A92147:132
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.
QUEST. XXIX. Whether in the case of defensive War, the distinction of the Person of the King as a man, who may, and can commit hostile acts of tyranny against his subjects, and of the Office and Royal Power that he hath from God and the people, can have place? Affirmatur. p. 265. The Kings Person in concreto, and his Office in abstracto, or which is all one, the King using his Power lawfully, to be distinguished, Rom. 13. p. 265. To command unjustly maketh not a higher power. p. 265. 266. The person may be resisted, and yet the Office cannot be resisted, proved by fourteen Arguments, p. 265, 266. seq. Contrary Objections of Royalists, and of the P. Prelate answered, p. 270, 271. seq. What we mean by the person and Office in abstracto in this dispute, we do not exclude the person in concreto altogether, but only the person as abusing his power, we may kill a person as a man, and love him as a son, father, wife, according to Scripture, p. 272, 273, 274. We obey the King for the Law, and not the Law for the King, p. 275, 276. The loosing of habitual and actual Royalty different, p. 276. Joh. 19. 10. Pilates power of crucifying Christ, no Law-power given to him of God, its proved against Royalists by six Arguments, p. 280.
QUEST. XXIX. Whether in the case of defensive War, the distinction of the Person of the King as a man, who may, and can commit hostile acts of tyranny against his subjects, and of the Office and Royall Power that he hath from God and the people, can have place? Affirmatur. p. 265. The Kings Person in concreto, and his Office in abstracto, or which is all one, the King using his Power lawfully, to be distinguished, Rom. 13. p. 265. To command unjustly maketh not a higher power. p. 265. 266. The person may be resisted, and yet the Office cannot be resisted, prooved by fourteene Arguments, p. 265, 266. seq. Contrary Objections of Royalists, and of the P. Prelate answered, p. 270, 271. seq. What we meane by the person and Office in abstracto in this dispute, we doe not exclude the person in concreto altogether, but only the person as abusing his power, we may kill a person as a man, and love him as a sonne, father, wife, according to Scripture, p. 272, 273, 274. We obey the King for the Law, and not the Law for the King, p. 275, 276. The loosing of habituall and actuall Royalty different, p. 276.