網頁圖片
PDF

“authority: now they may.—Then, without consent, they “could make no ministers: now they do.—They could “ confirm no children in other parishes: they do now in “many shires.—Then they had no living of the church, but “ only in one congregation: now they have.—Then they “ had neither officials, nor commissaries, nor chancellors, “under them.—Then they dealt in no civil government, by “any established authority.—Then they had no right in “alienating any parsonage, to give it in lease.—Then they “ had the church where they served the cure, even as those “whom we now call parish ministers.”—This bold and excellent letter contains many other interesting particulars, too numerous for our insertion." Upon the appearance Öf Mr. Deering in the star-chamber, the following charges were brought against him : “That he had spoken against godfathers and godmothers.--That he had asserted that the statute of providing for the poor was not competent to the object.—That he had said, he could provide for them in a better way, by committing them to be kept by the richThat, at a public dinner, he took off his cap, and said, “Now I will prophesy, Matthew Parker is the last archbishop that shall ever sit in that seat:” and that Mr. Cartwright said, Accipio omen.” To acquit himself of these charges, he presented an address, November 28th, to the lords of the council, who constituted the above court. In this address, he proves his innocence, and establishes his own reputation. He says here, “Against godfathers and godmothers, save only the name, I spake nothing.—That I said the statute of provision for the poor was not competent to the object, or any such words, I utterly deny: I commended the statute.—That I . said I could provide for the poor, I utterly deny, as words which I never spake, and thoughts which were never yet in my heart. And if I had spoken any such thing, I had spoken wickedly, and accordingly deserved punishment. And thus much I profess and protest, before the seat of justice, where I dare not lie.—In the last place, I am charged with taking off my cap, and saying, ‘Now I will prophesy, Matthew Parker is the last archbishop that shall ever sit in that seat: and that Mr. Cartwright said, Accipio omen.” To this I answer, that I have confessed what I said; and here I send it, witnessed by the hands of those who heard it. I put off no cap, nor spake of any prophesy.”

* Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 70–279. + Ibid. Appendix, p. 55–58

: However before Mr. Deering could be restored to his beloved ministerial work, the bishop or the archbishop required him to acknowledge and subscribe to the four following articles:—“1. I acknowledge the Book of Articles, agreed upon by the clergy in the Synod of 1563, and confirmed by the queen's majesty, to be sound, and according to the word of God.” In reply to this, he excepted against the article of the consecration of bishops and archbishops, as contained in the said book. “To what purpose,” says he, “ is this article put in 2 What reason is there to make all subscribe unto it? Who dare make so bold an addition to the word of God, as to warrant these consecrations to be tied unto it? Let him allow of it, who hath the profit of it: and he that liketh it not, let him have no bishopric. I would, therefore, dly make this exception. Also, the article touching omilies, to which, because they are made by man, I dare not give my absolute warrant, that they are, in all things, according to the word of God. And when I set my hand unto it, I must needs avow that which I know not. I would, therefore, make this addition, As far as I know.” . . “2. That the queen's majesty is the chief governor, next under Christ, of the church of England, as well in ecclesiastical, as civil causes.”—“The second article,” says he, “I freely acknowledge.” * , “3. That in the Book of Common Prayer, there is nothing evil, or repugnant to the word of God; but that it may be well used in this our church of England.” To this he excepts, “That in the book, there are many phrases and hard speeches, which require a favourable exposition. There are many things, though well meant, when first appointed, which were certainly ill devised, being first used by papists. And, therefore, being still kept in the Prayer Book, they are offensive.—That day in which there is no communion, certain prayers are to be said after the offertory. 'What this offertory is, and what it meaneth, I cannot tell. And to account our prayers as offertories, I dare not warrant that it is according to the word of God.— In this book, we are commonly called by the name of priests; which name, besides importing a popish sacrificer, and so is sacrilegious, cannot possibly be given to us, and to our Saviour also.--On Christmas-day; we say, ‘Thou hast given us thy Son this day, to be born of a virgin.' The same words we use all the week after, as if Christ had been born anew every day in the week. If it be said, this is but a trifle, the more loath I am to subscribe, that it is according to the word of God.—In one of the prayers, we say, ‘Grant us that, which, for our unworthiness, we dare not ask.” These words cannot be excused. They fight. directly against our faith. We must come boldly to the throne of grace, and doubt not of obtaining mercy, in whatever God has promised. These and such other things, thus standing in the prayer book, make many fearful of subscribing, that every part of it is according to the word of God.” “4. That, as the public preaching of the word, in the church of England, is sound and sincere; so the public order, in the ministration of the sacraments, is consonant to. the word of God.” Upon this he observes, “How can I tell, that all preaching in England is sound and sincere, when I hear not all preachers ? And sometimes those whom I do hear, preach neither soundly, nor sincerely: but this is the fault of man. —And that the public order, in the ministration of the sacraments, is according to God's word, I cannot simply confess. There is an order how women may baptize. All reformed churches have condemned this, and how can I allow it? All learned men write against the questions and crossings in baptism; and why should I, with my hand, condemn all their doings? The wafer cake in many churches, is thought intolerable ; and our own act of parliament for avoiding superstition, hath appointed other bread: what then if I should dislike it 2 “Another reason why I cannot subscribe both to this article and the first, is the one contradicting the other. In the first I must subscribe to all the homilies: in this, to all the ceremonies; and yet our homilies condemn many of our ceremonies. In the homilies it is said, “That the costly and manifold furniture of vestments lately used in the church, is Jewish, and maketh us the more willingly, in such apparel to become Jewish.” If I subscribe to this, how can I subscribe to the ceremonies used in cathedral churches, where the priests, deacon, and subdeacon, are in copes and vestments In the homilies, it is said, ‘That piping, singing, chanting, playing on organs, &c. greatly displease God, and filthily defile his holy temple.” If I must subscribe to this, then I must not subscribe to the contrary, even that all our ceremonies are good, and acording to the word of God. How can I say, that our doctrine, our sacraments, our prayers, our ceremonies, our orders, even that all is according to the word of God? A person having a conscience, or no conscience, must needs be tried here: and blessed is he that is not offended. See, I beseech you, what wrong I sustain, if I be urged to this subscription. While any law bound me to wear the cap and surplice, I wore both. When I was at liberty, surely I would not wear them for devotion. I never persuaded any to refuse them, nor am I charged with ever preaching against them. Thus, according to my promise, I have set down how far I would yield in these articles which your worship sent me. If I seem curious, or to stand upon little points, conscience, it should be remembered, is very tender, and will not yield contrary to its persuasion of the truth. I have sent you these articles, subscribed with mine own hand, and sealed with my heart, even in the presence of God; whom I humbly beseech, for Christ's sake, to give peace unto his church, that her ministers may rejoice, and her subjects be glad. i conclude, desiring God to make you rich in all grace, to his honour and glory. December 16, 1573.” Here we see the evil of requiring subscription to articles and creeds of human composition. To yield in such a case as this, would rack the conscience of every honest man. - Twenty other articles were, about the same time, presented to Mr. Deering in the star-chamber; to each of which, he gave a particular answer. These articles were designed, says Mr. Strype, to make exact inquiry into his principles and opinions, concerning the church, its usages, practices, and clergy, and the queen's authority; and he might, with truth, have added, that it assumed all the appearance of a tyrannical and cruel inquisition. ... Mr. Deering, in the preface to his answers to these articles, thus expressed himself:-‘‘I most humbly beseech your honours, to remember my former protestation, that I have never spoken against the book of prayers; and in my book in print, I have spoken openly for the allowance of it. I resort to common prayers; and sometimes, being requested, I say the prayers as prescribed. If I be now urged to speak what I think, as before an inquisition, there being no law of God requiring me to accuse myself, I beseech your honours, let my answer witness my humble duty and obedience, rather than be prejudicial and hurtful to me. This I most humbly crave; and under the persuasion of your favour, I will answer boldly, as I am required.” These articles, which so much discover the spirit of the times, and the answers which Mr. Deering presented to the court, though at some length, we here present to the curious and inquisitive reader. They were the following: Article 1. Is the book entitled “ The Book of Common Service,” allowed by public authority in this realm, to be allowed in the church of God, by God's word, or not Answer. The similitude of this book, to that form of prayer used by the papists, leads me to think it declineth from those laws, Deut. vii. 25., xii. 30., xviii. 9. Also, its great inconvenience in encouraging unlearned and indolent ministers to conclude, that the mere reading of the service is sufficient. These are some of the reasons why I cannot subscribe, that all the book is allowable by the word of God. Some other things, the bishops themselves confess to be faulty. 2. Are the articles set down by the clergy in Synod, and allowed by public authority, according to God's word, Or not ? . . I confess, as I am persuaded, that the articles of faith are good. I think the same of the articles about traditions, an oath before a judge, the civil magistrate, the doctrine of the homilies, &c. But that which relates to the consecration of archbishops and bishops, I can by no means confess as godly, and according to the word of God. 3. Are we tied in all things, by God's word, to the order and usage of the apostles and primitive church, or not ? No doubt we are bound to whatsoever was the usual order of the apostles. When St. Paul had said to Timothy, “Thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose,” &c. &c. he adds, continue in the things which thou hast learned. And , he chargeth the Philippians, Those things which ye have both learned and received, and heard and seen in me, do. 4. Is there any right ministry, or ecclesiastical govern ment, at this time, in the church of England, or not : If, by right, you mean such a calling as the word of God requireth: as, 1 Tim. iii. 2., Acts i. 23., xiv. 23, 1 Tim. iv. 14, I am sure you will confess it is not right. If you mean a right ministration of the doctrine and sacraments, I humbly confess, that no man ought to separate himself from the church. Concerning government, see the seventh article. 5. May nothing be in the church, either concerning cere

* Parte of a Register, p. 81–85.

[ocr errors]
« 上一頁繼續 »