The reception of Mrs. Bowes into his household, especially with his knowledge of her deep-seated melancholia, says much for the kindliness of Knox's heart; and contrasts strongly with the spirit manifested on a similar matter by that other Scotsman whose correspondence has so recently been given to the world. We know not if the cheap sneer indulged in by so many at the expense of the mother-in-law were as common in his days as it is in ours, but, in any case, Knox in all this was thoughtfully tender, and though he admits that the desponding habit of Mrs. Bowes was often a great trial to him, yet he never withdrew his regard from her. The following sentences of Dr. Laing express all that needs to be said more on this subject: "Her husband, I presume, was a bigoted adherent of the Roman Catholic faith, and this may serve as the key both to his opposition to Knox's marriage with his daughter, and to the mother's attachment to her son-in-law. It cannot at least be said that Knox was actuated by the expectation of wealth. In his last will and testament he states that all the money he received from the mother's succession for the benefit of his two sons was one hundred marks sterling, which he, 'out of his poverty,' had increased to five hundred pounds Scots, and had paid through Mr. Randolph to their uncle, Mr. Robert Bowes, for their use. The comparative value of money at this time was very variable; but we may reckon (that) the hundred marks, or £66 13s. 4d., were increased by Knox to £100 sterling."[[1]]

After Knox left Scotland the courage of the bishops revived, for they actually summoned him again, and on his failure to put in an appearance they were bold enough to burn him in effigy at the Cross of Edinburgh! But this brutum fulmen of theirs could not undo the work which he had wrought. For by his labours at this time, especially in exposing the evil of the Protestants' any longer countenancing, papal worship, he detached from the Romish communion the nucleus round which the Church of Scotland, in a reformed state, was ultimately to form itself. Hitherto there had been no separate organization of the adherents to the Protestant faith; and no formal observance by them of the ordinance of the Supper. But now they had, to some extent at least, committed themselves to ultimate separation from the Church of Rome. As Lorimer says, "They were now a "Congregation" or community of Evangelical Christians, as much bound to one another as they were dissevered from the Church of the popes." And Knox's leaving of them in that condition was as much for their good as his arrival among them some months before had been. Had he remained longer in Scotland at this time, his presence would have undoubtedly provoked an outburst of persecuting fury on the part of the bishops and their friends; while as it was, the seed which he sowed had opportunity to root itself in the hearts of those who had received it at his hands; and this it would assuredly do if they followed the directions which he had left behind him. For before his departure he drew up a letter of wholesome counsel addressed to his brethren in Scotland, in which he exhorts them to give themselves to the daily study of the Bible and worship of God in their homes, and gives them directions as to the holding and conducting of assemblies for public worship and mutual conference and prayer, recommending them to observe a regular course in their reading, and cautioning those who should speak, to do so with modesty, avoiding "multiplication of words, perplexed interpretation, and wilfulness in reasoning." If anything occurred in the text which they could not resolve for themselves, he advised them to apply for assistance to the more learned, and offered if they should refer it to him, to give them such help as he could render, saying, "I will more gladly spend fifteen hours in communicating my judgment with you, in explaining as God pleases to open to me any place of Scripture, than half an hour in any matter beside."

To the same period belong his "Answers to some Questions concerning Baptism," etc., which had been proposed to him by some inquirers, and which are of a sort that have often troubled young converts in similar cases. They are, whether baptism administered by the popish priests was valid and did not require repetition? Whether the decree of the apostles and elders at Jerusalem be still in all its points binding on believers? Whether the prohibition in 2 John 10 extended to the common salutation of those who taught erroneous doctrine? How the directions respecting dress in 1 Peter iii. 3 are to be obeyed? and the like. And with them all he deals in a spirit of wisdom for which multitudes unacquainted with his works would hardly give him credit. We need not enter into details regarding them; but as the first mentioned of the above subjects was debated a few years ago in the Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (North) of the United States, it may not be uninteresting to state that, while Knox declares unequivocally that it would be wrong for Protestant believers to seek baptism for their children from popish priests, he yet as plainly affirms that a man who had been baptized in infancy in papistry ought not to be rebaptized when he cometh to knowledge, because Christ's institution could not be utterly abolished by the malice of Satan or by the abuse of man.

From September, 1556, to September, 1557, Knox laboured in Geneva, delighting in his work and rejoicing in the fellowship of congenial friends. Indeed, these halcyon months seem to have been the most peaceful of his chequered life, and we do not wonder that he wrote regarding Geneva: "I neither fear nor shame to say, it is the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the days of the apostles." In the public services of the Church he used the form of prayer which had been drawn up by himself and others for the English congregation, and which was the groundwork of the "Book of Common Order" that was received by the Church of Scotland in 1565. But as that will come up for description in its proper place, we need not dwell upon it here. The harmony of the Geneva Church was sweet after the controversies of Frankfort, and the intercourse of the brethren from England, who were then engaged in the preparation of that version of the Scriptures which continued to be for nearly a hundred years the favourite Bible of the Puritans, must have been a constant joy.

But this happiness did not last long; for in the month of May (1557) James Syme and James Barron, two burgesses of Edinburgh, and his own very devoted friends, arrived with a letter from Glencairn, Lorn, Erskine, and Lord James Stuart, beseeching "in the name of the Lord," that he would return to his native land; and affirming that he would find all the faithful whom he had left behind him, not only glad to hear his doctrine, but also ready to jeopardise their lives and goods for the setting forward of the glory of God. The opinion of Calvin and other friends to whom he submitted this request, was that he could not refuse such a call "without declaring himself rebellious unto God and unmerciful to his country"; and no doubt his own heart had already given a similar response. Accordingly, after making all due arrangements for the leaving of his charge, and for the care of his family in his absence, he set out from Geneva in the end of September, and arrived at Dieppe on the 24th October. He was met there, however, with letters which gave him the impression that those who had invited him to return to Scotland had repented of their action in that regard; and that many of the professed adherents of the truth had drawn back and became faint-hearted in the cause. This brought him to a stand, and he determined to go no farther until his way should be more clear. He immediately wrote to his correspondents, explaining how he came to be at Dieppe, upbraiding them for their fear and fickleness; admonishing them of the great importance of the enterprise to which they had committed themselves; and alleging that they ought to hazard their lives and fortunes to deliver themselves and their brethren from spiritual bondage. This letter is dated October 27th, 1557, and was followed by another of a more general tenour to his brethren in Scotland, which appears to have been written in the same place on the 1st of December.

In the expectation of receiving some definite information from Scotland, Knox lingered in Dieppe for some considerable time, and officiated as temporary preacher to a Protestant Church which had recently been formed there. But when no answer came to his appeal to his countrymen, he set his face again toward Geneva, to which, after visiting Lyons, Rochelle, and other towns, he returned in the spring of 1558.

But though he had heard nothing from Scotland, matters there had been making steady progress. There may have been just enough of wavering on the part of some to give occasion for the desponding letters which had arrested him at Dieppe, yet there had been no great reaction. For on the 3rd December, perhaps after the receipt of Knox's letter of the preceding October, there had been a conference of the leading Protestants as to what was best to be done, and as the result a Common Bond or Band—the earliest of those covenants which have had so conspicuous a place in the church history of Scotland—was drawn up and subscribed by Argyle, Glencairn, Morton, Lorn, Erskine of Dun, and many others. By this "engagement" they pledged themselves in the most solemn manner "to strive in their Master's cause even unto death;" "to maintain, set forward, and establish the most blessed word of God, and His congregation;" with their "whole power, substance, and their very lives; and to labour to the utmost of their possibility, to have faithful ministers purely and truly to preach Christ's gospel, and minister His sacraments to His people."

This was brave and hopeful in the highest degree. But Knox knew nothing of it meanwhile, and in his despondency composed and issued that tract which must be pronounced the greatest mistake of his life. We refer, of course, to "The First Blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous Regiment (i.e. government) of Women," which is an elaborate argument designed to establish the proposition that "to promote a woman to bear rule, superiority, dominion, or empire, above any realm, nation, or city, is repugnant to nature, contumely to God, a thing most contrarious to His revealed will and approved ordinance; and finally it is the subversion of good order, of all equality and justice." We have already seen from the questions which he put to Bullinger, that he had been pondering this subject for some time; and there is evidence in the tract itself, that he had diligently consulted what we should now call "the literature of the subject," for he refers to Aristotle's politics; to the Books of the Digests; to such Fathers of the Church as Tertullian, Augustine, Ambrose, Chrysostom, etc. But it was clearly prompted by the fact that Mary Tudor was on the throne of England; and there is throughout a strong undercurrent of application to her character and cruelties. Whatever opinion may be taken on the main question, however,—and the very existence of the Salic law in some states still proves that there are two sides to it, there can be no doubt that Knox's treatment of it at all, not to speak of the sort of treatment which he gave it, was at this time impolitic and imprudent. In his preface he intimates that he is prepared to be condemned by multitudes, and even for being accused by some of high treason; and doubtless, he thought that he had counted the cost before he built his tower. But the publication brought such a storm about his head, that though he had purposed to follow his first blast with a second and a third, the two latter were never blown. His friend and colleague, Christopher Goodman, put himself by his side in a work entitled "How Superior Powers ought to be Obeyed of their Subjects;" and at a later day John Milton, in quoting from Goodman, and referring to him and others, in his "Tenure of Kings and Magistrates" says, "These were the pastors of those saints and confessors, who, flying from the bloody persecution of Queen Mary, gathered up at length their scattered members into many congregations ... These were the true Protestant divines of England, our fathers in the faith we hold."[[2]] But such laudations were exceptional. Foxe, the martyrologist, wrote a long and friendly letter to Knox, in which he expostulated with him on the impropriety of its publication; and even his friend John Calvin, in a letter to Cecil, felt compelled to deny all complicity with its production. Mary Tudor did not live long to resent it; but her sister Elizabeth never either forgot or forgave it; and it prejudiced the mind of Mary Stuart against him long before she looked upon his face. Not many months after its publication he was constrained to say "My first Blast hath blown from me all my friends in England," and could he have foreseen what the alliance of Elizabeth was ultimately to do for Scotland in the very climax of her Reformation agony, we may safely say that the work would neither have been written nor published.

But his excuse (valeat quantum) is not far to seek, and we cannot do better than give it in the words of Carlyle.[[3]] "It is written with very great vehemency; the excuse for which, so far as it may really need excuse, is to be found in the fact that it was written while the fires of Smithfield were still blazing, on best of bloody Mary, and not long after Mary of Guise had been raised to the Regency of Scotland—maleficent crowned women these two—covering poor England and poor Scotland with mere ruin and horror, in Knox's judgment, and may we not still say to a considerable extent, in that of all candid persons? The book is by no means without merit; has in it various little traits unconsciously autobiographic, and others which are illuminative and interesting. One ought to add withal, that Knox was no despiser of women, far the reverse in fact; his behaviour to good and pious women is full of respect; and his tenderness, his filial helpfulness in their suffering and infirmities (see the letters to his mother-in-law and others) are beautifully conspicuous. For the rest his poor book testifies to many high intellectual qualities in Knox, and especially to far more of learning than has ever been ascribed to him, or is anywhere traceable in his other writings."

To this time also belongs his treatise on Predestination, in answer to an anonymous writer who called his work "The Careless of Necessity." It is the most elaborate of all the Reformer's productions, and goes into the Augustinian controversy, on the side of the great ecclesiastical father, with much vigour of logic, great clearness of language, and apt and extended references to Scripture. Nowhere else, as it seems to us, does Knox indulge in such closely compacted argument, or write in such a nervous style. He is very careful to keep himself from misrepresentation, and all he states may be accepted as true; but there is another side to the shield to which he rarely refers, and which must be admitted as implicitly as that to which he has restricted his attention. It is not, of course, equal to the great work of Mozley on the same subject; but they who would master the literature of the controversy cannot afford to overlook this valuable contribution to its documents.