I am not ignorant that the subtill wittes of carnall men (which can neuer be broght vnder obedience of Goddes simple preceptes to maintein this monstruous empire) haue yet two vaine shiftes[146]. First they alledge, that albeit women may not absolutelie reigne by themselues, because they may nether sit in iudgement, nether pronounce sentence, nether execute any publike office: yet may they do all such thinges by their lieutenantes, deputies and iudges substitute. Secondarilie, say they, a woman borne to rule ouer anyrealme, may chose her a husband, and to him she may transfer and geue her authoritie and right. To both I answer in fewe wordes. First that frome a corrupt and venomed fountein can spring no holsome water: Secondarilie that no person hath power to geue the thing, which doth not iustlie appertein to them selues[147]: But the authoritie of a woman is a corrupted fountein, and therfore from her can neuer spring any lauful officer. She is not borne to rule ouer men: and therfore she can apointe none by her gift, nor by her power (which she hathn ot) to the place of a laufull magistrat. And therfore who soeuer receiueth of a woman[148], office or authoritie, are adulterous and bastard officers before God. This may appeare straunge at the first affirmation, but if we will be as indifferent and equall in the cause of God, as that we can be in the cause of man, the reason shall sodeinlie appeare. The case suposed, that a tyranne by conspiracie vsurped the royall seat and dignitie of a king, and in the same did so established him selfe, that he apointed officers, and did what him list for a time, and in this meane time, the natiue king made streit inhibition to all his subiectes, that none shuld adhere to this traitor, nether yet receiue any dignitie of him, yet neuer the lesse they wold honor the same traitor as king, and becomme his officers in all affaires of the realme. If after, the natiue prince did recouer his iust honor and possession, shuld he repute or esteme any man of the traitors apointement for a laufull magistrate? or for his frende and true subiect? or shuld he not rather with one sentence condemne the head with the membres? And if so he shuld do, who were able to accuse him of rigor? much lesse to condemne his sentence of iniustice. And dare we denie the same power to God in the like case? For that woman reigneth aboue man, she hath obteined it by treason and conspiracie committed against God. Howe can it be then, that she being criminall and giltie of treason against God committed, can apointe any officer pleasing in his sight? It is a thing impossible[149]. Wherefore let men that receiue of women authoritie, honor or office, be most assuredly persuaded, that in so mainteining that vsurped power, they declare them selues ennemies to God. If any thinke, that because the realme and estates therof, haue geuen their consentes to a woman, and haue established her, and her authoritie: that therfore it is laufull and