Within a short tyme after [t]his, there was a Commission graunted forth and directed to M. Cranmer (then Archbishop of Canterbury) to determyne the matter of the Mariage between the King, & Queene Katharine, at S. Albans. Where at last, it was fully determined and concluded, according to the Kings desire: and then began he to co[m]playne, that since he could haue no Iustice at the Popes handes, he would therfore from thenceforth separate himselfe from the Sea of Rome, and thereupon he presently maried the Lady Anne Bullen. 
       Which, when Syr Tho. More vnderstood, he sayd to M. Roper, God graunt, God graunt, Sonne Roper, that these matters within a while, be not confirmed by Oath. 
       About this tyme, Queene Anne was to passe through London fro[m] the Tower to Westminster, to her Coronation, & some few dayes before, Syr Thomas More receiued a letter fro[m] the Bishops of Durham, Bath & Winchester requesting him, both to keep them company from the Tower to Westminster to the said Coronation, and withall to accept of Twenty Poundes, which by the Bearer thereof they had sent vnto him to buy him a gowne; which he thankfully receiued, but yet went not, staying still at home vntill the Coronation was past. At his next meeting with the said Bishops, he spake merrily vnto them, saying My Lordes, by the letter which you sent lately vnto me, you required of me two things, one wherof since I was well contented to graunt, therefore I thought I might be the boulder to deny you the other: and also, because I tooke you for no Beggars, and my selfe I know to be no rich man, I thought I might the rather accept of your liberality with the more honesty. But indeed your other Request put me in mynd of a certaine Emperour ( I haue now forgotten his name) that made a law, that whosoeuer co[m]mitted a certayne offe[n]ce (which I do not now neyther remember,) should suffer death, by being deuoured of wild beastes, except it were a Virgin that offended against the same, such reuerence did he beare vnto Virginity. Now, it so fell out, that the first who committed the offence, was indeed a Virgin, wherof the Emperour hearing, was much perplexed because for the example of others, he would fayne haue had that Law put in execution.  Whereupon his Counsell had sate, and long debated the case, suddenly there arose vp one amongst the rest a good playne fellow, and said, Why make you so much ado about this businesse, my Lordes? The matter seemes to me but small, and easy to be decided: For let her first be deflowered, and then afterwardes she may be deuoured.  And so my Honourable good Lords, though your Lordships haue in the matter of marriage hitherto kept your selues pure Virgins, yet take yee good heed you keepe your Virginity still. For there be some, who first by procuring your Lordshipps to be present at the Coronation, will next be egging you on, to preach for the setting of it forth, and finally compell you to publish Bookes vnto all the world in defence therof. These are they that be desirous to defloure you, and then when they haue defloured you, they will not fayle, soone after to deuoure you. Now my Lordes, it lyeth not in my power, but that they may deuoure me; but God being still my good Lord, I will so prouide, that they shall neuer defloure me. 

From William Roper, The mirrour of vertue in worldly greatnes; or the life of Syr T. More, transcribed by Richard Bear from the Paris duodecimo of 1626, STC 21316.  The entire work is available at Renascence Editions.

And first, where I affirm the empire of a woman to be a thing repugnant to nature, I mean not only that God, by the order of his creation, has spoiled [deprived] woman of authority and dominion, but also that man has seen, proved, and pronounced just causes why it should be. Man, I say, in many other cases, does in this behalf see very clearly. [14] For the causes are so manifest, that they cannot be hid. For who can deny but it is repugnant to nature, that the blind shall be appointed to lead and conduct such as do see? That the weak, the sick, and impotent persons shall nourish and keep the whole and strong? And finally, that the foolish, mad, and frenetic shall govern the discreet, and give counsel to such as be sober of mind? And such be all women, compared unto man in bearing of authority. For their sight in civil regiment is but blindness; their strength, weakness; their counsel, foolishness; and judgment, frenzy, if it be rightly considered.

[15]I except such as God, by singular privilege, and for certain causes known only to himself, has exempted from the common rank of women, and do speak of women as nature and experience do this day declare them. Nature, I say, does paint them forth to be weak, frail, impatient, feeble, and foolish; and experience has declared them to be inconstant, variable, cruel, lacking the spirit of counsel and regiment.  And these notable faults have men in all ages espied in that kind, for the which not only they have removed women from rule and authority, but also some have thought that men subject to the counsel or empire of their wives were unworthy of public office. [16]For thus writes Aristotle, in the second of his Politics. What difference shall we put, says he, whether that women bear authority, or the husbands that obey the empire of their wives, be appointed to be magistrates? For what ensues the one, must needs follow the other: to wit, injustice, confusion, and disorder. The same author further reasons, that the policy or regiment of the Lacedemonians (who other ways amongst the Greeks were most excellent) was not worthy to be reputed nor accounted amongst the number of commonwealths that were well governed, because the magistrates and rulers of the same were too much given to please and obey their wives. What would this writer (I pray you) have said to that realm or nation, where a woman sits crowned in Parliament amongst the midst of men?

"Oh fearful and terrible are thy judgments, O Lord, which thus hast abased man for his iniquity!"

I am assuredly persuaded that if any of those men, which, illuminated only by the light of nature, did see and pronounce the causes sufficient why women ought not to bear rule nor authority, should this day live and see a woman sitting in judgment, or riding from Parliament in the midst of men, having the royal crown upon her head, the sword and the scepter borne before her, in sign that the administration of justice was in her power: I am assuredly persuaded, I say, that such a sight should so astonish them, that they should judge the whole world to be transformed into the Amazons,[17] and that such a metamorphosis and change was made of all the men of that country, as poets do feign was made of the companions of Ulysses; or at least, that albeit the outward form of men remained, yet should they judge their hearts were changed from the wisdom, understanding, and courage of men, to the foolish fondness and cowardice of women. Yea, they further should pronounce, that where women reign or be in authority, that there must needs vanity be preferred to virtue, ambition and pride to temperance and modesty; and finally, that avarice, the mother of all mischief, must needs devour equity and justice.[18] [19]

....

[46]The apostle takes power from all women to speak in the assembly. Ergo, he permits no woman to rule above man. [47]The former part is evident, whereupon the conclusion of necessity does follow; for he that takes from woman the least part of authority, dominion, or rule, will not permit unto her that which is [the] greatest. But greater it is to reign above realms and nations, to publish and to make laws, and to command men of all estates, and finally, to appoint judges and ministers, than to speak in the congregation. For her judgment, sentence, or opinion in the congregation, may be judged by all, may be corrected by the learned, and reformed by the godly. But woman being promoted in sovereign authority, her laws must be obeyed, her opinion followed, and her tyranny maintained, supposing that it be expressly against God and the profit of the commonwealth, as too manifest experience does this day witness.

And therefore yet again I repeat, that which before I have affirmed: to wit, that a woman promoted to sit in the seat of God (that is, to teach, to judge, or to reign above man) is a monster in nature, contumely to God, and a thing most repugnant to his will and ordinance. For he has deprived them, as before is proved, of speaking in the congregation, and has expressly forbidden them to usurp any kind of authority above man. How then will he suffer them to reign and have empire above realms and nations? He will never, I say, approve it, because it is a thing most repugnant to his perfect ordinance, as after shall be declared, and as the former scriptures have plainly given testimony. To the which to add anything were superfluous, were it not that the world is almost now come to that blindness, that whatsoever pleases not the princes and the multitude, the same is rejected as doctrine newly forged, and is condemned for heresy. I have therefore thought good to recite the minds of some ancient writers in the same matter, to the end that such as altogether be not blinded by the devil, may consider and understand this my judgment to be no new interpretation of God's scriptures, but to be the uniform consent of the most part of godly writers since the time of the apostles.

[48]Tertullian, in his book of Women's Apparel, after he has shown many causes why gorgeous apparel is abominable and odious in a woman, adds these words, speaking as it were to every woman by name: [49]"Do you not know," says he, "that you are Eve. The sentence of God lives and is effectual against this kind; and in this world, of necessity it is, that the punishment also live. You are the port and gate of the devil. You are the first transgressor of God's law. You did persuade and easily deceive him whom the devil durst not assault. For your merit (that is, for your death), it behooved the Son of God to suffer the death; and does it yet abide in your mind to deck you above your skin coats?"

By these and many other grave sentences and quick interrogations, did this godly writer labour to bring every woman in contemplation of herself, to the end that every one, deeply weighing what sentence God had pronounced against the whole race and daughters of Eve, might not only learn daily to humble and subject themselves in the presence of God, but also that they should avoid and abhor whatsoever thing might exalt them or puff them up in pride, or that might be occasion that they should forget the curse and malediction of God. And what, I pray you, is more able to cause a woman to forget her own condition, than
if she is lifted up in authority above man? It is a very difficult thing to a man (be he never so constant) promoted to honours, not to be tickled somewhat with pride (for the wind of vain glory does easily carry up the dry dust of the earth). [50]But as for woman, it is no more possible that she, being set aloft in authority above man, shall resist the motions of pride, than it is able to the weak reed, or to the turning weathercock, not to bow or turn at the vehemence of the inconstant wind. And therefore the same writer expressly forbids all women to intermeddle with the office of man. [51]For thus he writes in his book deViginibus Velandis: "It is not permitted to a woman to speak in the congregation, neither to teach, neither to baptize, neither to
vindicate to herself any office of man." [52]The same he speaks yet more plainly in the Preface of his sixth book written Against Marcion, where, recounting certain monstrous things which were to be seen at the Sea called Euxinum, amongst the rest, he recites this as a great monster in nature, "that women in those parts were not tamed nor abased by consideration of their own sex, but that, all shame laid apart, they made expenses upon weapons, and learned the feats of war, having more pleasure to fight than to marry and be subject to man." Thus far of Tertullian, whose words are so plain, that they need no explanation. For he that takes from her all office appertaining to man, [and] will not suffer her to reign above man ? and he that judges it a monster in nature that a woman shall exercise weapons ? must judge it to be a monster of monsters that a woman shall be exalted above a whole realm and nation. Of the same mind are Origen and diverse others (whose sentences I omit to avoid prolixity), yea, even till the days of Augustine.

From John Knox, The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women (1558).  Extracted from: Selected Writings of John Knox: Public Epistles, Treatises, and Expositions to the Year 1559.  The entire work is available at http://www.swrb.com/newslett/actualnls/FirBlast.htm.