The First Blast of the Trumpet &c.
The First Blast of the Trumpet &c.
ISSUES IN THE AUTHOR’S LIFETIME.
A. As a separate publication.
1. 1558. [i.e. early in that year at Geneva. 8vo.] See title at p. 1.
B. With other Works.
None known.
ISSUES SINCE HIS DEATH.
A. As a separate publication.
2. [?1687? Edinburgh.] 8vo. The First Blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous Regimen[t] of Women.
4. 15. Aug. 1878. Southgate London N. English Scholar’s Library. The present impression.
B. With other Works.
| 3. |
1846-1848. Edinburgh. 8vo. Bannatyne Club. The Works of John Knox. Collected and edited by David Laing. In 6 Vols. A special and limited edition of 112 copies of the First Two Volumes was struck off for this Printing Club. |
|
1846-1848. Edinburgh. 8vo. Wodrow Club. The same Two Volumes issued to this Society. |
|
|
1854-1864. Edinburgh. 8vo. The remaining Four Volumes published by Mr. T. G. Stevenson. The First Blast &c. is at Vol. iv. 349. |
1. 26 Apr.
1559. Strasburgh. 4to. [John Aylmer, afterwards Bishop of
London]. An Harborovve for faithfull and trewe subiectes,
agaynst the late blowne Blaste, concerninge the Gouernmente of VVemen wherin he
confuted all such reasons as a straunger of late made in that behalfe, with a breife
exhortation to Obedience. Anno. M.D. lix.
[This calling John Knox a “stranger” sounds to us like a piece of impudence, but
may bring home to us that Scotland was then to Englishmen a foreign country.]
2. 1565-6. Antwerp. 8vo. Petrus Frarinus, M.A.
Oration against the Vnlawfull Insurrections of the Protestantes of our time, under the pretence to refourme religion.
¶ Made and pronounced in the Schole of Artes at Louaine, the xiiij of December. Anno 1565. And now translated into English with the aduise of the Author. Printed by John Fowler in 1566.
The references to Knox and Goodman are at E. vj and F. ij. At the end of this work is a kind of Table of Contents, each reference being illustrated with a woodcut depicting the frightful cruelties with which the Author in the text charges the Protestants. One woodcut is a curious representation of Goodman and Nokes.
Doctor Fulke wrote a Confutation of this work.
3. 1579. Paris. 8vo. David Chambers of Ormond.
Histoire abregée de tous les Roys de France, Angleterre et Escosse, etc. In three Parts, each with a separate Title page.
The Third Part is dated 21 August 1573; is dedicated to Catherine de Medici; and is entitled
Discours de la legitime succession des femmes aux possessions de leurs parens: et du gouernement des princesses aux Empires et Royaumes.
4. 1584. [Printed abroad]. 8vo. John Lesley, Bishop of Ross.
A treatise towching the right, title and interest of the most Excellent Princesse Marie, Queen of Scotland, And of the most noble King James, her Graces sonne, to the succession of the Crowne of England. . . . Compiled and published before in Latin, and after in English. The Blast is alluded to at C. 2.
5. 1590. [Never printed.] Lord Henry Howard [created Earl of Northampton 13 March 1604.], a voluminous writer, but few of whose writings ever came to the press.
A dutifull defence of the lawfull Regiment of women deuided into three bookes. The first conteyneth reasons and examples grounded on the law of nature. The second reasons and examples grownded on the Ciuile lawes. The third reasons and examples grounded on the sacred lawes of god with an awnswer to all false and friuolous obiections which haue bene most vniustlie cowntenaunced with deceitfull coulores forced oute of theis lawes in disgrace of their approued and sufficient authorytie. Lansd. MS. 813 and Harl. MS. 6257.
At the time this tract was written the destinies, immediate and prospective, of the Protestant faith seemed to lay wholly in the laps of five women, viz:—
Catherine de Medici, Queen of France.
Marie de Lorraine, Queen Regent of Scotland, whose sole heir was her daughter Mary, afterwards Queen of Scots.
Mary Tudor, Queen of England, having for her heir apparent the Princess Elizabeth.
Of these, the last—also of least account at this moment, being in confinement—was the only hope of the Reformers. The other four, largely directing the affairs of three kingdoms, were steadfastly hostile to the new faith. Truly, the odds were heavy against it. Who could have anticipated that within three years of the writing of this book both Mary Tudor and Mary de Lorraine would have passed away; that Knox himself would have been in Scotland carrying on the Reformation; and that Elizabeth would have commenced her marvellous reign. So vast a change in the political world was quite beyond all reasonable foresight.
Meanwhile there was only present to the vision and heart of the Reformer as he gazed seaward, from Dieppe, but the unceasing blaze of, the martyr fires spreading from Smithfield all over England. Month after month this horrid work was deliberately carried on and was increasing in intensity.
We se our countrie set furthe for a pray to foreine nations,
we heare the blood of our brethren, the membres of Christ Iesus most cruellie
to be shed, and the monstruous empire of a cruell women (the secrete counsel
of God excepted) we
The vigour of the persecution had struck all heart out of the Protestants. Was this to go on for ever?
Heart-wrung at the ruthless slaughter—as we, in our day, have been by the horrors of the Indian mutiny or of the Bulgarian atrocities—-the Reformer sought to know the occasion of all these calamities. At that moment, he found it in the Empire of Woman. Afterwards he referred much of this book to the time in which it was written [pp. 58 and 61]. Shall we say that his heart compelled his head to this argument, that his indignation entangled his understanding on this subject? Just as Milton was led to the discussion of the conditions of divorce, through his desertion by his wife Mary Powell; so the fiery martyrdoms of England led Knox to denounce the female sex in the person of her whom we still call “Bloody Mary” that was the occasion of them all.
If in the happiest moment of his happiest dream, John Knox could have foreseen our good and revered Queen Victoria reigning in the hearts of the millions of her subjects, and ruling an Empire wider by far than those of Spain and Portugal in his day; if he could have seen England and Scotland one country, bearing the name which, as almost of prophecy, he has foreshadowed for them in this tract, “the Ile of greate Britanny;” if he could have beheld that one country as it now abides in its strength and its wealth, the most powerful of European states; if he could have realized free Italy with Rome, the Popes without temporal power, and modern civilisation more than a match for Papal intrigues; if he could have known that the gospel for which he lived had regenerated the social life of Great Britain, that it was tha confessed basis of our political action and the perennial spring of our Christian activities, so that not merely in physical strength, but in moral, force and mental enlightenment we are in the van of the nations of the world: if the great Scotch Reformer had but had a glimpse of this present reality, this tract would never have been written, and he would willingly have sung the pæan of aged Simeon and passed out of this life.
But this work was the offspring of the hour of darkness, if not of despair. Something must be done. A warrior of the pen, he would forge a general argument against all female rule that would inclusively destroy the legal right of Mary to continue these atrocities.
The first note of this trumpet blast, “The Kingdom apperteineth to our GOD,” shows us the vast difference between the way in which men regarded the Almighty Being then and now. Shall we say that the awe of the Deity has departed! Now so much stress is laid on the Fatherhood of GOD: in Knox’s time it was His might to defend His own or to take vengeance on all their murderers. Both views are true. Nevertheless this age does seem wanting in a general and thorough reverence for His great name and character.
Knox seems like some great Hebrew seer when he thus pronounces the doom of Mary and her adherents.
The same God, who did execute this greuous punishment, euen
by the handes of those, whom he suffred twise to be ouercomen in batel, doth
this day retein his power and iustice. Cursed Iesabel of England, with the pestilent
and detestable generation of papistes, make no litle bragge and boast, that
they haue triumphed not only against Wyet, but also against all such as haue
entreprised any thing against them or their procedinges. But let her and them
consider, that yet they haue not preuailed against god, his throne is more high,
then that the length of their hornes be able to reache. And let them further
consider, that in the beginning of their bloodie reigne, the haruest of their
iniquitie was not comen to full maturitie and ripenes. No, it was so grene,
so secret I meane, so couered, and so hid with hypocrisie, that some men (euen
the seruantes of God) thoght it not impossible, but that wolues might be changed
in to lambes, and also that the vipere might remoue her natural venom. But God,
who doth reuele in his time apointed the secretes of hartes, and that will haue
his iudgementes iustified euen by the verie wicked, hath now geuen open testimonie
of her and their beastlie crueltie. For man and woman, learned and vnlearned,
nobles and men of baser sorte, aged fathers and tendre damiselles, and finailie
the bones of the dead, as well women as men haue tasted of their tyrannie, so
that now
Within a year of the writing of this Mary Tudor was dead, and the system of which she was the centre was dead too.
There are some notable incidental matters in this tract.
First in matters of State. As
The spaniardes are Iewes and they bragge that Marie of England is the roote of Iesse. p. 46.
That most important testimony that the Reformation under Edward VI was mainly the work of the King and his court; as it had been in the days of his father Henry VIII.
For albeit thou diddest not cease to heape benefit vpon benefit,
during the reigne of an innocent and tendre king,
The political shrewdness of the Writer on the entanglement of England in the Spanish War against France, whereby we lost Calais on the 6th January 1558.
They see their owne destruction, and yet they haue no grace to auoide it. The nobilities and the hole realme of England, caste themselves willingly in to the pit. Yea they are becomen so blinde, that knowing the pit, they headlong cast them selues into the same, as the nobilitie of England, do this day, fighting in the defense of their mortall ennemie the Spaniard. Finallie they are so destitute of vnderstanding and iudgement, that althogh they knowe that there is a libertie and fredome, the whiche their predecessors haue inioyed; yet are they compelled to bowe their neckes vnder the yoke of Satan, and of his proude ministres, pestilent papistes and proude spaniardes. And yet can they not consider that where a woman reigneth and papistes beare authoritie, that there must nedes Satan be president of the counsel, p. 31.
The absence of any specific allusion to Calais shows that this book was wholly written before its capture.
Next, in the imagery with which he expresses his insight into the nature of things. As
It is a thing verie difficile to a man, (be he neuer so constant) promoted to honors, not to be tickled some what with pride (for the winde of vaine glorie doth easelie carie vp the, drie dust of the earth). p. 19.
The wise, politic, and quiet spirites of this world, p. 8.
The propertie of Goddes truth. The veritie of God is of that nature, that at one time or at other, it will pourchace to it selfe audience. It is an odour and smell, that can not be suppressed, yea it is a trumpet that will sound in despite of the adversarie. p. 7.
Lastly, the marvellous lashing of women, throughout: climaxing in
Woman . . . the porte and gate of the deuil. p. 19.
This work is therefore to us rather “the groaning of this angel,” this “watchman of the LORD” at the national subjection, the fiery martyrdoms, “the sobs and tears of the poor oppressed;” than the expression of any fundamental principle on which GOD has constituted human society. Intellectually, there is partiality, forgetfulness and disproportion in the argument. It applies as much to a Man as to a Woman, and more to a wicked than a good Woman. He started on the assumption that almost all women in authority were wicked. Time however alters many things; and he lived to love and reverence Queen Elizabeth.
So these trumpet notes are the outpouring of a very great nature, if not of a great thinker; of one whose absolute and dauntless devotion to GOD, to truth, to right, whose burning indignation against wrong-doing and faith in the Divine vengeance to overtake it, fitted him to do a giant’s work in the Reformation, and will enshrine his memory in the affection of all good men till time shall end.
With some other hints, gratefully acknowledged.
Of the various writings of the Reformer, no one was the occasion of exciting greater odium than his First Blast against the monstrous Regiment or Government of Women. Unlike all his other publications, it appeared anonymously, although he had no intention of ultimately concealing his name. His purpose was, as he tells us, “Thrice to Blow the Trumpet in the same matter, if GOD so permit,” and, on the last occasion, to announce himself as the writer, to prevent any blame being imputed to others. This intention, it is well known, was never carried into effect. That Knox’s views were in harmony with those of his colleagues, Goodman, Whittingham, and Gilby, need hardly be stated: but the reception of the little work fully confirmed the Author’s opinion, that it would not escape “the reprehension of many.” This may in a great measure be attributed to the course of public events within a few months of its publication.
The subject of Female Government had engaged his attention at an earlier period. One of his Questions submitted to Bullinger in 1554 was “Whether a Female can preside over, and rule a kingdom by divine right?” And in answer to some doubts regarding the Apparel of Women, he himself says that “if women take upon them the office which GOD hath assigned to men, they shall not escape the Divine malediction.” In his Additions to the Apology for The Protestants in prison at Paris, he expresses his conviction that the government of Princes had come to that state of iniquity that “no godly person can enjoy office or authority under them.” This assertion indeed was not specially applicable to Female government, but his feelings in reference to the persecutions in England under Mary, and in Scotland under the Queen Regent, impelled him to treat of a subject which all others at the time seemed most sedulously to avoid.
His First Blast was probably written at Dieppe towards the end of 1557; and it was printed early in the following year at Geneva, as is apparent upon comparison with other books from the press of John Crespin in that city.
A copy of the work having been sent to John Fox, then residing at Basle, he wrote “a loving and friendly letter” to the author, in which he expostulates with him on the impropriety of the publication. In Knox’s reply, dated the 18th of May 1558, he says, he will not excuse “his rude vehemencie and inconsidered affirmations, which may appear rather to proceed from choler than of zeal or reason.” “To me,” he adds, “it is enough to say, that black is not white, and man’s tyranny and foolishness is not GOD’s perfect ordinance.”
The similar work of Goodman on Obedience to Superior Powers which appeared at Geneva about the same time, was also suggested by the persecuting spirit which then prevailed. But both works were published somewhat unseasonably, as such questions on Government and Obedience, it is justly observed, might have been more fitly argued when a King happened to fill the throne. The terms used by Goodman in reference to Mary, Queen of England, are not less violent than unseemly. She died on the 17th of November 1558, and her successor regarded the authors of those works with the utmost dislike; although neither of them, in their writings, had any special reference or the least intention of giving offence to Queen Elizabeth. . . .
That these works, and every person supposed to entertain similar sentiments, should be regarded with marked aversion by Queen Elizabeth, need excite no surprise.
In the beginning of the year 1559, Calvin having revised and republished his Commentaries on Isaiah, originally dedicated to Edward VI. in 1551; he addressed the work in a printed Epistle to Her Majesty: but his messenger brought him back word that his homage was not kindly received by Her Majesty, because she had been offended with him by reason of some writings published with his approbation at Geneva.
Calvin felt so greatly annoyed at this
imputation, that he addressed a letter
Two years ago [i.e. in 1557] John Knox
asked of me, in a private conversation, what I thought about the Government of Women.
I candidly replied, that as it was a deviation from the original and proper order
of nature, it was to be
I had no suspicion of the book, and for a whole year was ignorant of its publication. When I was informed of it by certain parties, I sufficiently shewed my displeasure that such paradoxes should be published; but as the remedy was too late, I thought that the evil, which could not now be corrected, should rather be buried in oblivion than made a matter of agitation.
Inquire also at your father in law [Sir Anthony Cooke] what my reply was, when he informed me of the circumstance through Beza. And Mary was still living, so that I could not be suspected of flattery.
What the books contain, I cannot tell; but Knox himself will allow that my conversation with him was no other than what I have now stated.
Calvin then proceeds to say, that great confusion might have arisen by any decided opposition, and there would have been cause to fear, that in such a case—
By reason of the thoughtless arrogance of one individual, the wretched crowd of exiles would have been driven away, not only from this city [of Geneva] but even from almost the whole world.
Some years later, and subsequent to Calvin’s death, Beza, in a letter to Bullinger, adverts to Queen Elizabeth’s continued dislike to the Church of Geneva. In his letter, dated the 3rd of September 1566, he says—
For as to our Church, I would have you know that it is so hateful to the Queen [of England], that on this account she has never said a single word in acknowledgement of the gift of my Annotations [on the New Testament]. The reason of her dislike is twofold; one, because we are accounted too severe and precise, which is very displeasing to those who fear reproof; the other is, because formerly, though without our knowledge, during the lifetime of Queen Mary, two books were published here in the English language, one by Master Knox against the Government of Women, the other by Master Goodman on the Rights of the Magistrate.
As soon as we learned the contents of each, we were much displeased,
and their sale was forbidden in consequence; but she, notwithstanding, cherishes
the opinion she has taken into her head.
Wonder it is, that amongest so many pregnant wittes as the Ile of greate
Brittanny hath produced, so many godlie and zelous preachers as England
did somtime norishe, and amongest so many learned and men of graue iudgement,
as this day by Iesabel are exiled, none is found so stowte of courage, so
faithfull to God, nor louing to their natiue countrie, that they dare admonishe
the inhabitantes of that Ile how abominable before God, is the Empire or
Rule of a wicked woman, yea of a traiteresse and bastard. And what may a
people or nation left destitute of a lawfull head, do by the authoritie
of Goddes worde in electing and appointing common rulers and magistrates.
That Ile (alas) for the contempt and horrible abuse of Goddes mercies offred,
and for the shamefull reuolting to Satan frome Christ Iesus, and frome his
Gospell ones professed, doth iustlie merite to be left in the handes of
their own counsel, and so to come to confusion and bondage of strangiers.
God alway had his people amongst the
wicked, who neuer lacked their prophetes and teachers. The same prophetes for comfort of the afflicted and chosen saintes of
God, who did lie hyd amongest the reprobate of that age (as
commonlie doth the corne amongest the chaffe) did prophecie and before speake
the changes of kingdomes, the punishmentes of tyrannes, and the vengeance
To such as thinke that it will be long before such doctrine come to
the eares of the chief offenders, I answer that the veritie of God is of
that nature, that at one time or at other, it will pourchace to it selfe
audience. It is an odour and smell, that can not be suppressed,
The propertie of Goddes truth. yea it is a trumpet that will sound in despite of the aduersarie. It will
compell the verie ennemies to their own confusion, to testifie and beare
witnesse of it. For I finde that the prophecie and preaching of Heliseus
was declared in the hall of the king of Syria by the seruantes and flatterers
of the same wicked king,
And as concerning the danger, which may hereof insue, I
am not altogether so brutishe and insensible, but that I haue laid mine
accompt what the finishinge of the worke may coste me for mine own parte.
A very dangerous thing to speake against olde errors. First, I am not ignorant howe difficile and dangerous it is to speake against
a common error, especiallie when that the ambitious mindes
of men and women are called to the obedience of goddes simple commandement.
For to the most parte of men, laufull and godlie appeareth, what soeuer
antiquitie hath receiued. And secondarilie, I looke to haue mine aduersaries
not onlie of the ignorant multitude, but also of the wise, politike, and
quiet spirites of this worlde, so that aswell shall suche as oght to mainteine
the truth and veritie of God become ennemies to me in this case, as shall
the princes and ambitious persons, who to mainteine their vniust tyrannie
do
This precept, I say, with the threatning annexed, togither with the rest, that is spoken in the same chapter, not to Ezechiel onlie, but to euerie one, whom God placeth whatchman ouer his people and flocke, (and watchman are they whose eyes he doth open, and whose conscience he pricketh to admonishe the vngodlie) compelleth me to vtter my conscience in this mater, notwithstanding that the hole worlde shuld be offended with me for so doing. Yf any wonder, why I do concele my name, let him be assured, that the feare of corporall punishement is nether the onlie, nether the chef cause. My purpose is thrise to blowe the trumpet in the same mater, if God so permitte: For the Authors name. twise I intende to do it without name, but at the last blast, to take the blame vpon my selfe, that all others may be purged.
To promote a woman to beare rule, superioritie, dominion or empire aboue any realme, nation, or citie, is repugnant to nature, contumelie to God, a thing most contrarious to his reueled will and approued ordinance, and finallie it is the subuersion of good order, of all equitie and iustice
In the probation of this proposition, I will not be so curious, as to gather what soeuer may amplifie, set furth, or decore the same, but I am purposed, euen as I haue spoken my conscience in most plaine and fewe wordes, so to stand content with a simple proofe of euerie membre, bringing in for my witnesse Goddes ordinance in nature, his plaine will reueled in his worde, and the mindes of such as be moste auncient amongest godlie writers.
And first, where that I affirme the empire of a woman to be a thing
repugnant to nature, I meane not onlie that God by the order of his creation
hath spoiled woman of authoritie and dominion, but also that man hath seen,
proued and pronounced iust causes why that it so shuld be. Man, I say, in
many other cases blind, doth in this behalfe see verie clearlie. For the
causes be so manifest, that they can not be hid. For who can denie but it
repugneth to nature, that the blind shal be appointed to leade and conduct
such as do see? Causes why women shuld not have preeminence ouer
men. That the weake, the sicke, and impotent persones shall
norishe and kepe the hole and strong, and finallie, that the foolishe, madde
and phrenetike shal gouerne the discrete, and giue counsel to such as be
sober of
Priuate example do not breake the generall
ordinance. I except such as God by singular priuiledge, and for certein causes
knowen onlie to him selfe, hath exempted from the common ranke of women,
and do speake of women as nature and experience do this day declare them.
Nature I say, doth paynt them furthe to be weake, fraile, impacient, feble
and foolishe: and experience hath declared them to be vnconstant, variable,
cruell and lacking the spirit of counsel and regiment. And these notable faultes haue men in all ages espied in that kinde, for the whiche not onlie
they haue remoued women from rule and authoritie, but also some haue thoght
that men subiect to the counsel or empire of their wyues were vn worthie
of all publike office. For this writeth Aristotle in the seconde of his
Politikes:2 Politicorum Aristotelis. what difference shal we put, saith he, whether
that women beare authoritie, or the husbanesd that obey the empire of their
wyues be appointed to be magistrates? For what insueth the one, must nedes
folowe the other, to witte, iniustice, confusion and disorder. The same
author further reasoneth, that the policie or regiment of the Lacedemonians
(who other wayes amongest the Grecians were moste excellent) was not worthie
to be reputed nor accompted amongest the nombre of common welthes, that
were well gouerned, because the magistrates, and rulers of the same were
to[o] muche geuen to please and obey their wyues. What wolde this writer
(I pray you) haue said to that realme or nation, where a woman sitteth crowned
in parliament amongest the middest of men. Reade
De statu hominum Titul. 8. In the first boke of the digestes, it is
pronounced that the condition of the woman in many cases is worse then of
the man. As in iurisdiction (saith the lawe) Fromme women
power is taken away by the Ciuile lawe ouer their own children. in receiuing
of care and tuition, in adoption,
Wold to god the examples were not so manifest, Great
imperfections of women. to the
further declaration of the imperfections of women, of their naturall weaknes, and inordinat appetites. I might adduce histories, prouing
some women to haue died for sodein ioy, some for vnpaciencie to haue murthered
them selues, some to haue burned with such inordinat lust, that for the
quenching of the same, they haue betrayed Romilda the wife of Gisulphus betrayed to Cacanus
the dukedome of friaul in Italie, to strangiers their
countrie and citie: and some to haue bene so desirous of dominion, that
for the obteining of the same, they haue murthered the children of their
owne sonnes. Yea and some haue killed with crueltie their owne husbandes
and children.Iane quene of Naples hanged her husband.
Athalia,
Answer to an obiection. I am not ignorant, that the most part of men do vnderstand this malediction
of the subiection of the wife to her husband, and of the dominion, which;
he beareth aboue her: but the holie ghost geueth to vs an
other interpretation of this place, taking from all women all. kinde of
superioritie, authoritie and power ouer man, speaking as foloweth, by the
mouth of saint Paule.
A strong argument. The apostle taketh power frome all woman to speake in the assemblie.
Ergo he permitteth no woman to rule aboue man. The former parteis euident,
whereupon doth the conclusion of necessitie folowe. NOTE. For he that taketh from
woman the least parte of authoritie, dominion or rule, will
not permit vnto her that whiche is greatest: But greater it is to reigne
aboue realmes and nations, to publish and to make lawes, and to commande
men of all estates, and finallie to appoint iudges and ministers, then to
speake in the congregation. For her iudgement, sentence, or opinion proposed
in the congregation, may be iudged by all, may be corrected by the learned,
and reformed by the godlie. But woman being promoted in souereine authoritie,
her lawes must be obeyed, her opinion folowed, and her tyrannic mainteined:
supposing that it be expreslie against God, and the prophet [profit] of
the common welth, as to[o] manifest experience doth this day witnesse. And
therfore yet againe I repete that, whiche before I haue affirmed: to witt,
that a woman promoted to sit in the seate of God, that is, to teache, to
iudge or to reigne aboue man, is amonstre in nature, contumelie to God,
and a thing most repugnant to his will and ordinance. For he hath depriued
them as before is proued, of speakinge in the congregation, and hath expreslie
forbidden them to vsurpe any kinde of authoritie aboue man. Howe then will
he suffer them to reigne and haue empire aboue realmes and nations? He will
neuer, I say, approue it, because it is a thing most repugnant to his perfect
ordinance, as after shalbe declared, and as the former scriptures haue plainlie
geuen testimonie. To the whiche, to adde any thing were superfluous, were
it not that the worlde is almost nowe comen to that blindnes, that what
soeuer
Augustine in his 22. boke writen against Faustus,August.
lib. 22. contra Faustum, c. 31. proueth
that a woman oght to serue her husband as vnto God: affirming that in no
thing hath woman equall power with man, sauing that nether of both haue
power ouer their owne bodies. By whiche he wold plainlie conclude, that
a woman oght neuer to pretend nor thirst for that power and authoritie which
is due to man. For so he doth explane him selfe in an other place,De Trinitat. lib. 12
cap. 7.
affirming that woman oght to be repressed and brideled be times, if she
aspire to any dominion: alledging that dangerous and perillous it is to
suffre her to procede, althogh it be in temporall and corporall thinges.
And therto he addeth these wordes: God seeth not for a time, nether is there
any newe thinge in his sight and knowledge, meaninge therby, that what God
hath sene in one woman (as concerning dominion and bearing of authoritie)
the same he seeth in all. And what he hath forbidden to one, the same he
also forbiddeth to all. And this most euidentlie yet in an other place he
Chrysostome amongest the Grecian writers of no small credit, speaking
in rebuke of men, who in his dayes, were becdmen inferior to some women
in witt and in godlines, saith:Chrysost. homil. 17.
in genes. for this cause was woman
put vnder thy power (he speaketh to man in generall) and thou wast pronounced
Lorde ouer her, that she shulde obey the, and that the head shuld not folowe
the feet. But often it is, that we see the contrary, that he who in his
ordre oght to be the head, doth not kepe the ordre of the feet (that is,
doth not rule the feet) and that she, that is in place of the foote, is
constitute to be the head. He speaketh these wordes as it were in admiration,
NOTE that man was becomen so brutish, that he did not consider it to be a thing
most monstruouse, that woman shulde be preferred to man in any thing, whom
God had subiected to man in all thinges. He procedeth saying: Neuer the
lesse it is the parte of the man, with diligent care to repel the woman,
that geueth him wicked
Augustine definethDe ordine lib. 1 c. 10 ordre to be that thing, by the whiche God hath appointed and ordeined all thinges. Note well reader, that Augustine will admit no ordre, where Goddes apointment is absent and lacketh.
And in an other place he saith,De ciuit. Dei, lib. 19
cap. 13. that ordre is a disposition,
geuing their owne propre places to thinges that be vnequall, which he termeth
in Latin Parium et disparium, that is, of thinges equall or
like, and thinges vnequall or vnlike. Of whiche two places and of the hole
disputation, which is conteined in his second boke de ordine, it
is euident,what soener done withowt the appointment of Goddes
will is done withowt ordre. that what soeuer is done ether whithout the assurance
of Goddes will, or elles against his will manifestlie reueled in his word,
is done against ordre. But suche is the empire and regiment of all woman
(as euidentlie before is declared) and therfore, I say; it is a thing plainlie
repugnant to good ordre, yea it is the subuersion of the same. If any list
to reiect the definition of Augustin, as ether not propre to this purpose,
or elles as insufficient to proue mine intent: let the
But iust and rightuouse, terrible and fearfull are thy iudgements, o
Lorde! For as some times thou diddest so punishe men for vnthankfulnes,
NOTE. The seconde glasse, whiche God hath set before the eyes of man,
wherein he may beholde the ordre, whiche pleaseth his wisdome, concerning
authoritie and dominion, is that common welth, to the whiche it pleaseth
his maiestie to apoint, and geue lawes, statutes, rites and ceremonies not
onelie concerninge religion, but also touching their policie and
NOTE. The gentil no lesse bounde to the lawe moral then the
Iewe. Nowe if the lawe morall, be the constant and vnchangeable will of God,
to the which the gentil is no lesse bounde, then was the Iewe;
and if God will that amongest the gentiles, the ministres and executors
of his lawe be nowe apointed, as somtimes they were apointed amongest the
Iewes: further if the execution of iustice
The second argument. What soeuer repugneth to the will of god expressed in his most sacred
worde, repugneth to iustice: but that women haue authoritie
ouer men repugneth to the will of God expressed in his worde: and therfore
mine author commandeth me to conclude without feare, that all suche authoritie
repugneth to iustice. The first parte of the argument I trust dare nether
Iewe nor gentile denie: for it is a principle not onelie vniuersallie confessed,
but also so depelie printed in the hart of man, be his nature neuer so corrupted,
that whether he will or no, he is compelled at one time or other, to acknowledge
and confesse, Nature doth confesse that repugnancie to Goddes
will is iniustice. that justice is violated, when thinges are
done against the will of God, expressed by his worde. And to this confession
are no lesse the reprobate coacted and constrained, then be the chosen children
of god, albeit to a diuers end. The elect with displeasure of their facte,
confesse their offense, hauing accesse to grace and mercie, as did Adam,
Dauid, Peter, and all other penitent offenders. Howe the reprobat confesse Goddes will iust. But the reprobat,
not withstanding they are compelled to acknowledge the will of God to be
iust the which they haue offended, yet are they neuer inwardlie displeased,
with their iniquitie, but rage, complain and storme against God, whose vengeance
they can not escape:
Here might I bring in the oppression and iniustice, which is committed against realmes and nations, whiche some times liued free, and now are broght in bondage of forein nations, by the reason of this monstriferous authoritie and empire of women. But that I delay till better oportunitie. And now I think it expedient to answer such obiections, as carnal and worldlie men, yea men ignorant of God, vse to make for maintenance of this tyrannic (authoritie it is not worthie to be called) and most vniuste empire of woman.
Secondarily they do obiect the lawe made by Moses for
the doughters of zalphead.
Answer to the first obiection. To the first, I answer, that particular examples do establishe no common
lawe. The causes were knowen to God alon, why he toke the
spirite of wisdome and force frome all men of those ages, and did so mightely
assist women against nature, and against his ordinarie course: that the
one he made a deliuerer to his afflicted people Israel: and to the other
he gaue not onlie perseuerance in the true religion, when the moste parte
of men had declined from the same, but also to her he gaue the spirit of
prophecie, to assure king Iosias of the thinges which were to come. With
these women, I say, did God worke potentlie, and miraculouslie, yea to them
he gaue moste singular grace and priuiledge. But who hath commanded, that
a publike, yea a tyrannicall and moste wicked lawe be established vpon these
examples? The men that obiect the same, are not altogether ignorant, that
examples haue no strength, when the question is of lawe.
Examples against lawe haue no strength when
the question is of lawe. As if I shuld aske, what mariage is laufull? and it shulde be answered that
laufull it is to man, not onelie to haue manie wiues at ones, but also it
is laufull to marie two sisters, and to enioye them both liuing at ones,
because that Dauid, Iacob, and Salomon, seruantes of God did the same. I
trust that no man wold iustifie the vanitie of this reason. Or if the question
were demanded, if a Christian, with good conscience may defraude, steale
or deceiue: and answer were made that so he might by the example of the
Israelites, who at Goddes commandement, deceiued the Egyptians, and spoiled
them of their garmentes, golde and syluer. I thinke likewise this reason
shuld be mocked. And what greater force, I pray you, hath the former argument?
Debora did rule in Israel, and Hulda spoke prophecie in Iuda: Ergo it is laufull for women to reigne aboue realmes and nations, or to teache in the
presence of men. NOTE. The consequent is vain and of none effect.
For of examples, as is before declared, we may establishe
An answer to the second obiection. But now to the second obiection. In whiche women require (as to them appeareth) nothing but equitie and iustice. Whilest they and their patrones for them, require dominion and empire aboue men. For this is their question: Is it not lauful, that women haue their right and inheritance, like as the doughters of Zalphead were commanded by the mouth of Moses to haue their portion of grounde in their tribe?
I answer, it is not onlie laufull that women possesse their inheritance,
but I affirme also that iustice and equitie require, that so they do. But
therwith I adde that whiche gladlie they list not vnderstand:
what woman wold not gladly heare. that to beare rule or authoritie ouer man, can neuer be right nor inheritance
to woman. For that can neuer be iust inheritance to any person, whiche God
by his word hath plainlie denied vnto them: but to all women hath God denied
authoritie aboue man, as moste manifestlie is before declared: Therfore
to her it can neuer be inheritance. And thus must the aduocates of our ladies
prouide some better example and strongar argument. For the lawe made in
fauor of the doughters of Zalphead, will serue them nothing. And assuredlie
greate wonder it is, that in so greate light of Goddes truthe, men list
to grope and wander in darknes. For let them speak of conscience:
the daughters of Zalphead desired to reigne
ouer no man in Israel. if the petition of any of these fore named women was to reigne ouer any
one tribe, yea or yet ouer any one man within Israel. Plain it is, they
did not, but onelie required, that they might haue a portion of ground amonge
the men of their tribe, lest, that the name of their father shuld be abolished.
And this was graunted vnto them without respect had to any ciuil regiment.
And what maketh this, I pray you, for the establishing of this monstruous
empire of women? The question is not: if women may not succede to possession,
substance patrimonie or inheritance, such as fathers may leaue to their
children, for that I willinglie grant: women may succede to inheritance but not to
office. But the question
is: if women may succede to their fathers in offices, and chieflie to
The consent, say they, of realmes and lawes pronounced and admitted
in this behalfe, long consuetude and custorne, together with felicitie of
some women in their empires haue established their authoritie.
Answer to the third obiection. To whome, I answer, that nether may the tyrannie of princes, nether the
foolishnes of people, nether wicked lawes made against God, nether yet the
felicitie that in this earthe may herof insue, make that thing laufull,
whiche he by his word hath manifestlie condemned. For if the approbation
of princes and people, lawes made by men, or the consent of realmes, may
establishe any thing against God and his word, then shuld idolatrie be preferred
to the true religion. For mo realmes and nations, mo lawes and decrees published
by Emperours with common consent of their counsels, haue established the
one, then haue approued the other. And yet I thinke that no man of sounde
iudgement, will therfore iustifie and defend idolatrie. No more oght any
man to mainteine this odious empire of women, althogh that it were approued
of all men by their lawes. For the same God that in plain wordes forbiddeth
idolatrie,
I am not ignorant that the subtill wittes of carnall men (which can
neuer be broght vnder obedience of Goddes simple preceptes to maintein this
monstruous empire) haue yet two vaine shiftes. the
fourth obiection. First they alledge, that albeit women may not absolutelie reigne by themselues, because
they may nether sit in iudgement, nether pronounce sentence, nether execute
any publike office: yet may they do all such thinges by their lieutenantes,
deputies and iudges substitute. Secondarilie, say they, a woman borne to
rule ouer anyrealme, may chose her a husband, and to him she may transfer
and geue her authoritie and right. To both I answer in fewe wordes. First
that frome a corrupt and venomed fountein can spring no holsome water: Secondarilie
that no person hath power to geue the thing, which doth not iustlie appertein
to them selues: women can make no laufull officer. But the authoritie of a woman is a corrupted
fountein, and therfore from her can neuer spring any lauful officer. She
is not borne to rule ouer men: and therfore she can apointe none by her
gift, nor by her power (which she hathn ot) to the place of a laufull magistrat.
And therfore who soeuer receiueth of a woman, Let
England and Scotland take hede. office or authoritie, are adulterous and bastard officers before God. This may appeare
straunge at the first affirmation, but if we will be as indifferent and
equall in the cause of God, as that we can be in the cause of man, the reason
shall sodeinlie appeare. The case suposed, that a tyranne by conspiracie
vsurped the royall seat and dignitie of a king, and in the same did so established
him selfe, that he apointed officers, and did what him list for a time,
and in this meane time, the natiue king made streit inhibition to all his
subiectes, that none shuld adhere to this traitor, nether yet receiue any
dignitie of him, yet neuer the lesse they wold honor the same traitor as
king, and becomme
And nowe to put an end to the first blast, seing that by the ordre of
nature, by the malediction and curse pronounced against woman, by the mouth
of S. Paule the intrepreter of Goddes sentence, by the example of that common
welth, in whiche God by his word planted ordre and policie, and finallie
by the iudgement of the most godlie writers, God hath deiected woman frome
rule, dominion, empire, and authoritie aboue man. Moreouer, seing that nether
the example of Debora, nether the lawe made for the doughters of Zalphead,
nether yet the foolishe consent of an ignorant multitude, be able to iustifie
that whiche God so plainlie hath condemned: An
admonition. let all men take hede what quarell
and cause frome hence furthe they do defend.
The secret cause of this, I say, is knowen to God alone. But by his euident scriptures we may assuredly gather,
Why God permitteth somtimes his owne souldiers to fall in batel. that by such
means doth his wisdome somtimes, beat downe the pride of the flesh (for
the Israelites at the firste trusted in their multitude, power and strength)
and somtimes by such ouerthrowes, he will punish the offenses of his owne
children, and bring them, to the vnfeined knowledge of the same, before
he will geue them victorie against the manifest contemners, whom he hath
apointed neuerthelesse to vttermost perdition: as the end of that batel
did witnesse. For althogh with greate murther the children of Israel did
twise fall before the Beniamites, yet after they had wept before the Lorde,
after they had fasted and made sacrifice in signe of their vnfeined repentance,
they so preuailed against that proude tribe of Beniamin,
Praise God ye that feare him.
The following postscript occurs at p. 78 of John Knox's Appellation &c., which is dated “From Geneua. The 14 of Iuly, 1558.”
Because many are offended at the first blast of the trompett, in whiche I affirme, that to promote a woman to beare rule, or empire aboue any realme, nation or citie, is repugnant to nature, contumelie to God, and a thing moste contrariouse to his reuealed and approued ordenance: and because also, that somme hath promised (as I vnderstand) a confutation of the same, I haue delayed the second blast, till such tyme as their reasons appere, by the which I either may be reformed in opinion, or els shall haue further occasion more simply and plainly to vtter my iudgement. Yet in the meane tyme for the discharge of my conscience; and for auoyding suspition, whiche might be ingendred by reason of my silence, I could not cease to notifie these subsequent propositions, which by Gods grace I purpose to entreate in the second blast promised.
1 It is not birth onely nor propinquitie of blood, that maketh a kinge lawfully to reign aboue a people professing Christe Iesus, and his eternall veritie, but in his election must the ordenance, which God hath established, in the election of inferiour iudges be obserued.
2 No manifest idolater nor notoriouse transgressor of gods holie preceptes o[u]ght to be promoted to any publike regiment, honour or dignitie in any realme, prouince or citie, that hath subiected the[m] self to Christe lesus and to his blessed Euangil.
3 Neither can othe nor promesse bynd any such people to obey and maintein tyrantes against God and against his trueth knowen.
4 But if either rashely they haue promoted any manifest wicked personne, or yet ignorantly haue chosen suche a one, as after declareth him self vnworthie of regiment abouc the people of God (and suche be all idolaters and cruel persecuters) moste iustely may the same men depose and punishe him, that vnaduysedly before they did nominate, appoint and electe.
If the eye be single, the whole body shalbe clere.
[Underlying these Propositions is the great truth that the Rulers exist for the people, and not the people for the Rulers.]
JOHN KNOX’s apologetical Defence of his First Blast &c. to Queen ELIZABETH.
12 July 1559. John Knox to Sir William Cecil.
The spreit of wisdom heall your hart to the glorie of God and to the comforte of his afflicted mind.
On[e] caus[e] of my present writing is ryght honorable humblie to requyr you to Deliuer this other lettre enclosed to the quenes grace quilk conteaneht in few and sempill wordes my confession what I think of her authoritie, how far it is Just, and what may make it odious in goddis presence.
I hear there is a confutation sett furht in prent against the first blast. God graunt that the writar haue no more sought the fauours of the world, no less the glory of God and the stable commoditie of his country then did him who interprised in that blast to vt[t]er his Conscience. When I shall haue tym[e] (which now Is Dear and straitt vnto me) to peruse that work I will communicat[e] my Judgement with you concernying the sam[e]. The tym[e] Is now sir that all that eyther thrust Christ Jesus to r[e]ing in this yle, the liberties of the sam [e] to be keapt, to the inhabitantes therof, and theire hartis to be joyned together in love vnfeaned ought rather to study how the sam[e] may be brought to pass then vainly to trauall for the maintenance of that wharof allready we have seen the daunger, and felt the smart.
State Papers, Scotland, Vol. Art. 57. in Public Record office, London.
20 July 1559. John Knox’S Declaration to Queen Elizabeth.
To the verteuus and godlie Elizabeht by the grace of GOD quen of England etc John Knox desireht the perpetuall Encrease of the Holie Spiritt. etc.
As your graces displeasur against me most Iniustlie conceaned,
hath be[en] and is to my wretched hart a burthen grevous and almost intollerabill,
so is the testimonye of a clean conscience to me a stay and
I can not Deny the Writeing of a booke against the vsurped aucthoritie and Iniust regiment of wemen, neyther yet am I mynded to retract or to call any principall point or proposition of the sam[e], till treuth and veritie do farther appear, but why that eyther your grace, eyther yit ony such as vnfeanedlie favourthe libertie of England should be offended at the aucthor of such a work I can perceaue no iust occasion.
For first my booke tuchheht not your graces person in especiall, neyther yit is it preiudiciall till any libertie of the realme yf the tyme and my Writing be indifferently considered. How could I be enemy to your graces person? for deliuerance quhairof I did mor[e] study, and interprise farther, than any of those that now accuse me. And as concerning your regiment how could? or can I envy that? which most I haue thrusted and for the which (as obliuion will suffer) I render thankis vnfeanedlie unto GOD that is, that it hath pleased Him of His eternall goodnes to exalt your head (which tymes wes in Daunger) to the manifestation of his glorie and extirpation of Idolatrie.
And as for any offence whiche I haf committed against England eyther in writeing that or of any other werk I will not refuse that moderate and indifferent men Iudge and decerne betwixt me and thost that accuse me. To witt Whither of the partijs Do most hurt the libertie of England, I that afferme that no woman may be exalted above any realme to mak[e] the libertie of the sam[e] thrall to a straunge, proud, and euell nation, or thai that approve whatsoeuir pleaseth princes for the tyme.
Yf I were wer[e] asweall disposed till accuse, as som of them
(till thair owne schame) haue declared thame selves I nothing dowbt but that in
few wordis I should lett ressonabill men vnderstand that som that this Day lowlie
crouche to your grace, and lauboure to make me odious in your eyes, did in your
aduersitie neyther shew thame selvis faithfull frendis
But omitting the accusation of others for my owne purgation and for your graces satisfaction I say. That nothyng in my booke conceaued Is, or can be preiudiciall to your graces iust regiment prouided that ye be not found vngrate unto GOD. Vngrate ye shalbe proued in presence of His throne, (howsoeuir that flatterairs Iustifie your fact) yf ye transfer the glory of that honour in which ye now stand to any other thing, then to the dispensation of His mercy which onelye mackethe that lauthfull to your grace Which nature and law Denyeth to all woman. Neyther wold I that your grace should fear that this your humiliation befoir GOD should in any case infirm or weaken your Iust and lauthfull authoritie befoir men. Nay madam such vnfeaned confession of goddis benefittis receaued shalbe the establishment of the sam[e] not onelye to your self, bot also to your sead and posteritie. Whane contrariwise a prowd conceat, and eleuation of your self shalbe the occasion that your reing shalbe vnstabill, trublesum and schort.
GOD is witness that vnfeanedlie I both love and reverence your
grace, yea I pray that your reing may be long, prosperous, and quyet. And that for
the quyetnes which Christis membris before persecuted haue receaued vnder yow but
yit yf I should flatter your grace I were no freind, but a deceavabill trater. And
therfor of conscience I am compelled to say, that neyther the consent of peopill,
the proces of tyme, nor multitude of men, can establish a law which GOD shall approve,
but whatsoeuer He approveht (by his eternall word) that shalbe approued, and whatsoeuer
he dampneth shalbe condampneth, though all men in earth wold hasard the iustification
of the sam[e]. And therfor[e] madam the onlie way to retean and to keap those benefittes
of GOD haboundandlie powred now of laitt Dayis vpon yow, and vpon your realme is
vnfeanedlie to rendir vnto GOD, to His mercy and vndeserued grace the [w]holl glory
of this your exaltatioun, forget your byrth and all tytill which thervpon doth hing[e],
and considder deaplie how for feir of your lyfe ye did declyne from GOD, and bow
till Idolatrie. Lett it not appear a small offence in your eyis, that ye haue declyned
from Christ Iesus in the Day of his battale,
Yf thus in GODDis presence ye humill [humble] your self, as in my hart I glorifie GOD for that rest granted to His afflicted flock within England under yow a weak instrument, so will I with toung and pen iustifie your aucthoritie and regiment as the HOLIE GHOST hath iustified the same In DEBORA, that blessed mother in Israeli, but yf these premisses (as GOD forbid) neglected, ye shall begyn to brag of your birth, and to build your aucthoritie vpon your owne law, flatter yow who so list youre felicite shalbe schort. Interpret my rud[e] wordis in the best part as written by him who is no ennemye to your grace.
By diuerse letters I haue required licence to vesitt your realme not to seik my self neyther yit my owen ease, or commodite. Whiche yf ye now refuse and. deny I must remit my [?] to GOD, adding this for conclusioun, that commonlie it is sein that such as luf not the counsall of the faithfull (appear it never so scharp) are compelled to follow the Deceat of flatteraris to thair owen perdition. The mighty Spreit of the Lord Iesus move your hart to vnderstand what is said, geve vnto yow the discretion of spirittes, and so reull yow in all your actlonis and interprisis that in yow GOD may be glorified, His church edified, and ye your self as a livelie member of the sam[e] may be an exempill and mirroure of vertew and of godlie Lief till others.
So be it. Off Edinburgh the 20. Day of Julij. 1559.
By your graces [w]holly to command in godlynes.
Endorsed. John Knox.
To the ryght myghty ryght high and ryght excellent princesse Elzabeth quen of England, etc.
Be these Deliuered State Papers, Scotland, Vol. 1 Art. 65.
20 March 1561. Thomas Randolph to Sir William Cecil. [From Berwick on Tweed.]
Master Knox in certayne articles geuen vnto my Lord James at this tyme hath mytigated some what the rigour of his booke, referringe myche vnto ye tyme that the same was wrytten /
State Papers, Scotland, Vol. 6, Art. 37.
5 AUG. 1561. John Knox's second Defence to Queen Elizabeth.
Grace from GOD the Father throught our Lord Jesus with perpetuall Encrease of his holie spiritt.
May it please your maiestie that it is heir certainlie spoken that the Queen of Scotland [Mary Queen of Scots] travaleht earnestlie to have a treatise intituled the first blast of the trompett confuted by the answere of the learned in Diuerse realmes, And farther that she lauboureht to inflambe the hartes of princes against the writar. And because that it may appear that your maiestie hath interest, that she myndeht to trauall with your grace, your graces counsell, and learned men for Judgement against such a common enemy to women and to thair regiment. It were but foolishnes to me to prescribe vnto your maiestie what is to be done in any thing but especialie in such thinges as men suppose Do tuoch my self. But of on[e] thing I think my self assured and therefor I Dar[e] not conceall it. To witt that neyther Doht our soueraine so greatlie fear her owen estate by reasson of that book, neyther yet Doth she so vnfeanedlie fauour the tranquilitie of your maiesties reing and realme that she wo[u]lde tack so great and earnest paines onles that her crafty counsall in so Doing shot att a farther marck.
Two yeres ago I wrote vnto your maiestie my full Declaration tuoching
that work, experience since hath schawen that I am not Desirous of Innovations [i.e.
in Government], so that Christ Jesus be not in his members openlie troden
vnder the feitt of the vngodlie. With furthie purgation I will not trouble your
maiestie for the present. Besechinge the Eternall so to assist your Highnes in all
affaires, that in his sight you may be found acceptable, your regiment profitable
to your common wealht, and your factes [deeds] to be such that Iustlie thei may
be praised of all godlie vnto the cuming of the lord Jesus to whose mighty protection
I unfeanedlie
From Edinburgh the 5 of August 1561
Your maiesties suruand to command in godlines
Endorsed John Knox.
To the myghty and excellent princess Elizabeth the Quenes maiestie of England be these deliuered.
State Papers, Scotland, Vol. 6, Art 55.
Despite this triumphant appeal to his quiet citizenship under Mary Stuart, the following description of her mother shows that the great Scotchman never altered his private opinion on this subject.
The peace as said is contracted. The Queene Dowager past by sea to F[r]aunce with gallies that for that purpose were prepared and tooke with her diuerse of the nobilitie of Scotland. The Earles Huntly, Glencairne, Mershell, Cassilles. The Lordes Maxwell, flying, Sir George Dowglasse, together with all the kings sonnes, and diuerse Barrones, and gentlemen of Ecclesiasticall estate: the Bishop of Galloway, and manie others, with promise that they should be rechlie rewarded for their good seruice. What they receaued we can not tell, but few were made rich at their returning. The Dowager had to practise somewhat with her brethren, the Duke of Gwyse and the Cardinal of Lora[i]ne. The weight wherof the gouernour after felt: for shortlie after his returning, was the gouernour deposed of the gouernement (Iustlie by GOD, but most iniustlie by man) and she made regent, in the yere of our Lord 1554. And a crowne put vpon her head, as seemelie a sight (if men had eyes) as to put a saddle vpon the back of an vnruly cow. And so beganne she to practise, practise vpon practise, how Fraunce might be aduanced, hir friends made rich, and she brought to immortall glorie. For that was her common talke, “So that I may procure the wealth and honour of my friendes, and a good fame vnto my selfe, I regarde not what GOD doe after with me.” And in verie deede in deepe dissimulation to bring her owne purpose to effect she passed the common sort of women, as we will after heare. But yet GOD to whose Gospell she declared her selfe enemie, in the end [did] frustrate her of her deuises. The Historie of the Church of Scotland, pp. 192-193. [Ed. 1584].
Genesis
Numbers
Deuteronomy
2:4-5 17:14-15 17:18-19 32:1-52
Joshua
Judges
4:1-24 4:4 4:4 20:1-48 20:1-48
1 Kings
2 Kings
2 Chronicles
Psalms
Isaiah
2:1-22 3:1-26 5:1-30 23:1-18 42:1-25
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
2:1-10 7:1-27 8:1-18 9:1-11 16:1-63 20:1-49 22:1-31 23:1-31 33:1-33 34:1-31 36:1-38
Micah
Matthew
Luke
Acts
4:1-37 17:1-34 18:1-28 21:1-40
Romans
1 Corinthians
9:1-27 11:3 11:3 11:8-10 14:34
Ephesians
1 Timothy
Revelation