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.
Samuel Rutherford 1600?–1661London, : 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
[34], 438 p. · 210k words · Wing R2396 · ESTC R207911
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.
for if the people have no power to make a King, but do only approve him, or consent to him, when he is both made and designed of God to be King, it is not in their power that he be either brother or stranger, and so God commandeth what is simply impossible. 2. Consider the ⟨p. 30⟩sense of the command by the Prelates vain Logic: I Jehovah, as I only create the world of nothing, so I only constitute and design a man, whether Jew, or Nebuchadnezzar a stranger to be your King; yet I inhibit you under the pain of my curse, that you set any King over your selves, but only a brother. What is this, but I inhibit you to be creators by omnipotent power? 5. To these add the reasons I produced before, that the people by no shadow of reason can be commanded to make such a man King, not such a man, if they only consent to the man made King, but have no action in the making of the King.
for if the people have no power to make a King, but doe only approve him, or consent to him, when he is both made and designed of God to be King, it is not in their power that he be either brother or stranger, and so God commandeth what is simply impossible. 2. Consider the ⟨p. 30⟩sense of the command by the Prelates vaine Logick: I Iehovah, as I only create the world of nothing, so I only constitute and designe a man, whether Iew, or Nebuchadnezzar a stranger to be your King; yet I inhibit you under the pain of my curse, that you set any King over your selves, but only a brother. What is this, but I inhibite you to be creators by omnipotent power? 5. To these adde the reasons I produced before, that the people by no shadow of reason can be commanded to make such a man King, not such a man, if they only consent to the man made King, but have no action in the making of the King.
. Behold the King whom you have chosen and desired, and behold the Lord hath set a King over you. This election of the people can be no other but their admittance or acceptance of the King whom God hath chosen and constituted, as the words, whom ye have chosen, imply,
. You have Sauls election and constitution, where Samuel as Priest and Prophet anointeth him, doing reverence and obeisance to him, and ascribing to God, that he did appoint him supreme and Sovereign over his inheritance. And the same expression is,
. The Lord vindicateth as proper and peculiar to himself, the designation of the person. It was not arbitrary to the people to admit or reject Saul so designed; it pleased God to consummate the work by the acceptation, consent and approbation of the people▪ ut suaviore modo, that by a smoother way he might encourage Saul to undergo the hard charge, and make his people the more heartily, without grumbling and scruple, reverence and obey him. The peoples admittance possibly added something to the solemnity, to the pomp, but nothing to the essential and real constitution or necessity; it only puts the subjects in mala fide, if they should contravene, as the intimation of a Law, the coronation of an hereditary King, the enthronization of a Bishop. And,
. the first borne is above every brother severally, and above all, though a thousand jointly.
P. Prelate. All the acts reall and imaginable, which are necessary for the making of Kings, are ascribed to God: Take the first King as a ruling case, 1 Sam. 12. 13. Behold the King whom you have chosen and desired, and behold the Lord hath set a King over you. This election of the people can be no other but their admittance or acceptance of the King whom God hath chosen and constituted, as the words, whom ye have chosen, imply, 1 Sam. 9. 17. 1 Sam. 10. 1. You have Sauls election and constitution, where Samuel as Priest and Prophet anointeth him, doing reverence and obeysance to him, and ascribing to God, that he did appoint him supreame and Soveraigne over his inheritance. And the same expression is, 1 Sam. 12. 13. The Lord hath set a King over you: which is Psal. 2. 6. I have set my King upon my holy hill of Zion. Neither man nor Angel hath any share in any act of constituting Christ King, Deut. 17. The Lord vindicateth as proper and peculiar to himselfe, the designation of the person. It was not arbitrary to the people to admit or reject Saul so designed; it pleased God to consummate the worke by the acceptation, consent and approbation of the people▪ ut suaviore modo, that by a smoother way he might incourage Saul to undergoe the hard charge, and make his people the more heartily•, without grumbling and scruple, reverence and obey him. The peoples admittance possibly added something to the solemnitie, to the pompe, but nothing to the essentiall and reall constitution or necessitie; it only puts the subjects in mala fide, if they should contraveen, as the intimation of a Law, the coronation of an hereditary King, the inthronization of a Bishop. And, 1 King. 3. 7. Thou hast made thy servant King, 1 Sam. 16. 1. I have provided me a King, Psal. 18. 50. He is Gods King, Psal. 89. 19. I have exalted one chosen out of the people, v. 20. He anointeth them, 27. adopteth them. I will make him my first borne, Psal. 82. 6. the first borne is above every brother severally, and above all, though a thousand joyntly.
Answ. 1. By this reason, inferior Judges are no less immediate ⟨p. 31⟩Deputies of God, and so irresistible, then the Kings, because God took off the spirit that was on Moses, and immediately poured it upon the seventy Elders, who were Judges inferior to Moses, Num. 11. 14. 15. 16. Answ. 2. This P. P. cannot make a Syllogism: If all the acts necessary to make a King, be given to God, none to the people; then God both constituteth and designeth the King. But the former the Scripture saith, ergo, if all the acts be given to God, as to the prime King-maker, and disposer of Kings and Kingdoms, and none to the people in that notion, then God both constituteth and designeth a King. Both major and minor is false. The major is as false as the very P. Prelate himself. All the acts necessary for war making, are in an eminent manner given to God, as 1. the Lord fighteth for his people. 2. The Lord scattered the enemies. 3. The Lord slew Og King of Bashan. 4. The battle is the Lords. 5. The victory the Lords; ergo, Israel never fought a battle. So Deut. 32. The Lord alone led his people; the Lord led them in the wilderness; their bow and their sword gave them not the land: God wrought all their works for them, Esa 26. 12. ergo, Moses led them not; ergo, the people went not on their own legs through the wilderness; ergo, the people never shot an arrow, never drew a sword. It followeth not. 1. God did all these as the first, eminent, principal and efficacious pre-determinator of the creature, (though this Arminian and Popish Prelate mind not so to honour God.) 2. The assumption is also false; for the people made Saul and David Kings; and it were1 ridiculous, that God should command them to make a brother, not a stranger King, if it was not in their power whether he should be a Jew, a Scythian, an Ethiopian, who was their King, if God did only without them both choose, 2. constitute, 3. design the person, and perform all acts essential to make a King, and the people had no more in them but only to admit and consent, and that for the solemnity and pomp, not for the essential constitution of the King. 3. 1 Sam. 9. 17. 1 Sam. 10. 1. we have not Saul elected and constituted king, and Samuel did obeisance to him and kissed him, for the honour Royal which God was to put upon him: for before this prophetical unction, 1 Sam. 9. 22.
Answ. 1. By this reason, inferiour Iudges are no lesse immediate ⟨p. 31⟩Deputies of God, and so irresistible, then the Kings, because God took off the spirit that was on Moses, and immediately powred it upon the seventy Elders, who were Iudges inferiour to Moses, Num. 11. 14. 15. 16. Answ. 2. This P. P. cannot make a Syllogisme: If all the acts necessary to make a King, be given to God, none to the people; then God both constituteth and designeth the King. But the former the Scripture saith, ergo, if all the acts be given to God, as to the prime King-mak•r, and disposer of Kings and Kingdoms, and none to the people in that notion, then God both constituteth and designeth a King. Both major and minor is false. The major is as false as the very P. Prelate himselfe. All the acts necessary for warmaking, are in an eminent manner given to God, as 1. the Lord fighteth for his people. 2. The Lord scattered the enemies. 3. The Lord slew Og King of Bashan. 4. The battell is the Lords. 5. The victorie the Lords; ergo, Israel never fought a battell. So Deut. 32. The Lord alone led his people; the Lord led them in the wildernesse; their bow and their sword gave them not the land: God wrought all their workes for them, Esa 26. 12. ergo, Moses led them not; ergo, the people went not on their own leggs through the wildernesse; ergo, the people never shot an arrow, never drew a sword. It followeth not. 1. God did all these as the first, eminent, principall and efficacious pre-determinator of the creature, (though this Arminian and Popish Prelate mind not so to honour God.) 2. The assumption is also false; for the people made Saul and David Kings; and it were1 ridiculous, that God should command them to make a brother, not a stranger King, if it was not in their power whether he should be a Iew, a Scythian, an Ethiopian, who was their King, if God did only without them both choose, 2. constitute, 3. designe the person, and performe all acts essentiall to make a King, and the people had no more in them but only to admit and consent, and that for the solemnitie and pompe, not for the essentiall constitution of the King. 3. 1 Sam. 9. 17. 1 Sam. 10. 1. we have not Saul elected and constituted king, and Samuel did obeysance to him and kissed him, for the honor Royall which God was to put upon him: for before this propheticall unction,
1That Kings in an eminent act of divine providence, have their crowns from God, hindereth not but they have their crowns from the people also.That Kings in an eminent act of divine providence, have their crownes from God, hindreth not but they have their crownes from the people also.
he made him sit in the chief place, and honoured him as king, when as yet Samuel was materially King, and the Lords Vicegerent in Israel. If then the Prelate conclude any thing from Samuel his doing reverence and obeisance to him as King, it shall follow that Saul was formally King, before Samuel, 1 Sam. 10. 1. anointed him, and kissed him; and that must be before he ⟨p. 32⟩he was formally King, otherwise he was in Gods appointment King, before ever he saw Samuel's face; and it is true, he ascribeth honour to him, as to one appointed by God to be supreme Sovereign, for that which he should be, not for that which he was, as c. 9. 22. he set him in the chiefest place, and therefore it is false, that we have Sauls election and constitution to be King, 1 Sam. 10. for after that time the people are rebuked for seeking a King, and that with a purpose to dissuade them from it, as a sinful desire, and he is chosen by Lots after that, and made King, & after Samuel's anointing of him, he was a private, man, and did hide himself amongst the stuff, v. 22. 3. The Prelate if of ignorance, or wilfully I know not, saith, the expression and phrase is the same, 1 Sam. 12. 13. and Ps. 2. 6. which is false; for 1 Sam. 12. 13. it is [Greek or Hebrew] behold the Lord hath given you a King, such is the expression, Hos. 13. 11. I gave them a King in my wrath; but that expression is not Psal. 2. 6. but this [Greek or Hebrew] but I have established him my King; and though it were the same expression, it followeth not that the people have not hand any other way in appointing Christ their head; (though that phrase also be in the word, Hos. 1. v. 11.) then by consenting,1 and believing in him as King; but this proveth not that the people in appointing a King, hath no hand but naked approbation, for the same phrase doth not express the same action, nay the Judges are to kiss Christ, Ps. 2. 12. the same way, and by the same action that Samuel kissed Saul, 1 Sam. 10. 1. and the Idolaters kissed the calves, Hos. 13. 2. for the same Hebrew word is used in all the three places, and yet it is certain the first kissing is spiritual, the second a kiss of honour, and the third an Idolatrous kissing. 4. The anointing of Saul cannot be a leading rule to the making of all Kings to the worlds end; for the P. Prelate forgetting himself said, that only some few, as Moses, Saul, and David, &c.
he made him sit in the chiefe place, and honored him as king, when as yet Samuel was materially King, and the Lords Vicegerent in Israel. If then the Prelate conclude any thing from Samuel his doing reverence and obeysance to him as King, it shall follow that Saul was formally King, before Samuel, 1 Sam. 10. 1. anointed him, and kissd him; and that must be before he ⟨p. 32⟩he was formally King, otherwise he was in Gods appointment King, before ever he saw Samuels face; and it is true, he ascribeth honour to him, as to one appointed by God to be supreame Soveraigne, for that which he should be, not for that which he was, as c. 9. 22. he set him in the chiefest place, and therefore it is false, that we have Sauls election and constitution to be King, 1 Sam. 10. for after that time the people are rebuked for seeking a King, and that with a purpose to disswade them from it, as a sinfull desire, and he is chosen by Lots after that, and made King, & after Samuels anoynting of him, he was a private, man, and did hide himselfe amongst the stuffe, v. 22. 3. The Prelate if of ignorance, or wilfully I know not, saith, the expression and phrase is the same, 1 Sam. 12. 13. and Ps. 2. 6. which is false; for 1 Sam. 12. 13. it is 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 behold the Lord hath given you a King, such is the expression, Hos. 13. 11. I gave them a King in my wrath; but that expression is not Psal. 2. 6. but this 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 but I have established him my King; and though it were the same expression, it followeth not that the people have not hand any other way in appointing Christ their head; (though that phrase also be in the word, Hos. 1. v. 11.) then by consenting,1 and beleeving in him as King; but this proveth not that the people in appointing a King, hath no hand but naked approbation, for the same phrase doth not expresse the same action, nay the Iudges are to kisse Christ,
1Phrases ascribing the making of Kings in a peculiar manner to God prove not that the free will of the people hath no hand in the making Kings.
by extraordinary manifestation from Heaven were made Kings, pa. 19. 5. he saith it was not Arbitrary for the people to admit, or reject Saul so designed. What meaneth he? it was not morally arbitrary, because they were under a law, Deut. 17. 14, 15. to make him King, whom the Lord should choose. That is true, but was it not arbitrary to them to break a law Physically? I think he who is a professed Arminian will not side with Manicheans and Fatalists so, but the P. Prelate must prove it was not Arbitrary, either Morally or Physically to them not to accept Saul as their King, because they had no action at all in the making of a King, God did it all, both by constituting and designing the ⟨p. 33⟩King, why then did God, Deut. 17. give a Law to them to make such a man King, not such a man, if it was not in their free will to have any action or hand in the making of a King at all? but that some sons of Belial would not accept him as their King, is expressly said, 1 Sam. 10. 27. and how did Israel conspire with Absalom, to unking and dethrone David, whom the Lord had made King? If the Prelate mean it was not Arbitrary to them physically to reject Saul, he speaketh wonders, the sons of Belial did reject him; ergo they had physical power to do it: If he mean it was not arbitrary, that is, it was not lawful to them to reject him, that is true; but doth it follow they had no hand nor action in making Saul King, because it was not lawful for them to make a King in a sinful way, and to refuse him whom God chose to be King? then see what I infer. 1. Then they had no hand in obeying him as King, because they sin in obeying unlawful commandments against Gods Law; and so they had no hand in approving and consenting he should be King, the contrary whereof the P. Prelate saith. 2. So might the P. Prelate prove men are patients, and have no action in violating all the Commandments of God, because it is not lawful to them to violate any one Commandment. (6) The Lord Deut. 17. vindicates this as proper and peculiar to himself to choose the person, and to choose Saul. What then? ergo now the people choosing a King have no power to choose or name a man, because God anointed Saul and David by immediate manifestation of his Will to Samuel; this consequence is nothing, & also it followeth in no wise, that therefore the people made not Saul King. 7.
by extraordinary manifestation from Heaven were made Kings, pa. 19. 5. he saith it was not Arbitrary for the people to admit, or reject Saul so designed. What meaneth he? it was not morally arbitrary, because they were under a law, Deut. 17. 14, 15. to make him King, whom the Lord should choose. That is true, but was it not arbitrary to them to breake a law Physically? I think he who is a professed Arminian will not side with Manicheans and Fatalists so, but the P. Prelate must prove it was not Arbitrary, either Morally or Physically to them not to accept Saul as their King, because they had no action at all in the making of a King, God did it all, both by constituting and designing the ⟨p. 33⟩King, why then did God, Deut. 17. give a Law to them to make such a man King, not such a man, if it was not in their free wil to have any action or hand in the making of a King at all? but that some sonnes of Belial would not accept him as their King, is expresly said, 1 Sam. 10. 27. and how did Israel conspirc with Absolom, to unking and dethrone David, whom the Lord had made King? If the Prelate meane it was not Arbitrary to them physically to reject Saul, he speaketh wonders, the sonnes of Belial did reject him; ergo they had physicall power to doe it: If he meane it was not arbitrary, that is, it was not lawfull to them to reject him, that is true; but doth it follow they had no hand nor action in making Saul King, because it was not lawfull for them to make a King in a •infull way, and to refuse him whom God chose to be King? then see what I inferre. 1. Then they had no hand in obeying him as King, because they sinne in obeying unlawfull commandements against Gods Law; and so they had no hand in approving and consenting he should be King, the contrary whereof the P. Prelate saith. 2. So might the P. Prelate prove men are patientes, and have no action in violating all the Commandements of God, because it is not lawfull to them to violate any one Commandement. (6) The Lord Deut. 17. vindicates this as proper and peculiar to himselfe to choose the person, and to choose Saul. What then? ergo now the people choosing a King have no power to choose or name a man, because God anoynted Saul and David by immediate manifestation of his Will to Samuel; this consequence is nothing, & also it followeth in no wise, that therefore the people made not Saul King. 7.
That the peoples approbation of a King is not necessary▪ is Bellarmines and Papists saying, and that the people chose their Ministers in the Apostolic Church, not by a necessity of a divine Commandment, but to conciliate love betwixt Pastor and people. Papists hold that if the Pope make a popish King the head and King of Britain against the peoples will, yet is he their King. 8. David was then King all the time that Saul persecuted him; he sinned truly in not discharging the duty of a King, only because he wanted a ceremony, the peoples approbation, which the Prelate saith is required to the solemnity and pomp, not to the necessity and truth, and essence of a formal King. So the Kings Coronation Oath, and the peoples Oath must be Ceremonies; and because the Prelate is perjured himself, therefore perjury is but a ceremony also. 9. The enthronization of Bishops is like the Kinging of the Pope; the Apostles must spare Thrones, while they come to Heaven, ⟨p. 34⟩Luk. 22. 29, 30. the P. Prelates with their head the Pope must be enthroned. 10. The hereditary King he maketh a King before his Coronation, and his Acts are as valid before as after his Coronation; it might cost him his head to say that the Prince of Wales is now no less King of Britain, and his Acts, Acts of Kingly Royalty, no less1 then our Sovereign is King of Britain, if Laws and Parliaments had their own vigour from royal Authority. 11. I allow that Kings be as high as God hath placed them, but that God said of all Kings, I will make him my first borne, &c. Psalm 89. 26, 27. which is true of Solomon as the Type, 2 Sam, 7. 1 Chro. 17. 22. 2 Sam. 7. 12. and fulfilled of Christ, and by the Holy Ghost spoken of him, Heb. 1. 5, 6. is blasphemous; for God said not to Nero, Julian, Diocletian, Belshazzar, Evilmerodach, who were lawful Kings. I will make him my first borne; and that any of these blasphemous Idolatrous Princes should cry to God, he is my Father, my God, &c. is Divinity well beseeming an excommunicated Prelate. Of the Kings dignity above the Kingdom I speak not now; the Prelate pulled it in by the hair, but hereafter we shall hear of it.
That the peoples approbation of a King is not necessary▪ is Bellarmines and Papists saying, and that the people chose their Ministers in the Apostolick Church, not by a necessity of a divine Commandement, but to conciliate love betwixt Pastor and people. Papists hold that if the Pope make a p•pish King the head and King of Britaine against the peoples will, yet is he their King. 8. David was then King all the time that Saul presecuted him; he sinned truely in not discharging the duty of a King, onely because he wanted a ceremony, the peoples approbation, which the Prelate saith is required to the solemnity and pompe, not to the necessity and truth, and essence of a formall King. So the Kings Coronation Oath, and the peoples Oath must be Ceremonies; and because the Prelate is perjured himselfe, therefore perjury is but a ceremony also. 9. The enthronization of Bishops is like the Kinging of the Pope; the Apostles must spare Thrones, while they come to Heaven, ⟨p. 34⟩Luk. 22. 29, 30. the P. Prelates with their head the Pope must be enthroned. 10. The hereditary King he maketh a King before his Coronation, and his Acts are as valid before as after his Coronation; it might cost him his head to say that the Prince of Wales is now no lesse King of Britaine, and his Acts, Acts of Kingly Royalty, no lesse1 then our Soveraigne is King of Britaine, if Lawes and Parliaments had their owne vigour from royall Authority. 11. I allow that Kings be as high as God hath placed them, but that God said of all Kings, I will make him my first borne, &c. Psalm 89. 26, 27. which is true of Solomon as the Type, 2 Sam, 7. 1 Chro. 17. 22. 2 Sam. 7. 12. and fulfilled of Christ, and by the Holy Ghost spoken of him, Heb. 1. 5, 6. is blasphemous; for God said not to Nero, Iulian, Dioclesian, Belshazer, Evilmerodach, who were lawfull Kings. I will make him my first borne; and that any of these blasphemous Idolatrous Princes should cry to God, he is my Father, my God, &c. is Divinity well beseeming an excommunicated Prelate. Of the Kings dignity above the Kingdome I speake not now; the Prelate pulled it in by the haire, but hereafter we shall heare of it.
1Prophesies of Christ expounded by the P. Prelate of profane Heathen Kings. The P. Prelate expoundeth Prophesies of David, Solomon and Jesus Christ as true of profane heathen Kings.Prophesies of Christ expounded by the P. Prelate of prophane Heathen Kings. The P. Prelate expoundeth Prophesies of David, Solomon and Iesus Christ as true of prophane heathen Kings.
P. Prelate. God only anointed David, 1 Sam. 16. 4. the men of Bethlehem, yea Samuel knew it not before. God saith, with mine holy oil have I anointed him, Ps. 89. 91. 1. He is the Lords anointed 12. The oil is Gods, not from the Apothecaries shop, nor the Priests Vial; this oil descended from the Holy Ghost▪ who is no less the true Olive, then Christ is the true Vine; yet not the oil of saving grace, as some Fantastics say, but holy, 1. From the Author God. 2. From influence in the person, it maketh the Person of the King sacred. 3. From influence on his charge, his function and power is sacred. Ans. 1. The Prelate said before Davids anointing was extraordinary; here he draweth this anointing to all Kings. 2. Let David be formally both constituted and designed King divers years before the States made him King at Hebron, and then 1. Saul was not King, the Prelate2 will term that treason. 2. This was a dry oil, David his person was not made sacred, nor his authority sacred by it; for he remained a private man, and called Saul his King, his Master, and himself a subject 3. This oil was no doubt Gods Oil, and the Prelate will have it the Holy Ghosts, yet he denieth that saving grace, yea (p. 2. c. 1) he denieth that any supernatural gift should be the foundation of Royal dignity, and that it is a pernicious tenet. So to me he would have the Oil from Heaven, and not from Heaven. 4. This holy oil ⟨p. 35⟩wherewith David was anointed, Psalm 89. 20. to aAugustine, is the oil of saving grace: His own dear brethren the Papists say so, and especially bLyranus, cGlossa ordinaria, dHugo Cardinal, ehis beloved Bellarmine, fand Lorinus, Calvin, Musculus, Marlorat. If these be Fanatics (as I think they are to the Prelate) yet the Text is evident, that this oil of God was the oil of saving grace, bestowed on David, as on a special type of Christ, who received the spirit above measure, and was the anointed of God, Ps. 45. 7. whereby all his garments smell of myrrh, aloes, and cassia, ver. 8. and his name Messiah is as an ointment poured out, Cant. 1. 2. This anointed shall be head of his enemies. 3. His dominion shall be from the sea to the rivers, v. 25. 4. He is in the covenant of grace, v. 26. 5. He is higher then the Kings of the earth. 6. The grace of perseverance is promised to his seed, v. 28, 29, 30. 7.
P. Prelate. God onely anoynted David, 1 Sam. 16. 4. the men of Bethleem, yea Samuel knew it not before. God saith, with mine holy oyle have I anoynted him, Ps. 89. 91. 1. He is the Lords anoynted 12. The oyle is Gods, not from the Apothecaries shop, nor the Priests Viall; this oyle descended from the Holy Ghost▪ who is no lesse the true Olive, then Christ is the true Vine; yet not the oyle of saving grace, as some Fantasticks say, but holy, 1. From the Author God. 2. From influence in the person, it maketh the Person of the King sacred. 3. From influence on his charge, his function and power is sacred. Ans. 1. The Prelate said before Davids anoynting was extraordinary; here he draweth this anoynting to all Kings. 2. Let David be formally both constituted and designed King divers yeares before the States made him King at Hebron, and then 1. Saul was not King, the Prelate2 will tearme that treason. 2. This was a dry oyle, David his person was not made sacred, nor his authority sacred by it; for he remained a private man, and called Saul his King, his Master, and himselfe a subject 3. This oyle was no doubt Gods Oyle, and the Prelate will have it the Holy Ghosts, yet he denieth that saving grace, yea (p. 2. c. 1) he denyeth that any supernaturall gift should be the foundation of Royall dignity, and that it is a pernitious tenent. So to me he would have the Oyle from Heaven, and not from Heaven. 4. This holy oyle ⟨p. 35⟩wherewith David was annointed, Psalme 89. 20. to aAugustine, is the oyle of saving grace: His own deare brethren the Papists say so, and especially bLyranus, cGlossa ordinaria, dHugo Cardinal, ehis beloved Bellarmine, f
1Sacro sancta Maj. 43. 44.
2The P. P. maketh all the Heathen Kings to be anointed with grace from Heaven.The P. P. maketh all the Heathen Kings to be anoynted with grace from Heaven.
aAug. in locum, unxi m• num fort•m, servum obedienten• ideo in co posui adjutorium.
bLyra. Gratia est babitualis, qui• stat pugil contra di• bolum.
cGloss. ord••. &
dHugo Cardinalis, Olco laetitiae qu• prae consortibu• unctus fuit Christus, Ps. 45.
His kingdom is eternal, as the days of Heaven, vers. 35. 36. 8. If the Prelate will look under himself to gDiodatus, and hAinsworth, they say, this holy oil was poured on David by Samuel, and on Christ was poured the Holy Ghost, and that by iwarrant of Scripture, and kJunius, and lMollerus saith with them. Now the Prelate taketh the Court way, to pour this oil of grace on many dry Princes, who without all doubt are Kings essentially no less then David. He must see better then the man who finding Pontius Pilate in the Creed, said, he behoved to be a good man: so because he hath found Nero the tyrant, Julian the apostate, Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-Merodach, Hazael, Hagag, all the Kings of Spain, and I doubt not, the Great Turk, in the 89 Psalm, v. 19, 20. so all these Kings are anointed with the oil of grace, and all these must make their enemies necks their footstool; all these be higher then the Kings of the Earth, and are hard and fast in the covenant of grace, &c.
His kingdome is eternall, as the dayes of Heaven, vers. 35. 36. 8. If the Prelate will look under himselfe to gDiodatus, and hAinsworth, they say, this holy oyle was powred on David by Samuel, and on Christ was powred the Holy Ghost, and that by iwarrant of Scripture, and kJunius, and lMollerus saith with them. Now the Prelate taketh the Court way, to powre this oyle of grace on many drie Princes, who without all doubt are Kings essentially no lesse then David. He must see better then the man who finding Pontius Pilate in the Creed, said, he behoved to be a good man: so because he hath found Nero the tyrant, Julian the apostate, Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-Merodach, Hazael, Hagag, all the Kings of Spaine, and I doubt not, the Great Turke, in the 89 Psalm, v. 19, 20. so all these Kings are anointed with the oyle of grace, and all these must make their enemies necks their footstoole; all these be higher then the Kings of the Earth, and are hard and fast in the covenant of grace, &c.
P. Prelate. All the royal ensigns and acts of Kings are ascribed to God. The Crown is of God, Esa. 62. 3. Psal. 21. 3. in the Emperors coin was an hand putting a crown on their head: the Heathen said they were [Greek or Hebrew] as holding their Crowns from God▪Psal. 18. 39. Thou hast girt me with strength (the sword is the emblem of strength) unto battle. See Jud. 7. 17. their sceptre, Gods sceptre. Exod. 4. 20, 17, 9. we read of two rods, Moses and Aaron's; Aaron's rod budded; God made both the rods; Their judgement is the Lords. 2 Chron. 19. 6. their throne is Gods, 1 Chron. 19. 21. The Fathers called them, sacra vestigia, sacra majestas; their commandments, Divalis jussio. The Law ⟨p. 36⟩saith, all their goods are res sacrae., Ergo, our new Statists disgrace Kings, if they blaspheme not God, in making them the derivatives of the people, the basest extract of the basest of irrational creatures, the Multitude, the Commonalty.
P. Prelate. All the royall ensignes and acts of Kings are ascribed to God. The Crown is of God, Esa. 62. 3. Psal. 21. 3. in the Emperours coyne was an hand putting a crowne on their head: the Heathen said they were 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 as holding their Crownes from God▪Psal. 18. 39. Thou hast girt me with strength (the sword is the embleme of strength) unto battell. See Iud. 7. 17. their scepter, Gods scepter. Exod. 4. 20, 17, 9. we read of two rods, Moses and Aarons; Aarons rod budded; God made both the rods; Their judgement is the Lords. 2 Chron. 19. 6. their throne is Gods, 1 Chron. 19. 21. The Fathers called them, sacra vestigia, sacra majestas; their commandements, Divalis jussio. The Law ⟨p. 36⟩saith, all their goods are res sacrae., Ergo, our new Statists disgrace Kings, if they blaspheme not God, in making them the derivatives of the people, the basest extract of the basest of irrationall creatures, the Multitude, the Communaltie.
Answ. This is all one Argument from the Prelates beginning of1 his book to the end; In a most special and eminent act of Gods providence, Kings are from God; but therefore they are not from men, and mens consent: It followeth not. From a most special and eminent act of Gods providence, Christ came into the world, and took on him our nature: ergo, he came not of Davids loins. It is a vain consequence. There could not be a more eminent act then this, Psal. 40. A body thou hast given me; Ergo, he came not of Davids house, and from Adam by natural generation, and was not a man like us in all things except sin. It is tyrannical and domineering Logic. Many things are ascribed to God only, by reason of a special and admirable act of providence: as the saving of the world by Christ, the giving of Canaan to Israel, the bringing his people out of Egypt, and from Chaldea, the sending of the Gospel to both Jew & Gentile, &c. But shall we say, that God did none of these things by the ministry of men, and weak and frail men? 2. How proveth the Prelate that all royal ensigns are ascribed to God, because Esa. 62. the Church universal shall be as a crown of glory, and a royal diadem in the hand of the Lord; ergo, baculus in angulo, the Church shall be as a seal on the heart of Christ. what then? Hieronymus, Procopius, Cyrillus, with good reason render the meaning thus: Thou O Zion, and Church, shalt be to me a royal Priesthood, and a holy people. For that he speaketh of his own Kingdom and Church, is most evident, v. 1. 2. For Zions sake I will not hold my peace, &c. 3. God put a crown of pure gold on Davids head, Psal. 21. 3. therefore Julian, Nero, and no elective Kings, are made and designed to be Kings by the people: He shall never prove this consequence. The aChaldee paraphrase applieth it to the reign of King Messiah. bDiodatus he speaketh of the kingdom of Christ. cAinsworth maketh this crown a sign of Christs victory. Athanasius, Eusebius, Origen, Augustine, Dydimus, expound it of Christ and his kingdom. The Prelate extendeth it to all Kings, as the blasphemous Rabbins, especially Ra. Solomon, deny that he speaketh of Christ here: but what more reason is there to expound this of the crowns of all Kings given by God (I deny not) to Nero, Julian, &c. then to expound the foregoing and following verses as applied to ⟨p. 37⟩all Kings?
Answ. This is all one Argument from the Prelates beginning of1 his booke to the end; In a most speciall and eminent act of Gods providence, Kings are from God; but therefore they are not from men, and mens consent: It followeth not. From a most speciall and eminent act of Gods providence, Christ came into the world, and tooke on him our nature: ergo, he came not of Davids loynes. It is a vaine consequence. There could not be a more eminent act then this, Psal. 40. A body thou hast given me; Ergo, he came not of Davids house, and from Adam by naturall generation, and was not a man like us in all things except sinne. It is tyrannicall and domineering Logick. Many things are ascribed to God only, by reason of a speciall and admirable act of providence: as the saving of the world by Christ, the giving of Canaan to Israel, the bringing his people out of Egypt, and from Chaldea, the sending of the Gospel to both Iew & Gentile, &c. But shall we say, that God did none of these things by the ministerie of men, and weake and fraile men? 2. How proveth the Prelate that all royall ensignes are ascribed to God, because Esa. 62. the Church universall shall be as a crown of glorie, and a royall diadem in the hand of the Lord; ergo, baculus in angulo, the Church shall be as a seale on the heart of Christ. what then? Hieronymus, Procopius, Cyrillus, with good reason render the meaning thus: Thou O Zion, and Church, shalt be to me a royall Priesthood, and a holy people. For that he speaketh of his owne Kingdome and Church, is most evident, v. 1. 2. For Zions sake I will not hold my peace, &c. 3. God put a crown of pure gold on Davids head, Psal. 21. 3. therefore Iulian, Nero, and no elective Kings, are made and designed to be Kings by the people: He shall never prove this consequence. The aChaldee paraphrase applyeth it to the reigne of King Messiah. bDiodatus he speaketh of the kingdome of Christ. cAinsworth maketh this crowne a signe of Christs victorie. Athanasius, Eusebius, Origen, Augustine, Dydimus, expound it of Christ and his kingdome. The Prelate extendeth it to all Kings, as the blasphemous Rabbines, especially Ra. Salomon, deny that he speaketh of Christ here: but what more reason is there to expound this of the crownes of all Kings given by God (I deny not) to Nero, Julian, &c. then to expound the foregoing and following verses as applyed to
1Places, Esa. 62 3. Ps. 21 3. spoken of the Church and Christ, by the P. P. expounded of profane Kings.
Did Julian rejoice in Gods salvation? did God grant Nero his hearts desire? did God grant (as it is, v. 4.) life eternal to Heathen Kings, as Kings? which words all Interpreters expound of the eternity of Davids throne, till Christ come, and of victory and life eternal purchased by Christ, as dAinsworth with good reason expounds it. And what though God give David a Crown; ergo, not by second causes, and by bowing all Israels heart to come in sincerity to Hebron to make David King, 1 King. 12. 38. God gave corn and wine to Israel, Hos. 2. shall the Prelate and the Anabaptist infer; Ergo, he giveth it not by ploughing, sowing, and the art of the husband-man? 3. The Heathen acknowledged a Divinity in Kings; but he is blind who readeth them, and seeth not in their writings, that they teach that the people maketh Kings. 4. God girt David with strength, while he was a private man, and persecuted by Saul, and fought with Goliath, as the title of the same beareth; and he made him a valiant man of war to break bows of steel; ergo, he giveth the sword to Kings, as Kings, and they receive no sword from the people. This is poor Logic. 5. The P. Prelate sendeth us Judg. 7. 17. to the singular and extraordinary power of God with Gideon: and I say, that same power behoved to be in Oreb and Zeba, v. 27. for they were [Greek or Hebrew] Princes, and such as the Prelate from Pro. 8. 15. saith, have no royal power from the people. 6. Moses and Aaron their two rods were miraculous. This will prove that Priests are also Gods, and their persons sacred. I see not (except the Prelate would be at worshipping of Relics) what more royal Divinity is in Moses his rod, because he wrought miracles by his rod, then there is in Elijah his staff, in Peters napkin, in Pauls shadow. This is like the strong symbolical Theology of his fathers the Jesuits, which is not argumentative, except he say that Moses as King of Jesurum wrought miracles; and why should not Nero, Caligula, Pharaoh, and all Kings rods then dry up the red sea, and work miracles? 7. We give all the stiles to Kings that the Fathers gave, and yet we think not, when David commandeth to kill Uriah, and a King commandeth to murder his innocent subjects in England and Scotland, that that is Divalis jussio, the command of a God;
Did Julian rejoyce in Gods salvation? did God grant Nero his hearts desire? did God grant (as it is, v. 4.) life eternall to Heathen Kings, as Kings? which words all Interpreters expound of the eternitie of Davids throne, till Christ come, and of victorie and life eternall purchased by Christ, as dAinsworth with good reason expounds it. And what though God give David a Crown; ergo, not by second causes, and by bowing all Israels heart to come in sinceritie to Hebron to make David King, 1 King. 12. 38. God gave corne and wine to Israel, Hos. 2. shall the Prelate and the Anabaptist inferre; Ergo, he giveth it not by plowing, sowing, and the art of the husbahd-man? 3. The Heathen acknowledged a Divinitie in Kings; but he is blind who readeth them, and seeth not in their writings, that they teach that the people maketh Kings. 4. God girt David with strength, while he was a private man, and persecuted by Saul, and fought with Goliah, as the title of the same beareth; and he made him a valiant man of warre to breake bowes of steele; ergo, he giveth the sword to Kings, as Kings, and they receive no sword from the people. This is poore Logick. 5. The P. Prelate sendeth us Judg. 7. 17. to the singular and extraordinarie power of God with Gideon: and I say, that same power behoved to be in Oreb and Zeba, v. 27. for they were 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 Princes, and such as the Prelate from Pro. 8. 15. saith, have no royall power from the people. 6. Moses and Aaron their two rods were miraculous. This will prove that Priests are also Gods, and their persons srcred. I see not (except the Prelate would be at worshipping of Reliques) what more royall Divinitie is in Moses his rod, because he wrought miracles by his rod, then there is in Elias his staffe, in Peters napkin, in Pauls shadow. This is like the strong symbolicall Theologie of his fathers the Jesuites, which is not argumentative, except he say that Moses as King of Jesurum wrought miracles; and why should not Nero, Caligula, Pharoah, and all Kings rods then dry up the red sea, and work miracles? 7. We give all the stiles to Kings that the Fathets gave, and yet we thinke not, when David commandeth to kill Ʋriah, and a King commandeth to murther his innocent subjects in England and Scotland, that that is Divalis jussio, the command of a God;
and that this is a good consequence, What ever the King commandeth, though it were to kill his loyallest Subjects, is the commandment of God, Ergo, the King is not made King by the people. 8. Ergo, (saith he) these new Statists disgrace the King. If a most New Statist sprung out of a poor pursuivant of Kraill, from the dunghill to the Court, ⟨p. 38⟩could have made himself an old Statist, and more expert in state affairs, then all the Nobles and soundest Lawyers in Scotland and England, this might have more weight. 9. Therefore the King (saith P. P.) is not the extract of the basest of rational creatures. He meaneth, fex populi▪ his own house and linage; but God calleth them his own people, a royal Priesthood, a chosen generation, and, ps. 78. 71. will warrant us to say the people is much worthier before God, then one man, seeing God choose David for Jacob his people, and Israel his inheritance, that he might feed them, John P. P. his fathers suffrage in making a King will never be sought. We make not the multitude, but the three Estates including the Nobles and Gentry to be as rational creatures, as any Apostate Prelate in the three Kingdoms.
and that this is a good consequence, What ever the King commandeth, though it were to kill his loyallest Subjects, is the commandement of God, Ergo, the King is not made King by the people. 8. Ergo, (saith he) these new Statists disgrace the King. If a most New Statist sprung out of a poore pursevant of Kraill, from the dunghill to the Court, ⟨p. 38⟩could have made himselfe an old Statist, and more expert in state affaires, then all the Nobles and soundest Lawyers in Scotland and England, this might have more weight. 9. Therefore the King (saith P. P.) is not the extract of the basest of rationall creatures. He meaneth, fex populi▪ his owne house and linage; but God calleth them his owne people, a royall Priesthood, a chosen generation, and, ps. 78. 71. will warrant us to say the people is much worthier before God, then one man, seeing God choose David for Iacob his people, and Israel his inheritance, that he might feede them, Iohn P. P. his fathers suffrage in making a King will never be sought. We make not the multitude, but the three Estates including the Nobles and Gentry to be as rationall creatures, as any Apostate Prelate in the three Kingdomes.
QUEST. VII. Whether or no the P. Prelate the aforesaid Author doth by force of reason evince, that neither constitution nor designation of the King is from the people?
QUEST. VII. Whether or no the P. Prelate the aforesaid Auth•r doth by force of reason evince, that neither constitution nor designation of the King is from the people?
The P. Prelate aimeth (but it is an empty aim) to prove that the people are wholly excluded. I answer only Arguments not pitched on before, as the Prelate saith.
THe P. Prelate aymeth (but it is an empty ayme) to prove that the people are wholly excluded. I answer only Arguments not pitched on before, as the Prelate saith.
P. Prelate. 1. To whom can it be more proper to give the rule over men, then to him who is the only King truly and properly of the whole world? 2. God is the immediate Author of all rule and power that is amongst all his creatures, above or below. 3. Man before the fall received dominion, and empire over all the creatures below immediately, as Gen. 1. 28. Gen. 9. 2. ergo we cannot deny that the most noble government (to wit Monarchy) must be immediately from God, without any Contract or compact of men. Ans. The first reason concludeth not what is in question; for God only giveth rule and power to one man over another; ergo he giveth it immediately, it followeth not. 2. It shall as well prove that God doth immediately constitute all Judges, and therefore it shall be unlawful for a city to appoint a Major, or a shire a Justice of peace. 3. The second argument is inconsequent also, because God in creation is the immediate Author of1 all things, and therefore without consent of the creatures, or any act of the creature, created an Angel a nobler creature then man, and a man then a woman, and men above beasts; because those that are not, can exercise no act at all. But it followeth not; ergo all the works of providence, such as is the government of Kingdoms are done immediately by God, for in the works of providence, for the ⟨p. 39⟩most part in ordinary, God worketh by means; it is then as good a consequence as this. God immediately created man, ergo he keepeth his life immediately also without food and sleep. God immediately created the Sun, ergo God immediately without the mediation of the Sun giveth light to the world. The making of a King is an act of reason, and God hath given a man reason to rule himself; and therefore hath given to a society an instinct of reason, to appoint a governor over themselves, but no act of reason goeth before man be created; ergo it is not in his power whether he be created a creature of greater power then a beast or no. 4. God by creation gave power to a man over the creatures, and so immediately; but I hope a man cannot say, God by creation hath made a man King over men. 5. The Excellency of Monarchy (if it be excellenter then any other government, of which hereafter) is no ground why it should be immediately from God, as well as mans dominion over the creature;
P. Prelate. 1. To whom can it be more proper to give the rule over men, then to him who is the onely King truely and properly of the whole world? 2. God is the immediate Author of all rule and power that is amongst all his creatures, above or below. 3. Man before the fall received dominion, and empire over all the creatures below immediatly, as Gen. 1. 28. Gen. 9. 2. ergo we cannot deny that the most noble government (to wit Monarchy) must be immediatly from God, without any Contract or compact of men. Ans. The first reason concludeth not what is in question; for God only giveth rule and power to one man over another; ergo he giveth it immediatly, it followeth not. 2. It shall as well prove that God doth immediatly constitute all Iudges, and therefore it shall be unlawfull for a city to appoint a Major, or a shire a Iustice of peace. 3. The second argument is inconsequent also, because God in creation is the immediat Author of1 all things, and therefore without consent of the creatures, or any act of the creature, created an Angell a nobler creature then man, and a man then a woman, and men above beasts; because those that are not, can exercise no act at all. But it followeth not; ergo all the workes of providence, such as is the government of Kingdomes are done immediatly by God, for in the workes of providence, for the ⟨p. 39⟩most part in ordinary, God worketh by meanes; it is then as good a consequence as this. God immediatly created man, ergo he keepeth his life immediatly also without foode and sleepe. God immediatly created the Sunne, ergo God immediatly without the mediation of the Sunne giveth light to the world. The making of a King is an act of reason, and God hath given a man reason to rule himselfe; and therefore hath given to a society an instinct of reason, to appoint a governour over themselves, but no act of reason goeth before man be created; ergo it is not in his power whether he be created a creature of greater power then a beast or no. 4. God by creation gave power to a man over the creatures, and so immediatly; but I hope a man cannot say, God by creation hath made a man King over men. 5. The Excellency of Monarchy (if it be excellenter then any other government, of which hereafter) is no ground why it should be immediatly from God, as well as mans dominion over the creature;
1The excellency of Kings maketh them not of Gods only constitution and designation▪
for then the work of mans redemption being more excellent then the ray•ing of Lazarus, should have been done immediately without the incarnation, death and satisfaction of Christ (for no act of God without himself is comparable to the work of redemption, 1 Pet. 1. 11, 12. Col. 1. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22.) and Gods less excellent works, as his creating of beasts and worms should have been done mediately, and his creating of man immediately.
for then the worke of mans redemption being more excellent then the ray•ing of Lazarus, should have been done immediatly without the incarnation, death and satisfaction of Christ (for no act of God without himselfe is comparable to the worke of redemption, 1 Pet. 1. 11, 12. Col. 1. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22.) and Gods lesse excellent workes, as his creating of beasts and wormes should have been done mediatly, and his creating of man immediatly.
. for the same Hebrew word is used in all the three places, and yet it is certaine the first kissing is spirituall, the second a kisse of honour, and the third an Idolatrous kissing. 4. The anoynting of Saul cannot be a leading rule to the making of all Kings to the worlds end; for the P. Prelate forgetting himselfe said, that onely some few, as Moses, Saul, and David, &c.
and Lorinus, Calvin, Musculus, Marlorat. If these be Fanaticks (as I think they are to the Prelate) yet the Text is evident, that this oyle of God was the oyle of saving grace, bestowed on David, as on a speciall type of Christ, who received the spirit above measure, and was the anointed of God,
. This anointed shall be head of his enemies. 3. His dominion shall be from the sea to the rivers, v. 25. 4. He is in the covenant of grace, v. 26. 5. He is higher then the Kings of the earth. 6. The grace of perseverance is promised to his seed, v. 28, 29, 30. 7.
