A57975:80
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.
QUEST. IV. Whether or no, the King be only and immediately from God, and not from the people? Prius distinguitur, posterius prorsus Negatur, pag. 5. How the King is from God, how from the people, Ibid. Royal Power three ways in the people, P. 6, 10. How Royal Power is radically in the people, P. 7. The people maketh the King, Ibid. How any form of Government is from God, P. 8. How Government is a humane ordinance, 1 Pet. 2.3. P. 8, 9. The people create the King, P. 10, 11. Making a King, and choosing a King, not to be distinguished, P. 12▪ 13. David not a King formally, because anointed by God, P. 14, 15.
QUEST. IV. Whether or no, the King be onely and immediately from God, and not from the people? Prius distinguitur, posterius prorsus Negatur, pag. 5. How the King is from God, how from the people, Ibid. Royall Power three wayes in the people, P. 6, 10. How Royall Power is radically in the people, P. 7. The people mak•th the King, Ibid. How any form of Government is from God, P. 8. How Government is a humane ordinance, 1 Pet. 2.3. P. 8, 9. The people creat the King, P. 10, 11. Making a King, and choosing a King, not to be distinguished, P. 12▪ 13. David not a King formally, because anointed by God, P. 14, 15.
QUEST. V. Whether or no, the P. P. proveth, that Sovereignty is immediately from God, not from the people? p. 16. Kings made by the people, though the Office, in abstracto, were immediately from God, P. 16. The people have a real action, more then approbation in making a King, P. 19, Kinging of a person ascribed to the people, P. 20. Kings in a special manner, are from God, but it followeth not: Ergo, not from the people, P. 21. The place,