To promote a woman to be­are rule, superioritie, do­minion or empire aboue a­ny realme, nation, or citie, is repugnāt to nature, cōtumelie to God, a thing most contrarious to his reueled will and approued ordināce, 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 ād fewe wordes, so to stād 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 [Page] of a woman to be a thing repugnāt to nature, I meane not onlie that God by the order of his creatiō hath spoiled woman of authoritie ād dominiō, but also that man hath seen, proued and ꝓ­nounced iust causes why that it so shuld be. Mā, 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 cōduct such Causes why wom­en shuld not haue preemi­nēce ouer men. as do see? That the weake, the sicke, and impotent persones shall norishe and kepe the hole and strong, and finallie, that the foolishe, madde ād phrenetike shal gouerne the discrete, ād giue counsel to such as be sober of mind? And such be al women, cōpared vnto man in bea­ring of authoritie. For their sight in ci­uile regiment, is but blindnes: their strength, weaknes: their counsel, foo­lishenes: and iudgement, phrenesie, if it be rightlie considered.

Priuate examples do not breake the generall or­dinance. I except such as God by singular pri­uiledge, and for certain causes knowen [Page 10] onlie to him selfe, hath exempted from the cōmon ranke of womē, 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, impaciēt, feble and foolishe: and experience hath declared them to be vnconstant, variable, cruell and lac­king the spirit of counsel and regimēt. 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 vnworthie of all publike office. For thus writeth Aristotle in the seconde of his Politikes: what difference shal2. Politicorum Ari­stotelis. we put, saith he, whether that women beare authoritie, or the husbandes 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 [Page] of the Lacedemoniās (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 muche geuen to please and obey their wy­ues. What wolde this writer (I pray you) haue said to that realme or natiō, where a woman sitteth crowned in par­liament amongest the middest of men. Reade Isaie the thirde chaptre. Oh fearefull and terrible are thy iud­gementes (o Lord) whiche thus hast abased man for his iniquitie! I am assu­redlie persuaded that if any of those men, which illuminated onelie by the light of nature, did see and pronounce causes sufficient, why women oght not to beare rule nor authoritie, shuld this day liue ād see a woman sitting in iud­gement, or riding frome parliament in the middest of men, hauing the royall crowne vpon her head, the sworde and sceptre borne before her, in signe that the administration of iustice was in her [Page 11] power: I am assuredlie persuaded, I say, that suche a sight shulde so astonishe them, that they shuld iudge the hole worlde to be transfformed in to Ama­zones,Ama­zones were monstru­ouse wo­men, that coulde not abide the regimēt of men, and therfore killed the­ir husbandes. reade Iustine. and that suche a metamorphosis and change was made of all the men of that countrie, as poetes do feyn was made of the companyons of Vlisses, or at least, that albeit the owtwarde form of men remained, yet shuld they iudge that their hartes were changed frome the wisdome, vnderstanding, and cou­rage of men, to the foolishe fondnes ād cowardise of women. Yea they further shuld pronounce, that where women reigne or be in authoritie, that there must nedes vanitie be preferred to vertue, ambition and pride to temperācie and modestie, and finallie, that auarice theArist.2.Politic. mother of all mischefe must nedes de­uour equitie and iustice. But lest that we shall seme to be of this opinion a­lone, let vs heare what others haue seen and decreed in this mater. In the rules of the lawe thus it is written: WomenLib. 50. de regulis iuris. are remoued frome all ciuile and pu­blike [Page] office, so that they nether may be what wo­men may not be. iudges, nether may they occupie the place of the magistrate, nether yet may they be speakers for others. The same is repeted in the third and in the sex­tenth 3. 16.lib. Digesto­rum. bokes of the digestes: Where cer­tein persones are forbidden, Ne pro aliis postulent, that is, that they be no speakers Ad Senatus consul. Velleianū. nor aduocates for others. And among the rest are women forbidden, and this cause is added, that they do not against shamefastnes intermedle them selues with the causes of others, nether yet that women prefume to vse the offices Lib.3. de postulatione, Tit.1. due to men. The lawe in the same place doth further declare, that a naturall shamfastnes oght to be in womankind, whiche most certeinlie she loseth, when soeuer she taketh vpon her the office and estate of mā. As in Calphurnia wasCalphur­nia euidentlie declared, who hauing licēce to speake before the senate, at lēgth be­came so impudent and importune, that by her babling she troubled the hole Assemblie. And so gaue occasion that this lawe was established.

In the first boke of the digestes, it isDe statis hominum Titul.8. pronounced that the condition of the woman in many cases is worse then of the man. As in iurisdictiō (saith the la­we) in receiuing of cure and tuition, in adoption, in publike accusation, in de­lation, in all popular action, and in motherlie power, which she hath not vpon her owne sonnes. The lawe further will not permit, that the woman geue any thing to her husband, because it is a­gainst the nature of her kinde, being the inferiour mēbre to presume to geue any thing to her head. The lawe doth more ouer pronounce womankinde to be most auaricious (which is a vice into lerable in those that shulde rule or minister iustice). And Aristotle, as before is touched, doth plainly affirme, that whersoeuer womē beare dominiō, there must nedes the people be disordred, liuinge and abounding in all intēperancie, ge­uen to pride, excesse, and vanitie. And finallie in the end, that they must nedes come to confusion and ruine.Frome womē power is taken away by the Ciuile lawe ouer their own children. Dig. lib. 24. de donatione intervirū & faemi­nam. women be couetous, therfore vnmete gouernors Lib.1. Digest. de le gib. & senatuscon. Titul.3. Politic.2. England and Scotland be­ware.

Wold to god the exāples were not so manifest, [Page] to the further declaration of the Great imperfectiōs of women. 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 to strāgiers their countrie ād citie:Romilida the wife of Gisulphus betrayed to Caca­nus the dukedome of friawl in Italie. 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 ād some haue killed with crueltie their owne husbandes and children.Iane quene of Naples hāged her husband. Athalia,4.Reg.11 Hirene, Anton. Sabell. But to me it is sufficient (because this parte of nature is not my moste sure founda­tion) to haue proued, that men illumi­nated onlie by the light of nature, haue seen and haue determined, that it is a thing moste repugnant to nature, that women rule and gouerne ouer men. If the lesse thinges be denied to womē, the greater cā not be grā ted.For those that will not permit a woman to haue power ouer her owne sonnes, will not permit her (I am assured) to haue [Page 13] rule ouer a realme: and those that will not suffer her to speake in defense of those that be accused, nether that will admit her accusation intended against man, will not approue her, that she shal sit in iudgemēt crowned with the roy­all crowne, vsurping authoritie in the middest of men. But now to the second part of nature: In the whiche I include the reueled will and perfect ordinance of God, and against this parte of natu­re, I say, that it doth manifestlie repu­gne that any woman shal reigne or be­are dominion ouer man. For God first by the order of his creation, and after by the curse and malediction pronoun­ced against the woman, by the reason of her rebellion, hath pronounced the contrarie. First, I say, that woman in her greatest perfection, was made to seruewomā in her grea­test perfe­ction was made to serue man 1.Cor.11. and obey man, not to rule and cōmand him: As saint Paule doth reason in these wordes: Man is not of the woman but the womā of the man. And mā was not created for the cause of the woman, but the woman for the cause of man, and [Page] therfore oght the womā to haue a po­wer vpō her head (that is a couerture in signe of subiectiō). Of whiche words it is plaine that the Apostle meaneth, that woman in her greatest perfection shuld haue knowen, that mā was Lord aboue her: and therfore that she shulde neuer A good cō parison. haue pretēded any kind of superioritie aboue him, no more then do the angels aboue God the creator, or aboue Christ Iesus their head. So, I say, that in her greatest perfection woman was created to A newe necessity of womans subiection be subiect to man. But after her fall and rebellion cōmitted against God, there was put vpon her a newe necessitie, and she was made subiect to man by the irreuocable sentēce of God, pronounced in womā by the sentence of God, subiect to man. Gene.3. these wordes: I will greatlie multiplie thy sorowe and thy cōception. With so­rrowe shalt thou beare thy children, and thy will shall be subiect to thy man: and he shal beare dominion ouer the. Here­bie may such as altogither be not blin­ded plainlie see, that God, by his sentence, hath deiected all woman frome em­pire and dominion aboue man. For two [Page 14] punishmentes are laid vpon her, to wit­te, a dolor, anguishe and payn, as oft as euer she shal be mother: and a subiectiō of her selfe, her appetites and will, to her husband, and to his will. Frome the former parte of this malediction can nether arte, nobilitie, policie, nor lawe made by man, deliuer womankinde, but who soeuer atteineth to that ho­nour to be mother, proueth in experience the effect ād strēgth of goddes word. But (alas) ignorāce of God, ambition, and tyrannie haue studied to abolishe and destroy the secōd parte of Goddes punishment. For women are lifted vp to be heades ouer realmes, and to rule a­boue men at their pleasure and appeti­tes. But horrible is the vēgeance, which is prepared for the one ād for the other, for the promoters, and for the persones promoted, except they spedelie repent. For they shall be deiected from the glo­rieThe pu­nishement of women vniustlie promoted ād of their ꝓmoters. of the sonnes of God, to the sclaue­rie of the deuill, and to the tormēt that is prepared for all suche, as do exalte them selues against God. Against God cā nothing be more manifest, then that [Page] a woman shall be exalted to reigne a­boue man. For the cōtrarie sentēce hath Gene. 3. he pronounced in these wordes: Thy will shall be subiect to thy husband, and he shall beare dominion ouer the. As God shuld say: forasmuch as thou hast abused thy former condition, and because thy free will hath broght thy selfe and mankind in to the bōdage of Satan, I therfore will bring the in bon­dage to man. For where before, thy o­bedience shuld haue bene voluntarie, no we it shall be by constreint and by necessitie: and that because thou hast deceiued thy man, thou shalt therfore be no longar maistresse ouer thine own appetites, ouer thine owne will nor de­sires. For in the there is nether reason nor discretion, whiche be able to mo­derate thy affectiōs, and therfore they shall be subiect to the desire of thy mā. He shall be Lord and gouernour, not onlie ouer thy bodie, but euen ouer thy appetites and will. This sentence, I say, did God pronounce against Heua, and her daughters, as the rest of the Scriptures [Page 15] doth euidētlie witnesse. So that no woman can euer presume to reigne a­boue man, but the same she must nedesLet all women take hede. do in despite of God, and in contempt of his punishment and malediction.

I am not ignorant, that the most partAnswer to an ob­iection. 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 ād power ouer man, speaking as foloweth, by the mouth of saint Paule: I suffer1. Tim. 2. not a woman to teache, nether yet to v­surpe authoritie aboue man. Here he nameth women in generall, excepting none, affirming that she may vsurpe authoritie aboue no man. And that he speaketh more plainlie, in an other place in these wordes: Let women kepe si­lence1. Cor. 14. in the congregation, for it is not permitted to them to speake, but to be subiect as the lawe sayeth. These two testimonies of the holy ghost, be suffi­cient [Page] to proue what soeuer we haue af­firmed before, ād to represse the inordi­nate pride of women, as also to correct the foolishnes of those that haue stu­died to exalt womē in authoritie aboue man, against God, and against his sen­tence ꝓnounced. But that the same two places of the apostle may the better be vnderstand: it is to be noted, that in the latter, which is writen in the first e­pistle to the Corinthes the 14.chapitre, before the apostle had permitted that all persones shuld prophecie one after an other: addinge this reason: that all may learne and all may receiue conso­lation. And left that any might haue iudged, that amongest a rude multi­tude, and the pluralitie of speakers, manie, thinges litle to purpose might haue bene affirmed, or elles that some confusion might haue risen: he addeth, the spirites of the prophetes are sub­iect to the prophetes: As he shuld say, God shall alwayes raise vp some, to whome the veritie shalbe reueled, and vnto such ye shal geue place, albeit they [Page 16] sit in the lowest seates. And thus the a­postle wold haue prophecying an exercise to be free to the hole churche, that euerie one shuld communicate with the cōgregation, what God had reueled to them, prouidinge that it were orderlieFrome a generall priuiledge is woman secluded. done. But frome this generall priui­ledge he secludeth all woman, sayinge: let women kepe silence in the congre­gation. And why I pray you? was it be­cause that the apostle thoght no womā to haue any knowledge? no he geueth an other reason, saying: let her be sub­iect as the lawe saith. In which wordes is first to be noted, that the apostle cal­leth this former sentence pronounced against womā a lawe, that is, the immu­table decree of God, who by his owneShe that is subiect to one, may not rule many voice hath subiected her to one mēbre of the cōgregatiō, that is to her husbād. wherupon the holie ghost concludeth, that she may neuer rule nor bear empire aboue man. For she that is made subiect to one, may neuer be preferred to many, and that the holie ghoste doth mani­festlie expresse, saying: I suffer not that [Page] woman vsurpe authoritie aboue man: he sayth not, I will not, that woman v­surpe authoritie aboue her husband, but he nameth man in generall, taking frome her all power and authoritie, to speake, to reason, to interprete, or to teache, but principallie to rule or to iudge in the assemblie of men. So that woman by the lawe of God, and by the interpretation of the holy ghost, is vt­terly forbidden to occupie the place of God in the offices afore said, which he hath assigned to man, whome he hath appointed and ordeined his lieutenant in earth: secluding frome that honor ād dignitie all woman, as this short argu­ment shall euidentlie declare.

A strong argumēt. The apostle taketh power frome all woman to speake in the assemblie. Ergo he permitteth no woman to rule aboue man. The former parte is euidēt, wher­upon doth the couclusion of necessitie NOTE. folowe. For he that taketh from womā the least parte of authoritie, dominion or rule, will not permit vnto her that whiche is greatest: But greater it is to [Page 17] reigne aboue realmes and nations, to publish and to make lawes, and to cō ­mande men of all estates, and finallie to appoint iudges and ministers, then to speake in the cōgregation. For her iud­gemēt, sentence, or opiniō proposed in the cōgregation, may be iudged by all, may be corrected by the learned, and reformed by the godlie. But womā being promoted in souereine authoritie, her la wes must be obeyed, her opinion fo­lowed, and her tyrānie mainteined:supposing that it be expreslie against God, and the prophet of the common welth, as to 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 a monstre in nature, contumelie to God, and a thing most repugnāt to his will ād ordināce. For he hath depriued them as before is proued, of speakinge in the congregation, and hath expreslie forbidden them to vsurpe any kinde of [Page] authoritie aboue man. Howe then will he suffer them to reigne ād 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 anything were superfluous, were it not that the worlde is almost nowe comen to that blindnes, that what soeuer plea­seth not the princes and the multitude, the same is reiected as doctrine newe­lie forged, and is condemned for here­sie. I haue therfore thoght good to re­cite the mindes of some auncient wri­ters in the same mater, to the end that suche as altogither be not blinded by the deuil, may consider and vnderstand this my iudgement to be no newe in­terpretation of Goddes scriptures, but to be the vniforme consent of the most parte of godlie writers, since the time of the apostles. TertullianTertul­lian. de habitu mulierū in his boke of womens apparell, after that he hath she wed many causes why gorgious ap­parell is abominable and odiouse in a [Page 18] woman, addeth these wordes, speaking as it were to euery womā by name: Dost thou not knowe (saith he) that thou art Heua? the sentence of God liueth and is effectuall against this kind, and in this worlde of necessity it is, that the punishement also liue. Thou art the porte and gate of the deuil. Thou art the first trāsgressor of goddes law, thouLet womē hearken what Tertullian an olde Do­ctor saith. diddest persuade ād easely deceiue him whome the deuil durst not assault. For thy merit (that is for thy death) it beho ued the sōne of god to suffre the death, ād doth it yet abide in thy mind to dec­ke the aboue thy skin coates? By these ād many other graue sentēces, and quicke interrogations, did this godlie writer labour to bring euerie woman in con­templation of her selfe, to the end that euerie one depelie weying, what sentence God had ꝓnounced against the hole race ād doughters of Heua, might not onely learne daily to humble and sub­iect them selues in the presence of God, but also that they shulde auoide ād ab­horre what soeuer thing might exalte [Page] them or puffe them vp in pride, or that might be occasion, that they shuld for­get the curse and malediction of God. And what, I pray you, is more able to cause woman to forget her owne con­dition, then if she be lifted vp in autho­ritie aboue man? It is a thing verie dif­ficile to a man, (be he neuer so cōstant) promoted to honors, not to be tickled some what with pride (for the winde of vaine glorie doth easelie carie vp the NOTE. drie dust of the earth). But as for wo­man, it is no more possible, that she be­ing set aloft in authoritie aboue man, shall resist the motions of pride, then it is able to the weake reed, or to the tur­ning wethercocke, not to bowe or tur­ne at the vehemencie of the vnconstant wind. And therfore the same writer ex­preslie forbiddeth all woman to intre­medle Tertull. lib.8. de virgini­bus velandis. with the office of man. For thus he writeth in his book de virginibus velandis: It is not permitted to a woman, to speake in the cōgregation, nether to teache, nether to baptise, nether to vendicate to her selfe any office of man. The same [Page 19] he speaketh yet more plainly in the preface of his sixte boke writen against Marcion, where he recounting certeinIn procemio 6. lib. contra Marcio­nem. monstruous thinges, whiche were to be sene at the sea called Euxinum, amongest the rest, he reciteth this as a greate mon­stre in nature, that women in those par­tes, were not tamed nor embased by cōsideration of their own sex and kind: but that all shame laide a parte, they made expenses vpon weapons and lear­ned the feates of warre, hauinge more pleasure to fight, then to mary and be subiect to man. Thus farre of Tertul­lian, whose wordes be so plain, that they nede no explanation. For he that taketh from her all office apperteining to man, will not suffre her to reigne a­boue man: and he that iudgeth it a monstre in nature, that a woman shall exer­cise weapons, must iudge it to be a monstre of monstres, that a woman shalbe exalted aboue a hole realme and natiō. Of the same minde is Origen, and di­uers others. Yea euen till the dayes of Augustine, whose sentences I omit to [Page] to auoide prolixitie.

August. lib.22. cō tra Fau­stum .c.31. Augustine in his 22. boke writen a­gainst Faustus, proueth that a woman oght to serue her husbād 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 cōclude, that woman oght neuer to pretend nor thirst for that power ād authoritie which is due to mā. For so he doth De Trinitat. lib. 12 cap. 7. explane him selfe in an other place, 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. [Page 20] And this most euidētlie yet in an otherIn quaect. veteris Testamenti, quaest. 45. place he writeth, mouing this question: howe can womā be the image of God, seing (saith he) she is subiect to man, and hath none authoritie, nether to te­ache, nether to be witnesse, nether to iudge, muche lesse to rule, or beare em­pire? These be the verie wordes of Au­gustine,NOTE. of which it is euident that this godlie writer, doth not onelie agree withe Tertullian before recited, but also with the former sentence of the lawe, whiche taketh frome woman not onelie all authoritie amongest men, but also euerie office apperteining to man. To the question howe she can be the image of God, he answereth as folo­weth. Womā (saith he) cōpared to other creatures is the image of God, for she beareth dominion ouer them: but cōpared vnto man, she may not be called the image of God, for she beareth not rule and lordship ouer mā, but oght to obey him &c. And howe that woman oght toLib. de Cō tinentia, cap.4. obey man, he speaketh yet more clearlie in these words: the womā shalbe subiect [Page] to man as vnto Christ. For womā (saith he) hath not her example frome the bodie and from the fleshe, that so she shal­be subiect to man, as the fleshe is vnto the spirite. Because that the flesh in the weaknes and mortalitie of this life, lu­steth and striueth against the spirit, ād therfore wold not the holie ghost geue example of subiection to the womā of any suche thing &c. This sentēce of Augustine oght to be noted of all women, for in it he plainlie affirmeth, that wo­man oght to be subject to man, that she neuer oght, more to desire preeminence aboue him, then that she oght to desire aboue Christe Iesus. With Augustine a­greeth in euerie point S. Ambrose, who Ambros. in Hexa­emero, lib.5.c.7. thus writeth in his Hexaemeron: Adam was deceiued by Heua, and not Heua by Adam, and therfore iust it is, that woman receiue and acknowledge him for gouernor whom she called to sinne, lest that again she slide and fall by woman­lie facilitie. And writing vpon the e­pistle Cap.5. to the Ephesians, he saith: let women be subiect to their owne hus­bandes [Page 21] as vnto the Lorde: for the man is heade to the woman, and Christ is heade to the cōgregation, and he is the sauiour of the bodie: but the congrega­tion is subiect to Christ, euen so oght womē to be to their husbādes in all thin ges. He procedeth further saying: wo­men are commanded to be subiect to men by the lawe of nature, because that man is the author or beginner of the woman: for as Christ is the head of the churche, so is man of the woman. From Christ, the church toke beginning, and therfore it is subiect vnto him: euen so did woman take beginning from man, that she shuld be subiect. Thus we heare the agreing of these two writers to be such, that a man might iudge the one to haue stolen the wordes and sentences from the other. And yet plain it is, that duringe the time of their writinge, the one was farre distant frome the other. But the holie ghost, who is the spirite of concorde and vnitie, did so illumi­nate their hartes, and directe their ton­ges, and pennes, that as they did con­ceiue [Page] ceiue ād vnderstād one truth, so did they pronounce and vtter the same, leauing a testimonie of their knowledge and concorde to vs their posteritie. If any thinke that all these former sentēces, be spoken onelie of the subiection of the maryed womā to her husband, as before I haue proued the cōtrarie, by the plain wordes ād reasoning of S. Paule, so shal I shortlie do the same, by other testimonies of the forsaid writers. The same Ambrose Ambros. super 2. c.1. epist.ad Timoth. writing vpon the second chapitre of the first epistle to Timothie, after he hath spoken much of the simple array­mēt of women: he addeth these wordes: woman oght not onelie to haue simple arraymēt, but all authoritie is to be de­nied vnto her: for she must be in subie­ction to man (of whome she hath taken her originall) aswell in habit as in seruice. And after a fewe wordes he saith: be­cause that death did entre in to the world by her, there is no boldenes that oght to be permitted vnto her, but she oght to be in humilitie. Hereof it is plain, that frome all woman, be she ma­ried, [Page 22] or vnmaried, is all authoritie taken to execute any office, that appertei­neth to man. Yea plain it is that all wo­man is commanded, to serue, to be in humilitie and subiection. Whiche thing yet speaketh the same writer, more plainlie in these wordes: It is not per­mittedAmbros. in 1. epist. ad Corin, cap. 14. Genes.3. to womē to speake, but to be in silence, as the lawe saith. What saith the lawe? Vnto thy husband, shall thy con­uersion be, and he shall beare domi­nion ouer the. This is a speciall lawe (saith Ambrose) whose sentence, lest it shulde be violated, infirmed, or made weake, women are commanded to be in silence. Here he includeth all women. And yet he ꝓcedeth further in the same place saying: It is shame for them to presume to speake of the lawe in the house of the Lord, who hath commāded them to be subiect to their men. But moste plainly speaketh he writing vpō the 16. chapitre of the epistle of S. Paulewhose house I pray you oght the parliamēt house to be, Goddes or the deuilles? Rufus is by S. Paul saluted before his mother. to the Romaines, vpon these wordes: Salute Rufus and his mother. For this cause (saith Ambrose) did the apostle place [Page] Rufus before his mother, for the ele­ction of the administration of the gra­ce of God, in the whiche a woman hath no place. For he was chosen and promo­ted by the Lorde, to take care ouer his busines, that is, ouer the churche, to the whiche office could not his mother be appointed, albeit she was a woman so holie, that the apostle called her his mother. Hereof it is plaine that the admi­nistration of the grace of God, is de­nied to all woman. By the administra­tion of Goddes grace, is vnderstād not onely the preaching of the worde and administration of the sacramentes, by the whiche the grace of God is presen­ted and ordinarilie distributed vnto man, but also the administration of ci­uile iustice, by the whiche, vertue oght to be mainteined, and vices punished. The execution wherof is no lesse de­nied to womā, then is the preaching of the Euangile, or administration of the sacramētes, as herafter shall most plain­lie appeare.

Chrysostome amongest the Grecian [Page 23] writers of no small credit, speaking in rebuke of men, who in his dayes, were becomen 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, that man wasNOTE. becomen so brutish, that he did not cō ­sider 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 counsel: and woman, whiche gaue that pestilent counsel to man, oght at all ti­mes [Page] to haue the punishment, whiche was geuē to Heua, soūding in her eares. Homil.15 in Genes. And in an other place he induceth God speaking to the womā in this sorte: Be­cause thou left him, of whose nature thou wast participant, and for whome thou wast formed, ād hast had pleasure to haue familiaritie with that wicked beast, and wold take his counsel: ther­fore I subiect the to man, and I apointe and affirme him to be thy Lorde, that thou maist acknowledge his dominion, ād because thou couldest not beare rule God gra­unt all womēs har­tes to vn­derstand and folow this sentē ­ce. learne well to be ruled. Why they shulde not beare rule, he declareth, in other places, saying: womankinde is imprudent and soft, (or flexible) imprudent be­cause she can not consider withe wis­dome and reason the thinges which she heareth and seeth: and softe she is, be­cause she is easelie bowed. I knowe that In Mat. cap.23. homil. 44. Chrysostome bringeth in these wordes to declare the cause why false prophe­tes do commonlie deceiue women: be­cause they are easelie persuaded to any opinion, especiallie if it be against [Page 24] God, and because they lacke prudence and right reason to iudge the thinges that be spoken. But hereof may their nature be espied, ād the vices of the same, whiche in no wise oght to be in those, that are apointed to gouerne others: For they oght to be constant, stable, prudent ād doing euerie thing with discre­tion and reason, whiche vertues women can not haue in equalitie with men. For that he doth witnesse in an otherwoman can not haue ver­tue in e­qualitie with mā. Ad Ephe. cap.4. sermone 13. place, saying: womē haue in them selues a tickling and studie of vaine glorie, ād that they may haue common with men: they are sodeinlie moued to anger, and that they haue also common with some men. But vertues in which they excell, they haue not cōmon with man, ād ther­foreNOTE. hath the apostle remoued thē from the office of teachinge, which is an eui­dēt proof that in vertue they farre differ frome man. Let the reasons of this wri­ter be marked, for further he yet proce­deth: after that he hath in many wor­des lamented the effeminate maners of men, who were so farre degenerate to the weaknes of womē, that some might [Page] haue demanded: why may not women teache amongest suche a sorte of men, who in wisdome and godlines are becomē inferior vnto women? He finallie concludeth: that not withstanding that men be degenerate, yet may not women vsurpe any authoritie aboue them, and in the end, he addeth these wordes: These thinges do not I speake to ex­tolle them (that is women) but to the confusion and shame of our felues, and to admonish vs to take again the dominion, that is mete and conuenient for vs, not onelie that power which is ac­cording to the excellencie of dignitie: The body lackinge the head, can not be well gouerned nether can com­mon welth lackinge man. but that which is accordinge to proui­dence, and according to helpe, and ver­tue. For then is the bodie in best proportion, when it hath the best gouernor. O that both man and woman shulde con­sider the profound counsel and admonition of this father! He wolde not that mā for appetit of any vaine glorie shuld desire preeminence aboue woman. For God hath not made mā to be heade for any suche cause: but hauing respecte to [Page 25] that weaknes and imperfection which alwayes letteth woman to gouerne. He hath ordeined man to be superior, and that meaneth Chrysostome, saying: then is the bodie in best proportion, when it hath the best gouernor. But woman can neuer be the best gouernor, by reason that she being spoiled of the spirit of regiment, can neuer attein to that degree, to be called or iudged a good gouernor. Because in the nature of all woman, lurketh suche vices, as in good gouernors are not tolerable. Which theIn ca.22.Ioh. ho­mil.87. same writer expresseth in these wordes: womākind (saith he) is rashe and fool­hardie, and their couetousnes is like the goulf of hell, that is, insaciable. AndIn Ioh. homil.41. therfore in an other place, he will that woman shall haue no thing to do in iudgement, in common affaires, or in the regiment of the cōmon welth, because she is impaciēt of troubles, but that she shall liue in tranquillitie, and quietnes. And if she haue occasion to go frome the house, that yet she shal haue no mater of trouble, nether to folowe her, ne­ther [Page] to be offered vnto her, as common­lie there must be to such as beare authoritie. And with Chrysostome fullie a­greeth Basilius MagnusBasilius Mag. in aliquot scripturae locos. in a sermon which he maketh vpon some places of scripture, wherin he reproueth diuers vices and amōgest the rest, he affirmeth woman to be a tendre creature, flexible, soft and pitifull: whiche nature, God hath geuē vnto her, that she may be apt to norishe children. The which facilitie of the womā, did Satā abuse, ād therby broght her frome the obediēce of God. And therfore in diuers other places doth he conclude, that she is not apt to beare rule, and that she is forbidden to teache. Innumerable mo testimonies, of all sortes of writers may be adduced for the same purpose, but withe these I stand content: iudgeing it sufficient to stoppe the mouthe of such as accuse ād condemne all doctrine, as hereticall, whiche displeaseth them in any point that I haue proued, by the determina­tions and lawes of mē illuminated one­lie by the light of nature, by the ordre [Page 26] of Goddes creation, by the curse and maledictiō pronounced against womā, by the mouth of saint Paule, who is the interpreter of Goddes sentence, and lawe, and finallie by the mindes of those writers, who in the church of God, haue bene alwayes holden in greatest reuerē ­ce: that it is a thing moste repugnant to nature, to Goddes will and apoin­ted ordinance, (yea that it can not be without contumelie committed against God) that a woman shuld be promoted to dominion or empire to reigne ouer man, be it in realme, natiō, prouince or citie. Now resteth it in fewe wordes, to be shewed, that the same empire of wo­men is the subuersion of good ordre e­quitie and iustice.

Augustine defineth ordre to be thatDe ordine lib.1.c.10 thing, by the whiche God hath apoin­ted and ordeined all thinges. Note well reader, that Augustine will admit no or dre, where Goddes apointment is ab­sent and lacketh.

And in an other place he saith, that orDe ciuit. Dei, lib.19cap.13. dre is a disposition, geuing their owne [Page] propre places to thinges that be vne­quall, whiche he termeth in Latin Pa­rium & disparium, that is, of thinges equall or like, and thinges vnequall or vnlike. Of whiche two places and of the hole disputation, which is cōteined in his se­cond boke de ordine it is euidēt, that what soeuer is done ether whithout the assu­rance what soe­uer is done withowt the ap­pointmēt of Goddes will, is done wi­thowt or­dre. 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 insuf­ficiēt to proue mine intent: let the same man vnderstand, that in so doinge, he hath infirmed mine argumēt nothinge. For as I depend not vpon the determi­nations of men, so think I my cause no weaker, albeit their authoritie be de­nied vnto me. Prouided that god by his will reueled, and manifest worde, stand [Page 27] plain and euidēt on my side. That God hath subiected womankinde to man by the ordre of his creatiō, and by the curse that he hath pronounced against her, is before declared. Besides these, he hathTwo mir­rors, in which we may be­holde the ordre of nature. set before our eyes, two other mirrors and glasses, in whiche he will, that we shulde behold the ordre, which he hath apointed and established in nature: the one is, the naturall bodie of man: the o­ther is the politik or ciuile body of that cōmon welth, in which God by his own word hath apointed an ordre. In the natural body of māGod hath apointed an ordre, that the head shall occupie the vppermost place. And the head hath he ioyned with the bodie, that frome it, doth life and motion flowe to the rest of the mēbres. In it hath he placed the eye to see, the eare to hear, and the tōge to speake, which offices are apointed to none other mēbre of the bodie. The rest of the mēbres, haue euery one their own place ād office apointed: but none may haue nether the place nor office of the heade. For who wolde not iudge [Page] that bodie to be a monstre, where there was no head eminēt aboue the rest, but that the eyes were in the hādes, the tōge and mouth beneth in the belie, and the eares in the feet. Men, I say, shulde not onlie pronounce this bodie to be a mō ­stre: but assuredlie they might cōclude that such a bodie coulde not lōg indu­re. And no lesse mōstruous is the bodie of that cōmon welth, where a womā beareth Commonwelthes vnder the rule of wo­men, lacke a laufull heade. Idol. empire. For ether doth it lack a laufull heade (as in very dede it doth) or els there is an idol exalted in the place of the true head. An idol I call that, which hath the forme ād apparāce, but lacketh the vertue and strength, which the name ād proportiō do resemble ād promise. As images haue face, nose, eyes, mouth, hādes ād feet painted, but the vse of the same, can not the craft and art of man geue thē: as the holy ghost by the mouth Psal.115. of Dauid teacheth vs, saying: they haue eyes, but they see not, mouth, but they speake not, nose, but they smell not, handes and feet, but they nether touche nor haue power to go. And suche, I say, is [Page 28] euerie realme and nation, where a wo­man beareth dominion. For in despite of God (he of his iust iudgement, so ge uing them ouer in to a reprobat minde) may a realme, I cōfesse, exalt vp a womā to that monstriferous honor, to be este­med as head. But impossible it is to mā The empire of a woman is an idol. and angel, to geue vnto her the proper­ties and perfect offices of a laufull he­ade. For the same God that hath denied power to the hād to speake, to the bely to heare, and to the feet to see, hath de­nied to womā power to cōmande man, and hath taken a way wisdome to consi­der, and prouidence to forsee the thin­ges, that be profitable to the common welth: yea finallie he hath denied to her in any case to be head to mā: but plainly hath pronounced that mā is head to woman, euen as Christ is heade to all man.1. Cor. 11. If men in a blinde rage shulde assemble to gether, and apointe them selues an other heade then Iesus Christ, (as the papistes haue done their romishe Anti­christ) shuld Christ therefore lose his owne dignitie, or shulde God geue to that [Page] counterfet head power to geue life to the bodie, to see what soeuer might en­damage or hurte it, to speake in defen­se, ād to heare the request of euerie sub­iect? It is certein that he wold not. For that honor he hath apointed before all times to his onelie sonne: and the same will he geue to no creature besides: no NOTE. more will he admit, nor accept woman to be the lauful head ouer man, althogh man, deuil, and angel will coniure in their fauor. For seing he hath subiected her to one (as before is saide) he will ne­uer permit her to reigne ouer manie. Seing he hath commāded her to heare, and obey one, he will not suffre that she speake, and with vsurped authoritie cō mand realmes and natiōs. Chrysostome explaning these wordes of the apostle: 1. Cor. 11. (the heade of woman is man) cōpareth God in his vniuerfall regimēt to a king sitting in his royall maiestie, to whome Marke the simili­tude of Chryso­stome. all his subiectes cōmanded to geue ho­mage and obedience, appeare before him, bearing euerie one suche a badge and cognisance of dignitie and honor, [Page 29] as he hath geuen to them: which if they despise and contemne, then do they dis­honor their king. Euen so saith he oght man and womā to appeare before God, bearing the ensignes of the condition, whiche they haue receiued of him. Man hath receiued a certein glorie ād dignitie aboue the woman, and therfore oght he to appeare before his high maiestie, bearing the signe of his honor, hauinge no couerture vpon his heade: to wit­nesse that in earth man hath no head, (beware Chrysostome what thou saist, thou shalt be reputed a traytor if En­glisheNOTE. men heare the: for they must haue my souereine lady and maistresse, and Scotland hath drōken also the enchant­ment and venom of Circes, let it be so to their owne shame and confusion, he procedeth in these wordes) but woman oght to be couered, to witnesse, that in earth she hath a head, that is mā. TreweHowe women be couered in England and Scot­land. it is (Chrysostome) woman is couered in both the saide realmes, but it is not with the signe of subiection, but it is with the signe of superioritie, to witt, [Page] with the royal crowne. To that he an­swereth in these wordes: what if mā neglect his honor? he his no lesse to be moc­ked (saith Chrysostome) then if a king shulde depose himself of his diademe or crowne and royal estat, and cloth him self in the habit of a sclaue. What, I pray you, shulde this godlie father haue saide, if he had sene all the men of a re­alme or nation fall downe before a wo­man? If he had sene the crowne, sceptre, and sworde, whiche are ensignes of the royall dignitie, geuen to her, and a wo­man curfed of God, and made subiecte to man, placed in the throne of iustice, to sit as Goddes lieutenant? What, I say, in this behalfe, shuld any hart vnfeined lie fearing God haue iudged of suche men? I am assured that not onlie shulde they haue bene iudged foolishe but also enraged, and sclaues to Satan, mani­festlie fighting against God and his a­pointed ordre. The more that I cōsider the subuersion of Goddes ordre, which he hath placed generallie in all liuinge thinges, the more I do wondre at the [Page 30] blindnes of man, who doth not cōsider him self in this case so degenerate, thatBrute be­astes to be preferred. the brute beastes are to be preferred vnto him in this behalfe. For nature hath in all beastes printed a certein marke of dominiō in the male, ād a certeine subiection in the female, whiche they kepe inurolate. For no man euer sawe the lion make obediēce, and stoupe be­fore the lionesse, nether yet can it be proued, that the hinde taketh the con­ducting of the heard amongest the har­tes. And yet (alas) mā, who by the mouth of God hath dominiō apointed to him ouer woman, doth not onlie to his own shame, stoupevnder the obediēce of women, but also in despit of God ād of his apointed ordre, reioyseth, and maintei­neth that monstruouse authoritie, as a thing lauful and iust. The insolentioy,Insolent ioy brin­geth so­dein so­rowe. the bonefiers, and bāketing, which were in lōdon and els where in Englād, when that cursed Iesabell was proclaimed qwene, did witnesse to my hart, that mē were becomen more then enraged. For els howe coulde they so haue reioysed [Page] at their owne confusion and certein de­struction? For what mā was there of so base iudgemēt (supposing that he had any light of God) who did not see the erecting of that monstre, to be the o­uerthrowe of true religion, and the assured destruction of England, and of the auncient liberties therof? And yet ne­uer the lesse, all men so triumphed, as if God had deliuered them frome all ca­lamitie.

But iust and rightuouse, terrible and fearfull are thy iudgementes, o Lorde! For as some times thou diddest so pun­ishe Rom.1. men for vnthankfulnes, that man ashamed not to commit villanie withe man: and that because, that knowinge the to be God, they glorified the not as God, euen so haste thou moste iustlie nowe punished the proude rebellion and horrible ingratitude of the realmes of England and Scotland. For when thou diddest offre thy selfe moste mer­cifullie to them both, offering the mea­nes by the whiche they might haue bene ioyned to gether for euer in godly con­corde: [Page 31] then was the one proud ād cruel, and the other vnconstant, and fikle of promise. But yet (alas) did miserable England further rebell against the. For albeit thou diddest not cease to heape benefit vpon benefit, during the reigne of an innocent and tendre king, yet no man did acknowledge thy potent hand and meruelouse working. The stoutewhat robbed God of his ho­nor in England in the time of the Gospell. courage of capitaines, the witte ād policie of coūselers, the learning of bishoppes, did robbe the of thy glorie and ho­nor. For what then was heard, as concer­ning religion, but the kinges procedinges, the kinges procedinges must be o­beyed? It is enacted by parliament: therefore it is treason to speake in the cō trarie. But this was not the end of this miserable tragedie. For thou diddestGoddes benefites she wed to England. yet procede to offre thy fauors, sending thy prophetes and messagers, to call for reformation of life in all estates: For e­uen frome the highest to the lowest, all were declined frome the (yea euē those that shuld haue bene the lanterns to o­thers) some I am affured did qwake and [Page] tremble, and frome the botome of their hartes thirsted amendment, and for the same purpose did earnestly call for dis­cipline. But then brust furth the ve­nome which before lurked: then might they not conteine their despiteful voi­ces, but with open mouthes did crie: we will not haue suche a one to reigne Discipline refused in England. ouer vs. Then, I say, was euerie man so stoute, that he wolde not be broght in bōdage: no not to the, ô Lord, but with disdein did the multitude cast frome them the amiable yoke of Christ Iesus. No mā wolde suffre his finne to be rebuked, no man wolde haue his life called to triall. And thus did they refuse the, ô Lorde, and thy sonne Christ Iesus to be their pastor, protector and prince. And therefore hast thou geuē them ouer in to a reprobat minde. Thou hast takē from them the spirit of boldnes, of wisdome The nobi­litie and the hole realme of England, castle thē selues wil­lingly in to the pit. ād of rightuous iudgemēt. They see their owne destruction, and yet they haue no grace to auoide it. Yea they are becomen so blinde, that knowing the pit, they headlong cast them selues in to [Page 32] 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 cōpelled to bowe their neckes vnder the yoke of Satan, and of his proude ministres, pe­stilent papistes and proude spaniardes. And yet cā they not cōsider that where a womā reigneth and papistes beare au­thoritie, that there must nedes Satan be prefident of the counsel. Thus hast thou, ô Lorde, in thy hote displeasure reuenged the contempt of thy graces offred. But, ô Lord, if thou shalt reteine wrath to the end, what fleshe is able to susteine? We haue sinned, ô Lord, ād areCōfession. not worthy to be releued. But worthy art thou, ô Lorde, to be a true God, and worthy is thy sonne Christ Iesus, to haue his Euangil and glorie aduanced: whiche both are troden vnder foot in this cruell murther and persecution, [Page] whiche the builders of Babylon cōmit in their furie, haue raised against thy children, for the establishing of their kingdome. Let the sobbes therfore of thy prisoners, ô Lord, passe vp to thine eares, consider their affliction: and let the eyes of thy mercie looke downe v­pon the blood of such as die for testi­monie of thy eternal veritie: and let not thine ennemies mocke thy iudgement for euer. To the, ō Lorde, I turne my wretched and wicked hart: to the alone I direct my complaint and grones: for in that Ile to thy faintes there is left no comforte. Albeit I haue thus (talkinge with my God in the anguishe of my harte) some what digressed: yet haue I not vtterlie forgotten my former pro­positiō, to witt, that it is a thing repug­nant to the ordre of nature, that any woman be exalted to rule ouer men. For God hath denied vnto her the office of a heade. And in the intreating of this parte, I remembre that I haue made the nobilitie both of England and Scot­land inferior to brute beastes, for that [Page 33] they do to women, which no male amongest the cōmon sorte of beastes can be proued to do to their females: that is, they reuerēce them, and qwake at their presence, they obey their cōmandementes, and that against God. Wherfore I iudge them not onelie subiectes to wo­men, but sclaues of Satan, and seruantes of iniquitie. If any mā thinke these my wordes sharpe or vehement, let him cō ­sider that the offense is more haynous, then can be expressed by wordes. For where all thinges, be expressedly con­cluded against the glorie and honor of God, and where the blood of the sain­tes of God is commanded to be shed, whome shall we iudge, God or the de­uil, to be presidēt of that counsel? PlainNOTE it is, that God ruleth not by his loue, mercie, nor grace in the assembly of the vngodlie. Then it resteth, that the de­uil, the prince of this worlde, doth rei­gne ouer suche tyrannes. whose seruan­tes, I pray you, shal then be iudged, such as obey, and execute, their tyrānie? God for his greate mercies sake, illuminate [Page] the eyes of men, that they may preceiue in to what miserable bondage they be broght, by the monstriferous empire of women.

NOTE. The seconde glasse, whiche God hath set before the eyes of mā, wherin 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 concerning religion, but also touching their poli­cie and regiment of the same. And a­gainst that ordre it doth manifestly re­pugne, that any woman shall occupie the throne of God, that is, the royall seate, which he by his worde hath apointed to man. As in geuing the lawe to Is­rael, concerning the election of a king, Deut.17. is euident. For thus it is writen: If thou shalt say, I will apoint a king aboue me, as the rest of the nations, whiche are a boute me: Thou shalt make the a kinge, whome the Lorde thy God shall chose, one frome amongest the middest of thy [Page 34] bretheren, thou shalt apointe kinge a­boue the. Thou maist not make a stran­gier that is not thy brother. Here expressedly is a mā apointed to be chosē king, and a man natiue amōgest them selues, by whiche precept is all woman and all strāgier secluded. What may be obiected for the parte or election of a strangier, shalbe, God willinge, answered in the blast of the second trumpet. For this present, I say, that the erecting of a woman to that honor, is not onely to inuert the ordre, which God hath established: but also it is to defile, pollute ād prophane (so farre as in man lieth) the throne and seat of God, whiche he hath sanctifiedGod hath apointed man his ministre and lieu­tenant. and apointed for man onely, in the course of this wretched life, to occupie and possesse as his ministre and lieute­nant: secluding frome the same all wo­man, as before is expressed. If any thin­keAnswer to an ob­iection. that the fore writen lawe did binde the Iewes onelie, let the same man con­sider, that the election of a kinge, and apointing of iudges, did nether apperteine to the ceremoniall lawe, [Page] nether yet was it mere iudiciall: but The ele­ction of a king floweth frome the moral lawe. that it did flowe frome the morall lawe, as an ordinance, hauing respect to the cōseruation of both the tables. For the office of the magistrate oght to haue the first and chief respect to the glorie of God, commanded and conteined in the former table, as is euident by that, whiche was inioyned to Iosue by God, what time he was accepted and admit­ted ruler and gouerner ouer his people, Iosue 1. in these wordes: Thou shalt diuide the inheritance to this people, the whiche I haue sworne to their fathers, to geue vnto them: so that thou be valiant and strong, that thou maist kepe and do, ac­cording to that hole lawe, whiche my seruant Moses hath commanded the. Thou shalt not decline frome it, nether to the right hande, nether to the left hand, that thou maist do prudentlie in all thinges, that thou takest in hand, let not the boke of this lawe departe from thy mouth, but meditate in it, day and night: that thou maist kepe ād do, according to euery thing, that is writen in it. [Page 35] For then shall thy wayes prosper, andRulers shuld ta­ke hede to this. then shalt thou do prudētly &c. And the same precept geueth God by the mouth of Moses, to kinges, after they be ele­cted, in these wordes: when he shal sit inDeut.17. the throne or seate of his kingdome, he shall write to him self a copie of this lawe in a boke, ād that shalbe with him, that he may reade in it all the dayes of his life, that he may learne to feare the Lorde his God, and to kepe all the wor­des of this lawe, and all these statutes, that he may do them &c. Of these two places it is euident, that principallie it apperteineth to the king or to the chief magistrate, to knowe the will of God, to be instructed in his lawe ād statutes, and to promote his glorie with his hole hart ād studie, which be the chief poin­tes of the first table. No mā denieth, but that the sworde is committed to the magistrate, to the end that he shulde pu­nishe vice, and mainteine vertue. To punishewhat vi­ces magi­strates oght to punishe. vice, I say, not onelie that, whiche troubleth the tranquillitie and quiet e­stat of the common welth by adulterie, [Page] thest or murther committed, but also suche vices as openly impugne the glo­rie of God: as idolatrie, blasphemie, and manifest heresie, taught and obsti­natly mainteined: as the histories and notable actes of Ezechias, Iosaphat, and Iosias do plainlie teache vs. Whose study and care was not onlie to glorifie God in their own life and cōuersation, but also they vnfeinedlie did trauel to bring their subiectes to the true wor­shipping and honoring of God. And did destroye all monumentes of idola­trie, did punishe to deathe the teachers of it, and remoued frome office and honors suche, as were mainteiners of those abominations. Wherbie I suppose that it be euident, that the office of the king or supreme magistrate, hath respect to the lawe morall, and to the conserua­tion NOTE. of both the tables.

The gētil no lesse bounde to the lawe moral thē 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 amōgest the gentiles, the ministres and [Page 36] executors of his lawe be now apointed, as sometimes they were apointed amon­gest the Iewes: further if the execution of iustice be no lesse requisite in the policie of the gentiles, then euer it was amongest the Iewes: what man can be so foolishe to suppose or beleue, that God will no we admit those persons, to sit in iudgement or to reigne ouer men in the common welth of the gentiles, whom he by his expressed word and or­dināce, did before debarre and seclude from the same? And that womē were se­cluded from the royall seate, the which oght to be the sanctuarie to all poore afflicted, and therfore is iustlie called the seat of god (besides the place before recited of the election of a king, ād be­sides the places of the new testament, whiche be moste euident) the ordre and election which was kept in Iuda and Is­rael, doth manifestlie declare. For whenNOTE. the males of the kinglie stocke failed, as oft as it chaunced in Israel and some­times in Iuda, it neuer entered in to the hartes of the people of chose [Page] and promote to honors any of the kin­ges doughters, (had he neuer so many) but knowing Goddes vengeance to be poured furth vpon the father by the a­way taking of his sonnes, they had no further respect to his stocke, but elected suche one man or other, as they iudged most apt for that honor and authoritie. Of whiche premisses, I conclude (as be­fore) that to promote a woman heade ouer men, is repugnant to nature, and a thinge moste contrarious to that ordre, whiche God hath approued in that cō ­mon welth, whiche he did institute and rule by his worde. But no we to the last point, to wit, that the empire of a wo­man is a thing repugnant to iustice, and the destruction of euerie cōmon welth, where it is receiued. In probation wher­of, because the mater is more then eui­dent, The first argument that the authoritie of women repugneth to iustice. I will vse fewe wordes. First, I say, if iustice be a constant and perpetuall will to geue to euerie person, their own right (as the moste learned in all ages haue defined it to be) then to geue, or to will to geue to any person, that whiche [Page 37] is not their right, must repugne to iu­stice. But to reigne aboue man, can ne­uer be the right to woman: because it is a thinge denied vuto her by God, as is before declared. Therfore to promote her to that estat or dignitie, can be nothing els but repugnācie to iustice. If I shulde speake no more, this were suffi­cient. For except that ether they can im­proue the definition of iustice, or els that they can intreate God to reuoke and call backe his sentence pronounced against woman, they shalbe compelled to admit my conclusion. If any finde faute with iustice, as it is defined, he may well accuse others, but me he shall not hurt. For I haue the shield, the weapon, and the warrant of him, who assuredlie will defend this quarel, and he cōman­deth me to crie:

What soeuer repugneth to the will ofThe secōd argument. 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 [Page] 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 mā, be his nature neuer so corrupted, that whether he will or no, he his compelled at one time or other, Nature doth con­fesse that repugnancie to Goddes will is iniustice. to acknowledge and confesse, that iu­stice is violated, when thinges are done against the will of God, expressed by his worde. And to this confession are no lesse the reprobat coacted and con­strained, then be the chosen childrē 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 Howe the reprobat confesse Goddes will to be iust. other penitent offenders. But the re­probat, not withstanding they are com­pelled to acknowledge the will of God to be iust the which they haue offēded, yet are they neuer in wardlie displeased, with their iniquitie, but rage, complain and storme against God, whose ven­geance [Page 38] they can not escape: as did Cain,Genes.4. Mat.27. Iudas, Herode, Iulian called apostata, Yea Iesabel, and Athalia. For Cain no doubte was conuict in conscience, that he had done against justice in murthe­ring of his brother, Iudas did openlie, before the high priest confesse that he had sinned, in betraying innocent blood. Herode being stricken by the angel, did mocke those his flaterers, saying vnto them: beholde your God (meaning of him selfe) can not nowe preserue him self frome corruption and wormes. Iulianus was compelled in the end to crie, O galilean (so alwayes in contempt did he name our sauiour Ie­sus Christ) thou hast nowe ouercomen. And who doubteth but Iesabel, and A­thalia, before their miserable end, were conuicted in their cankered conscien­ces, to acknowledge that the murther, which they had committed, and the em­pire whiche the one had six yeares vsur­ped, were repugnant to iustice: Euen so shall they I doubte not, whiche this daye do possesse and mainteine that [Page] womans authoritie bringeth furth monstres. monstriferous authoritie of women, shortlie be compelled to acknowled­ge, that their studies and deuises, haue bene bent against God: ād that all such authoritie as women haue vsurped, re­pugneth to iustice, because, as I haue saide, it repugneth to the will of God expressed in his sacred worde. And if any mā doubte herof, let him marke wel the wordes of the apostle, saying: I per­mit 1.Tim.2. not a woman to teache, nether yet to vsurpe authoritie aboue man. No man I trust will denie these wordes of the apostle, to be the wil of God expressed in his worde: and he saith openlie, I permit not &c. Which is asmuch as, I will not, that a woman haue authority, charge or power ouer man: for so much importeth the greke worde [...] in that place. Nowe let man and angell conspire against God, let them pro­nounce their lawes, and say, we will suffre womē to beare authoritie, who then can depose thē? yet shall this one worde of the eternal God spokē by the mouth of a weake mā, thruste them euerie one [Page 39] in to hell. Iesabel may for a time slepe quietlie in the bed of her fornication and hoordome, she may teache and de­ceiue for a season: but nether shall sheApoca. 2. preserue her selfe, nether yet her adulte rous children frome greate affliction, and frome the sworde of Goddes ven­geance, whiche shall shortlie apprehend suche workes of iniquitie. The admonition I differre to the end.

Here might I bring in the oppression ād iniustice, which is cōmitted 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 tyrannie (authoritie it is not worthie to be called) and most vniuste empire of woman.

First they do obiect the examples ofIudic.4. Para.34. Debora, and of Hulda the prophetesse, [Page] The defenses of the aduersa­ries. of whom the one iudged Israel, and the other, by all apparance, did teache and exhorte.

Secondarily they do object the lawe made by Moses for the doughters of Num. 27 zalphead. Thirdlie the consent of the e­states of such realmes as haue approued the empire and regimēt of women. And last the long custome, which hath recei­ued the regiment of women. Their va­liāt actes and prosperitie, together with some papistical lawes, which haue con­firmed the same.

Answer to the first obiection. To the first, I answer, that particular examples do establishe no cōmon 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 womē against nature, ād 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 frome the same, but also to her he gaue the spirit of prophecie, [Page 40] to assure king Iosias of the thin­ges which were to come. With these women, I say, did God worke potētlie, and miraculouslie, yea to thē 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? TheExamples against lawe haue no strēgth when the question is of lawe. men that obiect the same, are not alto­gether ignorant, that examples 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 cōscience may defraude, steale or deceiue: and answer were made that so he might by the exā ­ple of the Israelites, who at Goddes cō mandement, deceiued the Egyptians, [Page] 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. The consequent is NOTE. vain and of none effect. For of exāples, as is before declared, we may establishe no lawe, but we are alwayes bounde to the lawe writen, and to the commande­mēt expressed in the same. And the lawe writen and pronounced by God, for­biddeth no lesse that any womā reigne ouer mā, then it forbiddeth mā to take pluralitie of wiues, to mary two sisters liuing at ons, to steale, to robbe, to murther or to lie. If any of these hath bene transgressed, and yet God hath not im­puted the same: it maketh not the like fact or dede lawfull vnto vs. For God being free, may for suche causes as be approued by his inscrutable wisdome, dispense with the rigor of his lawe, and [Page 41] may vse his creatures at his pleasure. But the same power is not permitted to man, whom he hath made subiect to his lawe, and not to the exāples of fathers. And this I thinke sufficient to the rea­sonable and moderate spirites. But to represse the raging of womās madnes, I will descend somwhat deeper in to the mater, and not feare to affirme: that as we find a contrarie spirit in all these moste wicked women, that this day be exalted in to this tyrannouse authori­tie, to the spirite that was in those god­ly matrons: so I feare not, I say, to affir­me, that their condition is vnlike, and that their end shalbe diuers. In thoseAntithe­sis be­twixt the former matrones, ād our Iesa­belles. matrones we finde that the spirit of mercie, truthe, iustice and of humilitie did reigne. Vnder them we finde that God did shewe mercie to his people, deliue­ring them frome the tyrannie of stran­giers, and from the venom of idolatrie by the handes and counsel of those wo­men: but in these of our ages, we finde crueltie, falshed, pride, couetousnes, de­ceit, and oppression. In them we also [Page] finde the spirit of Iesabel, and Athalia, vnder them we finde the simple people oppressed, the true religion extinguish­ed, and the blood of Christes membres most cruellie shed. And finallie by their practises and deceit, we finde auncient realmes and nations geuen and betra­yed in to the handes of strangiers, the titles and liberties of them taken frome the iuste possessors. Which one thinge is an euident testimonie, howe vnlike our mischeuous Maryes be vnto Debo­ra, vnder whome were strangiers chased owt of Israel, God so raising her vp to be a mother and deliuerer to his oppressed people. But (alas) he hath raised vp these Iesabelles to be the vttermoste of NOTE. his plagues, the whiche mans vnthank­fulnes hath lōg deserued. But his secret and most iust iudgemēt, shal nether ex­cuse them, nether their mainteiners, be­cause their counsels be diuers. But to prosecute my purpose, let such as list to defend these monstres in their tyrānie, proue first, that their souereine maistresses be like to Debora in godlines and [Page 42] pitie: and secondarilie, that the same successe doth folowe their tyrannie, which did folowe the extraordinarie regimēt of that godlie matrone. Which thing althogh they were able to do (as they neuer shalbe, let them blowe til they brust) yet shall her example profetNOTE them nothing at all. For they are neuer able to prouc that ether Debora, or a­nyNo god­lie womā did euer claime authoritie o­uer man by reason of her birth and blood. other godlie woman (hauing the cō mendation of the holie ghoste within the scriptures) hath vsurped authoritie aboue any realme or nation, by reason of their birth and blood. Nether yet did they claime it by right or inheritance: but God by his singular priuiledge, fa­uor, aud grace, exempted Debora from the common malediction geuen to wo­men in that behalf: and against nature he made her prudent in counsel, strong in courage, happie in regiment, and a blessed mother and deliuerer to his people.why God sometimes worketh by extra­ordinarie meanes. The whiche he did partlie to ad­uance and notifie the power of his maiestie as well to his ennemies, as to his owne people: in that that he decla­red [Page] himself able to geue saluation and deliuerāce, by meanes of the moste we­ake vesselles: and partlie he did it to confound and ashame all man of that age, because they had for the moste part de­clined frome his true obedience. And therfore was the spirit of courage, re­giment, and boldnes taken frome them for a time to their confusion and fur­ther humiliation. But what maketh this for Mary and her matche Philippe? One thing I wold aske of suche as depend vpō the exāple of Debora, whether she was widowe or wife, when she iudged Israel, and when that God gaue that no table victorie to his people vnder her? If they answer she was widowe, I wold lay against them the testimonie of the holie ghost, witnessinge that she was Iudic. 4. wife to Lapidoth. And if they will shift, and alledge, that so she might be called, not witstanding that her hus­band was dead, I vrge them further, that they are not able to proue it to be any common phrase and maner of spe­ache in the scriptures, that a womā shall [Page 43] be called the wife of a dead man, except that there be some note added, wherbie it may be knowen that her husband isLuc. 2. departed, as is witnessed of Anna. But inIudic. 4. this place of the iudges, there is no note added, that her husband shuld be dead, but rather the expressed contrarie. For the text saith: In that time a womā named Debora a ꝓphetesse, wife to Lapidoth iudged Israel. The holie ghost plainlie speaketh, that what time she iudged Is­rael, she was wife to Lapidoth. If she was wife, and if she ruled all alone in Is­rael,NOTE. then I aske why did she not preferre her husband to that honor to be capitain, ād to be leader to the host of the Lord. If any thinke that it was her husbande, the text proueth the contrarie. For it af firmeth that Barak, of the tribe of Neph talie was apointed to that office. If Ba­rak had bene her husband: to what pur­pose shuld the holie ghost so diligent­lie haue noted the tribe, and an other name then was before expressed? Yea to what purpose shuld it be noted, that she send and called him? wherof I doubt [Page] not, but that euerie reasonable man doth consider that this Barak was not her husband, and therof likwise it is e­uident, that her iudgement or gouer­nement in Israel was no such vsurped power, as our quenes vniustlie possesse this day, but that it was the spirit of prophecie, which rested vpon her, what time the multitude of the people had wroght wickedlie in the eyes of the Lord: by the whiche spirit, she did re­buke the idolatrie and iniquitie of the people, exhort them to repentance, and in the end, did bring them this comfort, that God shuld deliuer them from the bondage and thraldom of their enne­mies. And this she might do, not with­standing that an other did occupie the NOTE. place of the supreme magistrat, (if any was in those dayes in Israel) for so I fin­de 2. Reg. 22. did Hulda the wife of Sallum in the dayes of Iosias king of Iuda speake prophecie and comfort the king:and yet he resigned to her nether the sceptre, nor the sword. That this our interpreta­cion, how that Debora did iudge in Israel [Page 44] is the true meaning of the holie ghost, the pondering and weying of the hi­storie shall manifestlie proue. When she sendeth for Barak, I pray you, in whoseDobora comman­ded not as princes v­se to com­mande. name geueth she him his charge? Doth she speake to him as kinges and prin­ces vse to speake to their subiectes in suche cases? No, but she speaketh, as she that had a speciall reuelation frome God, whiche nether was knowen to Barak nor to the people, saying: hath not the Lord God of Israel cōmanded the? This is her preface, by the whiche she wold stirre vp the dull senses of Ba­rak, and of the people, willing to per­suade vnto them, that the time was co­men, when God wold shewe him selfe their protector and deliuerer, in which preface she vsurpeth to her selfe, nether power nor authoritie. For she saith not, I being thy princes, thy maistresse, thy souereine Jadie and quene, commande the vpon thine allegeance, and vnder pain of treason to go, and gather an ar­mie. No, she spoileth her self of all po­wer to commande, attributing that au­thoritie [Page] to God, of whom she had her reuelation and certitude to apoint Ba­rak capitain, whiche after appeareth more plainlie. For when she had decla­red to him the hole counsel of God, a­pointing vnto him as well the nombre of his souldiors, as the tribes, owt of which they shuld be gathered: and whē she had apointed the place of the batel, (whiche she coulde not haue done, but by especiall reuelation of God) and had assured him of victorie in the name of God, and yet that he fainted and o­penlie refused, to entre in to that iour­ney except that the prophetesse wold accompanie him, she did vse against him no external power, she did not threaten him with rebellion and death, but for assurance of his faint hart and weake cō science, being content to go with him, she pronounceth, that the glorie shulde not be his in that iourney, but that the Lord shuld sell Sisera in to the hand of a woman. Such as haue more pleasure in light then in darknes, may clearlie per­ceiue, that Debora did vsurpe no such [Page 45] power nor authoritie, as our quenes do this day claime. But that she was in­dued with the spirit of wisdome, of knowledge, and of the true feare of God: and by the same she iudged the factes of the rest of the people. She re­buked their defection and idolatry, yea and also did redresse to her power, the iniuries, that were done by man to man. But all this, I say, she did by the spiri­tuall sworde, that is, by the worde of God, and not by any temporall regimēt or authoritie, whiche she did vsurpe o­uer Israel. In which, I suppose, at that time there was no laufull magistrate, by the reason of their greate affliction. For so witnesseth the historie, saying: And Ehud being dead, the Lorde sold Israel in to the hand of Iabin king of Canaan. And he by Sisera his capitain afflicted Israel greatlie the space of twentie yeares. And Debora her self, in her song of thankes geuing, confesseth that before she did arise mother in Is­rael, and in the dayes of Iael, there was nothing but confusion and trouble. If [Page] any sticke to the terme, alledging that the holie ghost saith, that she iudged Israel:let them vnderstand, that nether doth the Ebrue word, nether yet the Latin, To iudge is not al­way vn­derstand of the ci­uil regi­ment. Isaie 2. Isaie 42. Mich. 4. Isaie 5. alwayes signifie ciuile iudgement, or the execution of the tēporall sword, but moste commonlie is taken in the sense, whiche we haue before expressed. For of Christ it is said: he shal iudge ma­ny natiōs. And that he shall pronounce iudgement to the gentiles. And yet it is euident, that he was no minister of the temporal sword. God commandeth Ie­rusalem and Iuda to iudge betwixt him and his vineyarde, and yet he apointed not them all to be ciuil magistrates. To EZech.20 Ezech.22 Ezech.34 Ezechiel it is said: shalt thou not iudge them sonne of man? and after:thou son­ne of man, shalt thou not iudge? shalt thou not iudge, I say, the citie of blood? and also: behold, I shall iudge betwixt beast ād beast. And such places in great nombre, are to be founde thrughout the hole scriptures, ād yet I trust no mā wilbe so foolish, as to thinke that any of the Prophetes were apointed by God [Page 46] to be politike iudges, or to punishe the sinnes of man, by corporal punishmēt. No the maner of their iudgement is ex­pressed in these wordes: Declare toEZech.22 them all their abominations, and thou shalt say to them: Thus saith the Lorde God: a citie shedding blood in the middest of her, that her time may approche and which hath made idoles against her selfe, that she might be polluted. Thou hast transgressed in the blood which thou hast shed, ād thou art polluted in the idoles, which thou hast made. Thus, I say, do the prophetes of God iudge, pronouncing the sentēce of God against malefactors. And so I doubt not but Debora iudged, what time Israel had declined from God: rebuking their defection, and exhorting them to repentance, without vsurpation of any ciuill authoritie. And if the people gaue vnto her for a time any reuerence or honour, as her godlines and happie counsel did well deserue, yet was it no such empire,NOTE. as our mōstres claime. For which of her sonnes or nerest kinsmen left she ruler [Page] and iudge in Israel after her. The holie ghost expresseth no such thing. Wherof it is euident, that by her example God offreth no occasion to establish any re­giment of women aboue men, realmes, and nations.

An an­swer to the second obiection. But now to the second objection. In whiche women require (as to them appeareth) nothing but equitie and iu­stice. Whilest they ād their patrones for them, require dominion and empire a­boue men. For this is their question: Is it not lauful, that womē 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, what wo­man wold not glad­ly heare. that so they do. But therwith I adde that whiche gladlie they list not vnderstand: 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, [Page 47] whiche God by his word hath plainlie denied vnto them: but to all womē 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 argumēt. 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 letthe doughters of Zalphead de­sired to reigne ouer no mā in Israel. them speak of conscience: 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 amōge the mē 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 mōstruous empire of womē? The que­stion [Page] women may suc­cede to in­heritance but not to office. 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: But the question is:if women may succede to their fathers in offices, and chieflie to that office, the executor wherof doth occupie the place ād throne of God. And that I absolutelie de­nie: and feare not to say, that to place a woman in authoritie aboue a realme, is to pollute and ꝓphane the royall seate, the throne of iustice, which oght to be the throne of God: and that to main­teine them in the same, is nothing els, but continuallie to rebell against God. Num. 36 One thing there is yet to be noted and obserued in the lawe made concerning the inheritance of the doughters of Zalphead, to wit, that it was forbid­den vnto them to marie without their owne tribe, lest that such portion as fell to their lotte, shuld be transferred frome one tribe to an other, and so shuld the tribe of Manasses be defrau­ded and spoiled of their iust inheritāce [Page 48] by their occasiō. For auoiding of which it was commanded by Mofes, that they shuld marie in the familie or housholde of the tribe and kindred of their father. Wonder it is that the aduocates and pa­trones of the right of our ladies did notOur pa­trones for women do not mar­ke this caution. consider and ponder this lawe before that they counseled the blinde princes and vnworthie nobles of their coun­tries, to betray the liberties therof in to the handes of strangiers. England for satisfying of the inordinat appetites of that cruell monstre Marie (vnworthie by reason of her bloodie tyrānie, of the name of a woman) betrayed (alas) to the proude spaniarde: and Scotland by the rashe madnes of foolish gouerners, and by the practises of a crastie dame resigned like wise, vnder title of maria­ge in to the power of Frāce. Doth such trāslation of realmes and natiōs please the iustice of God, or is the possessiō byRealmes gotten by practises are no iuste posses­sion. such means obteined, lauful in his sight? Assured I am that it is not. No otherwi­se, I say, then is that possessiō, wherunto theues, murtherers, tyrannes and op­pressors [Page] do attein by theft, murther, ty­rannie, violēce, deceit, and oppression, whiche God of his secrete (but yet most iust) iudgement doth often permit for punishment, as wel of the sufferers, as of the violent oppressors, but doth neuer approue the same as laufull and godlie. For if he wold not permit that the inhe­ritance of the children of Israel shuld passe frome one tribe to an other by the NOTE. mariage of any doughter, not witstan­ding that they were all one people, all spake one tonge, all were descended of one father, and all did professe one God, and one religion:If yet, I say, God wold not suffer that the cōmoditie and vsuall frute, which might be gathered of the portion of grounde limited and assigned to one tribe shulde passe to an other: Will he suffer that the liber­ties, lawes, commodities and frutes of hole realmes and natiōs, be geuen in to the power and distributiō of others, by the reason of marriage, ād in the powers of suche, as besides, that they be of a strange tonge, of strange maners and [Page 49] lawes, they are also ignorant of God, ennemies to his truth, deniers of Christ Iesus, persecutors of his true membres, and haters of all vertue? As the odious nation of spaniardes doth manifestlie declare: who for very despit, which theythe spa­niardes are Iewes and they bragge that Ma­rie of En­glād is of the route of Ieffe. do beare against Christe Iefus, whome their forefathers did crucifie (for Iewes they are, as histories do witnesse, andNote the law which he hath proclai­med in France a­gainst such as he termeth Lutheriās they them selues confesse) do this day make plaine warre against all true pro­fessors of his holie gospell. And ho we blindlic and outragiouslie the frenche king, and his pestilent prelates do fight against the veritie of God, the flaming fiers, which lick vp the innocent blood of Christes membres, do witnesse, and by his cruel edictes is notified and pro­claimed. And yet to these two cruell ty­rannes (to France, and Spain I meane) is the right and possession of England, and Scotland appointed. But iust or lau­full shall that possession neuer be, till God do chaunge the statute of his for­mer lawe: whiche he will not do for the pleasure of mā. For he hath not created the earth to satisfie the ambitiō of two [Page] Act.17. or three tyrannes, but for the vniuersall feed of Adam: and hath apointed ād de­fined the boundes of their habitation to diuerse natiōs, assigning diuers countries as he himselfe confesseth, speaking Deuter.2. to Israel in these wordes: You shal passe by the boundes and limites of your bretheren the sonnes of Esau, who dwell in mount Sier. They shall feare you. But take diligent hede, that ye shewe not your selues cruell against them. For I will gene you no part of their land. No not the bredth of a foote. For mount Seir I haue geuen to Esau to be posses­sed. And the same he doth witnesse of the sōnes of I ot, to whom he had geuē Deut.32. Arre to be possessed. And Mosesplainlie affirmeth, that when the almightie did distribute, and diuide possessions to the gentiles, and when he did disperse, and scatter the sonnes of men, that then he did apoint the limites and boundes of peoples, for the nomber of the sonnes NOTE. of Israel. Wherof it is plain, that God hath not exposed the earth in pray to tyrānes, making all thing laufull, which by violence and murther they may pos­sesse, [Page 50] but that he hath apointed to euery feuerall nation, a feuerall possession, willing them to stand content (as natu­reCicero of­fic.lib.1. did teache an ethnik to affirme) with that portion, whiche by lotte and iust meanes they had inioyed. For what causes God permitteth this his distribution to be troubled, and the realmes of aunciēt nations to be possessed of strā ­giers, I delay at this time to intreate. Onelie this I haue recited to geue the worlde to vnderstand, that the reigne, empire, and authoritie of women, hath no grounde within Goddes scriptures. Yea that realmes or prouinces posses­sedRealmes gotten by marriage, is vniust conquest. by their mariage, is nothing but vn­iust conquest. For so litle doth the lawe made for the doughters of Zalphead helpe the cause of your quenes, that vt­terlie it fighteth against them, both dā ­ning their authoritie and fact. But now to the thirde objection.

The consent, say they, of realmes andAnswer to the third ob­iection. lawes pronounced and admitted in this behalfe, long consuetude and custome, together with the felicitie of some wo­men [Page] in their empires haue established their authoritie. To whome, I answer, that nether may the tyrānie 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 hat 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 cōmmon consent of their counsels, haue established the one, then haue approued the other. And yet I thinke that no man of sounde iudgemēt, 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 mē by their lawes. For the same God that in plain wordes forbiddeth idola­trie, doth also forbidde the authoritie of women ouer man. As the wordes of [Page 51] saint Paule before rehearsed do plainly teach vs. And therfore whether women be deposed from that vniust authoritie (haue they neuer vsurped it so long) or if all such honor be denied vnto them,women may and oght to be deposed from au­thoritie. I feare not to affirme that they are ne­ther defrauded of right, nor inheritan­ce. For to women can that honor neuer be due nor laufull (muche lesse inheri­tance) whiche God hath so manifestlie denied vnto them.

I am not ignorant that the subtill wittes of carnall men (which can neuer be broght vnder the obediēce of God­des simple preceptes to maintein this monstruous empire) haue yet two vaine shiftes. First they alledge, that albeit womenthe fourth obiecteon. may not absolutelie reigne by thē selues, because they may nether fit in iud gement, 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 womā borne to rule ouer any realme, may chose her a husband, ād to him she may trāsfer ād geue her authoritie and right. To both I an­swer [Page] 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 womī can make no laufull of­ficer. to them selues: But the authoritie of a womā is a corrupted fountein, ād 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 hath not) to the place of a laufull magi­strat. Let En­glād and Scotland take hede. And therfore who socuer recei­ueth of a womā, office or authoritie, are adulterous and bastard officers before God. This may appeare straunge at the first affirmation, but if we will be as in­differēt ād 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 tyrāne by cōspiracie vsurped the royall seat ād dignitie of a king, ād in the same did so establish 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 [Page 52] any dignitie of him, yet neuer the lesse they wold honor the same traitor as king, and becōme his officers in all affaires of the realme. If after, the natiue prince did recouer his iust honor ād possessiō, shuld he repute or esteme any mā of the traitors apointemēt for a laufull magistrate? or for his frende and true subiect? or shuld he not rather with one sentēce condēne the head with the membres? And if so he shuld do, who were a­ble to accuse him of rigor? much lesse to condemne his sentēce of iniustice. And dare we denie the same power to God in the like case? For that womā reigneth aboue mā, she hath obteined it by treasō and cōspiracie cōmitted against God. Howe can it be then, that she being cri­minall ād giltie of treason against God cōmitted, can apointe any officer plea­sing in his sight? It is a thing impossible. Wherefore let men that receiue of wo­men authoritie, honor or office, be mostwoman in autho­ritie is re­bel a­gainst God. assuredly persuaded, that in so maintei­ning that vsurped power, they declare them selues ennemies to God. If any thinke, that because the realme and [Page] estates therof, haue geuen their consentes to a woman, and haue established her, and her authoritie: that therfore it is laufull and acceptable before God: let the same men remembre what I haue said before, to wit, that God can not approue the doing nor consent of any multitude, cōcluding any thing against his worde and ordinance, and therfore they must haue a more assured defēse against the wrath of God, then the approba­tion and cōsent of a blinded multitude, or elles they shall not be able to stand in the presence of the consuming fier: that what the nobilitie oght to do in this be­half. is, they must acknowledge that the re­giment of a woman is a thing most o­dious in the presēce of God. They must refuse to be her officers, because she is a traitoresse and rebell against God. And finallie they must studie to represse her inordinate pride and tyrannie to the vttermost of their power. The same is the dutie of the nobilitie and estates, by whose blindnes a woman is promo­ted. First in so farre, as they haue moste haynouslie offended against God, pla­cing in authoritie suche as God by his [Page 53] worde hath remoued frome the same, vnfeinedly they oght to call for mercie, and being admonished of their error and damnable fact, in signe and token of true repentance, with common con­sent they oght to retreate that, which vnaduisedlie and by ignorāce they haue pronounced, and oght without further delay to remoue from authority all such persones, as by vsurpation, violence, or tyrannie, do possesse the same. For so did Israel and Iuda after they had re­uolted from Dauid, and Iuda alone in the dayes of Athalia. For after that she2. Reg. 11 by murthering her sonnes children, had obteined the empire ouer the land, and had most vnhappelie reigned in Iuda six years, Iehoiada the high priest called together the capitaines and chief rulersMarke this fact, for it agreeth with Goddes lawe pro­nounced. of the people, and shewing to them the kinges sōne Ioas, did binde them by an othe to depose that wicked womā, and to promote the king to his royall seat, whiche they faithfullie did, killinge at his cōmandement not onlie that cruell and mischeuous womā, but also the people did destroie the tēple of Baal, break [Page] his altars and images, and kill Mathan Baales high priest before his altars. The same is the dutie as well of the estates, as of the people that hath bene blinded. First they oght to remoue frome honor and authoritie, that monstre in nature (so call I a woman cled in the habit of man, yea a woman against nature rei­gning aboue man). Secondarilie if any presume to defende that impietie, they oght not to feare, first to ꝓnounce, and then after to execute against thē the sentēce of deathe. If any man be affraid to violat the oth of obediēce, which they haue made to suche mōstres, let them be most assuredly persuaded, that as the be­ginning of their othes, proceding from ignorance was sinne, so is the obstinate purpose to kepe the same, nothinge but plaine rebelliō against God. But of this mater in the second blast, God willing, we shall speake more at large.

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 interpreter of Goddes sentence, [Page 54] 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 codemned: let all men ta­keAn admonition. hede what quarell and cause frome hence further they do defend. If God raise vp any noble harte to vendicat the libertie of his countrie, and to sup­presse the monstruous empire of wo­men, let all suche as shal presume to de­fend them in the same, moste certeinlie knowe, that in so doing, they lift their hād against God, and that one day they shall finde his power to fight against their foolishnes. Let not the faithfull, godlie, and valiant hartes of Christes souldiours be vtterlie discouraged, ne­ther yet let the tyrannes reioise, albeit [Page] for a time they triumphe against such as studie to represse their tyrannie, and to remoue them from vniust authoritie. For the causes alone, why he suffereth the souldiours to fail in batel, whome neuerthelesse he commandeth to fight as somtimes did Israel fighting against Beniamin. The cause of the Israelites was most iust:for it was to punishe that horrible abominatiō of those sonnes of Iudic. 20 Belial, abusing the leuites wife, whome the Beniamites did defēd. And they had Goddes precept to assure them of well doing. For he did not onelie commāde them to fight, but also apointed Iuda to be their leader and capitain, ād yet fell they twise in plain batel against those most wicked adulterers.

why God ꝑmitteth somtimes his owne souldiors to fall in batel. The secret cause of this, I say, is knowē to God alone. But by his euidēt scriptures we may assuredly gather, that by such means doth his wisdome sōtimes, beat downe the pride of the flesh (for the Is­raelites at the firste trusted in their multitude, power ād strēgth, and somtimes by such ouerthrowes, he will punish the offenses of his owne childrē, and bring [Page 55] them to the vnfeined knowledge of the same, before he will geue them victorie against the manifest cōtēners, whom he hath apoīted 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 Bēiamites, yet after they had wept before the Lorde, after they had fasted ād made sacrifice in signe of their vnfeined repentance, they so preuailed against that proude tribe of Beniamin, that after 25. thousande strong men of warre were killed in batel, they destro­yedIudic. 20 man, womā, childe and beaste, as well in the fieldes, as in the cities, whiche all were burned with fier, so that onelie of that hole tribe remained fix hundreth men, who fled to the wildernes, where they remained foure monethes, and so were saued. The same God, who did executeNOTE. this greuous punishmēt, euē by the hādes of those, whom he suffred twise to be ouercomen in batel, doth this day re­tein his power ād iustice. Cursed Iesabel of Englād, with the pestilent ād detestable generatiō of papistes, make no litle [Page] bragge and boast, that they haue trium­phed not only against Wyet, but also a­gainst all such as haue entreprised any thing against thē 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 lēgth of their hornes be able to reache. And let them further cōsider, that in the be­ginning of this 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 chāged in to lābes, ād 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 iudgemētes iusti­fied euen by the verie wicked, hath now geuen open testimonie of her and their beastlie crueltie. For man and womā, le­arned and vnlearned, nobles ād men of baser sorte, aged fathers and tendre da­miselles, and finailie the bones of the [Page 56] dead, aswell womē as mē haue tasted of their tyrānie, so that now not onlie the blood of father Latimer, of the milde man of God the bishop of Cātorburie, of learned and discrete Ridley, of inno­cent ladie Iane dudley, and many godly and worthie preachers, that can not be forgotten, such as fier hath cōsumed, ād the sworde of tyrannie moste vniustlie hath shed, doth call for vēgeance in the eares of the Lord God of hostes: but also the sobbes and teares of the poore oppressed, the groninges of the ange­les, the watch men of the Lord, yea and euerie earthlie creature abused by their tyrannie do continuallie crie and call for the hastie execution of the same. I feare not to say, that the day of vengeance, whiche shall apprehend that horri­ble monstre Iesabel of England, and suche as maintein her monstruous cru­eltie, is alredie apointed in the coun­sel of the Eternall: and I verelie be­leue that it is so nigh, that she shall not reigne so long in tyrannie, as hitherto she hath done, when God shall decla­re him selfe to be her ennemie, when [Page] he shall poure furth cōtempt vpon her, according to her crueltie, ād shal kindle the hartes of such, as sōtimes did fauor her with deadly hatred against her, that The authoritie of all women, is a wall without foū dation. they may execute his iudgementes. And therfore let such as assist her, take hede what they do. For assuredlie her empire ād reigne is a wall without foundatiō: I meane the same of the authoritie of all womē. It hath bene vnder propped this blind time that is past, with the foolishnes of people, ād with the wicked lawes of ignorāt ād tyrānous princes. But the fier of Goddes worde is alredie laide to those rottē proppes (I include the Popes lawe with the rest) and presentlie they burn, albeit we espie not the flame: whē they are cōsumed, (as shortlie they will be, for stuble ād drie timbre can not lōg indure the fier) that rottē wall, the vsur­ped ād vniust empire of womē, shall fall by it self in despit of all man, to the de­struction of so manie, as shall labor to vphold it. And therfore let all man be aduertised, for the trumpet hath ones blowen.