A92147:1265
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.
3. There is not any Absoluteness above Law in the Act. 1. The Parliament must be more absolute themselves. King James 6. had been divers years before this 18. Parl. King of Scotland; then if they gave him by Law an Absoluteness, which he had not before, then they were more Absolute. These who can add Absoluteness, must have it in themselves, Nemo dat quod non habet, if it be said, King James had that before the Act, the Parliament legally declared it to be his power, which before the Declaration, was his power. I answer, All he had before this Declaration was, to govern the people according to Law and Conscience, and no more; and if they declare no other Prerogative Royal to be due to him, there is an end, we grant all. But then this which they call Prerogative Royal is no more, then, a power to govern according to Law, and so you add nothing to King James, upon the ground of his personal virtues, only you make an oration to his praise in the Acts of Parliament.
3. There is not any Absolutenesse above Law in the Act. 1. The Parliament must be more absolute themselves. King James 6. had been divers yeers before this 18. Parl. King of Scotland; then if they gave him by Law an Absolutenesse, which he had not before, then they were more Absolute. These who can adde Absolutenesse, must have it in themselves, Nemo dat quod non habet, if it be said, King James had that before the Act, the Parliament legally declared it to be his power, which before the Declaration, was his power. I answer, All he had before this Declaration was, to govern the people according to Law and Conscience, and no more; and if they declare no other Prerogative Royall to be due to him, there is an end, we grant all. But then this which they call Prerogative Royall is no more, then, a power to govern according to Law, and so you adde nothing to King James, upon the ground of his personall vertues, onely you make an oration to his praise in the Acts of Parliament.
4. If this Absoluteness of Prerogative, be given to the King, the subjects swearing obedience, swear, That he hath power from themselves, to destroy themselves: this is neither a lawful oath, nor though they should swear it, doth it oblige them.