Lex Rex, Question 6
QUEST. VI. Whether the King be so from God onelyonly both in regard of his Soveraignty, and of the designation of his person to the Crown, as that he is no waies from the people, but by meere approbation?
Dr. Ferne, a man much for Monarchy saith, Though Monarchy hath its excellency,Dr. Fern, 3. …. 13. being first set up of God, in Moses, yet neither Monarchy, Aristocracy, nor any other forme, is jure divino, but we say (saith he) the power it selfe, or that sufficiency of authority to governe, that is in a Monarchy, or Aristocracy, abstractly considered from the qualification of other formes, is a flux and constitution subordinate to that providence; an ordinance of that Dixi, or silent word by which the world was made, and shall be governed under God. This is a great debasing of the Lords anoynted,The formes of Government not from God by a naked act of Providence, but by his approving will. for so soveraignty hath no warrant in Gods Word formally as it is such a government, but is in the world by providence, as sin is, and as the falling of a Sparrow to the ground; whereas Gods Word hath not onelyonly commanded that government should be, but that fathers and mothers should be. 2. and not only that politick Rulers should be, but also Kings by name, and other Iudges Aristocraticall should be, Rom. 13.3. Deut. 17.14. 1 Pet. 2.17. Prov. 24.21. Prov. 15.16.3. If the power of Monarchy and Aristocracy abstracted from the formes be from God, then it is no more lawfull to resist Aristocraticall Government, and our Lords of Parliament, or Iudges, then it is lawfull to resist Kings.
But heare the Prelates reasons to prove that the King is from the people by approbation only.
P. Prelate. The people, cap. 4. pag 41Deut. 17. is said to set a King over them only, as 1 Cor. 6. The Saints are said to judge the world, that is, by consenting to Christs Iudgement. So the people doe not make a King by transferring on him soveraignty, but by accepting, acknowledging, reverencing him as King, whom God hath both constituted and designed King. Answ. This is said, but not a word proved: for the Queen of Sheba, and Hiram acknowledged, reverenced and obeyed Solomon as King, and yet they made him not King, Soveraigntie not from the people by sole approbation.as the Princes of Israell did. 2. Reverence and obedience of the people is relative to the Kings lawes, but the peoples making of a King is not relative to the laws of a King; for then he should be a King giving laws, and commanding the people, as King, before the people make him King. 3. If the peoples approving and consenting that an elected King be their King, presupposeth that he is a King designed, and constituted by God, before the people approve him as King; Let the P. Prelate give us an act of God now designing a man King: for there are no immediate voyces from heaven, saying to a people, This is your King, before the people elect one of sixe to be their King. And this infallibly proveth that God designeth one of sixe to be a King, to a people who had no King before, by no other act but by determining the hearts of the States to elect and designe this man King, and passe any of the other five. 4. When God, Deut. 17. forbiddeth them to choose a stranger, he presupposeth they may choose a stranger: for Gods law now given to man in the state of sinne, presupposeth he hath corruption of nature to doe contrary to Gods law: Now if God did hold forth, that their setting a King over them, was but the peoples approving the man whom God shall both constitute and designe to be King, then he should presuppose that God was to designe a stranger to be the lawfull King of Israel; and the people should be interdicted to approve and consent, that the man should be King whom God should choose: for it was unpossible that the people should make a stranger King, (God is the only immediate King-creator) the people should only approve and consent that a stranger should be King; yet upon supposall that God first constituted and designed the stranger King, it was not in the peoples power that the King should be a Brother rather then a stranger; for if the people have no power to make a King, but doe only approve him, or consent to him, when he is both made and designed of God to be King, it is not in their power that he be either brother or stranger▪ and so God commandeth what is simply impossible. 2. Consider the sense of the command by the Prelates vaine Logick: I Iehovah, as I only create the world of nothing, so I only constitute and designe a man, whether Iew, or Nebuchadnezzar a stranger to be your King; yet I inhibit you under the pain of my curse, that you set any King …ver your selves, but only a brother. What is this, but I inhibite you to be creators by omnipotent power? 5. To these adde the reasons I produced before, that the people by no shadow of reason can be commanded to make such a man King, not such a man, if they only consent to the man made King, but have no action in the making of the King.
P. Prelate. All the acts reall and imaginable, which are necessary for the making of Kings, are ascribed to God: Take the first King as a ruling case, 1 Sam. 12.13. Behold the King whom you have chosen and desired, and behold the Lord hath set a King over you. This election of the people can be no other but their admittance or acceptance of the King whom God hath chosen and constituted, as the words, whom ye have chosen, imply, 1 Sam. 9.17. 1 Sam. 10.1. You have Sauls election and constitution, where Samuel as Priest and Prophet anointeth him, doing reverence and obeysance to him, and ascribing to God, that he did appoint him supreame and Soveraigne over his inheritance. And the same expression is, 1 Sam. 12.13. The Lord hath set a King over you: which is Psal. 2.6. I have set my King upon my holy hill of Zion. Neither man nor Angel hath any share in any act of constituting Christ King, Deut. 17. The Lord vindicateth as proper and peculiar to himselfe, the designation of the person. It was not arbitrary to the people to admit or reject Saul so designed; it pleased God to consummate the worke by the acceptation, consent and approbation of the people, ut suaviore modo, that by a smoother way he might incourage Saul to undergoe the hard charge, and make his people the more heartily, without grumbling and scruple, reverence and obey him. The peoples admittance possibly added something to the solemnitie, to the pompe, but nothing to the essentiall and reall constitution or necessitie; it only puts the subjects in mala fide, if they should contraveen, as the intimation of a Law, the coronation of an hereditary King, the inthronization of a Bishop. And, 1 King. 3.7. Thou hast made thy servant King, 1 Sam. 16.1. I have provided me a King, Psal. 18.50. He is Gods King, Psal. 89.19. I have exalted one chosen out of the people, v. 20. He anointeth them, 27. adopteth them. I will make him my first borne, Psal. 82.6. the first borne is above every brother severally, and above all, though a thousand joyntly.
Answ. 1. By this reason, inferiour Iudges are no lesse immediate Deputies of God, and so irresistible, then the Kings, because God took off the spirit that was on Moses, and immediately powred it upon the seventy Elders, who were Iudges inferiour to Moses, Num. 11.14.15.16. Answ. 2. This P. P. cannot make a Syllogisme: I… all the acts necessary to make a King, be given to God, none to the people; then God both constituteth and designeth the King. But the former the Scripture saith, ergo, if all the acts be given to God, as to the prime King-maker, and disposer of Kings and Kingdoms, and none to the people in that notion, then God both constituteth and designeth a King. Both major and minor is false. The major is a… false as the very P. Prelate himselfe. All the acts necessary for war-making, are in an eminent manner given to God, as 1. the Lord fighteth for his people. 2. The Lord scattered the enemies. 3. The Lord slew Og King of Bashan. 4. The battell is the Lords. 5. The victorie the Lords; ergo, Israel never fought a battell. So Deut. 32. The Lord alone led his people; the Lord led them in the wildernesse; their bow and their sword gave them not the land: God wrought all their workes for them, Esa 26.12. ergo, Moses led them not; ergo, the people went not on their own leggs through the wildernesse; ergo, the people never shot an arrow, never drew a sword. It followeth not. 1. God did all these as the first, eminent, principall and efficacious pre-determinator of the creature, (though this Arminian and Popish Prelate mind not so to honour God.) 2. The assumption is also false; for the people made Saul and David Kings;That Kings in an eminent … of divine providence, have their crownes from God, hindreth not but they have their crownes from the people also▪ and it were ridiculous, that God should command them to make a brother, not a stranger King, if it was not in their power whether he should be a Iew, a Scythian, an Ethiopian, who was their King, if God did only without them both choose, 2. constitute, 3. designe the person, and performe all acts essentiall to make a King, and the people had no more in them but only to admit and consent, and that for the solemnitie and pompe, not for the essentiall constitution of the King. 3. … Sam. 9.17. 1 Sam. 10.1. we have not Saul elected and constituted king, and Samuel did obeysance to him and kissed him, for the honor Royall which God was to put upon him: for before this propheticall unction, 1 Sam. 9.22. he made him sit in the chiefe place, and honored him as king, when as yet Samuel was materially King, and the Lords Vicegerent in Israel. If then the Prelate conclude any thing from Samuel his doing reverence and obeysance to him as King, it shall follow that Saul was formally King, before Samuel, 1 Sam. 10.1. anointed him, and kissd him; and that must be before he he was formally King, otherwise he was in Gods appointment King, before ever he saw Samuels face; and it is true, he ascribeth honour to him, as to one appointed by God to be supreame Soveraigne, for that which he should be, not for that which he was, as c. 9.22. he set him in the chiefest place, and therefore it is false, that we have Sauls election and constitution to be King, 1 Sam. 10. for after that time the people are rebuked for seeking a King, and that with a purpose to disswade them from it, as a sinfull desire, and he is chosen by Lots after that, and made King, & after Samuels anoynting of him, he was a private, man, and did hide himselfe amongst the stuffe, v. 22.3. The Prelate if of ignorance, or wilfully I know not, saith, the expression and phrase is the same, 1 Sam. 12.13. and Ps. 2.6. which is false; for 1 Sam. 12.13. it is foreign behold the Lord hath given you a King, such is the expression, Hos. 13.11. I gave them a King in my wrath; but that expression is not Psal. 2.6. but this foreign but I have established him my King; and though it were the same expression, it followeth not that the people have not hand any other way in appointing Christ their head; (though that phrase also be in the word, Hos. 1. v. 11.) then by consenting, and beleeving in him as King;Phrases ascribing the making of Kings in a peculiar manner to God prove not that the free will of the people hath no hand in the making Kings. but this proveth not that the people in appointing a King, hath no hand but naked approbation, for the same phrase doth not expresse the same action, nay the Iudges are to kisse Christ, Ps. 2.12. the same way, and by the same action that Samuel kissed Saul, 1 Sam. 10.1. and the Idolaters kissed the calves, Hos. 13.2. for the same Hebrew word is used in all the three places, and yet it is certaine the first kissing is spirituall, the second a kisse of honour, and the third an Idolatrous kissing. 4. The anoynting of Saul cannot be a leading rule to the making of all Kings to the worlds end; for the P. Prelate forgetting himselfe said, that onelyonly some few, as Moses, Saul, and David, &c. by extraordinary manifestation from Heaven were made Kings, pa. 19.5. he saith it was not Arbitrary for the people to admit, or reject Saul so designed. What meaneth he? it was not morally arbitrary, because they were under a law, Deut. 17.14, 15. to make him King, whom the Lord should choose. That is true, but was it not arbitrary to them to breake a law Physically? I think he who is a professed Arminian will not side with Manicheans and Fatalists so, but the P. Prelate must prove it was not Arbitrary, either Morally or Physically to them not to accept Saul as their King, because they had no action at all in the making of a King, God did it all, both by constituting and designing the King, why then did God, Deut. 17. give a Law to them to make such a man King, not such a man, if it was not in their free wil to have any action or hand in the making of a King at all? but that some sonnes of Belial would not accept him as their King, is expresly said, 1 Sam. 10.27. and how did Israel conspire with Absolom, to unking and dethron… David, whom the Lord had made King? If the Prelate meane it was not Arbitrary to them physically to reject Saul, he speaketh wonders, the sonnes of Belial did reject him; ergo they had physicall power to doe it: If he meane it was not arbitrary, that is, it was not lawfull to them to reject him, that is true; but doth it follow they had no hand nor action in making Saul King, because it was not lawfull for them to make a King in a sinfull way, and to refuse him whom God chose to be King? then see what I inferre. 1. Then they had no hand in obeying him as King, because they sinne in obeying unlawfull commandements against Gods Law; and so they had no hand in approving and consenting he should be King, the contrary whereof the P. Prelate saith. 2. So might the P. Prelate prove men are patientes, and have no action in violating all the Commandements of God, because it is not lawfull to them to violate any one Commandement. (6) The Lord Deut. 17. vindicates this as proper and peculiar to himselfe to choose the person, and to choose Saul. What then? ergo now the people choosing a King have no power to choose or name a man, because God anoynted Saul and David by immediate manifestation of his Will to Samuel; this consequence is nothing, & also it followeth in no wise, that therefore the people made not Saul King. 7. That the peoples approbation of a King is not necessary, is Bellarmines and Papists saying, and that the people chose their Ministers in the Apostolick Church, not by a necessity of a divine Commandement, but to conciliate love betwixt Pastor and people. Papists hold that if the Pope make a …pish King the head and King of Britaine against the peoples will, yet is he their King. 8. David was then King all the time that Saul presecuted him; he sinned truely in not discharging the duty of a King, onelyonly because he wanted a ceremony, the peoples approbation, which the Prelate saith is required to the solemnity and pompe, not to the necessity and truth, and essence of a formall King. So the Kings Coronation Oath, and the peoples Oath must be Ceremonies; and because the Prelate is perjured himselfe, therefore perjury is but a ceremony also. 9. The enthronization of Bishops is like the Kinging of the Pope; the Apostles must spare Thrones, while they come to Heaven, Luk. 22.29, 30. the P. Prelates with their head the Pope must be enthroned. 10. The hereditary King he maketh a King before his Coronation, and his Acts are as valid before as after his Coronation; it might cost him his head to say that the Prince of Wales is now no lesse King of Britaine, and his Acts, Acts of Kingly Royalty, no lesse then our Soveraigne is King of Britaine,Prophesies of Christ expounded by the P. Prelate of prophane Heathen Kings. The P. Prelate expoundeth Prophesies of David, Solomon and Iesus Christ as true of prophane heathen Kings. if Lawes and Parliaments had their owne vigour from royall Authority. 11. I allow that Kings be as high as God hath placed them, but that God said of all Kings, I will make him my first borne, &c. Psalm 89.26, 27. which is true of Solomon as the Type, 2 Sam, 7. 1 Chro. 17.22. 2 Sam. 7.12. and fulfilled of Christ, and by the Holy Ghost spoken of him, Heb. 1.5.6. is blasphemous; for God said not to Nero, Iulian, Dioclesian, Belshazer, Evilmerodach, who were lawfull Kings. I will make him my first borne; and that any of these blasphemous Idolatrous Princes should cry to God, he is my Father, my God, &c. is Divinity well beseeming an excommunicated Prelate. Of the Kings dignity above the Kingdome I speake not now; the Prelate pulled it in by the haire, but hereafter we shall heare of it.
P. Prelate. God onelyonly anoynted David, 1 Sam. 16.4. the men of Bethleem, yea Samuel knew it not before. God saith, with mine holy oyle have I anoynted him, Ps. 89.91. 1. He is the Lords anoynted 2. The oyle is Gods, Sacro sancta Maj. 43.44.not from the Apothecaries shop, nor the Priests Viall; this oyle descended from the Holy Ghost, who is no lesse the true Olive, then Christ is the true Vine; yet not the oyle of saving grace, as some Fantasticks say, but holy, 1. From the Author God. 2. From influence in the person, it maketh the Person of the King sacred. 3. From influence on his charge, his function and power is sacred. Ans. 1. The Prelate said before Davids anoynting was extraordinary; here he draweth this anoynting to all Kings. 2. Let David be formally both constituted and designed King divers yeares before the States made him King at Hebron, The P. P. maketh all the Heathen Kings to be anoynted with grace from Heaven.and then 1. Saul was not King, the Prelate will tearme that treason. 2. This was a dry oyle, David his person was not made sacred, nor his authority sacred by it; for he remained a private man, and called Saul his King, his Master, and himselfe a subject 3. This oyle was no doubt Gods Oyle, and the Prelate will have it the Holy Ghosts, yet he denieth that saving grace, yea (p. 2. c. 1) he denyeth that any supernaturall gift should be the foundation of Royall dignity, and that it is a pernitious tenent. So to me he would have the Oyle from Heaven, and not from Heaven. 4. This holy oyle wherewith David was annointed, Psalme 89.20. to (a)Aug. in locum, u…xi manum fortem, servum obedient…m ideo in …o posui adjutorium.Augustine, is the oyle of saving grace: His own deare brethren the Papists say so, and especially (b)Lyra. Gratia est habitualis, quia stat pugil contra diabolum.Lyranus, (c)Gloss. ordin. &Glossa ordinaria, (d)Hugo Cardinalis, Oleo laetitia quo prae consortibus unctus fuit Christus, Ps. 45.Hugo Cardinal, (e)Bellarm. ib.his beloved Bellarmine, (f)Lorinus.and Lorinus, Calvin, Musculus, Marlorat. If these be Fanaticks (as I think they are to the Prelate) yet the Text is evident, that this oyle of God was the oyle of saving gtace, bestowed on David, as on a speciall type of Christ, who received the spirit above measure, and was the anointed of God, Ps. 45.7. whereby all his garments smell of myrrhe, aloes, and cassia, ver. 8. and his name Messiah is as an oyntment powred out, Cant. 1. 2. This anointed shall be head of his enemies. 3. His dominion shall be from the sea to the rivers, v. 25. 4. He is in the covenant of grace, v. 26. 5. He is higher then the Kings of the earth. 6. The grace of perseverance is promised to his seed, v. 28, 29, 30. 7. His kingdome is eternall, as the dayes of Heaven, vers. 35, 36. 8. If the Prelate will looke under himselfe to (g)Theodatus.Diodatus, and (h)Ainsworth, annot.Ainsworth, they say, this holy oyle was powred on David by Samuel, and on Christ was powred the Holy Ghost, and that by (i)1 Sam. 16 1.13, 14. Luk. 4.18.21. Io. 3.…4.warrant of Scripture, and (k)Iunius annot. in loc.Junius, and (l)Mollerus com. ibid.Mollerus saith with them. Now the Prelate taketh the Court way, to powre this oyle of grace on many drie Princes, who without all doubt are Kings essentially no lesse then David. He must see better then the man who finding Pontius Pilate in the Creed, said, he behoved to be a good man: so because he hath found Nero the tyrant, Julian the apostate, Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-Merodach, Hazael, Hagag, all the Kings of Spaine, and I doubt not, the Great Turke, in the 89 Psalm, v. 19, 20. so all these Kings are anointed with the oyle of grace, and all these must make their enemies necks their footstoole; all these be higher then the Kings of the Earth, and are hard and fast in the covenant of grace, &c.
P. Prelate. All the royall ensignes and acts of Kings are ascribed to God. The Crown is of God, Esa. 62.3. Psal. 21.3. in the Emperours coyne was an hand putting a crowne on their head: the Heathen said they were foreign as holding their Crownes from God. Psal. 18.39. Thou hast girt me with strength (the sword is the embleme of strength) unto battell. See Iud. 7.17. their scepter, Gods scepter. Exod. 4.20, 17, 9. we read of two rods, Moses and Aarons; Aarons rod budded; God made both the rods; Their judgement is the Lords. 2 Chron. 19.6. their throne is Gods, 1▪ Chron. 19.21. The Fathers called them, sacra vestigia, sacra majestas; their commandements, Divalis jussio. The Law saith, all their goods are res sacrae. Ergo, our new Statists disgrace Kings, if they blaspheme not God, in making them the derivatives of the people, the basest extract of the basest of irrationall creatures, the Multitude, the Communaltie▪
Answ. This is all one Argument from the Prelates beginning of his booke to the end;… of the Church and Christ, by the P P. exp…unded of profane Kings▪ In a most speciall and eminent act of Gods providence, Kings are from God; but therefore they are not from men, and mens consent: It followeth not. From a most speciall and eminent act of Gods providence, Christ came into the world, and tooke on him our nature: ergo, he came not of Davids l oynes. It is a vaine consequenc…. There could not be a more eminent act then this, Psal. 40. A body thou hast given me; Ergo, he came not of Davids house, and from Adam by naturall generation, and was not a man like us in all things except sinne. It is tyrannicall and domineering Logick. Many things are ascribed to God only, by reason of a speciall and admirable act of providence: as the saving of the world by Christ, the giving of Canaan to Israel, the bringing h…s people out of Egypt, and from Chaldea, the sending of the Gospel to both Iew & Gentile, &c. But shall we say, that God did none of these things by the ministerie of men, and weake and fraile men? 2. How proveth the Prelate that all royall ensignes are ascribed to God, because Esa. 62. the Church universall shall be as a crown of glorie, and a royall diadem in the hand of the Lord; ergo, baculus in angulo, the Church shall be as a seale on the heart of Christ. what then? Hieronymus, Procopius, Cyrillus, with good reason render the meaning thus: Thou O Zion, and Church, shalt be to me a royall Priesthood, and a holy people. For that he speaketh of his owne Kingdome and Church, is most evident, v. 1.2. For Zions sake I will not hold my peace, &c. 3. God put a crown of pure gold on Davids head, Psal. 21.3. therefore Iulian, Nero, and no elective Kings, are made and designed to be Kings by the people: He shall never prove this consequence. The (a)Chald. par.Chaldee paraphrase applyeth it to the reigne of King Messiah. (b)Diodat. an.Diodatus he speaketh of the kingdome of Christ. (c)Ainsworth. Athanasius, Eusebius, Origen. Augustine, Dydimus.Ainsworth maketh this crowne a signe of Christs victorie. Athanasius, Eusebius, Origen, Augustine, Dydimus, expound it of Christ and his kingdome. The Prelate extendeth it to all Kings, as the blasphemous Rabbines, especially Ra. Salomon, deny that he speaketh of Christ here: but what more reason is there to expound this of the crownes of all Kings given by God (I deny not) to Nero, Julian, &c. then to expound the foregoing and following verses as applyed to all Kings? Did Julian rejoyce in Gods salvation? did God grant Nero his hearts desire? did God grant (as it is, v. 4.) life eternall to Heathen Kings, as Kings? which words all Interpreters expound of the eternitie of Davids throne, till Christ come, and of victorie and life eternall purchased by Christ, as (d)Ainsw. an. i… v. 5.Ainsworth with good reason expounds it. And what though God give David a Crown; ergo, not by second causes, and by bowing all Israels heart to come in sinceritie to Hebron to make David King, 1 King. 12.38. God gave corne and wine to Israel, Hos. 2. shall the Prelate and the Anabaptist inferre, Ergo, he giveth it not by plowing, sowing, and the art of the husbahd-man? 3. The Heathen acknowledged a Divinitie in Kings; but he is blind who readeth them, and seeth not in their writings, that they teach that the people maketh Kings. 4. God girt David with strength, while he was a private man, and persecuted by Saul, and fought with Goliah, as the title of the same beareth; and he made him a valiant man of warre to breake bowes of steele; ergo, he giveth the sword to Kings, as Kings, and they receive no sword from the people. This is poore Logick. 5. The P. Prelate sendeth us Judg. 7.17. to the singular and extraordinarie power of God with Gideon: and I say, that same power behoved to be in Oreb and Zeba, v. 27. for they were foreign Princes, and such as the Prelate from Pro. 8.15. saith, have no royall power from the people. 6. Moses and Aaron their two rods were miraculous. This will prove that Priests are also Gods, and their persons srcred. I see not (except the Prelate would be at wo…sh…pping of Reliques) what more royall Divinitie is in Moses his rod, because he wrought miracles by his rod, then there is in Elias his staffe, in Peters napkin, in Pauls shadow. This is like the strong symbolicall Theologie of his fathers the Jesuites, which is not argumentative, except he say that Moses as King of Jesurum wrought miracles; and why should not Nero, Caligula, Pharoah, and all Kings rods then dry up the red sea, and work miracles? 7. We give all the stiles to Kings that the Fathers gave, and yet we thinke not, when David commandeth to kill Vriah, and a King commandeth to murther his innocent subjects in England and Scotland, that that is Divalis jussio, the command of a God; and that this is a good consequence, What ever the King commandeth, though it were to kill his loyallest Subjects, is the commandement of God, Ergo, the King is not made King by the people. 8. Ergo, (saith he) these new Statists disgrace the King. If a most New Statist sprung out of a poore pursevant of Kraill, from the dunghill to the Court, could have made himselfe an old Statist, and more expert in state affaires, then all the Nobles and soundest Lawyers in Scotland and England, this might have more weight. 9. Therefore the King (saith P. P.) is not the extract of the basest of rationall creatures. He meaneth, fex populi, his owne house and linage; but God calleth them his owne people, a royall Priesthood, a chosen generation, and, ps. 78.71. will warrant us to say the people is much worthier before God, then one man, seeing God choose David for Iacob his people, and Israel his inheritance, that he might feede them, Iohn P. P. his fathers suffrage in making a King will never be sought. We make not the multitude, but the three Estates including the Nobles and Gentry to be as rationall creatures, as any Apostate Prelate in the three Kingdomes.