Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
law_n king_n power_n subject_n 18,588 5 7.0694 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A57976 A peaceable and temperate plea for Pauls presbyterie in Scotland, or, A modest and brotherly dispute of the government of the Church of Scotland wherein our discipline is demonstrated to be the true apostolick way of divine truth, and the arguments on the contrary are friendly dissolved, the grounds of separation and the indepencie [sic] of particular congregations, in defence of ecclesiasticall presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, are examined and tryed / by Samuell Rutherfurd ... Rutherford, Samuel, 1600?-1661. 1642 (1642) Wing R2389; ESTC R7368 261,592 504

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

rebuke him from this Text. 14. Christ immediately and without the mediation of the Church saith Parker communicateth himselfe to beleevers ergo he communicateth his power also immediately to his Church Ans. It followeth not because he communicateth not his power of the keyes to the Church of believers either mediately or immediately because he giveth it not to them at all CHAP. V. Q. Whether or no some doe warrantably teach that the power of the Keyes is essentially and originally in the Church of Beleevers and in the Church-guides only at the second hand and in the by quoad exer●itium so as the Church of Believers should be the mistresse delegating the keyes by an imbred and kindly authority and the Church-guides as her proper servants and delegats do borrow the use and exercise of the keyes from the foresaid Church of Believers THe tenent of these with whom we now dispute is that all the power of the keyes is given by Christ to the multitude of Believers as to the first fountaine and that this power is derived and gested by the mulmultitude of believers to such and such persons to be used and exercised by them as the servants both of Christ and the Church For the clearing of the question and trying if this distinction be law-biding These distinctions are to be observed 1. The power of the keyes may be thought to come to the Ministers of the Church three waies as shall be cleared 1. By mediate derivation the Church receiving this power from Christ and deriving it over to the friends of the Bridegroome 2. By immediate donation God immediately giveth the honour of the keyes to these whom he maketh his Courtyers in this kinde 3. By application the Church only naming the men to the office 2. The power of the keyes and all sacred offices in Gods House are from the immediate wisdome of Christ The designation of such men to such offices is by the ministery of the Church 3. The power of the keyes is one thing the lawfull exercise of the keyes is another thing 4. The Ministers may be thought the servants either of the Church or servants of Christ for the Church 5. Designation of men by the Church to sacred offices may be thought either in the Churches free-will or tyed to the lawes designed by Christ. 6. The Church of believers may be thought either the virtuall or the formall subiect of the keyes 7. The power of the keyes may be thought to be given to the community or multitude of Believers or professours of faith in Christ in the generall not designing one man rather then another but leaving that to the disposition of meanes and disposition of second causes who shal● be the man as to be a Musitian to be an Astronomer is given to mankinde as some way proper to man as Porphyre saith howbeit all and every one of mankinde be not alwayes Musitians and Astronomers It is thought by our Brethren that the Church of believers is the first seat the prime subject and head fountaine under Jesus Christ to whom the keyes are given and that howbeit all offices and officers be only of Christs institution yet the Church of believers doe as the Spouse and Mistresse and bride of Christ communicate the lawfull exercise of some acts of the keyes as to preach administer the Sacraments oversee the conversation of the flock care for the poore to some certain men as her deputies and servants with borrowed authority from her selfe as the Well-head and prime fountain under Christ of all the authority and use of the keyes that is in the officers of the House as Pastors Doctors and Elders the Church still keeping in her own hands authority and power of the keyes in most materiall acts of the power of the keyes as by these keyes to ordain and elect all the officers and in case of aberration or failing to censure depose excommunicate them and all members of the visible Church and that independently and without any subordination to Presbyteries Classes and Synods even as the kingly power of actuall government is in the Kings hand and he appointeth deputies and servants under himself and in his name and authority to do and execute his will according to the Laws of the Kingdom so doth the Church of believers under Christ by an imbred authority and power received from Christ send out Pastors Doctors and Elders in her name and authority to exercise certain ministeriall acts yet so as the Church of believers in all the acts performed by the officers remaineth the principall and prime agent cause and actor under Christ and the officers only her servants deputies and instruments performing all by authority borrowed from her the bride Queen and Spouse of Christ This they believe to be contained in the Scriptures and taught by Fathers and Doctors of the Church I deny not but by the faculty of Paris this question was agitated in the Councell of Basil and Constance to bring the Pope as a sonne and servant under the power of a Generall Councell The Sorbonists and Doctors of Paris that are not near the smoake of the Popes glory for this contend with the Jesuites men that are sworne bellies to the world and the Pope The Parisians cite the Councell of Carthage where Augustine was present And Augustine and Tertullian and Chrysostome seeme to favour this So Maldonate Ferus Jansenius Sutluvius Whittaker Morton Spalato Gerson Almain Petr. de Alliac Also Edmundus Richerius and Sim. Vegorius set out a booke of Church policy depressing the Pope and extolling the Church power as full and compleat without a ministeriall head as their owne Parisian Doctors acknowledging the command of having a Pope to be affirmative and not to bind alwayes and that the Churches power remaineth full when the Pope is dead as the Parisians say p. 8. The booke came out without the name of an Authour and was condemned by Cardinall Peronius Archbishop of Senona and Primate of France and Germany and is refuted by Andreas Duvallius a Sorbonist What our Divines say in this I have exponed to be far otherwise then is the mind of Parker M. Jacob M. Best and the Authours of presbyteriall government examined Ann. 1641. Hence our first conclusion is All offices and office-bearers in Gods house have their warrant immediately from Christ Jesus as we all agree against the bastard prelacy 1. because of the perfection and plenitude of Scripture 2 because of our Law-giver Christs wisedome and his seven Spirits that are before the Throne seeing he seeth better then men 3. because of the Scriptures Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8 9. w 1 Cor. 12. 26 27 28 29. 1 Tim. 3. Act. 20. ●8 And therefore Presbyters and Deacons have their offices immediately from Christ and not from the Prelates 11. Conclusion The first subject of the keyes is either made quate or narrower as one Pastor and some ruling Elders of
Christ or beleeve not in him joyne hands with Papists and make way for Anabaptisticall Ana●chy that a persecuting or an unbeleeving King is no King not to be obeyed but to be turned out of his Throne And to this meaning Calvin Viretus and Cartwright teach that the kingly power floweth immediately from God the Creator not from God in the Mediator Christ. But 2. th● kingly power is considered in a speciall manner as it is in a Christian whether professing onely the Gospell or truly beleeving in Christ and so in relation to Christs Church and to the soule of a beleeving Prince the kingly power floweth from God in and through the Mediator Jesus Christ as all common favours which in general● flow from God the Creator are sanctified and blessed to the beleevers in the Mediator Christ as meat drinke sleep riches kingly honour And in this meaning Sauls kingly honour in respect of Saul himselfe is but a common favour flowing from the Creator howbeit to Gods Church for whose good he did fight the battels of the Lord it was a speciall favour flowing from God in Christ as our Divines say that creation which in it selfe is a common favour to all is a meane in the execution of the Decree of El●ction to the children of God 3. Conclusion Hence our Divines say that kingly authority is the same ordinance of God essentially considered in the heathen Princes as in Christian Kings as Cartwright and others say Neither doth it follow as our unlawfull Canons teach That the Christian Kings now have that same power in Causes Ecclesiasticall which the godly Kings amongst the Jewes as David and Salomon had ●or David and Salomon were Prophets as well as Kings and had power to pen Canon●cke Scripture and to prophesie which power in Ecclesiasticke causes no King now can have Neither doth it follow which Whytgift saith that we give no more authority to the Christian Magistrate in the Church of Christ then to the great Turke Our Divines say and that with good warrant that the kingly power as kingly is one and the same in kind in heathen Nero and in Christian Constantine As a heathen man is as essentially a father to his owne children and a husband to his owne wife and a King to his owne subjects as a Christian man is a father husband and king to his owne children wife and subjects Neither doth Christianity superadde and give of new any kingly power to a King because he is now become by Gods grace of a Heathen King a Christian King Christianity addeth indeed a new obligation to imploy his kingly power which he had full and entire before now in its exercise and use to more regall and kingly acts as to take care that the Gospell be soundly preached the Sacraments and discipline of the Church kept pure and heretickes punished according to that he to whom much is given from him much shall be required But the same King while he was a heathen King had the same kingly power and authority to performe these regall acts but being yet a heathen he wanted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supernaturalis a supernaturall or reall and physicall power to performe these acts now this power which he wanted before he heard of the Gospell and beleeved in Christ was not a kingly authority for then he should not have been a compleat Heathen King before which is against Gods word commanding obedience to heathen Kings Rom. 13. 1 2. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. 1 Pet. 2. 17. but this power that he wanted is a Christian power to exercise regall and kingly acts Neither is this an inconvenience that power to exercise the acts of a calling in a Christian manner be Christian and supernaturall and yet the authority kingly and not formally Christian but such as is and may be in a heathen King therefore kingly power and Christian power are here carefully to be distinguished and a Christian Kings power as a Christian is more then the Turks power in Church-matters Hence our Adversaries here dethrone and degrade the King for they give the King a head-ship and dominion over the Church as he is a Christian man and take that headship from him as a King because if the Turke by sword should conquer Britaine and become our King by their grounds he should be Head of the Church no lesse then our Christian Prince who now re●gneth over us and certaine it is a poore Headship that they give to the King even such a Head-ship as a Heathen King and the Turke hath over subdued Christian kingdomes and thus by their way Nero and Julian were heads of Christs Church 2. If unbeleeving Kings cease to be Kings then when they commit any fault that maketh them in Gods Court no members of the Church they are to be dethroned which is most seditious doctrine and so Formalists herein joyne with Papists 4. Conclusion There be these distinctions here consider●ble 1. The Kings power ordinary and extraordinary 2. His power as a King 2. and as a singularly graced Christian. 3. His power hortatorie as a Christian and coactive as a King 4. His power accumulative not privative in Church-matters 5. His power in actibus imperatis in acts commanding to another and his power in actibus elicitis which he is to performe himselfe If a King were a Prophet as a David he might doe many things in an extraordinary way in Church-matters which he cannot now ordinarily doe 2. As a singularly graced Christian he may write Sermons and Commentaries on holy Scripture for edifying the Church but this should be done by him by no kingly faculty 3. As a Christian he may exhort others to doe their duty but as King he may command that which Paul commanded Timothy and Titus to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others to preach in season and out of season to lay hands suddenly on no man and reforme Religion purge the Church of idolatry and superstition as Joshuah and H●zekiah did all which Church-men and Synods might doe also but Synods doe this in an Ecclesiasticke way upon the paine of Ecclesiasticke censures The King doth it by a regall kingly and coactive power of the sword 4. the Kings power is accumulative in giving to the Church and ayding and helping God hath given to the King the ten Commandements and the Gosp●ll as a pupill is given to a Tutor The King holds his sword above the Law of God to ward off the stroakes of wicked men who doe hurt the Law but the Kings power is not privative to take any priviledge from the Law and the Church so his power is as a tutor to keep not as a father who may both give and take away from his son the inheritance his power is defensive not offensive 5. He hath power in actibus imperatis to command that all preach sound Doctrine decree just Canons exercise discipline aright but in
19 20. where the Church had her owne Synods without the consent of a civill Magistrate but we are to repute it a speciall favour of God when the King as a nursing-●ather will countenance Synods with his royall presence God blesse our King 5. Conclusion The Kings royall power in adding his sanction to the ecclesiasticall constitutions and in punishing such as are decreed to be hereticks by the Church is regall and not ministeriall and servile See for this the Con c. Chalced. A●t 16. the Imperiall lawes Cod. l. 1 tit 8. leg 2. Heretic Vocab decret p. 2. caus 23. q. 8. c. 30. crossing Bellar. de pont l. 1. c. 7. So do their owne men goe against Bellarmine in this as Sanderus de clavib David l 2. c. 13. Carerius de potest sum pont l. 2. c. 23 Leo epist. 38. to Martian and Pulcheria and Leo epist. 7. to Theodosius Becanus erreth here with Bellarmine making the King as a servant obliged to adde his sanction civill to ecclesiasticall Canons Becan in opusc exam conc Anglic c. 7. 1. Because the use of the sword at Gods commandement is a kingly act commanded by God and is service done to God not to the Church 2. Neither is the King so to execute the Churches will as he should judge only of the fact and of the assumption yea he is to judge of the law and of the major proposition I or we see not in the Word of God where a Judge is a Judge to punish a fault and is not to know judicially that it is a fault a Judge as a Judge should know such a thing to be heresie and not tak● it upon the word of an Assembly of Church-men Deu. 17. 18 19. he is expresly to reade and know the law and to know and remember the Decree Prov. 31. 5. And the cause which he knoweth not he is to search out Job 29. 16. all which is meant of a knowledge not of private discretion which is required in all private Christians but as I take these places of a knowledge judiciall and authoritative which agreeth to a Judge as a Judge 3. If a Synod erre and decree that man to be an heretick who is sound in the faith the King is not obliged to erre with the Synod and to punish the innocent he is to decree righteous judgement and so the King is to judge of heresie but after a regall and civill way and with a coactive pow●r as the Synod or Church-Assembly is to judge of heresie after an ecclesiastick way and with a spirituall power 2. The King punisheth heresie as it troubleth the Common-w●alth and the Synod as it is scandalous and infectious in the Church Yea and the Christian King ruleth over men as men and also as Christian-m●n he ruleth over them as men with a dominion over their bodies lives and goods by his civill lawes he hath also dominion as King over men as Christians and members of Christs kingdome and Church not over their consc●ences for that is proper only to the father of spirits but he hath a coactive power over all men even Pastors as to cause them do their Christian duties he hath power to compell Church-men in Assemblies to determine truth and to use the keyes right and to preach and use the Sacraments according as Christ hath commanded in his Word and to punish them when they do otherwise What then if the King discerne that to be truth and absolve the man whom the Church-Assembly doth condemne as an heretick who shall judge betwixt them I answer the infallible rule of judging for both is the Word of God which speaketh home unpartially to both if they will heare but certainly the Kings civill kingly coactive power to compell men to doe their duty remaineth the highest and most supream power on Earth in genere potestatis politicae in the kind of politick power and pastors and all men may by this power be compelled to do right as for the abuse of the power it is no part of the power and in this kind the King hath a negative politick and kingly suffrage and voyce in all Church Assemblies no ecclesiasticall constitution hath the force of a law without the politick suffrage of the civill Judge And againe the ecclesiastick power that Christ hath given to his Church remaineth also the most supreme power under Christ in genere potestatis ecclesiasticae and the King is subject to this power The King is not excepted in this He that despiseth you despiseth me and in this whatsoever ye shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven and in this whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained and this ecclesiasticall power being the highest on Earth Pastors may command Kings in the Lord Jer. 1. 10 18 17. to doe their duty by an ecclesiastick power Arminians and Formalists both aske which of the two powers are highest and nearest unto the head Christ whither the kingly power or the ecclesiastick power for two paralell highest powers on earth cannot be I answer by asking which of the two shoulders in a mans body are highest and nearest to the mans head Certainly one of them in a well proportioned body is not higher then another and both are alike neare the head as none of two pole-starrs are nearer to their Zenith and Nadir none of two wheels in a right Chariot are higher then another The Church power saith the Prelate Davenant is highest in teaching and directing the kingly power in commanding and compelling Barclai compareth them to two shoulders under one head Meisner saith one of them is not above another There is no absurdity saith Spalato that in two bodies formally different there should be two heads yea it is necessary The Roman Glosse saith Patricius is the Popes father in things temporall and the Pope is his father in things spirituall as Cusan saith Papists saith Spalat have deleted that out of the Glosse So Berengarius Gelasius Papa Nicolaius the I agree to these words Sciendum quod nec Catholicae fidei nec Christianae contrarium est legi si ad honorem regni sacerdotij Rex pontifici pontifix obediat regi Spalato seemeth against Bellarmine to make up the losses made by Papists in Kings honour while he holdeth that the King his person and as he is a Christian man is subject to Church-power but as King he is subject to none but to Christ from whom immediately he hath his kingly dignity even as saith he when an Emperours servant being a Physitian the Emperour as Emperour is not subject to the Physitian but only the Emperour as he is a wounded man is subject to the art of his owne servant who cureth him and that of the Emperour free-will not by coaction so the Image-maker or he who maketh pourtracts in his art is not subject to the King neither is the King as King
knowne three wayes 1. When the naked naturall images or species of the materiall object are only cast in by God and no more and this is most in dreames as Nebuchadnezar saw a tree in his dreame but knew not that it was a King Pharoah saw seven blasted reeds and seven leane kine but knew not that they were seven yeares of Famine And sometimes in a vision being in an extasie as John Rev. 1. saw 1. seven candl●sticks but knew not that they were the seven Churches of Asia while Christ revealed the meaning to him 2. The images and species are knowne formally as signes signifying thus and thus as Joseph by a propheticall light saw the seven leane kine to be seven yeares of famine 3. Now there is a third light to judge of the act of seeing which I take to be two-fold 1. When the Seer and Prophet is perswaded that what he seeth is a propheticall vision and not a delusion of Satan this is as saith Pareus the very light of prophecy or some extraordinary light as saith Anto Walleus There is another light whereby the Seer beleeveth these things shall come to passe which he seeth either by a common light of historicall faith as Pharoah might beleeve that seven yeares of plenty should come and Balaam that Christ the starre of Jacob should certainly arise and shine upon the Church or the Seer seeth and beleeveth by light of saving faith as Isaiah and Daniel beleeved that the Messiah should be slai●e and this latter light whatever good Schoole-men say on the contrary is the light of faith for the three former lights might well be in Balaam 1. He might see in his fantasie the species of the starre of Jacob. 2. And know that they meaned no other thing then the Messiah 3. And be certainly perswaded that he saw so and that he was not deluded yea and historically beleeve that that blessed Starre should arise and yet he had no light of saving faith to beleeve that the Messiah should come So h●●e we cannot but distinguish betwixt a propheticall light in the second and third sight which is gratia gratis data a free gift and the light of saving faith which is gratia gratum fa●iens a saving grace of GOD in the sound beleever onely in this last sight 4. Conclus Hence Separatists may see that extraordinary acts of prophecy may well be subjected to the determination of the Church and yet be extraordinary inspirations and that divers wayes 1. Because the● were Prophets of the New Testament and so grace being more aboundant now nor under the old Testament it can bow and facilitate free-will to acts of prophecying and Paul from more grace laboured more aboundantly then they all 2. Prophecying at that time in Corinth might well be obtained by prayer upon the extraordinary impulsion of the spirit as Daniel obtained by prayer the interpretation of a dreame neither can it be proved from 1 Cor. 14. that Paul willeth them all without exception to covet to speake with tongues and to prophecy but only these that were extraordinarily moved to pray except these v. 31. yea may all prophecy be contrary to these words 1 Cor. 12. 29. are all Prophets which we cannot say 3. Because it was of old in the power of Prophets to use some meanes to dispose themselves to prophecy for when the passion of anger overclouded the fancy and the species therin then Elisha calleth for a minstrell to play and dispose the minde better as Ca●etan saith Howbeit for all that the Text saith the hand of the Lord only actuated these species and caused him to prophecy Neither are Robinsons arguments of great weight I answer only these that have most apparency 1 If the Lords giving of the spirit extraordinary to Eld●d and Medad made them Prophets both in office and exercise by due proportion gifts under the New Testament are sufficient to make men ordinary Prophets Answ. The antecedent is false because to Eldad and Medad were given both the spirit of prophecy and from that gifted spirit came a propheticall impulsion actually to prophecy without any farther call of the Church for God spake then by impulsion as he doth now by his Word els one may say the physicall and naturall power that Samuell had to kill Agag was a calling sufficient to authorize him to kill ●gag and an hability to discharge the office of the high-Priest in a man of the tribe of Iudah were a good calling for one so gifted to thrust himselfe in Aarons chair which God tyed only to Levies Tribe 2. This is that which Epi●copius Se●inians and Arminians teach from Anabaptists so The●phil Nicolai● And Radaecius Catech. of Raccovia Ostorod Socinus the 〈◊〉 1. That the sending and calling of Ministers by the Church n●w when the Gospell is sufficiently promulgated is not necessary 2. That any gifted man hath a warrant because he is gifted to be a Pastour without any call or authority officiall from the Church And what will Robinson say because these Prophe●s are gifted to baptize and to administer the Supper of the Lord as well as they are to preach the Gospell then by this goodly reason of his they may be pastors without any calling of the Church and certainly any man gifted to be a King and a Magistrate by the calling that the Word of God alloweth sh●ll by this reason have a call to leape up to the throne and the bench but our Divines as Calvin Parcus Zanchius Iunius Beza make two dif●e●rent things in a lawfull calling 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gifts for the calling which is not enough 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 authority from the Church which is also required 2. He objecteth 2 Chron. 17. 7. Jehoshaphat sent his Princes to teach the cities of Judah with the Levites and all Princes and Ma●istrates are bound to expound open up and apply the law by which they governe else they rule by tyranny Hence the publick Sermon of Jehoshaphat 2 Chron. 19. to the Iudges and Levites and his prayer and Hezekiahs Sermons 2 Chr 29. and Nehemiah taught the people Neh. 8. Answ. 1. Iunius and Ar. Mont●● Iehoshaphat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shalach Lesarou read he sent with the Princes the Levites to teach so that the Princes were not sent to teach 2. It is said hee sent the Princes to teach not in their owne persons but hee sent them to take care that the Levites should teach in time of that Apostacy 3. The Kings and Judges were to teach according to the judiciall Law the equity of their sentence to the ill doer as a Judge to convince a thiefe and a murtherer may lay before him the eighth and the sixt commandement in so farre as the breach of these disturbeth the peace of the common-wealth not as they are Church scandals and whither the male-factor be convinced or not the Judge punisheth with the sword so that
Master of the art of painting or pourtract-making the art onely is subject to the precepts and principles of art but the person of the painter is subject to the kingly power for the King as Bellarmin saith may forbid the Image-maker to draw obscene and filthy Images or to waste too much gold or silver upon his Images or to sell his images at too deare a price Hence saith he the kingly dignity is not subject to the ecclesiasticall power or to any other power on earth but only to Jesus Christ. I answer the Prelate doth well difference in the art of paintry these two 1. That which is artificiall and is only ruled by art that the King cannot command another thing which is morall as that he sell not his Images too deare and hurt not the common wealth by spending vainly too much gold and silver on his Images and in this the King may make lawes to limit the Painters morall carriage but then he and his fellowes honour not the King who call him judge over all persons and of all causes or in all causes and that without any distinction for when two Shoomakers contend about a point of tanning leather the King is not Judge in that cause because it is a point of art which belongeth to the art not the King Also the right translation of the Bible out of the Hebrew and the Greeke in the vulgar language is a cause meerly ecclesiasticall belonging to the Church Assembly it were hard to make the King being ignorant of these mother languages the Judge of that version as he is made by them Judge in all causes ecclesiasticall howbeit de jure he is a politick Judge even in this judging by a coactive and kingly power howbeit de facto and through ignorance he cannot exercise the kingly power that God hath given him in this act 2. By this comparison the Prelate putteth upon the King ●ut a course peece of country honour O faith he as King I make him above all and subject to no power in Heaven or Earth but immediately to God forsooth so make you the Painter the Shoomaker the Fashioner subject to no power in Heaven and Earth no not to the King but only immediately to God only their persons are subject to the King and so is the person of the King as a Christian man not as a King subject to Pastors who may exhort him and rebuke him when he judgeth unjustly But 3. saith the Prelate The wounded Emperour is subject to his servant the Physitian who cureth him not as Emperour but as a wounded man and that of his owne free-will and not by coaction What meaneth this not by coaction but that a King neither as King neither as a Christian man is subject to Church-discipline to the admonition of Pastors by any ecclesiasticall coaction or any law of God but of the Kings owne free-will Consider how Court-parasites doe dishonour the Lord for if Nathan by Gods commandement was obliged to rebuke David for his adultery and murther and the man of God obliged to cry against Jeroboams Altar and the Seer obliged to reprove King Asa and Jeremiah commanded to speake against the Kings and Princes of the land and if the Kings of Israel and Judah were plagued of God because they would not heare and submit to the Prophets speaking to them in the name of the Lord then the King as a Christian man is subject to the Ecclesiasticall power not of his owne free-will as this flatterer saith but by such Ecclesiasticall coaction as God layeth upon all men whose spirits are subject to Christs kingly power 4. This comparison halteth fowlely In the art of paintry ye may abstract that which is morall from that which is artificiall but in a King as a King there is nothing artificiall or which is to be abstracted from justice and piety for all the acts of kingly authority as kingly are morall acts of justice and of piety in preserving both the Tables of the Law if a King command a stratagem of war that which is meerly artificiall is not from the King as King but from a principle of military art in him as an expert souldier if then the King as King be a morall agent and a preserver of both Tables then as King he is subject to the Ecclesiasticall power 5. Spalato faileth farre in making the end of kingly government a naturall end not life eternall as the end of sayling is the desired harbour and not the kingdome of Heaven which is l●fe eternall nay but if we speake either of the end of the worke or the end of the worker the end of kingly power is a morall end for the end of the worke called finis operis is by Paul said to be that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty and this is de iure also finis operantis the end which the Ring is to intend and so the dignity office acts and end of the King as the King is subordinated to Christs kingly power in Church-discipline and yet he is the most supreme politicke power on earth and in eo genere solo Deo minor and above the Pastors in that kind But doe we joyne with Papists in this 1. Papists say Kings hold their Crownes of the Pope the Church universall virtually We thinke Nero had not his kingdome from Peter nor Domitian and Traian their kingdome from Clemens and Anacletus nor Hadrian from Enaristus and Alexander 2. Innocentius 3d. forbad obedience to Emperours Bonifacius 8● for hatred of King Philip of France forbad to pay tribute to the Emperors the Devill might blush to lay that upon us 3. Was there ever amongst us the like of their 8 generall Councell A Prelate shall not light off his horse nor bow to a King nor shall a King seeke that of a Bishop under the paine of two yeares excommunication 4. Did any of us thinke or write what Bellarmine hath spoken against the Lords anointed If Princes cannot be moved by Church-censures and if the necessity of the Church require the Pope shall free their subiects from obeying them ipsisque principatus abrogabit and shall pull their Princedome from them I say no more of this CHAP. XX. Q. 20. Whether or no the government of the Church of Scotland can be proved by Gods Word to be lawfull 1. ARTICLE Of the Doctrine and worship of the Church of Scotland WE acknowledge the Scriptures of God contained in the Old and New Testament to containe the whole doctrine of faith and good manners our Covenant rejecteth all traditions contrary without and beside the word of God and so it rejecteth all religious observances all humane Ceremonies all religious symbolicall signes all new meanes of worshipping God all Images positive Rites which have any influence in Gods worship as will-worship and impious additions to Gods word Jer. 7. 7. 2 Sam. 7. 7. Deut. 12.