason and judgement of an absolute Monarch for ill doing, and we punished, yet the Magistrates will is the command of a reasonable will, and so to be submitted unto, because such a one suffereth by Law, ⟨p. 201⟩where the Monarchs Will is a Law, and in this case some power must judge. Now in an absolute Monarchy all judgement resolveth in the Will of the Monarch, as the supreme Law: and if Ancestors have submitted themselves by Oath, there is no repeal, or redresment.
Obj. 2. It sesmeth, 1 Pet. 2.18, 19. if well doing be mistaken by the reason and judgement of an absolute Monarch for ill doing, and we punished, yet the Magistrates will is the command of a reasonable will, and so to be submitted unto, because such a one suffereth by Law, ⟨p. 201⟩where the Monarches Will is a Law, and in this case some power must judge. Now in an absolute Monarchy all judgement resolveth in the Will of the Monarch, as the supreame Law: and if Ancestors have submitted themselves by Oath, there is no repeale, or redresment.
Ans. Who ever was the Author of this Treatise, he is a bad defender of the defensive wars in England, for all the lawfulness of wars then must depend on this. 1. Whether England be a conquered Nation at the beginning? 2. If the Law-will of an absolute Monarch, or a Nero be a reasonable Will, to which we must submit in suffering ill, I see not but we must submit to a reasonable will; if it be reasonable will in doing ill, no less then in suffering ill. 3. Absolute Will in absolute Monarchs is no Judge De jure, but an unlawful and a usurping Judge. 4. 1 Pet. 2.18, 19. Servants are not commanded simply to suffer (I can prove suffering formally not to fall under any Law of God, but only patient suffering. I except Christ, who was under a peculiar commandment to suffer.) But servants,