A92147:1269
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.
7. Supreme Judge in all causes, cannot be taken Quoad actus elicitos, as if the King were to judge between two Sea-men, or two Husband-men, or two Trades-men, in that which is proper to their Art; or between two Painters: certainly the King is not to Judge which of the two draweth the fairest Picture, but which of the two wasteth most gold on his Picture, and so doth interest most of the Common-wealth. So the King cannot judge in all Ecclesiastical Causes, that is, he cannot, Quoad actos elicitos, prescribe this Worship: for example, the Mass, not the Sacrament of the Lords Supper. Therefore the King hath but Actus imperatos, some Royal Political Acts about the Worship of God to command God to be Worshipped according to his Word, to punish the superstitions or neglectors of Divine Worship; therefore cannot the King be sole Judge in matters that belong to the College of Judges by the Laws of Scotland, the Lords of Session only may judge these matters. K. James, 1. Parl. 2. Act. 45. K. James 3. Par. 8. Act. 62. K. James 3. Par. 4. Act. 105. K. I. 1. Parl. 6. Act. 83. K. I. 1. Par. 6 Act. 86. K. I. 5. Par. 7. Act. 104. and that only according to Law, without any remedy of appellation to King or the Parliament, Act 62, and 63. Par. 14. K. I. 2. And the King is by Act of Parliament inhibited to send any private letter to stay the Acts of Justice; or if any such letter be procured, the Judges are not to acknowledge it, as the Kings Will, for they are to proceed unpartially according to Justice, and are to make the Law, which is the King and Parliaments public revealed will, their rule, King I. 5. Parl. 5. Act. 68. K. Ja. 6. Part. 8. Act. 139. and K. I. 6. Par. 6. Act. 92. most lawful. Nor may the Lords suspend the course of Justice, or the sentence or execution of Decrees upon the Kings private letter. King I. 6. Parl. 11. Act 79. and K. Jam. 6. Par. 11. Act 47. and so if the Kings Will or desire, as he is a man, be opposite to his Law, and his Will as King, it is not to be regarded. This is a strong Argument, that the Parliaments never made the King supreme Judge, Quoad actus elicitos, in all causes, nay not if the King have a Cause of his own that concerneth Lands of the Crown; far less can the King have a will of Prerogative above the Law by our Laws of Scotland: ⟨p. 439⟩