A57975:85
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. IX. Whether or no, Sovereignty is so in and from the people, that they may resume their power in time of extreme necessity? Negatur. pag. 58. How the people is the subject of Sovereignty, Ibid. No Tyrannical power is from God, P. 59. People cannot alienate the natural power of self-defence, Ibid. The power of Parliaments, P. 60. The Parliament hath more power then the King, Ibid. Judges and Kings differ, P. 61. People may resume their power, not because they are infallible, but because they cannot so readily destroy themselves, as one man may do, P. 63. That the Sanhedrin punished not David, Bathsheba, Joab, is but a fact, not a law, P. 63, 64. There is a subordination of Creatures natural, Government must be natural; and yet this, or that form, is voluntary, P. 65, 66, 67.
QUEST. IX. Whether or no, Soveraigntie is so in and from the people, that they may resume their power in time of extreme necessity? Negatur. pag. 58. How the people is the subject of Soveraignty, Ibid. No Tyrannicall power is from God, P. 59. People cannot alienate the naturall power of self-defence, Ibid. The power of Parliaments, P. 60. The Parliament hath more power then the King, Ibid. Judges and Kings differ, P. 61. People may resume their power, not because they are infallible, but because they cannot so readily destroy themselves, as one man may do, P. 63. That the San•drim punished not David, Bathsheba, Joab, is but a fact, not a law, P. 63, 64. There is a subordination of Creatures naturall, Government must be naturall; and yet this, or that form, is voluntary, P. 65, 66, 67.
QUEST. X. Whether or not Royal birth be equivalent to Divine Unction? Negatur. pag. 68. Impugned by eight Arguments. Ibid. Royalty not transmitted from father to son. ibid. A family may be chosen to a Crown as a single person is chosen, but the tie is conditional in both. pag. 68.69. The Throne by special promise made to David and his seed, by God,