A92147:232
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.
for the Judges were indeed immediately and for the most part extraordinarily raised up of God, and God indeed in the time of the Jews was the King of Israel in another manner then he was the King of all the nations, and is the King of Christian Realms now, and therefore the peoples despising of Samuel, was a refusing that God should reign over them, because God in the Judges revealed himself even in matters of Policy, as what should be done to the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day, and the like, as he doth not now to Kings.
for the Iudges were indeed immediatly and for the most part extraordinarily raised up of God, and God indeed in the time of the Iewes was the King of Israel in another manner then he was the King of all the nations, and is the King of Christian Realmes now, and therefore the peoples despising of Samuel, was a refusing that God should reigne over them, because God in the Iudges revealed himselfe even in matters of Policy, as what should be done to the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day, and the like, as he doth not now to Kings.
P. Prelate. Sovereignty is a ray of divine glory and majesty: but this cannot be found in people, whether you consider them jointly, or singly; if you consider them singly, it cannot be in every individual man; for Sectaries say, That all are born equal with a like freedom: and if it be not in the people singly, it cannot be in them jointly; for all the contribution in this compact and contract which they fancy to be humane composition, and voluntary constitution, is only, by a surrender of the native right that every one had in himself; from whence ⟨p. 42⟩then can this majesty and authority be derived? Again, where the obligation amongst equals is by contract and compact, violation of the faith, plighted in the contract, cannot in proper terms, be called disobedience, or contempt of authority▪ it is no more but a receding from, and a violation of that which was promised, as it may be in States or Counties confederate. Nature, reason, conscience, scripture, teach, That disobedience to Sovereign power is not only a violation of Truth, breach of Covenant, but also high disobedience and contempt, as is clear,