Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Socio-Political Activity of Women in the 19th and 20th Century

Introduction:
The need for women’ history is now recognized to a certain extent. A focus on women leads to the articulation of gender as a category of historical analysis, and to a conceptual perspective that makes possible a genuine rewriting of history. The paucity literature on women, however, remains grave, especially in the context of modern Indian history. One has to extend one’s sources. In this context, contemporary literature becomes extremely important. Literature is socially constructed and is too political.
During the nineteenth century women actively participated in the philanthropic and missionary activity which is the result of the evangelical movement and the new female role that was implicit in this Protestant revival. The Evangelical movement was a reform movement within the Anglican Church and in American churches and dominated Anglo-American societies during the nineteenth century. It had a profound and complex influence on the life and world-view of women.[1]
When we analysis the history carefully, one striking and glaring similarity is that different cultures, civilizations and even societies of different faith and religions down the annals of time, women were exploited and subjugated. We read in the history the deplorable plight of Indian women in the 19th and 20th century, wherein women were denied even basic human rights. Religious texts and sacred texts were interpreted in such a way that the women fold remain subjugated and chained by ancient beliefs and traditions. The women were not treated at par with men, and there were many social evils like child marriage, female infanticide, and the inhuman practice of Sati. (The burning alive of a widow, on the funeral pyre of her husband.) Though elementary schools were open yet girls and low caste children were not given admission in these schools. But there was a small section of girls who had received education. Widow Remarriage was prohibited, devadasi system, dowry system thus women were denied liberty. As the saying goes ‘Old habits die hard’, some of the social evils that haunted the women in the 19th century or the periods before continued to be practiced till today even by the educated people, a good example will be the inhuman custom of Dowry.
It is very sad to note that many Indologists have seized upon these social evils as distinctive evidence of India’s perennial backwardness. Moreover, during the colonial period these social inequalities and social divisions based on caste has become a convenient tool in the hands of the colonizers. On the one hand, they could tactfully play of one community against another. On the other hand, they could create an impression that India was a land rife with uniquely abhorrent social practices that only an enlightened foreigner could attempt to reform. India's social ills were discussed with a contemptuous cynicism and often with a willful intent to instill a sense of deep shame and inferiority.
The nineteenth-century-Protestant missionaries’ understanding of Christian mission as transplanting of the Western Christianity in Asia and Africa reinforced the subjugation of native women. It reduced the Christian mission to the changing of religious identities; it also divested the women of their personhood by treating them as either “stumbling blocks” or stepping-stones in missionaries’ expansionist enterprise.[2] Most female reformers of the nineteenth century believed that the guarantor of social progress, the agent of civilization, was woman herself. Western missionaries were committed to effecting a substantial change in the social norms affecting women. Among the majority of missionaries in India, for example, this commitment was reflected in a rhetoric that stressed women’s low status in Indian society and urged conversion to Christianity as a means of raising women’s status.[3]
Missionary reports written by Katherine mc Laurin and Mattie E. Currie, Canadian Baptist missionaries in Andhra Pradesh in the first half of the 19th century illustrate that they used women as an ‘agency’ to achieve their agenda of ‘winning’ the native community. They represented Telugu women both as obstacles to and as potential agents in Christianization of the Telugu communities. Moreover, they opined that these “brute” objects could become “Kings (God’s) daughters through the efforts of Canadian missionary women. Mc Laurin believed that “pagan” Telugus were waiting to be redeemed by her compatriots and their “dark” cultures needed “light” from Canadian Baptists. She regarded her compatriots as “masters” and Telugu Christians as “servants”.[4]
However, it should be admitted that Laurin has taken an extreme step in preserving the stories of single women missionaries and some Bible women in a chapter, which need to be appreciated. Other Canadian Baptist missionaries did not give so much space for women in their reports. While Mc Laurin representation viewed Telugu women as mostly hindrances to Christian expansion, Mattie E. Currie, a missionary teacher at Eva Rose York Bible Training School for Women, Tuni, depicted Telugu women as heroic new women. The story of Rajabullamma, a Telugu Bible woman, by Mattie Currie illustrates this attitude. A Canadian Baptist missionary journal, Among the Telugus, published this account of a runaway woman in 1936. Currie explained the enthusiasm that Telugu women showed in embracing Christianity and the need for women’s missionary adventures and sought support of the readers.[5]
Evangelization for Christ was the only aim of the missionary societies and for that they wanted to educate the women also. They believed that the church of Christ will never appear in its great beauty, unless the foundation of Christian education be laid in the minds of its members by the hands of a Christian mother. Moreover the missionaries realized that education was one of the means to raise the women folk from their low status in the society. Therefore, along with evangelistic work, the missionaries concentrated on educational work also. Women missionaries had a far-reaching impact and were among the most effective agents of cultural change. New ideas of female higher education, employment and social liberation and equality touched the lives of many women, and contributed much to their social and cultural transformation. The missionaries showed particular interest in the development of female education, irrespective of caste or creed. Free boarding, food, and clothing provided at the beginning was a blessing to the slaves and poor girls.
While women were often in subordinate positions in terms of missionary hierarchy, the mission movement contributed significantly to the entrance of women into the public domain. It gave women the opportunity to engage in charitable activities outside the home, the chance to learn organizational skills, and the opportunity to enter the labour market as missionaries. Most missions have acted deliberately to change gender structures among the local people they encountered in the mission field, but they have also, intentionally and unintentionally, caused changes in such structures both in their own organizations and in their home countries.[6]


Pandita Ramabai
Pandita Ramabai, a poet, scholar, and champion of the rights of women, has been acclaimed as a "mother of modern India." A widely traveled lady, she visited most parts of India, and even went to England (1883) and the USA (1886-88). She wrote a book titled The High Caste Hindu Woman, which was used as an appeal to raise funds in the US and elsewhere, for a home for Brahmin widows in India.
She married at the age of twenty-two, but her husband died of cholera after only sixteen months, leaving her alone with an infant daughter, Manorama. Her travels in India and now her present circumstances sensitized her to the bleak plight of widows and orphans.
The practice among higher castes of betrothing young girls to much older men (her own mother had been nine, her father over forty, at the time of their marriage) had contributed to the vast number of widows, women without status or protection. Ramabai set out to do something about this social problem, establishing centers for widows and orphans in Poona and later Bombay, where the women were given basic education and training in marketable skills. Soon Ramabai had become the leading advocate for the rights and welfare of women in India. She established the Mukti Mission in 1889 as a refuge for young widows who were abused by their families. Meera Kosambi and Meena Alexander, in their respective studies of Pandita Ramabai Saraswathi, the feminist and social reformer of late 19th century and early 20th century say that the path was harder, as women of her days had not entered the public domain. Educated, outspoken and unorthodox, Ramabai lived her life on her own terms, while working for the social emancipation of women through institutional initiatives such as shelters for widows as well as through her writings and active public life. Kosambi draws attention to an aspect of Ramabai's perspective that almost anticipated the human development approach towards social and economic progress, namely, her belief that a society which oppresses its women and discriminates against them can never progress.

[1] Billie Melman, Women’s Orient: English Women and the Middle East, 1718-1918 London 1995, 166.
[2] James Taneti, Empowering Mission or Enslaving Enterprise? Women Missionaries’ attitudes to Telugu Women in Bangalore Theological Forum vol. XXXIX, No. 1 June 2007. 161.
[3] Flemming ‘A New Humanity: American Missionaries’ Ideals for Women in North India, 1870-1930’ (1992) p. 194.
[4] Malcolm L. Orchard & Katherine S. Mc Laurin, The Enterprise: The Jubilee Story of the Canadian Baptist Mission in India, 1874-1924 (Toronto: The Canadian Baptist Foreign Mission Board, n.d).
[5] Mattie Currie, Among the Telugus: The Canadian Baptist Foreign Mission board, a report published by CBFMB, Toronto, 1936. 93-94.
[6] Line Nyhagen Predelli and Jon Miller ‘Piety and Patriarchy: ‘Contested Gender Regimes in Nineteenth-Century Evangelical Missions’ in Taylor Huber and N C Lutkehaus (eds.) 1999.

Monday, August 20, 2007

Nineteenth to Twentieth Century’s Missionary Movement

Introduction

In the early-to-mid 16th century, the Roman Catholic Church carried out its mission works in India. Protestant Christianity was firmly planted on India through the Tranquebar mission with the arrival of German Lutherans sent from the King of Denmark in the early 18th century.

From the mid-nineteenth century the Christian Protestant mission developed a great momentum. The movement engaged women on a large scale in the USA and in Europe and enjoyed an unparalleled success among married as well as unmarried women. Women played a central role both at home, as fund-raisers and as active agents in non-Christian countries. Women were a majority in the missionary movements and missionary work attracted women. It also offered middle class women a wider range of permissible activities. While spreading the Christian message was initially the main aim, social work, especially health and education, soon became accepted missionary activities, legitimized as the best way of reaching the local population. As the result, the late nineteenth and early twentieth century mission thinking emphasized the need for the social work along with the evangelization by providing health facilities and education to the recipients of the Gospel. In such a shift in the mission activity, the contribution of women to the mission in India is remarkable.

The Contributions of the Missionaries in the Evolution of Women’s Education in India
The Christian missionaries played a pioneering role in promoting female education in India. Infact, we can say that they were the initiators of female education in India, “because in the early 19th century the officials of the East India Company were reluctant to take up issue for they feared that it would create unnecessary hostility amongst the people and would amount to interference in their social and religious activity.”[1] It was the Christian missionaries who promoted the female education in India despite the strong opposition because of their evangelical and humanitarian zeal. However, the education work of the Christian missionaries is often criticized badly as the cause and the end of proselytization. There were agencies through which the Christian missionaries worked for promoting female education. They are: 1) Girls Day Schools 2) Orphanages and Boarding establishments 3) Domestic teaching of women arranged in middle and higher class families popularly termed as “Zenana teaching”[2]

The Role of Education in Women’s life

Education became the most widespread and effective form of women missionary activity and was seen as the primary avenue for social change. The Girls’ schools were started in the mission fields and much importance was given to the education of women. However, the education of women was seen as an opportunity for evangelization. Besides teaching local girls and women hygiene and childcare among other things, education thus played a central role in the proselytism. The education of women would besides provide Christian wives for the native Christian workers also subvert the very foundations of ‘heathen’ society and would catalyze the profound social changes needed to accompany broad conversion to Christianity. In general, Protestant missionaries were eager to found boarding schools and especially boarding schools for girls, in hopes that more sustained and pervasive influence of the teachers would result in more effective evangelism and the formation of ‘Christian Character’.

Schools became havens for the girl children of all communities, though they meant certain restrictions. It was here they started to discover themselves away from their families. While for some of the girls, whose childhood was in a way no childhood at all because they were not allowed to play freely, speak loudly, even hop, skip and jump, school must have meant a real liberative experience. For some others, in their childhood, they had to take care of their siblings or to contribute to the family earnings. In this way, the education of women in the schools must have opened them to totally new avenues of life.

Contribution of Women in the Teaching ministry

v Mary Lyon, a schoolteacher from Massachusetts, America, was the pioneer who founded the world wide model of higher education for women.[3] She is considered as the important personality in the history of mission.

v Jarena Lee: Lee born in the year1783 at New Jersey. Lee left home at the age of seven to become a maid in a household. Though lee is recognized as the first female preacher in the African Methodist Episcopal Church, she was not ordained. Lee used to conduct prayer meetings and preach in the churches. In this way, lee’s teaching ministry through preaching in the church is remarkable.

v Pandita Ramabai (1858-1922): Ramabai was the daughter of orthodox Hindu parents and the native of India. When she was eight, she learned to read the sacred puranic literature from her parents. At that time, there were no schools for girls or women, and training in the sacred literature was forbidden. After her family suffered during an extreme famine, Ramabai and her brother journeyed to Calcatta in 1878. in 1881, at age twenty-two she married, but sooner he died leaving her with an infant. In 1883 she left for England to study, and there was baptized. After returning to India, she established the Mukti mission in 1889, to provide education and opportunities for women and girls of India.

Ramabai in her autobiography mentions about the education ministry that she did through her mukti mission.
“…there were only two day-pupils in my school, when it was started…, No one was urged to become a Christian, nor was any one compelled to study the Bible. But the Book was placed in the library along with other religious boos… After the first ten years of our existence as a school, our constitution was changed slightly. Since, then every pupil admitted in the school has been receiving religious instruction…Many hundred of the girls and young women who have come to my Home ever since its doors were opened for them have found Christ as I have. They are capable of thinking themselves. They have had their eyes opened by reading the Word of God, and many of them have been truly converted and a saved, to the praise and the glory of God…”[4]
v Amy Carmichael (1867-1951): Carmichael was a Protestant Christian missionary in India, who opened an orphanage and founded a mission in Dohnavur. She served in India for fifty-five years without absence. Amy Carmichael was born in the small village of Millisle in Northern Ireland to David and Catherine Carmichael. In many ways she was an unlikely candidate for missionary work. She suffered neuralgia, a disease of the nerves that made her whole body weak and achy and often put her in bed for weeks on end. It was at the Keswick Convention of 1887 that she heard Hudson Taylor speak about missionary life. Soon afterward, she became convinced of her calling to missionary work.
Initially Amy traveled to Japan for fifteen months, but she later found her lifelong vocation in India. She was commissioned by the Church of England Zenana Mission. Much of her work was with young ladies, some of whom were saved from forced prostitution. The organization she founded was known as the Dohnavur Fellowship. Dohnavur is situated in Tamil Nadu, thirty miles from the southern tip of India. The fellowship would become a sanctuary for over one thousand children. In an effort to respect Indian culture, members of the organization wore Indian dress and the children were given Indian names. She herself dressed in Indian clothes, dyed her skin with coffee, and often traveled long distances on India's hot, dusty roads to save just one child from suffering. Even today, the educational institution stated by Amy Carmichael stand as the monument for her contribution in serving the children of the missionaries.
Conclusion
The mission movements gave much importance to the education from 19th century onwards. The education of women and their engagement in teaching has made a huge change in the social condition of the people. The entire life of the people has changed dramatically, with the education that they learnt from the mission societies. In this way, the contribution of women to the shaping of the church and society is remarkable.


[1] Gouri Srivastava, Women’s Higher Education in the 19th Century (New Delhi: Ashok Kumar Mittal Concept Publishing Company, 2000), 38.
[2] Ibid., 40.
[3] http://www.mtholyoke.edu/marylyon/
[4] Amy Oden (ed), In Her Words: Women’s Writings in the History of Christian Thought, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994), 326,327.

Theological and cultural assumptions of “Early Church Fathers”

Introduction:
Early Christianity accepted the Hebraic conviction that the world had been created by God and hence was essentially good, as Genesis 1 proclaimed. In Genesis 3 we come across the first sin in the world which is the fall. Who is the cause for the fall? Is it Adam or Eve or the serpent? This is one of the pertinent questions that the church and every individual Christians raise right from then and even now. Pondering over the same, this paper is an attempt to highlight from an historical perspective the ways in which the Early Church Fathers[1] praised and blamed, honored and disparaged the female sex. I would like to highlight the Father’s use of Scripture in their discussions of women.

Theological and cultural assumptions:

The main topics that were discussed by the Fathers are Creation, Fall and Marriage. I would like to present the opinion of the fathers accordingly.

The Church Fathers understood Genesis 1 & 2 as a connected unit written by a single author. They assert that both woman and man was formed by God and hence shared in the goodness of the created order. Augustine, bishop of Hippo argued in his treatise On the Good of Marriage that God created humans as social beings and that the first human “society” was that of man and woman.[2] Every person is a part of the human race and human nature is something social. There is a power of friendship in this human nature. This is the reason that God created all humans from one person so that they might hold fast in their society not only by likeness of descent but by the bond of relationship. Thus the first tie of natural human society is husband and wife. The union of their society resulted in children not of the marriage of man and woman, but of sexual intercourse. Hence Augustine says, there could have been a kind of friendly, genuine relationship between sexes one of them ruling the other even without such sexual intercourse.

Despite this positive view of creation, Augustine reflects on the kind of “help” Eve was supposed to provide for Adam. He puts forward a question. “If the woman was not created to be man’s helper specifically for the production of children, why was she created as a “helper”? He responds that Eve was created as a helper because she could provide the companionship for the man.[3]

The purpose of Woman’s creation in view of her responsibility for the original sin was also considered by Ambrose, bishop of Milan in his treatise On Paradise. He focuses on the Genesis 2:15 and argues that man was in the very land in which he was created. God by his power thus took the man and breathed into him in order to develop and increase the man’s power. In other words, God stationed him in Paradise so that we may know that he was “taken,” breathed on by the divine power. Man was made outside the Paradise but the woman was made inside the paradise. In fact, even though man was created outside the Paradise (i.e. in an inferior place), he is found to be superior, while woman, though created in a better place(i.e. inside Paradise) is found inferior because the woman was the first one to be deceived (I Tim. 2:14). So she who was created to be a helper to man requires male protection and the head of woman is man (I Cor. 11:3).

John Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople had two minds about woman’s status at the time of creation. In some of his writings he stretched that there had been an original “equality of honor” between Adam and Eve and argued that Eve’s role as “helper” was much superior that of the animals that God had also made to assist man. Before the sin, the woman was like the man. Indeed, when God molded the woman, he used the words in creating her that he had used when he created man. He does not call her simply a “helper,” but “a helper like him (fit for him),” once more showing the equality of honor.[4] Even though he argues for equality of honor, he also believed that woman did not possess the “image of God” (Gen. 1:26) as man did, and he linked her subordinate status to this deficiency. Eve’s status in other words was not simply a result of the fall, but was an inferior one even at the moment of her creation. He also argues against those who claim that both the man and woman have the “image of God.” He says that the “image” is not meant in regard to essence, but in regard to authority.[5] He quotes Paul’s words in order to substantiate his arguments. “For the man ought not to be veiled, for he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. Therefore she ought to have a veil on her head” (I Cor. 11:7-10). The “image” has rather to do with authority, and this only the man has and the woman has it no longer. For he is subjected to no one, while she is subjected to him; as God said, “Your inclination shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you” (Gen. 3:16). Therefore the man is in the “image of God” since he had no one above him just as God has no superior but rules over everything. The woman, however, is “the glory of man,” since she is subjected to him. Whatever Eve’s original role and purpose, the Church Fathers agreed that she was responsible for the sin of Genesis 3.

Eve’s particular responsibility for the first sin is also pressed home by Augustine in his Literal Commentary on Genesis. Augustine makes much of the Biblical wording that Eve, not Adam, was the one who was led astray. He argues that if Adam was already spiritual (atleast in mind), how could he have believed what the serpent said? For the serpent said that God prohibited them from eating the fruit of that tree because he knew that if they did so, they would become gods by their knowing good and evil (Gen. 3:5). And just because it is impossible to believe it, woman was given to man, woman who was of small intelligence. He asks, is this why the apostle Paul does not attribute the image of God to her? Paul speaks, “The man ought not to cover his head, for he is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man” (I Cor. 11:7). He further explains that, however, maybe the woman had not yet received this grace that comes with the knowledge of God, but would have acquired it only gradually, under the man’s rule and management. He asserts that the apostle Paul’s words were not meaningless when he said, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not led astray, but the woman was, and was made guilty of transgression.”

Interestingly, Irenaeus contrasts Eve’s disobedience with the obedience of Mary but he does not engage in vituperative declamations against women on the basis of Eve’s sin. Irenaeus argues that Eve was disobedient since she did not obey when she was still a virgin. Indeed, she had a husband, Adam, but was still a virgin. Eve having become disobedient was made the cause of death both for herself and for the entire human race. Thus also Mary had a husband selected for her and nonetheless was a virgin, yet by her obedience she was made the cause of salvation both for herself and for the entire human race.

The view that blame for the first sin extended from Eve to all other women soon became a commonplace in early Christian Literature. Tertulian, an important Christian writer was particularly passionate in his denunciations. He accuses women very unkindly in his treatise On the Dress of Women. Once he address a female audience in the third century saying, “you are the devil’s gateway; you are the unsealer of that tree; you are the first foresaker of the divine law; you are the one who persuaded him whom the devil was not brave enough to approach; you silently crushed the image of God, the man Adam; because of your punishment, that is, death, even the Son of God had to die.”[6]

Chrysostom made clear that whatever the inferior position of woman at creation, she was subjected to the man chiefly because of her role in the first sin. He, however, believed that woman’s subjection was all for the good and was not burdensome to women who accepted it s God’s will.

Augustine’s views on the original sin were of prime importance for the development of western theology. He agreed with other Church Fathers that women’s subjection was one result of that sin, but he analyzed in greater detail two other results of that sin, the entrance of death and of lust to the world. Augustine believed that lust, so irrational in its expression, would not have existed in Paradise had the sin not been committed, yet he affirmed that there would have been sexual intercourse and procreation even if the sin had not occurred. Despite Augustine’s despair over the power of lust, his hypothesis that sexual intercourse would have been part of God’s world even if humans had remained sinless opened the way for a stronger appreciation of marriage than did the views of some other Church Fathers. Clement argues against the Gnostics who say that Adam and Eve became like beasts when they began to practice sexual intercourse. He retorts that the first couple performed the sex act “by nature.”

Augustine firmly believed that God had willed women to be subject to their husbands in marriage. Even if they wished to live an ascetic life, one more in keeping with the monastic values of late ancient Christianity, they could not do so unless their husbands agree.

It was not just marriage in general that early Christian writers criticized; special problems associated with marriage might arise for Christian women who lived in a world still dominated by pagan values and customs. When a woman converted to Christianity but her husband did not, thorny difficulties could develop in their relationships.

Reflective Conclusion:
In such ways which we discussed above, the Church Fathers alternately praise the goodness of God’s created order, condemn the woman responsible for the original sin, and consign her female descendants to a life of submission to men. According to them, marriage was a reminder to women of the Paradise they had lost.
One of the problems in the understanding of the Early Church Fathers is that they read the Scriptures selectively to find legitimation for their arguments. It would be desirable that we balance our argument. I strongly believe that God who is the creator of this entire universe is a God of just and there is no partiality in God. We are all God’s children no matter male or female. Thus, each individual in this world is of the image of God which really brings out the love of God for the entire humanity. When we consider the other as not the image of God, there we can find lack of oneness which may lead to social disharmony.


Bibliography:

Clark, Elizabeth A. Women In The Early Church. Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1983.
[1] The term “Fathers” is usually reserved for Christian writers by orthodoxy of doctrine, holiness of life, ecclesiastical approval and antiquity. “Antiquity” is generally understood to include writers down to Gregory the Great in the West, and John Damascene in the East. Elizabeth A. Clark, Women In The Early Church (Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1983), 11.
[2] Ibid., 27.
[3] Ibid., 28.
[4] Ibid., 34.
[5] Ibid., 35.
[6] Ibid., 39.

Women and Interfaith Dialogue

Full and equal participation of women in church and society has been one of the long standing commitments of WCC and it applies to WCC’s own structure also. In world today we experience pluralism in religions, cultures, customs, language, and world views. Inter-religious dialogue, as currently understood practices and promoted in many parts of the world, particularly among Christians, is strongly marked by the absence of women. In deeper sense dialogue implies intimacy of personal relationship, enjoyment of each other, and sharing of knowledge, experience, problems, suffering and resources.[1] The founders of various religions Jesus, Buddha and Prophet worked to bring about change in the position of women but in due course of history the advances made have been reversed and thus pressing women back to subordinate position, fixation of roles, scripture denied to them. Here in this paper I would like to discuss the role of inter-religious dialogue which is concerned about women, their empowerment.

Issues of Women Interest to be Taken Up in Dialogue
In 1994 a group of women were interviewed from around the world concerning the guidelines by the central committee of the WCC, and in 1995 the group was drawn together for a dialogue. The guidelines for dialogue were identified as marginalization, identity, boundaries, power and strength.[2] Marginalization emerged as the strongest theme; it was believed to be the common experience of the majority of women.[3] The women in the group felt that the way of living led them to marginalization and the experience of it formed the backdrop to their experience of the whole life and helped them to formulate other common themes which were identified as follows. The question of Identity also provided a strand in the women’s self understanding. The nature of identity was of particular interest to women in their self perception and the perception of the world. The question before them was weather identify can be defined individually or only in community; how much of personality helps to define identity and how much it is bound by the culture. The third guideline was with the issue concerning women and boundaries.[4] This question was based in context of Christian service; weather women have boundaries to their compassion, to their willingness and to serve others. Strength and power provided the final backdrop of discussion. This point aimed to explore the nature of power both structural and innate which exercised in the context of women and service. The focus was to be on the fact that women exercised much in innate power and show great strength and creativity, but are rarely in the position of structural power and influence.



Patriarchal Nature of Inter Religious Dialogue
Feminist theologians have argued that the dialogue program has suffered from insufficient involvement of women and the absence of women concerns in the issues taken up for dialogue. Diana Eck[5] pointed out how glaring was the absence of women in interfaith events and efforts.[6] She pointed out, that although there had been a consciousness of the issue and the efforts to address it; the dialogue has suffered from the insufficient involvement of women and the absence of women’s concerns in the issues taken up by the dialogue. Women have actively participated in dialogue but the overall picture remains poor. The sexism that pervades among religions is evident in dialogue also. The participation of women is only symbolic than real as men could set both agenda and frame the work of discussion.
Ursula King has pointed out that it is evident the inter-religious dialogue remains a part of patriarchy.[7] She says “to envision the development of post-patriarchal dialogue, it will be necessary to do away with the hierarchies of gender which is persuasive in religion. Radical institution and doctrinal transformation are needed to respond to the needs of women for equal participation and dignity and demand to condemn all prejudice and violence against women, especially done in the name of religion.”[8] The real problem lie in the heart of religious tradition themselves, the sexism that pervades in religious traditions is also affected in their dialogue with one another. Thus the dialogue enterprise so far accommodates this reality and in compromised. Diana Eck further dealing with the same issue, calls for six fold revolution, revolution of language history, interpretation, experience, leadership and ritual. According to them feminism is a missing dimension in dialogue
Need For Change
Dialogue has played an important role in transforming people, there views. It has granted people different perspectives to ponder upon. If the Dialogue has to respond to the challenges that feminism posits it has to undergo a change. The dialogue has to undergo change because of four major reasons.
1) The importance of dialogue at grass root levels: the approach to dialogue and the actual practice of dialogue among women are more life oriented, they evolve out of experience. It brings concrete changes in perception and practice at basic level of the lives of people. As Raymond Pannikar pointed out “an inter-religious dialogue today is unavoidable; it is a religious imperative and a historical duty for which, we must suitably prepare.”[9] A dialogue that is life oriented is needed. Women approach to dialogue is oriented to the practice of this reality.
2) The importance of feeding new thinking in Dialogue: The participants of inter-religious dialogue should become aware of the need to explore ways in which abstract religious beliefs both effect and are effected by social situations in which religions are practices. There are men and women in each religious tradition that challenge some of the traditional language, imagery, teaching and structures of patriarchy. Paul Knitter pints out in an essay in his collection the Myth of Christian Uniqueness “from the perspective of those concerned with liberation, the past decade has indicated what an important and powerful role religion can play, for better or worse, in bringing about socio-political transformation.”[10] The inter-religious dialogue should give preference to them in bringing about new concepts that address the problem of feminism.
3) The importance of dialogue for new thinking that is emerging: it is evident that all religious traditions are in the process of revisiting there traditional teachings in response to the present challenges. Religion and ideologies are not only explanation of the meaning of life, but also ways to live according to that explanation.[11] Therefore the involvement of women dialogue in important not only for dialogue but for feminist thought also.
4) The importance of sign and signals: dialogue through its work should make evident that it is a part of women’s activity or else it will remain a part of patriarchy.

Implication Of inter religious dialogue for women[12]
The implication of inter-religious dialogue for women are threefold, firstly, women will have greater awareness and appreciation of diversity among themselves. Through which an atmosphere of trust is created clarifying diverse perspectives. Secondly, there will arise a need for women to reflect on and write about there conversation. As the meaning of the concepts such as liberation, Oppression and feminism cannot be assumed; therefore inter-religious dialogue must forsake the preconceived notions and place them specifically in context of social change and prevent them from irrelevant theorizing. Thirdly women will be more prepared to act for social change. Dialogue is commitment; only through dialogue women will come to learn each others needs, existence and the extent of oppression, and the most effective way to end them. Through dialogue and literature, women will able to communicate their growing consciousness of themselves and of others and their experience of similarities and differences with each other. Communication of all this will empower women in inter-religious dialogue to act more dynamically.

Conclusion
It is really important to know who people are, in order to really understand what they believe and why the believe it. The common struggle for greater equality between men and women brings women closer to each other. What is to be envisioned is that women engaging in dialogue seek to discover, through conversation, the reality of oppression. Inter religious dialogue helps women in coming over boundaries. Dialogue takes place I terms of collective experience, dialogue can help women in finding new ways of restoring the balance of power in relation between men and women.
In women’s dialogue, therefore, we need to question the concrete situation in which women has to suffer, and we need to understand relativity of our own. What needs to be analyzed in the inter connectedness of social issues and women issues and demonstrate new and creative ways and interpretation and approaches to women’s rights. We have to view feminism in broader political perspective, which would be visible everywhere.
Dialogue is commitment. The more one engages in it, the greater is the perspective and the goal. Only through dialogue mutuality among women can be realized. Only through dialogue we can learn on others need, the existence and the extant of a culture’s oppression practices, the women’s reaction to those practice, and the most effective ways to end them.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
ü Knitter, Paul. “Towards a Liberation Theology of Religion,” In The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Towards a Pluralistic Theology Of Religions Edited John Hick and Paul F. Knitter. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990.
ü O’Neill, Maura. Women Speaking Women Listening: Women In Inter Religious Dialogue. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990.
ü Swiddler, Leonard. “Interreligious and Interideological Dialogue: the Matrix for All Systematic reflections Today,” in Towards a Universal Theology of Religion, Edited by Leonard Swidler. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1987.
ü Ariarajah, S. Wesley. Not Without My Neighbor: Issues In interfaith Dialogue. Switzerland: WCC Publication, 1999.
ü Panikkar, R. The Intra Religious Dialogue. USA: Paulist Press, 1978.
ü Selvanayagam, Israel. A dialogue on Dialogue. Madras: Christian literature Society, 1995.
ü Blyth Myra & Wendy S. Robins. No Boundaries to Compassion? An Exploration of Women, Gender and Diakononia. (Great Britain: Kent Christian Press, 1998.

[1] Israel Selvanayagam, A dialogue on Dialogue (Madras: Christian literature Society, 1995), 2.
[2] Myra Blyth & Wendy S. Robins, No Boundaries to Compassion? An Exploration Of Women, Gender And Diakononia (Great Britain: Kent Christian Press, 1998), 12-15.
[3] Myra Blyth, No Boundaries…, 12.
[4] Myra Blyth, No Boundaries…, 13.
[5] She is from Harvard University and has been the moderator of the Sub- unit on dialogue. She made these comments in the meeting of the working Group in Casablanca, Morocco, in June 1989.
[6] S. Wesley Ariarajah. Not Without My Neighbor: Issues In interfaith Dialogue (Switzerland: WCC Publication, 1999), 59-60.
[7] S. Wesley, Not Without…, 60-61.
[8] S. Wesley, Not Without…, 61.
[9] R. Panikkar, The Intra Religious Dialogue (USA: Paulist Press, 1978), 78.
[10] Paul Knitter, “Towards a Liberation Theology of Religion,” in The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Towards a Pluralistic Theology Of Religions eds. John Hick and Paul F. Knitter (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990), 179.
[11] Leonard Swiddler, “Interreligious and Interideological Dialogue: the Matrix for All Systematic reflections Today,” in Towards a Universal Theology Of Religion, ed. Leonard Swidler (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1987), 16.
[12] Maura O’Neill, Women Speaking Women Listening: Women In Inter Religious Dialogue (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990), 102-104.

“Women Who Influenced the Protestant Reformation in Europe”

What an honoured place is given to godly women in the New Testament! And throughout the history of the Christian church there has been a succession of women who have been shining examples in their life and witness. There are a number of women who devoted their lives to the cause of religious reformation, and courageous women who renounced religious vows, opened their homes to those fleeing religious persecution, and faced estrangement from their families in the cause of the Protestant Reformation. There are also politically powerful women who employed their power to influence, promote and strengthen the reformation movement in various ways. The Reformation period was therefore marked by a number of gracious women whom God raised up.

Besides, the women constituted a half of the population, and therefore, had they boycotted the Reformation movement, it may be sure that would have been the end. Some aspects of women's historical roles in the church will never be known, because for most Christian history only a small percentage of women were educated sufficiently to write and leave a literary legacy for us to discover. Male church historians have seldom told us very much about women's life and thoughts, and what they tell us is often biased against women. Fortunately recent research has shown that there is a rich literature written by women of the church for us to explore, so many women's voices from the past are being heard again.

Of many prominent women figures who influenced and contributed to the Protestant Reformation in Europe during the 15th and 16th centuries, we shall deal briefly with the most prominent ones, those from Germany, Italy, France and England.
(Main Source:- Ronald H. Bainton, Women of the Reformation)
A. Germany:
1. Katharina von Bora (January 29, 1499 – December 20, 1552)

Katharina von Bora was Luther's companion and equal partner; she was the picture of a self-assured, self-confident, liberated woman at the side of her husband. But this most important woman of the Reformation period of the 16th century is relatively unknown, for she lived in the shadow of her powerful husband.

Katharina (Catherine) von Bora was born in January of 1499, and at the age of ten she was placed in the convent at Nimschen near Grimma when her father remarried. While at the convent, she learned reading, writing, and some Latin. After several years of religious life, Katharina became interested in the growing reform movement and grew dissatisfied with her life at the convent. She conspired with several other nuns to flee from it, however, this was difficult, as leaving or assisting others in leaving religious life was an offense punishable by death. The women secretly contacted Luther, begging for his assistance. The nuns successfully escaped by hiding in Koppe's covered wagon among the fish barrels, and fled to Wittenberg. Within two years, Luther was able to arrange homes, marriages, or employment for all of the escaped nuns- except for Katharina. Katharina had a number of suitors, including Wittenberg University alumnus Jerome (Hieronymus) Baumgärtner (1498–1565) of Nuremberg and a pastor, Dr. Kaspar Glatz of Orlamünde, but none of the proposed matches resulted in marriage. Finally, she told Luther’s friend and fellow reformer, Nikolaus von Amsdorf, that she would be willing to marry only Dr. Luther or him.
Luther eventually became engaged to Katharina on June 13, 1525. On June 27 of the same year, they were married by Bugenhagen. Katharina was twenty-six years old, Luther forty-two. The couple took up residence in "The Black Cloister", the former Augustinian monastery in Wittenberg, given as a wedding gift by the reform-minded John Frederick, Elector of Saxony.
Katie was a wonderful manager of the household, despite limited funds and a large number of guests, she managed the finances of the family and helped free Luther's mind for his work of writing, teaching, and ministering. She immediately took on the task of administering and managing the vast holdings of the monastery, she took care of the vegetable garden, orchard, fishpond, and barnyard animals, even to the butchering of them herself; breeding and selling cattle, and running a brewery in order to provide for their family and the steady stream of students who boarded with them and visitors seeking audiences with Luther. Often there were as many as 30 students, guests, or boarders staying in the monastery, all of whom came under Katie's care. Luther was often ill, and Katie was able to minister to him in his illnesses because of her great medical skill. In times of widespread illness, Katharina operated a hospital on site, ministering to the sick alongside other nurses. Luther called her the "morning star of Wittenberg" for her habit of rising at 4 a.m. to take care of her various responsibilities.
In addition to her busy life tending to the lands and grounds of the monastery, Katharina bore six children. The Luthers also raised four orphan children, including Katharina's nephew, Fabian. After Luther died in 1546, Katie lived six years. She fled from the Smalkaldian War in 1546 to Dessau and then to Magdeburg. She died on December 20, 1552 in Torgau where she had fled to get away from the plague in Wittenberg.
2. Catherine Zell (1497 - 1562)
Catherine Zell of Strasbourg was a zealous promoter of the Reformation and supporter of equality between women and men. When her husband, Matthew Zell, one of the reforming pastors of Strasbourg was excommunicated for marrying her, she published a letter to the bishop in defense of clerical marriage, declaring: “You remind me that the apostle Paul told women to be silent in church. I would remind you of the word of this same apostle that in Christ there is no longer male nor female (Gal. 3:28) and of the prophecy of Joel (2:28-9): ‘I will pour forth my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy.’ I do not pretend to be John the Baptist rebuking the Pharisees. I do not claim to be Nathan, upbraiding David. I aspire only to be Balaam's ass, castigating his master.” In other words, she desired to be a prophetic voice.
Catherine published other tracts. One was for the consolation of wives whose husbands were in exile because of their faith, citing Isaiah 49:15, where God is spoken of as a mother who can not forget her nursing child. Another consolation tract was for a magistrate of the city who was quarantined with "leprosy." This tract was a meditation on the Lord's prayer, which included these thoughts: "Our Father, who art in heaven. He is called not Lord or judge, but Father. And since through his Son we are born again we may call him grandfather, too. He may be likened also to a mother who has known the pangs of birth and the joy of giving suck." There was also a collection of hymns edited by Catherine.
Catherine was not primarily a writer, however. She visited the prisoners and the sick and arranged care for floods of Protestant refugees. When she saw serious deficiencies in the way one of the city hospitals was being run, she sent the City Council a scathing set of criticisms with recommendations for reform. The Council complained, but it adopted her recommendations. She accompanied two of the ministers visiting troops assembled at the time of the Peasants' War; they pleaded for peaceful solutions. Finally, just before her death, she conducted a funeral service for an Anabaptist woman at 6 a.m. because the husband could not accept the conditions laid down by the pastors for conducting a funeral. Since she held no public office at all, she was often criticized for her abrasiveness and her "imperiousness" in involving herself in such activities. She seems to have felt the call of God to do so.
3. Elizabeth of Brandenburg (1485 – 1545)
Elizabeth, daughter of King John of Denmark, was born in 1485, just two years after the birth of Martin Luther. While Elizabeth was convinced of the truth of the Reformation teachings through her brother, she was married to Elector Joachim I of Brandenburg, a staunch opponent of the Reformation. She was forced to practice her faith in secret. While her husband was away on Easter 1527, she received communion from a preacher sent out from Wittenberg- both bread and wine. When the news reached her husband, he demanded that she return to Catholicism and gave her until next Easter to change her mind. He became impatient in the meantime, however, and when she refused to celebrate All Saints’ Day with him, his bishops and abbots exhorted him to imprison his wife for the remainder of her life.
Terrified by her husband’s intentions, Elizabeth made plans to flee to her uncle, Elector John of Saxony. One evening when her husband was absent, she slipped out a side door and made her way across the river to where her brother was waiting to escort her to Torgau. Angry with John for agreeing to protect Elizabeth, Joachim demanded that John surrender his wife. John would only agree on the condition that Elizabeth be allowed to profess her Protestant beliefs openly and without retribution. This was unacceptable to Joachim, who later involved even the emperor in his unsuccessful demand for the return of his wife.
During the time of her exile Elizabeth lived in Torgau, Weimar and at the home of Martin and Katie Luther in Wittenberg. Later, Elector John Frederick provided her with living accommodations at Castle Lichtenberg. Joachim I died in 1535 without ever reconciling with his wife, and their son Joachim II invited his mother to return from exile. Suspicious of his engagement to the Catholic Polish Princess Hedwig, Elizabeth would return only if her son gave her his word that she could openly practice Protestantism. Again her demand was deemed unacceptable, and finally only after Joachim II converted to the Protestant faith in 1545 did Elizabeth finally return home.
A testament to her enduring faith, Elizabeth’s daughter Elizabeth of Brunswick-Calenberg went on to become a major reforming influence in that region.
4. Elizabeth of Brunswick-Calenberg (1510 – 1558)
Elizabeth was born in 1510 to the Catholic Joachim I of Brandenberg and his wife, Elizabeth of Brandenberg, who was a follower of Luther. She shared her mother’s faith and grew up to become a strong reforming influence in her territories.
Elizabeth was married at 15 to Duke Erich I of Brunswick-Calenberg, who was loyal to the Emperor and the Catholic Church. This meant that Elizabth, like her mother before her, did not share the religious conviction of her husband. Unlike her father Elizabeth’s husband Erich I did not exile his wife because of their strong religious difference, but sought to keep family life harmonious. He stated “My wife does not interfere with and molest us in our faith, and therefore we will leave her undisturbed and unmolested in her.”
However, even this passionate opponent of the Reformation could not keep the new beliefs out of his land. In order to supplement the dwindling financial resources of his dukedom, Erich I was forced in 1532 to sale their religious freedom to three cities. When he died in 1540, his and Elizabeth’s son Erich II was not yet of age, and Elizabeth therefore became regent.
Now completely unhindered in her faith practices, Elizabeth waste no time in championing Martin Luther and his colleagues, and by 1542 Brunswick-Calenberg belonged entirely to the Reformation. She converted Catholic into Protestant convents, and established in Hannover and endowment fund that still today funds churches, social agencies and the Sciences. She also directed her creative energies towards the cause of composing lyrics for several Protestant hymns and writing a book of consolation for widows. She later remarried to Count Poppo XVIII of Henneberg-Schleusingen.
Elizabeth of Brunswick-Calenberg was a woman of strong convictions and character. Her faith, learned at her mother’s feet, sustained and inspired her, and through her the message of the Reformation reached many.
B. Italy:

1. Olympia Morata, (1526-1555)

Olympia Morata was born in Ferrara in 1526 to Fulvio Pellegrino Morato and a certain Lucrezia. In her early years, she was educated by her father, a well-known humanist and university professor. She learned her subjects so well that at the age of twelve or thirteen she was invited to the court of Ferrara as a companion of study to Anna d'Este, the daughter of Duke Ercole II and Duchess Renée of France. There she continued her classical studies with Anna under the guidance of her father and two German brothers, John and Chilian Sinapi. She was considered a "fanciulla prodigio," and won the praise of many intellectuals for her fluency in Latin and Greek. It is highly probable that her sympathies for the Reformation began at the court of Ferrara since the Duchess herself supported the efforts of the reformers. Morata’s formal studies came to an end in 1548 when she was called home to care for her dying father. After her father’s death, she made a request to return to the court, but it was denied. Many of her reformist friends had already left the court and Anna now resided in France with her new husband Francis de Guise.
In 1549 or 1550, Morata married Andreas Grunthler, a German protestant who came to Ferrara to study medicine. Shortly after their marriage, the couple moved to Germany to evade the Roman Inquisition. They took with them Morata's eight-year-old brother Emilio, never to return to Italy. They were at Grunthler's home in Schweinfurt, in central Germany (Morata's mother and sisters remained in Italy). There Morata continued her writing: the second of two Latin dialogues; Greek poems; and letters, written in Latin to fellow scholars (male and female) and in Italian to non-scholarly women. Two of her letters and one poem were published in 1553.
In a war between mercenaries, the city of Schweinfurt was besieged for 13 months and then destroyed, and the Grunthler household left the city as refugees, having lost everything, including most of Morata's written work. Then they went eventually to Heidelberg; Grunthler accepted a position as professor of medicine at the university in Heidelberg and Morata tutored students in Greek and Latin. However, the fever that Morata caught in Schweinfurt never subsided, and a few months later she died. She was not quite 29 years old. Less than two months later, Grunthler and Emilio also died, most likely of the plague that had taken hold of the residents of Heidelberg.
While much of Morata's writing was lost in the siege on Scheiwnfurt, Grunthler managed to salvage some and sent it to Celio Secondo Curione, a professor at the University of Basel and close friend of Morata's father, who published three editions of her work (1558, 1562, 1570). Another edition followed in 1580. Morata's extant writings consist of fifty-two letters (most written in Latin), two dialogues (in Latin), a declamation on Cicero's Stoic Paradoxes and another In Praise of Mutius Scaevola (the latter in both Greek and Latin), eleven poems (eight in Greek and three in Latin), as well as translations of seven Psalms (in Greek) and the first two stories of Boccaccio's Decameron (in Latin). From these remaining works of Morata, we can hear the voice of a woman trying to balance her humanist ideals with her religious beliefs, and trying both to live in an uncertain world and to help her friends to do the same. 2. Renee, Duchess of Ferrara (October 25, 1510 - June 12, 1574)

Also known as Renee of France, was born on October 25, 1510 in the Chateau de Blois, France and was the second daughter of Louis XII, King of France and Anne, Duchess of Brittany. Two years after Renee's birth Anne died and therefore Renee became an orphan.

Having been early orphaned, she was brought up by the devout Madame de Soubise. She was married in April 1528 to Ercole II, Duke of Ferrara, eldest son of Alfonso I d'Este and Lucrezia Borgia. On October 31, 1534, her father-in-law died and Ercole succeeded to the throne. And while the Curia was urging the duke to put away the French that were suspected of heresy, there came to Ferrara no less a heretic than John Calvin, whose journey to Italy must have fallen in March and April 1536. Calvin passed several weeks at the court of Renée, though the persecution had already begun, and about the same time a chorister by the name of Jehannet, also one Cornillan, of the attendants of the duchess, together with a cleric of Tournay, Bouchefort, were taken prisoners and tried.

In 1559 Ercole died, and from that day Renee passed entirely out of the sphere of the Renaissance into that of the Reformation.

Renée was not only in correspondence with a very large number of Protestants abroad, with intellectual sympathizers like Vergerio, Camillo Renato, Giulio di Milano, and Francis Dryander, but also that on two or three occasions, about 1550 or later, she partook of the Eucharist in the Evangelical manner together with her daughters and fellow believers. Meanwhile, notwithstanding its external splendor, her life had grown sad. The last of her French guests, the daughter and son-in-law of Madame de Soubise of Pons, had been obliged, in 1543, by the constraint imposed by the duke, to leave the court. The drift of the Counter-Reformation, which had been operative in Rome since 1542, led to the introduction of a special court of the Inquisition at Ferrara, in 1545, through which, in 1550 and 1551, death sentences were decreed against Evangelical sympathizers, and executed by the secular arm.
Finally Duke Ercole lodged accusation against Renée before King Henry II of France, and through the Inquisitor Oriz, whom the king charged with this errand, Renée was arrested as a heretic, and declared forfeit of all possessions unless she recanted. She thereupon yielded, made confession on September 23, 1554, and once again received communion at mass. “How seldom is there an example of steadfastness among aristocrats,” wrote Calvin to Farel on February 2, 1555.
Renée's generosity was admirable. The most prominent facts in the book of her daily expenses are sums given in some form of charity. She appears, indeed, to have been unable to refuse any cry for assistance, and all her life gave with equal pleasure either to Roman Catholics or to Protestants. She had been writing secret letters to the Pope, supplicating him to have the prisoners delivered out of the power of Ercole into the authority of France.
Renee's longing to return home was satisfied when her husband died on October 3, 1559. In France she found her eldest daughter's husband, Francis, Duke of Guise, at the head of the Roman Catholic party. His power, indeed, was broken by the death of Francis II, in December, 1560, so that Renée became enabled not only to provide Evangelical worship at her estate, Morntargis, engaging a capable preacher by application to Calvin, but also generally to minister as benefactress of the surrounding Evangelicals. In fact, she made her castle a refuge for them, eventhough her son-in-law once again lighted the torch of war.
Her conduct won Calvin's praise (May 10, 1563); and she is one of the frequently recurring figures in his correspondence of that period; he repeatedly shows recognition of her intervention on behalf of the Evangelical cause; and one of his last writings in the French tongue, despatched from his deathbed (April 4, 1564), is addressed to her. While Renée continued unmolested in the second religious war (1567), in the third (1568–70) her castle was no longer respected as an asylum for her fellow believers. On the other hand, she succeeded in rescuing a number of them from the massacre of St. Bartholomew's night, when she happened to be in Paris. After having many contributions for the cause of the Reformation Renee passed her life on June 12, 1574.
C. France:

1. Marguerite de Navarre (April 11, 1492 - December 21, 1549) (Catholic)
One of the most elusive queens in French history, Marguerite de Navarre, was the queen consort of King Henry II of Navarre. She was the daughter of Charles of Orleans; her younger brother became King Francis I in 1515, after a batch of unexpected deaths among closer heirs to the throne. Her mother Louise tutored Marguerite's mind from her earliest childhood by excellent teaching and she even learnt Latin. Marguerite therefore received an education in Latin, Italian, Spanish, German, and later, Greek and Hebrew. At 17, she was politically married to a duke, a feudal lord culturally not her match. When her brother ascended to the throne, she became a major cultural influence: she had Leonardo da Vinci and Benvenuto Cellini work at the court of Francis I. This brother was taken prisoner during a war on Italian soil with Charles V of Spain, the Holy Roman Emperor.
After the death of her first husband in 1525, Marguerite married Henry-II of Navarre. Marguerite bore Henry a daughter, Jeanne d'Albret (mother of the future Henry-IV of France). Marguerite was an intellectual who corresponded with many European humanists during her lifetime. Like many French humanists, Marguerite was a devout Catholic interested in religious reform who supported translating the Scriptures into the vernacular and believed in a doctrine known as French Evangelism. Unlike the Protestants, French Evangelicals were interested in reforming the church from within. The French Evangelical agenda focused on specific clerical abuses, such as pluralism and absenteeism, and reforming convents and monasteries.
Marguerite became the most influential woman in France, with the exception of her mother, when her brother acceded to the crown as Francis I in 1515.
Marguerite wrote many poems and plays and the classic collection of stories, the Heptameron. Anne Boleyn, before becoming the second wife of King Henry VIII of England, was lady-in-waiting to Queen Marguerite, who gave her the original manuscript of Miroir de l'âme pécheresse. Later Anne's daughter, Elizabeth—to become Queen Elizabeth I (1533-1603)- at age twelve, translated this poem for publication in English.
As a generous patron of the arts, Marguerite befriended and protected many artists and writers, among them François Rabelais (1483-1553), Clément Marot (1496-1544), and Pierre de Ronsard (1524-85); also, Marguerite was mediator between Roman Catholics and Protestants (including John Calvin). Although Margaret espoused reform within the Catholic Church, she was not a Calvinist. She did, however, do her best to protect the Reformers and dissuaded Francis I from intolerant measures as long as she could. During the time of the Reformation movements, Marguerite was preoccupied with religious and ethical issues: like Erasmus, her philosophy was that of "Christian humanism," and she protected writers and thinkers accused or suspected of Protestant leanings, including Rabelais.
2. Jeanne d'Albret, Queen of Navarre (January 7, 1528June 9, 1572)
“Jeanne d'Albret (1528-1572), though little remembered today, is one of the great heroes of the French Reformation. Luther had posted his ninety-five theses in Germany years before, Calvin was preaching in Switzerland, and Knox in Scotland, and Jeanne d'Albret was furthering the cause of the Huguenots in France. Strength and weakness, power and helplessness -- these extremes characterized the life of so remarkable a woman. She did not possess physical strength. In fact, always frail, she died of tuberculosis at the age of forty-four. She did have some political strength as the highest ranking Protestant in France, but beyond that, she possessed a strength of will and a strength of character that held her up when she seemed the most helpless. Above all, however, was her reliance on God and the strength of His power to preserve her which bolstered her beyond measure when her situation seemed the most hopeless.” -Marilyn B. Manzer, an instructor of Latin and English at Newport Christian Schools.

Jeanne d'Albret was Queen regnant of Navarre from 1555 to 1572, wife of Antoine de Bourbon, and mother of King Henry IV of France. She was born in Saint-Germain-en-Laye, Yvelines in 1528, and was the daughter of Henry II of Navarre and Marguerite of Navarre. Marguerite was the sister of Francis I of France, and Jeanne grew up at the French court. In 1541, when she was thirteen, Francis married her to William "the Rich", Duke of Jülich-Cleves-Berg, but this political marriage was annulled four years later.

After the death of Francis and the accession of Henry II Jeanne was married to Antoine de Bourbon, who would become heir to the French throne if the Valois line died out. She bore two children, Henry and Catherine. The couple lived quietly until 1555, when Jeanne's father died and they became rulers of Navarre and Bearn, with control over much of Gascony and Guyenne. The southwest of France had become a refuge for French Calvinists- called “Huguenots”, and fertile ground for preachers from Geneva. Calvinism had been spreading throughout France from the mid 1530's to the 1550's. The Reformers insisted that they were not bringing in a new gospel but returning to the gospel preached by the apostles. They challenged the people to open their Bibles and to prove it to themselves. Ministers were sent from Geneva, and, despite the work of the Counter Reformation, the number of French Protestants was increasing daily.

Calvinism was in vogue even at the royal court. Nobles brought the ministers into their own apartments to preach. And support from the nobility was exactly what the Calvinists needed if the movement in France was to be considered anything more than a rebellion. Jeanne also had already supported religious reformers, as her mother had before her, and she began to become more active in Bearn. In the first year of her reign, Jeanne d'Albret called a conference of beleaguered Huguenot ministers which led to her declaring Calvinism the official religion of her kingdom. In 1560, Jeanne publicly announced her adherence to Calvinist belief; because of her rank she became one of the leaders of the Huguenot party.

However, Antoine's interest in reform is less certain; he seems to have chosen whatever side promised more political benefit. The power struggle between Catholics and Huguenots for control of the French court and France as a whole led to the outbreak of the French Wars of Religion in 1562. Antoine declared for the Catholics and sent Jeanne home, but he kept their 9-year-old son Henry at court, ostensibly for his education, in effect as a hostage. But Antoine was mortally wounded at the siege of Rouen, and that finally ended his life. Jeanne's son Henry now became "first prince of the blood."
In 1567, Jeanne was allowed to take Henry, now 14, away from the court and home to Bearn. Later that year war broke out again, and Jeanne fled to the Huguenot city of La Rochelle.

Huguenots captured the city of La Rochelle and fortified it as a permanent base. In 1568, Catholic nobles in Jeanne's lands revolted, and Bearn was threatened by both French and Spanish forces. Jeanne took her two children and went to La Rochelle, where she was involved both in military planning and in raising money for ships and arms. A year later, Catherine de Medici, Charles' mother, began peace negotiations with Jeanne, but fighting continued; in 1570 a peace was concluded and official talks began on a marriage between Henry and Catherine's youngest daughter, Marguerite de Valois.

With her lands restored, Jeanne returned to Bearn to establish an even more thoroughly Calvinist state. At the start of 1572, she went to the French court to arrange Henry's marriage. She hoped he would be a future Protestant king of France; in case that didn't come about, she wanted him to be given all of Guyenne as a dukedom, so that there would be at least one area within France to provide a Protestant refuge. By April an agreement for the marriage had been made (but with no dukedom). Jeanne accepted it because she saw it as the best hope for Henry and for the Protestant cause. She died in Paris at the age of 44, two months before the wedding and the massacre of Huguenots that followed it.

The writings published during Jeanne's life span were mostly of her active political career from 1563 to 1571. Their purpose was to encourage the Protestant faithful and to exhort the undecided to join her in the cause. An exchange of letters between Jeanne and a Catholic cardinal were printed in Bearn in 1563. Four letters that she wrote to the royal family on her 1568 trip from Bearn to La Rochelle and one written later to Elizabeth I of England were published. In 1570 was published Ample declaration “sur la jonction de ses armes des Reformes en 1568,” Jeanne's justification for having left Bearn to join the army at La Rochelle. Finally, in 1571 the Ordonnance Ecclesiastiques de la Reine de Navarre was printed, for the use of other Protestant rulers.

{{{….It is necessary at this point to say a few words about France's foreign and domestic affairs during this period. The royal families of France and Spain (the Valois and Hapsburg respectively) had been in constant rivalry since the 1490's. The country of France was slowly led to bankruptcy in a series of wars that had lasted well through the 1540's. An uncomfortable peace ensued. The financial status caused great dissatisfaction, to the point of threats of a civil war among the French people. The spread of Calvinism brought into the country still more unrest. Catherine had now to deal not only with the threat of a Spanish invasion but with the displeasure of the Papacy, as well. Beginning in November of 1561 the Catholics issued their counter-attack. "From Parisian pulpits inflammatory sermons aroused the congregations against the royal family and the crown's officers as well as the Huguenots....Destruction of Huguenot property, assassination, and other violent incidents were occurring all over France." The Papacy also let it be known that it lent its support to the King of Spain. Though sympathetic to the reform, Catherine's first priority was to keep control of France.

Antoine's Betrayal
Antoine and Jeanne were at court when Antoine at last sided with the Roman Catholics. Many nobles followed his lead. This, in turn, forced Catherine's hand. She reinstated conservative Catholic tutors for Charles IX, forbade discussion of Calvinist doctrine, and her lenience towards those arrested for religious reasons ceased. Still more nobles placed themselves within the Roman camp.

Jeanne, however, could not be dissuaded. Her conversion had been motivated by neither politics nor fashion, and she would not bend. The strength of her will, this time put into service for God, was unflinching. While others cowered back to the Mass, Jeanne had Protestant services in her apartments "with all the doors open" as exasperated observers pointed out. Others followed Antoine's lead, but Jeanne called to him to remember the true teaching they had received. Antoine demanded that she go to Mass, but Jeanne flatly refused. "When the Queen Mother tried to persuade her to accommodate her husband, she finally replied, rather than ever go to Mass, if she held her kingdom and her son in her hand, she would throw them both to the bottom of the sea. This was the reason they then left her in peace on the matter."

As fellow Calvinists saw the price Jeanne was paying for her stand, her strength strengthened them. Already suffering from tuberculosis, she was so ill at this time (1562) that doctors were unsure if she could recover. Antoine had made her all but a prisoner in her apartments, had taken away their son, and was threatening divorce. Finally, both Antoine and Catherine wanted her out of Paris. Catherine had even promised that after Jeanne's departure, no Protestant services would be permitted at court. This in itself should speak of Jeanne's influence. On March 6, 1562, Jeanne left Paris to return to Bearn. She left without her son (she was permitted to say goodbye and to enjoin him never to go to Mass), still very ill, and under fear of being kidnapped along the way.

Jeanne as Supreme Regent
In April 1562, the first civil war (the first of three that would occur in Jeanne's lifetime) broke out while Jeanne was still en route to Bearn. The Huguenots were under the command of the Prince de Conde and Admiral Gaspard de Coligny. The Catholics were led by the Duke de Guise. Jeanne herself was not involved in this or the second civil war, but rather concentrated her efforts on her own kingdom. Upon her return, "Jeanne devoted herself primarily to local administration and to foster the Reformed faith in her domain." She could not escape the war's impact, however. First, being so close to Spain, she needed to prepare herself with military defense. Secondly, some months into the war, Antoine had been wounded fighting on the Catholic side. Although Antoine had summoned his mistress in his convalescence, when word of his injury reached Jeanne, she immediately made herself ready to go nurse him. But the infection spread, and Antoine died before Jeanne could obtain permission to enter enemy lines.

Antoine's death forced the surrounding powers to deal with Jeanne directly. Her son was still to be a hostage at court for the next four years, but she was able to reinstate Protestant tutors for the boy to oversee his education. Her husband's death also put her in sole control of Bearn, and she worked with great energy, against great obstacles, to strengthen and reform her domain. "Her reorganization of the economic and judicial system was so sound it remained in force well into the 18th century." Theodore Beza, Calvin's right hand man in her request, sent her more than a dozen ministers to preach the gospel. Laws were passed to protect these ministers, she abolished public processions, purified the churches of images, and suppressed the Mass in some parts of her kingdom. A synod was formed and there were plans for a Protestant Academy. Her achievements led one reformer to say of her, "The Queen of Navarre has banished all idolatry from her domains and sets an example of virtue with incredible firmness and courage."

Meanwhile, the King of Spain, now Philip II (the same Philip to whom her father had hoped to marry Jeanne), tried to persuade her to marry one of his sons. Ironically, the union with the Spanish royal family that her father had so wanted in the past would now have cost Jeanne everything -- her kingdom, her independence, and her faith. She saw this but felt compelled to reopen the negotiations with Spain that had stopped at her husband's death. Sending an ambassador, Philip demanded she cast aside her religious policy, calling it evil and threatening that he would not tolerate Calvinism "so near to his subjects." The ambassador related Jeanne's reply, characteristically sharp when she was provoked. "Although I am just a little Princess, God has given me the government of this country so I may rule it according to His Gospel and teach it His Laws. I rely on God, who is more powerful than the King of Spain." Philip's reply is menacing. "This is quite too much of a woman to have as a daughter-in-law. I would much prefer to destroy her and treat her as such an evil woman deserves." Quite too much of a woman, indeed.

The Papacy, too sought Jeanne. Pious IV sent his own ambassador and his own set of threats. She was warned that her subjects would not stand for reform, that Spain would not stand for it. She was ordered to restore the churches and to cast off the heresies that he for a time "seduced" her. She was implored "with tears to return to the true fold." Her reply did little to hide her annoyance, "You appeal to your authority as the Pope's legate. The authority of the Pope's legate is not recognized in Bearn. Keep your tears for yourself. Out of charity I might contribute a few." There followed a plot to kidnap her and deliver her the Inquisition in Spain. She was summoned to appear in Rome upon penalty of excommunication, confiscation of goods, and a declaration that her lands would be open to the first taker.

This last claim troubled Philip of Spain who did not want just anyone to take over Navarre. It made Catherine furious. She resented the Papacy's presumption in disciplining Jeanne over the head of France. It was a dangerous game Jeanne was playing, pitting the larger powers against one another while her kingdom and her life were held in the balance. Meanwhile, she continued with her reform. There were plans to carry out "the total suppression of idolatry." The Calvinist Academy became a reality and ecclesiastical wealth was confiscated and given to the poor.

Spain and the Papacy were up in arms. "It was disturbing enough that John Knox had created a Calvinist establishment in Scotland, but if it were allowed to develop in Bearn, it might spread throughout France, a far more serious challenge to the church." They put pressure on Catherine, Catherine put pressure on Jeanne, Jeanne was evasive. She had returned to court for a time to appease Catherine who was confident of her powers to control people near her. Reform went on in Bearn in spite of Jeanne's absence. She was able to return with her son Henry, at last.

Fleeing Navarre to Greater Service
When the third civil war broke out in 1568, Jeanne could no longer concern herself with her domains alone. Catherine could no longer protect her because a moderate faction no longer seemed to exist. Jeanne's life was now threatened by Spanish and French Catholic troops. She and her son took flight to La Rochelle, the Protestant stronghold and threw in their lot with Coligny, Conde and the other French Protestants.

It is in La Rochelle that the strength of Jeanne's service to her God -- and His strength at work through her -- is best seen. While staying in touch as best she could be with Bearn, she also proved invaluable to the Huguenot cause. As Minister of Propaganda, she wrote manifestoes and requests for aid to foreign princes. Under her direction fell such concerns in La Rochelle as "finances, fortifications, discipline (except in the army), and, in part, intelligence." She contributed her wealth, even offering her jewels as security in foreign loans. She supervised the care of the tens of thousands of refugees that poured into the city. She did not confine herself within the city's walls, however. At even critical points in the fighting, she would accompany Coligny, inspecting the defences and rallying troops. When one Huguenot captain, La Noue, hesitated to have his arm amputated after it had been crushed, Jeanne held his hand in support during the surgery and was praised for the care she took of him in his recovery.

A college was established in La Rochelle under direction, to be "a seminary of piety and a center for the education of the holy ministry." She brought to it some of the most learned men of the Reform. The better part of their salaries was paid by Jeanne herself. She was working at such a frenzied pace, perhaps realizing that she did not have long to live. Her body grew weaker, but her determination was stronger than ever.

Jeanne was at her height; the Huguenot cause was at its height. It offered its terms of peace. Jeanne wrote to both the King and the Queen Mother, but when the terms were denied and the Huguenots were told that the condition of peace was that they lay down absolutely all their arms, Jeanne answered, "We have come to the determination to die, all of us, rather than to abandon our God, and our religion, the one which we cannot maintain unless permitted to worship publicly, any more than a human body can live without meat and drink." At last the Peace of St. Germain was signed by Charles IX in August of 1570, granting the Huguenots more than they had ever before been granted: "freedom of worship except in Paris or near the court, full eligibility to public office, and, as guarantee that these terms would be honored in practice, the right to hold four cities under their independent rule for two years."

Peace was uneasy. The Catholics were outraged by the King's concession. Charles was himself trying to assert his independence from his mother, and under Coligny's council was considering war with Spain in an attempt to unify his people. Catherine had her own plans for unity. She suggested the marriage of Henry of Navarre to her daughter Marguerite. This would unite the Bourbon and Valois families, it would unite Jeanne and Catherine, Protestant and Catholic, it would unite France. Both factions had strong supporters of the marriage, each side thinking it had the most to gain. Other Protestants were quite critical. Jeanne herself was in agony. She greatly feared that her son would return to Catholicism, and that would break her heart. On the other hand, she feared for France and took it to heart when it was suggested that her stubbornness in the matter would be at the cost of the Reform.

She arrived in Paris in January 1572 to begin what would be months of negotiations concerning the marriage. Horrified upon her arrival by the court's decadence, she wrote to her son:
[Marguerite] is beautiful, discreet, and graceful, but she has grown up in the most vicious and corrupt atmosphere imaginable. I cannot see that anyone escapes its poison... Not for anything on earth would I have you live here. Therefore I wish you to be married and to retire -- with your wife -- from this corruption. Although I knew it was bad, I find it even worse than I feared.... If you were here you would never escape without a special intervention from God...

You have doubtless realized that their main object, my son, is to separate you from God, and from me...you can understand my anxiety for you.... I beg you, pray to God.

Feeling herself powerless to stop the marriage, Jeanne nevertheless made certain demands. "She insisted that Cardinal de Bourbon should perform the ceremony, not as a priest but as a prince, not in a church but outside it, and that Henry should not accompany his wife into the Church to hear Mass." Catherine reluctantly agreed.}}}


3. Louise de Coligny (1555 - 1620)

Louise de Coligny was the daughter of Gaspard de Coligny and Charlotte de Laval and the fourth and last spouse of William the Silent.

When she was seventeen, she married Charles de Teligny. Both he and her father were murdered at the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre. She then married William the Silent on April 12, 1583. Like her murdered father, she was a French Huguenot. She became the mother of Frederick Henry in 1584, William's fourth legitimate son and future prince of Orange. During her life she remained an advocate for protestantism.



D. England:

1. Catherine of Aragon (16 December 1485 – 7 January 1536)

Catherine of Aragon was the first wife and Queen Consort of Henry VIII of England. Catherine was born on 16 December 1485, the same year that Henry VII established the Tudor dynasty. At the age of three, she was betrothed to his infant son, Prince Arthur. In 1501, shortly before her sixteenth birthday, Catherine sailed to England. But her marriage to Arthur lasted less than six months and was supposedly never consummated. Catherine was then betrothed to Arthur's younger brother, Prince Henry. Henry tried to have their twenty-four year marriage annulled in part because all their male heirs died in childhood, with only one of their six children, Princess Mary (later Queen Mary I) surviving as heiress presumptive, at a time when there was no precedent for a woman on the throne. The Pope refused to allow the annulment of Henry's marriage to Catherine, which set off a chain reaction that led to Henry's break with the Roman Catholic Church and his subsequent marriage to Anne Boleyn in the hope of fathering a male heir to continue the Tudor dynasty.

Because of the lack of heirs, Henry began to believe that his marriage was cursed and sought confirmation from two verses of the biblical Book of Leviticus, which said that, if a man marries his brother's wife, the couple will be childless. He chose to believe that Catherine had lied when she said her marriage to Arthur had not been consummated, therefore making their marriage wrong in the eyes of God. He therefore asked Pope Clement VII to annul his marriage in 1527.

The Pope stalled on the issue for seven years without making a final judgment, partially because allowing an annulment would be admitting that the Church had been in error for allowing a special dispensation for marriage in the first place, and partially because he was a virtual prisoner of Catherine's nephew Charles V, who had conquered Rome. Catherine chose to fight their case out in the courts, which ruled against her. Had Catherine acted differently, the religious reformation would have been delayed or might not have come to England at all. The pope would not agree to the annulment. Henry separated from Catherine in July 1531; in January 1533, he married one of Catherine's former ladies-in-waiting, Anne Boleyn, sister of his former mistress Lady Mary Boleyn. Henry finally had Thomas Cranmer, whom Henry had appointed as Archbishop of Canterbury in expectation of Cranmer's support, annul the marriage on May 23, 1533. Five days later Cranmer declared the marriage of Henry and Anne to be valid. To forestall an appeal to Rome, which Catherine would have almost certainly won, Henry had Parliament pass the Act of Supremacy, illicitly repudiating Papal jurisdiction in England, making the king the head of the English church, and beginning the English Reformation.

Catherine however refused to acknowledge the annulment and took the issue to the law, but she lost and was forced to leave Court. She was separated from her daughter and was sent to live in remote castles and in humble conditions, in the hope that she would surrender to the inevitable; but she never accepted the annulment and signed her last letter, "Catherine the Queen."

Catherine died of a form of cancer at Kimbolton Castle, on January 7, 1536 and was buried in Peterborough Cathedral with the ceremony due to a Princess Dowager of Wales, not a Queen. Catherine's embalmer confessed to her doctor that Catherine's heart had been black through and through, which led many of her supporters to spread the rumour that Anne Boleyn had poisoned her. Henry did not attend the funeral, nor did he allow Princess Mary to do so.

2. Anne Boleyn (1501 – 19 May 1536)

Anne Boleyn, Queen Consort of England was the second wife of King Henry VIII and the mother of Queen Elizabeth I. At the time Anne Boleyn came to court, Henry's first wife Queen Catherine was popular with many people, although she had been inactive in politics and court life for some time. All her sons by Henry had died young and Henry was anxious for a male heir to his throne in order to preserve the monarchy and prevent civil war. In the mean time, between Henry and Boleyn there was an affair, and both of them hoped that at the request of Henry the Pope would annul Henry’s marriage with Catherine, which, however was not successful. Her exasperation with the Vatican’s refusal to make her queen persuaded her to promote a new alternative to Henry. She suggested that he should follow the advice of religious radicals like William Tyndale, who denied Papal Authority and believed that the monarch should lead the church. When William Warham, the conservative Archbishop of Canterbury, died, Boleyn had her family's chaplain, Thomas Cranmer, appointed to the vacant position.

Events now began to move at a quick pace. On May 23, 1533, Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, sitting in judgment at a special court convened at Dunstable to rule on the validity of the King's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, declared the marriage of Henry and Catherine null and void. Five days later, on May 28, 1533, Cranmer declared the marriage of Henry and Anne to be good and valid. After seven long years, Anne was finally legally Henry's wife and Queen of England. Catherine was formally stripped of her title as queen in time for Anne's coronation, which took place on June 1, 1533. In defiance of the Pope, Cranmer now declared that the English Church was under Henry’s control, not Rome's. This was the famous "Break with Rome", which signalled the end of England's history as a Roman Catholic country. Although Henry VIII himself was a religious conservative, England slowly began to create the branch of Christianity known as Anglicanism, which often considers itself to have taken a middle road between Luther's and Calvin's Protestantism and Roman Catholicism.

King Henry's marriage to Anne, and her subsequent execution, were therefore part of the complex beginning of the considerable political and religious upheaval which was the English Reformation, with Anne herself actively promoting the cause of Church reform. She wielded immense political influence and has been called "the most influential and important queen consort England has ever had".

Anne Boleyn is popularly known for being beheaded on charges of adultery, incest and treason on 19 May 1536. She is widely assumed to be innocent of the charges, and was later celebrated as a martyr in English Protestant culture. After 1558, Anne was venerated as a martyr and heroine by English Protestantism, particularly through the works of the ultra-Protestant propagandist, John Foxe, who argued that Anne had saved England from the evils of Roman Catholicism (as he saw it) and that God had provided proof of her innocence and virtue by making sure her daughter, Elizabeth I, later became queen. As a result of this view, many English nobles displayed pictures of Anne in their homes, in order to show their loyalty to Elizabeth and the Protestant monarchy. While many Roman Catholics despised her, many Protestant Reformers hailed Anne and praised her. Anne's protection helped the Protestants further their cause.

3. Catherine Parr (1512 – 5 September 1548)
Catherine Parr, also known as Catherine or Catherine Parr(e), was the last of the six wives of Henry VIII of England. She was Queen Consort of England during 1543–1547, then Dowager Queen of England. She was the most married queen of England, with four husbands.

Catherine was born in about 1512, either in Kendal Castle or in Blackfriars, London. She was the daughter of Sir Thomas Parr of Kendal, Westmorland and his wife, Maud Green. Her father died when she was five. She married Henry VIII on 12 July 1543 at Hampton Court Palace. She was the first English Queen consort to enjoy the new title Queen of Ireland following Henry's adoption of the title King of Ireland.

Her religious views were complex, and the issue is clouded by the lack of evidence. Although she must have been brought up as a Catholic, given her birth before the Protestant Reformation, she later became sympathetic and interested in the "New Faith".

It is said that she held some strong reformed ideas after Henry's death. She was reformist enough to be viewed with suspicion by Catholic and anti-Protestant officials such as Bishop Stephen Gardiner and Chancellor Thomas Wriothesley, 1st Earl of Southampton who tried to turn the king against her in 1546. An arrest warrant was drawn up for her, but she managed to reconcile with the king after vowing that she had only argued about religion with him to take his mind off the suffering caused by his ulcerous leg.

4. Lady Jane Grey (1537 – February 12, 1554)

Lady Jane Grey, a grand-niece of Henry VIII of England, reigned as uncrowned queen regnant of the Kingdom of England for nine days in July 1553.

Though Jane's accession, pursuant to the will of King Edward VI, may have breached the laws of England, many powers of the land proved willing to accept her as Queen of England, even if only as part of a power-struggle to stop Henry's elder daughter, Princess Mary, a Roman Catholic, from acceding to the throne. Jane's brief rule ended, however, when the authorities revoked her proclamation as queen. Mary's subsequent régime eventually had her executed for treason.

Jane was well educated, knowing Latin, Greek and Hebrew as well as modern languages. Through the teachings of her tutors, she became a devoted Protestant.

The Protestant rebellion of Sir Thomas Wyatt in late January 1554 sealed Jane's fate, although she had nothing to do with it directly. Wyatt's rebellion started as a popular revolt, precipitated by the imminent marriage of Mary to the Catholic Prince Philip (later King of Spain, 1556–1598). But Jane's father (the Duke of Suffolk) and other nobles joined the rebellion, calling for Jane's restoration as Queen. Philip and his councilors pressed Mary to execute Jane to put an end to any future focus for unrest. Five days after Wyatt's arrest the execution of Jane took place. The "traitor-heroine of the Reformation" was merely 16 years old at the time of her execution.
4. Elizabeth I of England (7 September 1533 – 24 March 1603)
Elizabeth I was Queen of England, Queen of France (in name only), and Queen of Ireland from 17 November 1558 until her death. Elizabeth I was the fifth and final monarch of the Tudor dynasty, the other Tudor monarchs being her grandfather Henry VII, her father Henry VIII, her half-brother Edward VI, and her half-sister Mary I (also known as Mary Tudor or Bloody Mary). She reigned for about 44 years, during a period marked by increases in English power and influence worldwide, as well as great religious turmoil within England.
Henry VIII died in 1547 and was succeeded by Edward VI. Catherine Parr, Henry's last wife, married Thomas Seymour, 1st Baron Seymour of Sudeley, Edward VI's uncle, and took Elizabeth into her household. There, Elizabeth received her education under Roger Ascham. She came to speak and read six languages: her native English, as well as French, Italian, Spanish, Greek, and Latin. Under the influence of Catherine Parr and Ascham, Elizabeth was raised a Protestant.
Following a moderate start to her reign, the Roman Catholic Mary opted for a hard line against Protestants, whom she regarded as heretics and a threat to her authority. In the ensuing persecution she came to be known as "Bloody Mary". She urged Elizabeth to convert to the Roman Catholic faith, but Elizabeth, instead, kept up a skilful show of allegiance to suit her own conscience and ambitions. The persecuted Protestants saw Elizabeth as their savior, since she was seen as an icon of "the new faith". After all, it was to marry her mother Anne Boleyn that Henry instituted the break with Rome. Because of this, several rebellions and uprisings were made in Elizabeth's name, although she herself probably had little or no knowledge of them.
Mary Tudor contracted a marriage with Prince Philip of Spain (later King Philip II), seeking to strengthen the Catholic influence in England. Wyatt's Rebellion in 1554 sought to prevent Mary from marrying Philip, and after its failure, Elizabeth was imprisoned in the Tower of London for her alleged involvement. There were demands for Elizabeth's execution, but only few Englishmen wished to put a member of the popular Tudor dynasty to death. Even the Lord Chancellor Stephen Gardiner wanted to remove Elizabeth from the line of succession, but neither Mary nor Parliament would allow it. After two months in the Tower, Elizabeth was released on the same day her mother had been executed eighteen years earlier. She was then put under house arrest under the guard of Sir Henry Bedingfield
Mary Tudor died in November 1558, leaving Elizabeth as heir to the English throne. Upon Mary's death there was rejoicing in the streets of London, and in November 1558 Elizabeth was set to succeed to the throne.
One of the most important concerns during Elizabeth's early reign was religion. She relied primarily on Sir William Cecil (whom she called "Spirit") for advice on the matter. The Act of Uniformity 1559, which she passed shortly after ascending the throne, required the use of the Protestant Book of Common Prayer in church services. Communion with the Catholic Church had been reinstated under Mary I, but was ended by Elizabeth. The Queen assumed the title "Supreme Governor of the Church of England," rather than "Supreme Head," primarily because several bishops and many members of the public felt that a woman could not be the head of the Church. Therefore, her first order of business was to eliminate religious unrest. She was, compelled to take a stronger pro-Protestant stance when events demanded it, for two reasons: the machinations of Mary Queen of Scots and persecution of continental Protestants by the two strongholds of Orthodox Catholicism, Spain and France.
The persecution of continental Protestants forced Elizabeth into war, a situation which she desperately tried to avoid. She sent an army to aid French Huguenots (Calvinists who had settled in France) after a 1572 massacre wherein over three thousand Huguenots lost their lives. She sent further assistance to Protestant factions on the continent and in Scotland following the emergence of radical Catholic groups and assisted Belgium in their bid to gain independence from Spain.
Upon the death of her husband, Francis II, Mary Stuart (a catholic cousin of Elizabeth) had returned to Scotland. In France, meanwhile, conflict between the Catholics and the Huguenots led to the outbreak of the French Wars of Religion. The English government also involved itself in the conflict in France, where the throne was claimed by a Protestant heir, Henry of Navarre (later Henry IV of France). Elizabeth sent 20,000 troops and subsidies of over £300,000 to Henry, and 8,000 troops and subsidies of over £1,000,000 to the Dutch. She made peace with France in 1564.
In addition, the Act of Supremacy 1559 was passed requiring public officials to take an oath acknowledging the Sovereign's control over the Church or face severe punishment. Many bishops were unwilling to conform to the Elizabethan religious policy. These bishops were removed from the ecclesiastical bench and replaced by appointees who would agree with the Queen's decision. She also appointed a new Privy Council, removing many Catholic counsellors by so doing. Under Elizabeth, factionalism in the Council and conflicts at court greatly diminished.

Although Elizabeth entertained many marriage proposals and flirted incessantly, she never married or had children throughout her life. Probably because a Renaissance wife was expected to defer to a husband's authority, a reigning queen risked her political supremacy. Marital life might have created unwanted tension in the bedchamber, at home and abroad; however, the genuine reason of keeping her virginity was not known.

{{{Elizabeth and the 1559 Religious Settlement
Catholicism had been restored under Mary I, but Elizabeth claimed to be Protestant, and thus wanted to create a Protestant Church. Parliament was summoned in 1559 to consider the Reformation Bill and to create a new Church. The Reformation Bill defined the Communion as a consubstantial celebration as opposed to a transubstantial celebration, included abuse of the Pope in the litany, and ordered that ministers should not wear the surplice or other Catholic vestments. It allowed ministers to marry, banned images from churches, and confirmed Elizabeth as Supreme Head of the Church of England. The Bill met heavy resistance in the House of Lords, as Catholic bishops as well as the lay peers voted against it. They butchered much of the Bill, changed the litany to allow for a transubstantial belief in the Communion and refused to grant Elizabeth the title of Supreme Head of the Church.
Parliament was prorogued over Easter, and when it resumed, the government entered two new bills into the Houses — the Act of Supremacy and the Act of Uniformity. The Act of Supremacy confirmed Elizabeth as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, as opposed to the Supreme Head. Supreme Governor was a suitably equivocal phrasing that made Elizabeth head of the church without ever saying she was, important because in the sixteenth century, it was felt that women could not rule a church.
The Bill of Uniformity was more cautious than the initial Reformation Bill. It revoked the harsh laws against Catholics, removed the abuse of the Pope from the litany and kept the wording that allowed for both consubstantial and transubstantial belief in the Communion.
After Parliament was dismissed, Elizabeth, along with William Cecil, drafted what are known as the Royal Injunctions. These were additions to the Settlement, and largely stressed continuity with the Catholic past — ministers were ordered to wear the surplice. Wafers, as opposed to ordinary baker's bread, were to be used as the bread at Communion. There had been opposition to the Settlement in the shires, which for the most part were largely Catholic, so the changes were made in order to allow for acceptance to the Settlement.
Elizabeth never changed the Religious Settlement despite Protestant pressure (previously thought to originate from the Puritan choir) to do so and it is in fact the 1559 Settlement that forms much of the basis of today's Church of England.}}
In 1569, Elizabeth faced a major uprising, known as the Northern Rebellion, instigated by Thomas Howard, 4th Duke of Norfolk, Charles Neville, 6th Earl of Westmorland and Thomas Percy, 7th Earl of Northumberland. Pope Pius V aided the Catholic Rebellion by excommunicating Elizabeth and declaring her deposed in a papal bull. The Bull of Deposition, Regnans in Excelsis, was only issued in 1570, arriving after the Rebellion had been put down. After the Bull of Deposition was issued, however, Elizabeth chose not to continue her policy of religious tolerance. She instead began the persecution of her religious enemies, giving impetus to various conspiracies to remove her from the throne. She also permitted the Church of England to take a more explicitly Protestant line by allowing Parliament to pass the largely Calvinist 39 Articles in 1571 which acted as a declaration of Church of England faith.
Elizabeth was a successful monarch, helping steady the nation even after inheriting an enormous national debt from her sister Mary. Under her, England managed to avoid a crippling Spanish invasion. Elizabeth was also able to prevent the outbreak of a religious or civil war on English soil. Elizabeth's Accession Day of November each year was celebrated for many years after her death by Pope-burning processions. Her achievements, however, were greatly magnified after her death. She was depicted in later years as a great defender of Protestantism in Europe. }}}