« 上一頁繼續 »
prelate; nor whether the good man ever procured his restoration. Mr. Harvey appears to have written “A Treatise of the Church and Kingdom of Christ,” a copy of which is still preserved, though most probably it was never published." The Oxford historian gives a very curious account of one Mr. Richard Harvey, who lived about the same time, but he does not appear to have been the same person. One Mr. Richard Harvey of Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, took his degrees in Arts in 1581 and 1585. This was probably the same person as that last mentioned.}
EDw ARD DEERING, B. D.—This learned and distinguished puritan was descended from a very ancient and worthy family at Surrenden-Dering, in Kent; and having been carefully brought up in religion, and the rudiments of sound learning, completed his education in Christ's college, . Cambridge. Here he made amazing progress in valuable knowledge, and became an eminently popular preacher. He was fellow of the house, was chosen proctor in 1566, and Lady Margaret's preacher the year following. This, indeed, was not sufficient to protect him from the fury and persecution of the prelates. In the year 1571, being cited before Archbishop Parker and other commissioners, he was charged with certain assertions, which, it is said, he maintained and subscribed before them. These assertions were the following: “That breaking the laws of civil government is, in its own nature, no sin, but only on account of scandal.—That Christ's descent into hell relates only to the force and efficacy of his
ion; but that neither his body, nor his soul, went to
that place.—That it is lawful to take oaths, when the forms are written or printed, to determine the sense of the imposer; but to make use of the book, as a circumstance of solemnity, is a sacrilegious addition.—That the clerical garments which are derived from popery, are full of offence, an appear to me directly against the truth.” It does not appear, however, what punishment was inflicted upon him for these assertions.
Mr. Deering was domestic chaplain to the unfortunate Duke of Norfolk, (who, in the above year, lost his head on . Tower-hill,) and was tutor to his children. In this situation, he conducted himself with great propriety, and much to the satisfaction of his noble patron.” When the duke was imprisoned for his treasonable connections with the Queen of Scots, Mr. Deering thus addressed him: “You once earnestly professed the gospel; but now dissimulation, ambition, and hypocrisy hath bewitched you. You know how many times I dissuaded you from your wicked servants, your popish friends, and your adulterous woman. Alas! my lord, your high calling hath so bridled my words, that I could not speak to you as I would : my words were too soft to heal so old a disease.”4 In the year 1572, he became lecturer at St. Paul's, London; where, on account of his great learning, ready utterance, and uncommon boldness, he was amazingly followed. This being grievous to certain ecclesiastical persons, it was deemed most proper to silence him. This was accordingly done the very next year. Our historian intimates, that he was a great enemy to the order of bishops. This was, indeed, the case with most of the puritans. They generally looked upon the episcopal office, as appointed in the church, to be equally a popish invention, and contrary to its original design, according to the New Testament. He further informs us, that Mr. Deering was intimately acquainted with the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, with whom he often interceded, in behalf of the suffering nonconformists.t While he was lecturer of St. Paul's, he was charged with having spoken certain things, which, by interpretation, were said to reflect upon the magistrate, and tend to break the peace of the church. Therefore, by an order from the council, his lecture was put down. Persons were appointed to watch him continually, to take advantage of what he delivered; and when he was brought under examination for delivering certain things offensive to the ruling powers, he utterly denied that he had said any such thing, and declared that the charges were mere slanders. Indeed, upon his appearance before the attorney-general and the bishop. of London, the bishop frankly acknowledged that he could not accuse him. What a pity then was it, that so excellent a preacher as he is denominated, who had so large a
* Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 130. + MS. Chronology, vol. i. p.262. (2.) # Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 190. § Ibid. p.269.
congregation, and when such preachers were much wanted, should be put to silences - - * In September this year, he wrote to the treasurer, requesting that he might no more appear before the council, but be judged by the bishops themselves, at any time and place they should appoint. In order to the restoration of his lecture, he requested that judgment might not be deferred ; that he might be charged with some impropriety, either i his words or actions; and that upon the knowledge of which, his honour might himself be able to judge what he deserved. He beseeched his lordship to inquire into his character, and examine his actions, till he could find only two persons who had heard him speak evil: but if such evidence of his ill behaviour could not be obtained, he intreated him to become his friend. He urged further, that his lordship would either believe his own judgment, having himself sometimes heard him, or the report of multitudes, who were his constant hearers. And if his lecture mi hi not be restored, as he was persuaded it was his duty, to seek . the good of souls, he earnestly prayed that he might have liberty to preach in some other place. Though the treasurer was undoubtedly willing and desirous to serve him, he obtained no redress; but was cited to appear before the court of the star-chamber, when several articles were exhibited against him. But before his appearance to answer these articles, he wrote a long letter to Burleigh, dated November 1, 1573, in which he addressed him with great spirit and freedom, concerning his own case, and several important points of controversy. This letter was as follows: - “Grace and peace from God the Father, &c. “Bear with me, I beseech your honour, though I trouble “ you; and let the cause of my grief be the discharge of my “boldness. It behoveth me to discharge myself from “slander, lest the gospel should be reproached in me. And “ it behoveth you to obey this commandment, Receive no “ accusation against a preacher without good and sufficient “ witness. I know, my lord, you will not do it. I have “good evidence of your equity in this behalf. Yet I am “bold to put you in mind of the word of Christ, which you “cannot possibly too often remember. I ask no more than “what is due to me, even from her majesty's seat of govern“ment and justice. If I have done evil, let me be punished: “if not, let me be eased of undeserved blame. I crave no “partiality, but seek to answer, and to make you (including
“ the other lbrds of the council) judges of my cause; before “whose presence I ought to fear, and the steps of whose “feet I humbly reverence. If, before your honours, I “should be convinced of these pretended crimes, with what “shame should I hide my face all the days of my life! “Where were the rejoicing that I have in God, in all things “ that he hath wrought by me? Where were their comfort, “who have so desirously heard me * Where were the good “ opinion of many, and all the good-will you have shewed “me I am not so ignorant, that I see not this. Therefore “ persuade yourself, that I am on sure ground. Trial shall “teach your eyes and ears the truth. And to persuade your “heart, I give unto you my faith, I cannot accuse myself “of any thought of my mind, in which I have not honoured “ the magistrate, or word of my mouth, in which I have not “regarded the peace of the church. And I thank God, “who of his unspeakable mercy, hath kept for me this con“science against the day of trouble. “If you muse now, how these slanders have risen, you “may easily know, that the malice of satan is great against “the ministry of the gospel. I know I have given no “cause, more than I have confessed; and with what words “I have spoken, I desire to be judged by the hearers. And “So much the more bold I now speak to you, because my “lord of London, of late told me, before Mr. Attorney “ and Mr. Solicitor, that he could not accuse me of any “such thing. As I was glad to hear this discharge, so I “should have been much more glad, if, upon so free a con“fession, he would favourably have restored me to my “lecture. Though it be somewhat strange to punish a “man before he offend, lest hereafter he should offend; yet “I am contented with it, and leave it unto them, who “should be as much grieved as myself to see so great a con“gregation dispersed.” r. Deering next proceeds to prove the lordship and civil government of bishops to be unlawful, and contrary to scripture. “The lordship and civil government of bishops,” says he, “is utterly unlawful. The kingdom of Christ is “a spiritual government only. But the government of the “ church is a part of the kingdom of Christ. Therefore, “ the government of the church is only a spiritual govern“ment. What the kingdom of Christ is, and what “government he hath established in it, learn not of me, but “ of God himself. What can be plainer than the words of “Christ? My kingdom is not of this world? How plainly
“doth St. Paul say, The weapons of our warfare are not “carnal & Let him, therefore, who is the King of kings, “have the pre-eminence of government. And let him, “whose dominion is the kingdom of heaven, have the sword “ and the sceptre that is not fleshly. Let not a vile pope, in “the name of Christ, erect a new kingdom, which Christ “never knew : a kingdom of this world, which, in the “ministry of the gospel, he hath condemned. This kind of “ rule hath set all out of order, and in confusion, mingled “heaven and earth together.—As the minister hath nothin “to do with the temporal sword, so it much less becometh “ him to be called lord. The reason is plain from scripture. “Ministers are called fishers of men, labourers in the harvest, “ callers to the marriage, servants of the people, workmen, “stewards, builders, planters, &c. In all of which, they are “removed from a lordship over the people. And again, “ they are called fellow-elders, fellow-helpers, fellow“workmen, fellow-soldiers, fellow-servants, fellow-travel“lers, &c. In which names, they are forbidden lordship “over their brethren. And, surely, it must be great rashness “to refuse so many names, which God hath given us, and “take another, which importeth dominion over others. Can “we doubt then in the question of lordship & We appeal to “Christ, and the words of his mouth; to decide the contro“versy. The disciples had this contention, as well as “ourselves. They strove much, who should be highest; “against which strife, our Saviour Christ pronounceth this “sentence, He that is greatest among you, let him be as the “ least. And whosoever of you will be the chief, shall be “ servant of all. This is a brief account of the superiority “ in the ministry. And this shall for ever determine the “controversy, though all the wisdom in the world reply to “ the contrary. If a lord bishop find his titles given him “here, let him rejoice in his portion. If he have them not “ hence, he shall not have them from us: we will not so “dishonour him who hath given the sentence.” Afterwards, speaking of bishops in the primitive church, and those in modern times, he makes the following distinctions: “The bishops and ministers then, were one in degree: “now they are divers.-There were many bishops in one “town: now there is but one in a whole country.—No “bishop's authority was more than in one city: now it is in “many shires.—The bishops then used no bodily punish“ments: now they imprison, fine, &c.—Those bishops “could not excommunicate, nor absolve, of their own