A92147:897
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.
I see not how natural defence can put us to flee, even all Protestants, and their seed, and the weak and sick, whom we are obliged to defend as our selves, both by the Law of nature and grace. I read that seven wicked nations and idolatrous were cast out of their land to give place to the Church of God, to dwell there, but show me a warrant in natures Law and in Gods word that three Kingdoms of Protestant•, their seed, aged, sick, sucking children, should flee out of England, Scotland, Ireland, and leave Religion and the Land to a King and to Papists, Prelates and bloody Irish, and Atheists: and therefore to a Church and community having Gods right and mans law to the land, violent re-offending is their second mean (next to supplications and declarations, ⟨p. 329⟩&c.) and flight is not required of them, as of a private man. Yea flight is not necessarily required of a private man, but where it is a possible mean of self-preservation, violent and unjust invasion of a private man, which is unavoidable may be obviated with violent re-offending. Now the unjust invasion made on Scotland in 1640. for refusing the Service-book, or rather the idolatry of the Mass, therein intended, was unavoidable, it was unpossible for the Protestants, their old and sick, their women and sucking children to flee over sea, or to have shipping betwixt the Kings bringing an army on them at Duns-law, and the Prelates charging of the Ministers to receive the mass book; Althusius saith well, Pol. c. 38. n. 78. Though private men may flee; but the estates if they flee, they do not their duty to commit a country, religion and all to a Lion. Let not any object, we may not devise a way to fulfil the prophecy, Psal. 2. 8, 9. Isa. 49. 1. it is true, if the way be our own sinful way; nor let any object, a Colony went to New-England and fled the persecution. Answer, True, but if fleeing be the only mean after supplication, there was no more reason that one Colony should go to New-England, then it is necessary & by a divine law obligatory, that the whol• Protestants in the three kingdoms according to Royalists Doctrine, are to leave their native country, & religion to one man & to popish Idolaters & Atheists willing to worship idols with them, and whether then shall the Gospel be, which we are obliged to defend with our lives?