A92147:877
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.
They leave the argument from Christs example, who was thus far subject to higher powers, that he would not resist, and plead from the unlawfulness of resistance; this is petitio principii. 2. He that taketh the sword without Gods warrant, which Peter had not, but the contrary, he was himself a Satan to Christ, who would but counsel him not to die; but there is no shadow of a word to prove that violent resisting is unlawful, when the King and his Irish cut-throats pursue us unjustly; only Christ saith, when God may deliver extraordinarily by his Angels, except it be his absolute will, that his Son should drink the cup of death, then to take the sword, when God hath declared his will on the contrary, is unlawful; and that is all: Though I do not question but Christs asking for swords, and his arresting all his enemies to the ground, Joh. 18. 6. backward, is a justifying of self-defence. But hit hereto it is clear by Christs example, that he only was commanded to suffer. Now the second case in which suffering falleth under a Commandment, is indirectly and comparatively, when it cometh to the election of the witness of Jesus, that it is referred to them, either to deny the truth of Christ and his name, or then to suffer death, the choice is apparently evident, and this ⟨p. 317⟩choice that persecutors refer us unto, is to us a Commandment of God, that we must choose suffering for Christ, and refuse sinning against Christ: but the supposition must stand, that this alternative is unavoidable, that is not in our power to decline either suffering for Christ, or denying of Christ before men; otherwayes no man is to expect the reward of a witness of Jesus, who having a lawful possible means of eschewing suffering, doth yet cast himself into suffering needlessly. But I prove that suffering by men of this world, falleth not formally and directly under any divine positive Law, for the Law of nature, what ever Arminians in their Declaration, or this Arminian excommunicate think with them, (for1 they teach that God gave a Commandment to Adam, to abstain from such and such fruit with pain and trouble to sinless nature) doth not command suffering, or any thing contrary to nature as nature2 is sinless: I prove it thus, 1.