Treatise of Civil Policy, Treatise · 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, being firſt ſet up of God, in Moſes, yet neitherDr. Fern, 3. S. 13. 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 aThe formes of Government not from God by a naked act of Providence, but by his approving will. great debaſing of the Lords anoynted, 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, Deut. 17. is ſaid to ſet a King over them cap. 4. pag. 41.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 obeyedSoveraigntie not from the people by ſole approbation. Solomon as King, and yet they made him not King, 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 over 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: If 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-mak…r, 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 as falſe as the very P. Prelate himſelfe. All the acts neceſſary for warmaking, 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; and it wereThat Kings in an eminent act of divine providence, have their crownes from God, hindreth not but they have their crownes from the people alſo. 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. 1 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,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. and beleeving in him as King; 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 conſpirc with Abſolom, to unking and dethrone 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 …infull 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 p…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 leſſePropheſies 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. then our Soveraigne is King of Britaine, 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 Sacro ſancta Maj. 43. 44.2. The oyle is Gods, 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, and then 1. Saul was not King, the PrelateThe P. P. maketh all the Heathen Kings to be anoynted with grace from Heaven. 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 aAug. in locum, unxi m… num fort…m, ſervum obedienten… ideo in co poſui adjutorium.Auguſtine, is the oyle of ſaving grace: His own deare brethren the Papiſts ſay ſo, and eſpecially bLyra. Gratia eſt babitualis, qui… ſtat pugil contra di… bolum.Lyranus, cGloſſ. ord…. &Gloſſa ordinaria, dHugo Cardinalis, Olco laetitiae qu… prae conſortibu… unctus fuit Chriſtus, Pſ. 45.Hugo Cardinal, eBellarm. ….his beloved Bellarmine, fLorinus.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 grace, 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 look under himſelfe to gTheodatus.Diodatus, and hAinſworth, annot.Ainſworth, they ſay, this holy oyle was powred on David by Samuel, and on Chriſt was powred the Holy Ghoſt, and that by i1 Sam. 16 1. 13, 4 Luk. 4. 18. 21. 10. 3. 34.warrant of Scripture, and kIunius … not. in loe.Junius, and lMollerus 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 ofPlaces, Eſa. 62 3. Pſ. 21 3. ſpoken of the Church and Chriſt, by the P. P. expounded of profane Kings. his booke to the end; 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 loynes. It is a vaine conſequence. 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 his 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 aChald. par.Chaldee paraphraſe applyeth it to the reigne of King Meſſiah. bDiodat. an.Diodatus he ſpeaketh of the kingdome of Chriſt. cAinſworth. 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 dAinſw. an. in 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 worſhipping 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 Fathets gave, and yet we thinke not, when David commandeth to kill Ʋriah, 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.