A57975:831
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.
But if he be a murderer of his father, who doth counsel his father to come to a place of danger, where he may be killed, and where the King ought not to be, as Abner was worthy of death, who watched not carefully King Saul, but slept when David came to his bed side, and had opportunity to kill the King, they are Traitors and murderers of the King, who either counselled his Majesty to come to Edge-hill, where the danger was so great, or did not violently restrain him from coming thither, seeing Kings safety and lives are as much, yea more in the disposing of the people then in their own private will, 2 Sam. 18.2, 3. for certainly the people might have violently restrained King Saul from killing himself, and the King was guilty of his own death, and sinneth against his Office and subjects, who cometh out in person to any such battles where he may be killed, and the contrary party free of his blood. And here our Prelate is blind, if he see not the clear difference between the Kings Person, and the Office as he is King, and between his private Will, and his public and Royal Will. 3. The Angels may be named Thrones and Dominions in abstracto, and yet created, in concreto, and we may say the Angel and his power are both created at once; but David was not both borne the Son of Jesse, and a King at once: and the P. Prelate, by this may prove it is not lawful to resist the Devil (for he is of the number of these created Angels, Col. 1.) as he is a Devil, because in resisting the Devil as a Devil, we must resist an Angel of God, and a Principality. 4. To speak ill of dignities, 2 Pet. 2. and Jud. 8. Piscator insinuateth is, to speak evil of the very Office of Rulers, as well as of their manners▪ and Theodat. saith, on 2 Pet. 2. that these Railers spake evil of the place of Governors and Masters, as unbeseeming believers. All our Interpreters, as Beza, Calvin, Luther, Bucer, Marloratus from the place saith, It is a special reproof of Anabaptists and Libertines, who in that time maintained, that we are all free men in Christ, and that there should not be Kings, Masters, nor any Magistrates; however the abstract is put for the concrete, ⟨p. 274⟩