With some other hints, gratefully acknowledged.
Of the various writings of the Reformer, no one was the occasion of
exciting greater odium than his _First Blast against the monstrous
Regiment or Government of Women_. Unlike all his other publications, it
appeared anonymously, although he had no intention of ultimately
concealing his name. His purpose was, as he tells us, “Thrice to Blow
the Trumpet in the same matter, if GOD so permit,” and, on the last
occasion, to announce himself as the writer, to prevent any blame being
imputed to others. This intention, it is well known, was never carried
into effect. That KNOX’S views were in harmony with those of his
colleagues, GOODMAN, WHITTINGHAM, and GILBY, need hardly be stated: but
the reception of the little work fully confirmed the Author’s opinion,
that it would not escape “the reprehension of many.” This may in a
great measure be attributed to the course of public events within a few
months of its publication.
The subject of Female Government had engaged his attention at an
earlier period. One of his Questions submitted to BULLINGER in 1554 was
“Whether a Female can preside over, and rule a kingdom by divine
right?” And in answer to some doubts regarding the Apparel of Women, he
himself says that “if women take upon them the office which GOD hath
assigned to men, they shall not escape the Divine malediction.” In his
_Additions_ to the _Apology for The Protestants in prison at Paris_, he
expresses his conviction that the government of Princes had come to
that state of iniquity that “no godly person can enjoy office or
authority under them.” This assertion indeed was not specially
applicable to Female government, but his feelings in reference to the
persecutions in England under MARY, and in Scotland under the Queen
Regent, impelled him to treat of a subject which all others at the time
seemed most sedulously to avoid.
His First _Blast_ was probably written at Dieppe towards the end of
1557; and it was printed early in the following year at Geneva, as is
apparent upon comparison with other books from the press of JOHN
CRESPIN in that city.
A copy of the work having been sent to JOHN FOX, then residing at
Basle, he wrote “a loving and friendly letter” to the author, in which
he expostulates with him on the impropriety of the publication. In
KNOX’S reply, dated the 18th of May 1558, he says, he will not excuse
“his rude vehemencie and inconsidered affirmations, which may appear
rather to proceed from choler than of zeal or reason.” “To me,” he
adds, “it _is_ enough to say, that black is not white, and man’s
tyranny and foolishness is not GOD’s perfect ordinance.”
The similar work of GOODMAN on _Obedience to Superior_ Powers which
appeared at Geneva about the same time, was also suggested by the
persecuting spirit which then prevailed. But both works were published
somewhat unseasonably, as such questions on _Government_ and
_Obedience_, it is justly observed, might have been more fitly argued
when a King happened to fill the throne. The terms used by GOODMAN in
reference to MARY, Queen of England, are not less violent than
unseemly. She died on the 17th of November 1558, and her successor
regarded the authors of those works with the utmost dislike; although
neither of them, in their writings, had any special reference or the
least intention of giving offence to Queen ELIZABETH....
That these works, and every person supposed to entertain similar
sentiments, should be regarded with marked aversion by Queen ELIZABETH,
need excite no surprise.
In the beginning of the year 1559, CALVIN having revised and
republished his _Commentaries_ on _ISAIAH_, originally dedicated to
EDWARD VI. in 1551; he addressed the work in a printed Epistle to Her
Majesty: but his messenger brought him back word that his homage was
not kindly received by Her Majesty, because she had been offended with
him by reason of some writings published with his approbation at
Geneva.
CALVIN felt so greatly annoyed at this imputation, that he addressed a
letter[1] to Sir WILLIAM CECIL, in which he expresses himself with no
small degree of asperity on the subject of KNOX’S First B_last_. He
says—
Two years ago [i.e. _in_ 1557] JOHN KNOX asked of me, in a private
conversation, what I thought about the Government of Women. I candidly
replied, that as it was a deviation from the original and proper order
of nature, it was to be ranked, no less than slavery, among the
punishments consequent upon the fall of man: but that there were
occasionally women so endowed, that the singular good qualities which
shone forth in them made it evident that they were raised up by Divine
authority; either that GOD designed by such examples to condemn the
inactivity of men, or for the better setting forth of His own glory. I
brought forth Huldah and Deborah; and added, that GOD did not vainly
promise by the mouth of Isaiah that “Queens should be nursing mothers
of the Church”; by which prerogative it is very evident that they are
distinguished from females in private life. I came at length to this
conclusion, that since, both by custom, and public consent, and long
practice, it hath been established, that realms and principalities may
descend to females by hereditary right, it did not appear to me
necessary to move the question, not only because the thing would be
most invidious; but because in my opinion it would not be lawful to
unsettle governments which are ordained by the peculiar providence of
GOD.
I had no suspicion of the book, and for a whole year was ignorant of
its publication. When I was informed of it by certain parties, I
sufficiently shewed my displeasure that such paradoxes should be
published; but as the remedy was too late, I thought that the evil,
which could not now be corrected, should rather be buried in oblivion
than made a matter of agitation.
Inquire also at your father in law [Sir ANTHONY COOKE] what my reply
was, when he informed me of the circumstance through Beza. And MARY was
still living, so that I could not be suspected of flattery.
What the books contain, I cannot tell; but KNOX himself will allow that
my conversation with him was no other than what I have now stated.
Calvin then proceeds to say, that great confusion might have arisen by
any decided opposition, and there would have been cause to fear, that
in such a case—
By reason of the thoughtless arrogance of one individual, the wretched
crowd of exiles would have been driven away, not only from this city
[of Geneva] but even from almost the whole world.
Some years later, and subsequent to CALVIN’S death, BEZA, in a letter
to BULLINGER, adverts to Queen ELIZABETH’S continued dislike to the
Church of Geneva. In his letter, dated the 3rd of September 1566, he
says—
Some years later, and subsequent to CALVIN’S death, BEZA, in a letter
to BULLINGER, adverts to Queen ELIZABETH’S continued dislike to the
Church of Geneva. In his letter, dated the 3rd of September 1566, he
says—
For as to our Church, I would have you know that it is so hateful to
the Queen [of England], that on this account she has never said a
single word in acknowledgement of the gift of my _Annotations [on the
New Testament]_. The reason of her dislike is twofold; one, because we
are accounted too severe and precise, which is very displeasing to
those who fear reproof; the other is, because formerly, though without
our knowledge, during the lifetime of Queen MARY, two books were
published here in the English language, one by Master KNOX against the
_Government of Women_, the other by Master GOODMAN on the _Rights of
the Magistrate_.
As soon as we learned the contents of each, we were much displeased,
and their sale was forbidden in consequence; but she, notwithstanding,
cherishes the opinion she has taken into her head[2].
[1] The letter is not dated, but it was subsequent to one written on
the 29th of January 1559 [i.e. 1560], _Zurich Letters_. Second Series,
p. 35.
[2] _Zurich Letters_. Second Series, p. 34.
THE FIRST BLAST OF THE TRUMPET AGAINST THE MONSTRVOVS REGIMENT OF
WOMEN.
Veritas temporis filia,