194 LIVES OF THE PURITANS. 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 tohis 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 fromyour wicked servants, your popish friends, and your adulterous woman. Alas ! my lord, your high calling hath so bridled mywords, that I could not speak to you as I would : mywords were too soft to heal so old a disease."+ 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 ac- quainted with the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, with whom he often interceded, in behalf ofthe sufferingnonconformists.t While he was lecturer of St. Paul's, hewas 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 hewas brought under examination for delivering certain things offensive to the ruling powers, he utterly denied that he had said anysuch thing, anddeclared 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 excel- lent a preacher as he is denominated, who had so large a Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 150. + MS. Chronology, vol. i. p. 262. (5,) Strype's Aut415, p. 190. § Ibid. p. 269.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=