A57975:87
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. XI. Whether or no, he be more principally a King, who is a King by birth, or he who is a King by the free election of the people? Affir. posterius, pag. 79. The Elective King cometh nearer to the first King. Deut. 17. pag. 80. If the people may limit the King, they give him the power. ibid. A Community have not power formally to punish themselves. pag. 81. The Hereditary and the elective Prince in divers considerations better, or worse, each one then another. pag. 82.
QUEST. XI. Whether or no, he be more principally a King, who is a King by birth, or he who is a King by the free election of the people? Affir. posterius, pag. 79. The Elective King commeth nearer to the first King. Deut. 17. pag. 80. If the people may limit the King, they give him the power. ibid. A Community have not power formally to punish themselves. pag. 81. The Hereditary and the elective Prince in divers considerations better, or worse, each one then another. pag. 82.
QUEST. XII. Whether or no a Kingdom may lawfully be purchased by the sole Title of Conquest. Negatur. pag. 82. 7. Argu. for the nega• ▪ a twofold right of conquest. ibid. Conquest turned in an after-consent of the people, becometh a just title. pag. 83. Conquest not a signification to us of Gods approving will. pag. 84. Mere violent domineering contrary to the acts of governing. ibid. ⟨image 13⟩Violence hath nothing in it of a King. ibid. A bloody Conqueror not a blessing, per se, as a King is, pag. 85. Strength as prevailing is not Law or reason. pag. 86 Fathers cannot dispone of the liberty of posterity not borne. ibid. A father as a father hath not power of life and death. pag. 87. Israels and Davids Conquests of the Canaanites, Edomites, Ammonites not lawful, because conquest, but upon a Divine title of Gods promise. pag. 88.89.