A92147:525
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.
Ans. 1. Here is another absolute power disclaimed to be in the King, he hath not such a masterly and absolute liberty as the Turk hath. Why? John P. P. in such a tender and high point as concerneth soul and body of subjects in three Christian Kingdoms, you should have taught us 1. What bonds and fetters any covenant or paction betwixt the King and people layeth upon the King, why he hath not as King the power of the great Turk. I will tell you▪ The Great Turk may command any of his subjects to leap into a mountain of fire, and burn himself quick, in conscience of obedience to his Law. And what if the subject disobey the Great Turk? if the Great Turk be a lawful Prince, as you will not deny. And if the King of Spain should command foreign conquered slaves to do the like. By your Doctrine neither the one, nor the other were obliged to resist by violence, but to pray, or fly, which both were to1 speak to stones, and were like the man, who in case of ship-wrack, made his devotion of praying to the waves of the sea, not to enter the place of his b•d and drown him. But a Christian King hath not this power; Why, and a Christian King (by Royalists doctrine) hath a greater power then the Turk (if greater can be) he hath power to command his subjects to cast themselves into Hellfire; that is, to press on them a service wherein it is written: (Adore the work of mens hands in the place of the living God) and this is worse then the Turks commandment of bodily burning quick. And what is left to the Christian Subjects, in this case, is the ⟨p. 181⟩very same, and no other then is left to the Turkish and foreign Spanish subject; Either flee, or make prayers▪ There is no more left to us. 2. Many Royalists maintain, that England is a conquered2 Nation. Why then, see what power, by law of Conquest, the King of Spain hath over his slaves, the same must the King of England have over his subjects. For, to Royalists, a title by Conquest to a Crown, is as lawful as a title by birth or election. For lawfulness, in relation to Gods law, is placed in an indivisible point, if we regard the essence of lawfulness: And therefore there is nothing left to England, but that all Protestants who take the oath of a Protestant King, to defend the true Protestant Religion, should, after prayers, conveyed to the King through the fingers of Prelates and Papists;