Others were summoned, from distant parts of the kingdom, to appear at St. Paul’s, or at Lambeth. [68b] The inconvenience and expense of travelling at that period rendered their case particularly grievous. They had to answer, upon oath, a string of interrogatories with which they were previously unacquainted, and which could not fail to convict the puritan clergyman on his own testimony. [68c] Too conscientious to conform in all points, he scorned to avert the sword of persecution by the aid of falsehood. If he would have sacrificed his convictions at the shrine of bigotry, and have signed his name where his reason refused assent, he might have revelled in the emoluments of ecclesiastical preferment, although he were
“a sot, or dunce,
Lascivious, headstrong, or all these at once.”
But it was enough to extort from him an admission that he had, in any one instance, deviated in the slightest particular from the ceremonies; or that he had said or written, publicly or privately, aught against the Book of Common Prayer, or any thing therein contained, as being unscriptural or inconvenient;—and although he had evinced the laborious zeal of Paul, displayed the eloquence of Apollos, and exemplified the holy benevolence of John, still—he was a nonconformist—he was cast out.
Among those who were suspended for nonconformity at Archbishop Whitgift’s first visitation, was William Fleming, rector of Beccles.
The information which has been preserved respecting him leads to the conviction that he was a useful and an exemplary man, to a considerable extent influential and beloved; and respected even by his enemies. He had enemies. They who congratulate themselves on having none, have, frequently, cause to inquire whether they are discharging the duties incumbent upon them as members of society, with that high regard to principle which characterized the puritans, and is as remote from the meanness of indecision as from the rancour of mere party zeal.
During Mr. Fleming’s ministry in Beccles, a warm and long continued dispute, occurred between the first grantees from the crown of the tract of marshes already mentioned, [70a] and some of the inhabitants. The grant had been accompanied by extensive powers, which were employed with little moderation. This was naturally a source of dissatisfaction, and led to animosities which ended in a surrender of the property in question to the queen. [70b] The incorporating of the “portreeve, surveyors, and commonalty of the Fen of Beccles,” was the result; an arrangement which met with considerable opposition, from a person named Harsault and others. The plan, however, was probably approved by the more judicious inhabitants, as calculated, in the then existing state of things, to preclude the evils of either a narrower or a broader system of municipal government. Mr. Fleming appears to have lent his influence in support of the new charter.
A commission was issued to Sir Robert Wingfield and others, to attempt an arrangement of these differences. The commissioners met accordingly, at Beccles, and made a return, in which, after expressing their persuasion that the government of the town was likely to proceed in peace, they add: “And furder, whereas by vertue of the same yor ho: letters we are directed to th’ examynac’on of certeyn trobles and molestac’ons brought upon one Mr. Flemyng, the minister there; we fynde the man to be of verie good desert bothe concerning life and doctryne, and to have p’fited the peple there verie greatly, yet had he ben much trobled by some sorrie instruments issueing from the same spring as we take it; for having hym and them before us, they alledged no cause of offence, but rather iustified the man, and reconciled themselves to hym, except one Harsault, whome we fownde factious, and a man utterlie unworthye of eny good allowance or regarde emongst his honest neighbors.” [72a]
There was, however, one offence of which Mr. Fleming was found guilty. He did not conform in all points to the prescribed ritual. Urged in extenuation of this, the pains of a doubting or the convictions of a settled judgment, the testimony of a good life and the profession of sound doctrine, the attachment of his flock and the usefulness of his ministry—were, in the estimation of the intolerant ecclesiastics, of no value. He was summoned to London [72b] to undergo the mockery of an examination, and to sustain the costs of his journey, and the ultimate loss of his preferment.
Mr. Fleming refused to subscribe Whitgift’s Articles; and the discipline of the ecclesiastical courts having been employed in vain in his correction, the bishop, on the 23rd of July, 1584, deprived him of his living. [72c] He continued to reside in Beccles, probably exercising privately the most essential branches of a minister’s duty, if not, after a time, officiating in the parish church through the connivance of those who were conscious of his value. [74a] He died in 1613; and his interment, on the 8th of September in that year, is recorded in the parochial register in terms which prove that time had not sullied the reputation which persecution had failed to injure, and that when the grave had closed over his remains, he was remembered as the benefactor of his neighbours, and honoured as the founder of a new order of christian ministers among them. The entry, in the oldest register book now preserved, stands thus:
“Bury: Master William Fleming, our minister and faythfull teacher, the glory of our towne, & father of ye ministery round about us.” [74b]