A92147:546
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.
8. If the Kings of Israel and Judah were under censures and1 rebukes of the Prophets, and sinned against God and the people in rejecting these rebukes, and in persecuting the Prophets, and were under this Law not to take their neighbours wife, or his Vineyard from him against his will, and the inferior Judges were to accept the persons of none in Judgement, small or great; and if the King yet remain a brother, notwithstanding he be a King, then is his power not above any Law nor absolute: for what reason? 1. He should be under one Law of God to be executed by men, and not under another Law? Royalists are to show a difference from Gods Word. 2. His neighbours, brother, or subjects may by violence keep back their Vineyards, and chastity from the King: Naboth may by force keep his own Vineyard from Ahab; by the Laws of Scotland, if a subject obtain a Decree of the King of violent possession of the Heritages of a subject, he hath by Law, power to cast out, force, apprehend and deliver to prison these who are Tenants, brooking these Lands by the Kings personal Commandment.2 If a King should force a Damsel, she may violently resist, and by violence, and bodily opposing of violence to violence, defend her own chastity. Now that the Prophets have rebuked Kings is evident. Samuel rebuked Saul, Nathan David, Elijah King Ahab. Jeremiah is commanded to Prophesy against the Kings of Judah Jer. 1. 18. and the Prophets practised it, Jer. 19. 3. c. 21. 2. c. 22. 13, 14, 15. Hos. 5. 1. Kings are guilty before God, because they submitted not their Royal power and greatness to the rebukes of the Prophets, but persecuted them.
8. If the Kings of Israel and Iudah were under censures and1 rebukes of the Prophets, and sinned against God and the people in rejecting these rebukes, and in persecuting the Prophets, and were under this Law not to take their neighbours wife, or his Vineyard from him against his will, and the inferiour Iudges were to accept the persons of none in Iudgement, small or great; and if the King yet remaine a brother, notwithstanding he be a King, then is his power not above any Law nor absolute: for what reason? 1. He should be under one Law of God to be executed by men, and not under another Law? Royalists are to shew a difference from Gods Word. 2. His neighbours, brother, or subjects may by violence keepe back their Vineyards, and chastity from the King: Naboth may by force keepe his owne Vineyard from Achab; by the Lawes of Scotland, if a subject obtaine a Decree of the King of violent possession of the Heritages of a subject, he hath by Law, power to cast out, force, apprehend and deliver to prison these who are Tenants, brooking these Lands by the Kings personall Commandement.