A92147:1126
A treatise of civil policy
A treatise of civil policy: being a resolution of forty three questions concerning prerogative, right and privilege, in reference to the supreme prince and the people. / By Samuel Rutherford professor of divinity of St Andrews in Scotland.A treatise of civil policy: being a resolution of forty three questions concerning prerogative, right and priviledge, in reference to the supream prince and the people. / By Samuel Rutherford professor of divintiy of St Andrews in Scotland.
London, : Printed and are to be sold by Simon Miller at the Star in St Pauls Church-yard near the West end., 1657 i.e. 1656
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.
Arnisaeus saith in the council of Toledo 4. c. 74. The subjects ask from the King, that Kings would be meek and just, not upon the ground of a voluntary Contract and Paction, but because God shall rejoice in King and People, by so doing.
Arnisaeus saith in the councell of Toledo 4. c. 74. The subjects ask from the King, that Kings would be meek and just, not upon the ground of a voluntarie Contract and Paction, but because God shall rejoice in King and People, by so doing.
Answ. These two do no more fight one with another, then that two Merchants should keep faith one to another, both because God hath said he shall dwell in Gods mountain who sweareth and covenanteth, and standeth to his oath & covenant, though to his loss & hurt, Psa. 15. and also, because they made their covenant and contract thus and thus.
Answ. These two do no more fight one with another, then that two Marchants should keep faith one to another, both because God hath said he shall dwell in Gods mountaine who sweareth and covenanteth, and standeth to his oath & covenant, though to his losse & hurt, Psa. 15. and also, because they made their covenant and contract thus and thus.
Arnisaeus. 16. Every Prince is subject to God, but not as a vassal: for a Master may commit felony, and lose the propriety of his farm; can God do so? The Master cannot take the farm from the vassal without an express cause legally deduced, but cannot God take what he hath given, but by a law-Process? a vassal can entitle to himself a farm against the Masters will, as some jurists say, but can a Prince entitle a kingdom to himself, against the God of heavens will? though we grant the comparison, yet the subjects have no law over the Kings, because the coercive power of the vassal is in the Lord of the manor, the punishing of Kings belongeth to God.