III. The unlawful∣ness of ma∣king war a∣gainst our Su∣periors pro∣ved by the Jewish Law.
By the Hebrew Law, He that behaved himself contumaciously against either the High-Priest, or against him who was extraordinarily by God ordained to govern his people, was to be put to death; and that which in the eighth Chapter of the first Book of Samuel, is spoken of the right of Kings, to him that throughly inspects it, is neither to be under∣stood of their true and just rights, that is, of what they may do justly and honestly (for the duty of Kings is much otherwise described, Deut. 8.11.) nor is it to be understood barely, of what he will do: for then it had signified nothing that was singular or extraor∣dinary,* 1.1 for private men do the same to private men: But it is to be understood of such a fact, as usurps or carries with it the priviledge of what is right, that is, that it must not be resisted although it be not right; for Kings have a Right peculiar to themselves, and what in others is punishable, in them is not. That old Saying, Summum jus, summa injuria, Extreme right is extreme wrong, is best fitted to the case of Kings, whose abso∣lute power mak••s that seem right, which strictly taken is not so. There is a main diffe∣rence between Right in this sence taken,* 1.2 and Just; for in the former sence, it comprehends whatsoever may be done without fear of punishment: but Just, respects only things law∣ful and honest. And though some Kings there be, who are (what Servius in Cicero's Phi∣lippicks is commanded to be) magis Justitiae quam Juris Consulti; More regardful of their honour and duty, than of their power and prerogatives: Yet this doth not diminish their Soveraign Right; because if they will, they may do otherwise without the danger