AN ACCOUNT OF Mr. Whiston's PROSECUTION at, AND BANISHMENT from, THE University of CAMBRIDGE.

First Printed at the End of the Historical Pre­face, A.D. MDCCXI. And now Reprinted on Occasion of Dr. Bentley's late Prosecution, Suspension, and Deprivation from all his Degrees, Rights, and Titles in the said UNIVERSITY.

With an APPENDIX: Containing Mr. Whiston's farther Account; and particularly his Petition to the Vice-Chancellor and Heads of Colleges, after they had chosen a New Professor: Never before Printed.

Judge not according to the Appearance, but judge Righ­teous Judgment. Joh. vii. 24.

LONDON: Printed for the AUTHOR; And are to be Sold by J. Roberts, near the Oxford-Arms in Warwick-Lane. 1718. Price 6d.

An ACCOUNT of Mr. Whiston's Prosecution at, and Banishment from the University of Cam­bridge.

UPON Sunday, Octob. 22. 1710. (on which Day a Sermon in Defence of the Athanasian Creed was preach'd by Mr. Hughes of Jesus--College, at St. Mary's;) I was summon'd by Mr. At­wood of Pembroke, Deputy-Beadle, to appear before the Vice-Chancellor the next Day, at Three a Clock in the Afternoon. Accordingly, I was that Day (about Four a Clock) conducted in­to an Upper-Room of the Vice-Chancellor's Lodge; and appeared before Dr. Roderick, Provost of King's-College, the Vice-Chancellor; Sir John Ellis, Knight, Master of Caius-College; Dr. James, Master of Queen's, Regius Professor of Divinity; Dr. Blithe, Master of Clare-Hall; Dr. Balderston, Master of E­manuel; Dr. Covel, Master of Christ's; Dr. Richard­son, Master of Peter-House; Dr. Ashton, Master of Jesus; Dr. Fisher, Master of Sidney; and Dr. Lany, Master of Pembroke: The University-Register, Mr. Grove of St. John's, being there also. Where Note, That the Lord Bishop of Chester, Master of Catherine-Hall, [Page 2] tho' newly come to Town, never appear'd with the Heads at any of their Meetings about me; but, publickly at least, kept himself wholly unconcern'd in the Matter.

I came to the Vice-Chancellor's Lodge with a Friend, whose Presence and Assistance I desir'd. But he was not permitted to go up Stairs: So I was all alone be­fore my Judges. I was then immediately shewed a Book by Mr. Vice-Chancellor, and ask'd whether I would look upon it, and own it to be mine? Per­ceiving that it was the Sermons and Essays upon seve­ral Subjects, I reply'd, that I would not answer any such Questions; nor would I so much as look upon the Book: Affirming, that all which I had to say, was in a written Paper in my Hands. Neither would I make any other Answer; tho' then, and all along, many ensnaring Questions were put to me. But when I still persisted in the same Answers, the Vice-Chan­cellor, who (with the rest) seem'd much surpriz'd at this cautious Conduct of mine, was oblig'd to call for other Evidence. Accordingly Mr. Crownfield, our Printer, (who had been terrify'd, and threaten'd with being turn'd out of his Place by some of the Heads, for barely permitting his Boy to carry the Proposals for Printing my Primitive Christianity Reviv'd to them) was sent for, and depos'd so much as a­mounted to probable Evidence, That I had sent the small Essay upon the Epistles of Ignatius, to be di­spers'd in Cambridge; and that I had sent a Letter to the Vice-Chancellor, [which is set down p. 84, &c. of my Historical Preface:] and to plain Proof, That I de­sir'd his Boy might carry the fore-mention'd Propo­sals to the several Heads of Colleges the Tuesday be­fore; but could say nothing to the Sermons and Essays on several Subjects. The Regius Professor particularly wonder'd that I would not clear Mr. Crownfield, by owning the sending the Proposals; and intimated, That he suppos'd the Vice-Chancellor would also have [Page 3] an Order from the Chancery, to oblige Mr. Benjamin Tooke the Bookseller to come from London, to prove the Sermons and Essays upon me, and to inform them how they came to Cambridge. I said that it was not yet Time to say all I intended: But that when I made my proper Answer, it would be Time enough to think of such Things. That I had been accustom'd to Rea­son, Arguments, and Testimonies, but not to Law: So I had taken Advice as to my Answers, and observ'd the same Advice all along: Which he own'd it was reasonable for me to do, as one that he believ'd had never before been us'd to such legal Proceedings. He also took notice of an Expression of mine in my Let­ter to the Vice-Chancellor, before-mention'd, as if I were apprehensive of somewhat like Persecution that might befal me: And he added, that he durst say, No Body there had any Intention to persecute me. About this Time it was that the Depositions of Mr. Hughes and Mr. Townsend of Jesus; of Mr. Amyas and Mr. Macro of Caius; and of Mr. Thackham of King's; (which were in Part, if not wholly obtain'd by the Vice-Chancellor's Procurement, not by the voluntary Appearance of the Parties themselves) were openly read to me, as they here follow, Verba­tim.

Certificates, afterward depos'd upon Oath.

I well remember, that hearing Mr. Whiston one Sunday in the Afternoon, at the Parish-Church of St. Clements, in the Town of Cambridge, explaining the First Article of the Apostles Creed; Having establish­ed the Unity of the Godhead by several proper Arguments, he asserted, There was but One God, and that God the Father only was that One God; That the Father was in all the Ancient and Primi­tive Creeds mentioned to be the Only God; That the Son was indeed exalted above all Creatures, and made a Partaker of many Divine Excellencies and [Page 4] Perfections, and as such He was to be worshipp'd with a Sort or Degree of Divine Worship. This is the Substance of what I heard the said Mr. Whiston deliver in that Lecture. There were several other very black and aggravating Expressions, which in so long a Space of Time have slipp'd my Memory. But as to the Truth of this, I am ready and willing to give my Oath.

JOHN HUGHES.

In the Year 1708. in the Parish Church of St. Cle­ment's in Cambridge, I heard Mr. Whiston in one of his Carechetical Lectures upon the Apostles Creed, de­liver these Words, or Words to this Effect; viz, As to the Dignity of our Saviour's Person's, though he be a Being of vastly great and immense Perfections, yet I cannot say, as some do, that he is equal to God the Father: Because I should contradict my Blessed Saviour himself, who says expresly, My Father is grea­ter than I. Neither can I assert, that he is Omnisci­ent; for if I should, I should contradict my Blessed Saviour himself, who says, He knew not of the Day of Judgment. Of that Day and Hour knoweth no Man, no not the Angels which are in Heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Neither can I assert, that he is Essen­tially Good; For then also I should contradict my Blessed Lord and Saviour himself, who, to a certain Ruler that called him Good Master, said, Why callest thou me Good? None is Good, save One, that is God.

Witness my Hand, SA. TOWNSEND.

The Two First Articles mentioned by Mr. Towns­end I do likewise attest. To which Mr. Whiston at the same Time added, That all the Old Books of our Re­ligion witnessed the same; or Words to that Effect.

J. AMYAS.

I do Declare that at the same Place and Time, I heard Mr. Whiston speak those Words all above-men­tion'd by Mr. Townsend, or Words to that Effect.

Witness my Hand, THO. MACRO.

Memorand. That at a Meeting of the Ministers concerning the Charity-Schools, at the Old Coffee-House in Cambridge, about Michaelmas last was Twelvemonth, Mr. Townsend making a Motion for the Removal of Mr. Whiston from the Stewardship, by reason of Heretical Tenets interspers'd in his Cate­chetical Lectures, Mr. Whiston Enquir'd, What Te­nets they might be? I reply'd, The Denial of the Divinity of the Son. He said, He own'd him as God. I ask'd, Whether as God ab aeterno? He answered, No: Nor had any of the Fathers for the first Three Centuries.

At another Meeting about a Quarter of a Year since, on the Occasion, and at the Place above-menti­oned, Mr. Whiston offered a Paper hereunto annexed, in Vindication of his Alteration of the Doxologies subjoined to Dr. Brady's Translation of the Psalms; a Part whereof he was authoriz'd to Print, for the Use of the Charity-Schools. He having asserted his Alte­ration to be such as we might all join in, (as in the Paper is specified) I ask'd him whether he could not join with us in this,To Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, One God, whom we Adore.He reply'd, He would be a Turk as soon

These several Depositions I am ready to confirm by Oath.
W. THACKHAM.

N.B. The Paper referr'd to in this last Deposi­tion is that inserted toward the End of my Historical [Page 6] Preface. And observe, that the last vehement Expressi­on of mine, That I would be a Turk assoon, was, to the best of my Remembrance, followed by these Words, or others to the same Effect, which are omitted by Mr. Thackham; viz. That is a rash Expression: But I mean, that this Language is so entirely contrary to the Nature of the Christian Religion, that I cannot go into it for any Consideration whatsoever.

Some Time after these Depositions were read, I de­sired to know when it was a proper Time to give in my Answer: Which when it was intimated, I publickly read this Paper, and delivered it in as follows, Verba­tim.

Mr. Vice-Chancellor,

Saving to my self all future Legal Advantages, either as to the Jurisdiction of this Consistory, to the Form of Proceedings therein, or to any other Matters whatsoever; I do now desire that I may have a true Copy of the Statute upon which I am charg'd, and of the Articles and Depositions given me. I do also desire a competent Time may be allow'd me for making my Defence; which is never de­ny'd in Cases of this Nature: And that I may have Leave, though it be Term-Time, to go to London for some Weeks, where those my Papers are out of which my Defence is in good Part to be made: Especially since I intend that that Defence shall be very full and particular, and drawn up by the best Advice. And I cannot but beg and hope that you will all hear and consider what I shall have hereaf­ter to offer in my Answer with that Justice, Equi­ty and Candor, which the Laws of Nature, of the Gospel, and of the Land require; and particular­ly in so important a Cause, concerning the True Christian Faith and Practice; which your selves would expect to be heard with in the like Case; and which the Certainty of all our Appearing before [Page 7] Christ's own Tribunal at the Great Day does demand from you.

WILL. WHISTON.

Here follows also a true Copy of the 45th Statute of the University, upon which all these Proceedings were grounded.

CAP. XLV. De Concionibus.

Nullus Concionator sit, vel aliquam concionem pro gra­du suo habeat, nisi ad minimum Diaconus sit. Octavo Maij ad Henrici VII. commendationem sacra concio sit, quam Regius in Theologia Professor faciet. Pridie unius­cu [...]usque Termini concio Latina hora nona antemeridiana in Ecclesia Beatae Mariae habeatur. Primo Termino anni concionabitur Regius Professor in Theologia: Secundo Pro­fessor Dominae Margaretae: Tertio Concionator Academiae. Unoquoque die dominico de anno in annum conciones in A­cademiae Templo fiant. Ordo itidem Collegiorum in con­cionibus servabitur quem in disputationibus praescripsimus, incipiendo à senioribus qui concionatores sunt in unaquaque combinatione, & sic progrediendo ad juniores. Qui cur­sum suum in concionando omiserit viginti solidis mulcta­bitur. Collegia pro singulis concionibus solvent Bedellis quatuor denarios; nisi quis pro gradu concionatur. Con­cionatores autem in concione sua utentur caputio sitato Nonregentis, sub poena sex solidorum, & octo de [...] [...]orum, quoties deliquerint. Prohibemus ne quisquam in concione aliqua, in loco communi tractando, in Lectionibus publi­cis, seu aliter publicè infra Universitatem nostram quic­quam doceat, tractet, vel defendat contra religionem, seu ejusdem aliquam partem in regno nostro publica autoritate receptam & stabilitam, aut contra aliquem statum, auto­ritatem, dignitatem, seu gradam vel ecclesiasticum vel civilem hujus regni nostri Angliae, vel Hiberniae. Qui contra fecerit errorem vel temeritatem suam Cancellarij [Page 8] jussu, cum assensu majoris partis Praefectorum Collegiorum revocabit, & publice fatebitur. Quod si recusaverit, aut non humiliter so modo quo praescribitur perfecerit, eadem art [...]tate à Collegio suo perpetuo excludetur, & Universi­tate exulabit.

But to go on with my Narrative.

After I had deliver'd my Paper, desiring Copies of the Statute, and of the Depositions, and competent Time for my Answer; the former Parts were rea­dily granted me, but the Third much debated. I desired six Weeks Time, as not too long in a Mat­ter of such great Importance; and gave particular Reasons for it. I also assured them, that the main of that Answer would not be what they so much, and often, and earnestly fear'd and caution'd against, the producing my Original Testimonies in way of Justification of my Opinions; but would principally turn on those very Two Heads Mr. Vice-Chancellor propos'd as proper for it; viz. The shewing that my Doctrines were either not truly and compleatly re­presented, or were not so contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England as the Vice-Chancellor and some others imagin'd. I was answer'd, That this Consistory-Court used not to allow so long Time as those at Westminster; and thev were by no means willing to allow any considerable Time. However, the Master of Jesus was for a competent Time, that I might send for my Papers from London. And some­body hinted, as if a Week was more usually the Time afforded in this Consistory. The Master of Pe­terhouse, tho' he did not own the Necessity of a very long Time, yet confess'd that I must have Time al­low'd me for my Answer. Accordingly I fully ex­pected such Allowance. And when the Master of Peterhouse left them, it seems, a Week's Time was in­tended for that Answer. But all this notwithstanding, when I was finally call'd in, that Master being gone, [Page 9] I heard not a Syllable more about it; but was im­mediately order'd to appear again on Wednesday, to receive the main Charge, (of which presently;) and for other farther Proceedings. And when I once spake of going to London for Advice or Assistance, the Master of Emanuel said, It was fit I should go live elsewhere, and remove from Cambridge, since I had there perverted some already. The Masters of Sidney and Pembroke not only seem'd to grudge the least Delay for my Answer, but would needs tell me what an Answer I was to make. I reply'd, that I should not ask their Advice for the making that An­swer, but use my own Judgment. Nay, when the Master of Jesus plainly own'd the Reasonableness of some considerable Time for my Answer, the Master of Pembroke seem'd very angry at him for it. Yet when I once, with some Vehemence, said, ‘"There has somewhat been alledg'd here, which I am sur­priz'd to find so many Clergymen to say;"’ m [...]aning their Assertion, That the Three Persons collectively taken, were the One God of the Christian Religion, and not God the Father; contrary to all manner of Sacred and Primitive Doctrine and Language; no Notice was taken of it at all. But to go on with the main Narrative. Upon a Second Summons, I ap­pear'd again on Wednesday, Octob. 25th. But now in a lower Parlour of the same Lodge, none being pre­sent but my Judges, as before. Dr. Covel and Dr. Richardson being now absent; and Dr. Gower, Master of St. John's, the Lady Margarets's Professor, present in their Room. When I appear d, expecting the al­lowance of Time, not only for my main Answer, but for the clearing the Exceptions I had to make to their Evidence and Proceedings; instead thereof, I had only the sore-mentioned Paper of the main Charge given me, and a solemn Admonition therewith to leave my Errors, and return to the Doctrine of the Church of England, or else on Monday they would [Page 10] proceed to execute the Statute upon me. Only I was allowed to read and deliver in what I had prepared as an Answer so far; or as my Complaints of, and Ex­ceptions against their Proceedings. These Two Pa­pers, the first deliver'd to me, and the second by me, here follow, verbatim.

Positions published and spread about in the University of Cambridge, by Mr. Will. Whiston, contra Reli­gionem, &c. Stat. Acad. 45.

Vid. Postscript thro' out. Vid. Sermons and Es­says, &c. p. 213. l. 19, to 23. p. 215. l. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. l. 9, 10, 11. 26 to 34. Mr. Thackham's De­pos. Mr. Hughes Depos. Mr. Townsend, Mr. Ma­cro, and Mr. Amyas's De­positions Vid. Serm. and Essays, p. 276. l. 21, to p. 278. l. 6. (1) — That the Father alone is the One God of the Christian Religion, in oppositi­on to the Three Divine Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, being the One God of the Chri­stian Religion.

This Position is contrary to the 1, 2, and 5th of the 39 Ar­ticles, and to the Nicene and A­thanasian Creeds.

2 — That the Creed commonly call'd the Creed of St. Athanasius is a gross and Antichristian Innovation and Corruption of the Primitive Purity and Simplicity of the Christian Faith among us.

This Position is contrary to the Rubrick before the said Creed, and the 8th Article.

Vid. Serm and Es­says, &c. Note (1) p. 296. 3 — That the Canon of the Scripture, the Rule and Guide of a Christian's Faith and Practice, is that contain'd in the last of the Ecclesiasti­cal Canons, ordinarily stil'd Apostolical: Which all along appears to have been the Standard of the Primi­tive Church in this matter. I mean as including all the Books we now own for Canonical; and also the Two Epistles of St. Clement, and the Constitutions of [Page 11] the Apostles by St. Clement: To which the Pastor of Hermas is to be added; as well as we have already added the Apocalypse of St. John.

Proposals, &c. 1 Side Vol. III. l. 10. — That the Doctrine of the Apostles appears to be a Sacred Book of the New Testament, long lost to the Christian Church.

These Two Positions are con­trary to the Sixth of the 39 Articles.

Proposals, first Side Vol. II. Mr. Whiston undertakes to prove clearly, that the Aposto­lical Constitutions are the most Sacred Part of the Canonical Scriptures of the New Testament.

Vid. Postscript, p. 47. l. ult. Mr. Whiston asserts, that the Doxology, current in all these latter Ages, Vid. Thackham his De­position. Glory be to the Fa­ther, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, was not the true Christian Doxology.

This Position is against the Doxology receiv'd and establish'd in the publick Liturgy.

This Paper was deliver'd to Mr. Whiston the Day and Year above-written by Mr. Vice-Chancellor's Order.
Witness my Hand, Robert Grove.

My Answer: Or Complaints of, and Exceptions to these Proceedings; deliver'd in the same Day.

Mr. Vice-Chancellor,

The Accusation which now lies against me in this Place gives me but too much Occasion both for Surprize and Complaint. For truly, I cannot but be surpriz'd, that after all my Care and Concern to de­mean [Page 12] my self honestly and inoffensively both before God and Men, and to discharge my several Duties as a Man, a Christian, a Clergyman, and a Professor of the Mathematicks in this University; after an uncommon Search after, and Zeal for the pure, ori­ginal, uncorrupt Doctrines and Duties of Christiani­ty, as they appear in the Sacred Books of the Old and New Testament, and in all the most Ancient and Primitive Fathers; and yet, as far as possible, with a constant and regular Compliance with the Rules and Orders of the Church of England; after my earnest Endeavours to recover and retrieve seve­ral of the Original Sacred Books of our Religion, long lost, or despis'd, or neglected in these latter Ages, at least in these Western Parts of Christendom; and after such great Success in those and my other Enquiries, that of all the many Learned Persons who have perus'd my Papers, not any of them has undertaken to write an Answer to them: After all this, I say, I cannot but be surpriz'd, that without sending for any of those Papers, or at all examining them; and without allowing me any publick Con­ference and Disputation about the Notions contained in them; while every one else is permitted, if not encouraged to preach and dispute against me upon all Occasions, I am forced to stand here as an Of­fender, and a Criminal on Account of them. Nico­demus, tho' so timerous as to come to Jesus by Night only, yet ventured to say in the midst of the Rulers of the Jews, John VII. 50, 51. Doth our Law judge any Man before it hear him, and know what he doth? And certainly, 'tis not consistent with common Justice, with the Nature of the Christian Doctrine, nor with the Honour of this Learned Body, to censure or condemn either me or my Opinions, till upon a mature and solemn Examination it plain­ly appears, that those Opinions are not only false but groundless; and by Consequence, that I am [Page 13] grosly mistaken in them, and ought to retract them. And give me leave to say, that this Method of Con­ference and Examination is that which ought al­ways to be, and has ordinarily been used in such Cases. Nor has it, I suppose, been any where de­nied among those that call themselves Christians, but in the Popish Inquision it self. And this is cer­tainly the only way to influence reasonable Men in such Matters. And as to my self, I promise, that it shall influence me, even to perpetual Silence, and the burning my own Papers, if the contrary Do­ctrines can produce but one Tenth Part of that Evi­dence, that Original Evidence which I shall then al­lege for what I shall there defend. Nor will any other Method at all weigh with me as to my Faith or Practice. For I dare say you are all persuaded that I am not so insincere or fearful, as to retract or renounce any thing, which, upon full Examination, I am really persuaded to be either a Truth or a Du­ty of the Christian Religion, out of the Appre­hension of what any such Tribunal as this can inflict upon me. Permit me, Mr. Vice-Chancellor, to say farther, that this Way of Conference and Examina­tion is that very Method which is mark'd out by an Ancient and Famous Precedent, when this very Statute now before you was first us'd: I mean the Case of Professor Cartwright, in the Days of Queen Elizabeth; whom Archbishop Whitgift, the then Vice-Chancellor, and the University, would not proceed against till they had invited him to a Conference, and that in Writing, in order to his Conviction: But which he refused, and was thereupon censur'd and expell'd: As the Authentick Record, a Copy of which is hereunto annex'd, will testify. The Case is here quite otherwise. I am not only willing to accept of any such Invitation, but do here solemnly Invite the University to this Conference and Exami­nation. Nay, I Demand it, as the Right of the [Page 14] Sacred Truths of Christianity, and what this Learn­ed Body, cannot either in Equity, or Honour deny, that I be thus heard, and my Papers fairly and fully examin'd, before any farther Proceedings be had in this Matter. And to encourage your Acceptance of this Proposal, I do sincerely declare that I will have no regard therein to Victory or Triumph; but will alone seek for Truth, and genuine Christianity. For God is my Witness, that I am very unwilling to be in the least deceiv'd my self, or to deceive the Church of Christ: And that I am always very desirous of the Opportunity of improving and correcting my Notions and Papers, that so the least Syllable of the Truths of Christ Jesus may not receive any Diminution or Mis­representation by me, when my Papers come to be published.

But then, Mr. Vice-Chancellor, besides my Sur­prize at the several Things above-mentioned, with Re­lation to this Procedure, I think I have great Rea­son for Complaint on many Accounts also. Accord­ingly I must here take the Liberty to complain, That Matters have a long while been very unfairly and clancularly manag'd against me: That during the last Two Years and above half, wherein it has been known that I have been upon those Enquires whence the present Accusation is taken, No Vice-Chancellor, no publick Professor, not any one of those in Authority here, which are known to be the most disatisfy'd, have ever sent for me and my Papers, and discoursed me free­ly, or given me a friendly Caution about them. I think I have also Reason to complain, that so ma­ny and such improper Ways have been try'd to pro­cure some Censure upon me; as if I were such a publick Enemy, that all the Methods that could be thought of were to be used for my Destruction. Once a Grace of the Senate House was to be procur'd for my Expulsion, without my being heard at all. When [Page 15] that did not do, I have, as I hear, been threaten'd with the Ecclesiastical Court, and with the Assizes. Then Advice was taken, whether I could not with safety be legally convicted of Heresy, and so be ex­pell'd by Mr. Lucas's Statutes. And now a remote University Statute, not at all in its main and Ori­ginal Design, as I conceive, reaching my Case; and such an one as, if strain'd to the same Rigor as to others, might expel, I believe, much the greatest part of the University, is at last produc'd against me. This Statute is De Concionibus, concerning publick Sermons, and such like Publick Acts and Lectures be­fore the University. How can this Statute possibly reach me? since I never had the Honour to preach before the University in my Life. I never kept any Divini­ty Act, or oppos'd in the Divinity Schools, since I was admitted. My Publick Lectures have been all Mathematical; and being most of them printed, will shew how remote they have been from any things of this Nature. This Statute must therefore be strain­ed beyond all reasonable Construction e're it can af­fect me. I have indeed formerly had an Afternoon Lecture in the Town of Cambridge, by the Bishop's sole Permission, and upon his sole Salary. But 'tis the Opinion of the best Judges, that whatever I said there, can no way be us'd to my Prejudice in this Place. The Parish Churches, at least ordinarily, when none but the Inhabitants are suppos'd to be present, being certainly under no other Cognizance than of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of the Diocese. And accordingly, One Person of this University about a Year and a half ago did once make some Complaint to our Diocesan, for what happen'd in one of those Churches; who thereupon appointed us to appear before him at a certain Hour the next day: I came at the Hour appointed, and stay'd about an Hour, expecting my Accuser; but he did not come till the Bishop and my self were both gone: Which hindred [Page 16] any farther Proceedings. And sure I cannot be ac­cus'd both before the Bishop, and before this Consi­story for the same pretended Offences, in the same Parish Church. I do therefore insist upon it, that the true Extent of this Statute may be fully consider'd before any thing be done against me by virtue of it. As also I desire it may be consider'd, whether Words pretended to be spoken so long ago; especially where the Time is either not specify'd at all, or not nearer than that of a whole Year's space, can be admitted against me: And whether Books published at Lon­don, and private Discourses elsewhere, can come within the reach of this Statute; where the Offen­ces punishable by it must be committed not only infra Universitatem nostram, in a Place belonging to the University, but must be done publicè docendo, tractan­do, vel defendendo, in publick and solemn Sermons, Lectures, or Disputations before the same University. I do also complain, that the Chancellor of the Uni­versity has not, as I believe, been acquainted with this Matter; when the Statute says all the Proceed­ings upon it are to be Cancellarii jussa. And tho' in ordinary Affairs the Vice-Chancellor may have Autho­rity enough to act for the Chancellor, and may well enough exercise that Authority, yet certainly in a Case of so uncommon a Nature, and of such mighty Consequence; [the like whereto I will be bold to say never before came into this Consistory;] it was but reasonable that the Chancellor himself should be ac­quainted, and his Directions receiv'd, before any Proceedings should have been begun by the Univer­sity. I do also complain that the Accusations or De­positions against me relate generally to Things long since past and gone, without the pretence of any new Offences; unless the Civility of sending some inoffensive Proposals to any of you can be esteem'd of that Nature. I hope I may well call them inof­fensive, since they plainly are such, and will appear [Page 17] such to every Christian Reader that peruses them. I have also, I think, great Reason to complain that I am, as it were, by this Procedure prevented in my honest Design, recommended to me by a very learn­ed and pious Prelate of our own Church, and readily agreed to by me, of laying all my Papers before the Convocation, which is almost now ready to fit, for their Consideration and Correction. Sure the Uni­versity will never suppose, or believe, that the Convo­cation will censure without Examination; nor is the University to prejudge a Cause, which most properly belongs to the Cognizance and Judgment of the Con­vocation. I do also complain, that I have been so ex­ceeding privately conven'd, and particularly interro­gated; and not in the Consistory, before the Univer­sity; where all that desir'd might have been present, and I might have had such Assistance as Law and E­quity do allow. As if some Men's Hopes of op­pressing me, arose rather from the Prospect of the Terror I should be under in such Circumstances, and the unwary Answers I should thereupon make, than from the Strength of the Evidence, and the Noto­riety of the Offences I could be prov'd to be guilty of. I do, lastly, complain, that as I am inform'd, such a sort of Determination has been lately made about the Sense of that Statute whereby I am charg d, as might best reach my Case, before I have been any way heard, or any legal Advice has been taken con­cerning the true Extent and Meaning of it; contrary, I think, to the plain Rules of Justice and Equity in such a Case.

These, Mr. Vice Chancellor, are the principal Oc­casions of that Surprize and Complaint which I at first mention'd. Not that they all directly affect your selves; from whom I am willing to hope for no­thing but Fairness, Justice and Equity; but because they all belong to some Members of this University. And, for a Conclusion, give me leave to say, that [Page 18] these Matters are of such mighty Consequence, they are become so very publick, and the Fairness and Ne­cessity of a solemn Examination are so generally own'd by the Archbishops and Bishops, and the rest of those learned Men of all Parties who have peru­sed my Papers, that if the Proceeding in this Mat­ter here be with Haste, Precipitation, and Severity, those that act in it, will not only wound their own Consciences, commit an heinous Offence against God, and thereby expose themselves to severe Punishment from his Hand; but there will hereby be laid a lasting, an indelible Blot and Reproach upon the University; as undertaking rashly and violently to punish me, be­fore it appears that I am at all guilty of any Offence to deserve that Punishment: While at the same time I shall not only have the Comfort of an innocent Conscience for my Support, but shall also have the Expectation of speedy Relief and Redress from the known Justice and Equity of those who represent Her Sacred Majesty in Her Courts of Judicature; to which, in that Case, I shall be obliged immediately to appeal.

Saving therefore to my self the Liberty of making any other future Exceptions to these Proceedings a­gainst me, The principal ones that I make at present are these: I say,

(1.) That I am charged with breaking that 45th Statute, which I have been uncapable of breaking, because it only concerns such Publick University-Exer­cises as I have never perform'd.

(2.) That the Place where most of the Words are pretended to have been spoken, St. Clement's Church, is utterly out of the Jurisdiction of the University, and so no ways within this Statute.

(3.) That the want of the Specification of the Time, or the too loose Specification of it, renders most of the Depositions of no Value.

[Page 19] (4.) That Words charged at so great a Distance of Time, cannot be sworn to so particularly as is neces­sary to affect me.

(5.) That Words spoken in private Conversation, or at a Coffee-House, or [written] in a private Letter, can no way be within this Statute.

(6.) That no Books printed and published at Lon­don can be within this Statute.

(7.) That I ought to have been conven'd publickly in the Consistory, and Evidence fairly there pro­duced against me in an open Court; and not privately in a Chamber been ask'd many ensnaring Questions, with the Exclusion of even a single Friend, who was willing to have been there to assist and direct me.

(8.) That any prior Determination of the Sense of this Statute, before I have had Council allowed me, or legal Advice taken about its true Extent and Mean­ing, is of no Force at all against me.

And I desire and demand that I may have Time gi­ven me, and Council allow'd me to argue the Validity of these Exceptions.

WILL. WHISTON.

N.B. The Record herein referred to about Professor Cartwright, is taken out of Dr. Fuller's History of the University of Cambridge, Page 142. and runs thus: Ann. Reg. Eliz. 1 [...]. Ann. Dom. 157 [...]. March 18.

Whereas it is reported, that Master Cartwright, of­fering Disputations and Conference, touching the Assertions uttered by him, and subscribed with his Hand, and that he could not obtain his Re­quest therein; this is to Testify, that in the Presence of us, whose Names are here under­written, and in our hearing, the said Mr. Cartwright was offered Conference of divers; and namely of [Page 20] Mr. Doctor Whitgift, who offered, That if the said Mr. Cartwright would set down his Assertions in Writing, and his Reasons unto them, he would an­swer the same in Writing also; the which Master Cartwright refus'd to do. Further, the said Dr. Whitgift at such Time as Mr. Cartwright was depri­ved of his Lecture, did in our Presence ask the said Mr. Cartwright, whether he had both publickly, and privately divers Times offer'd the same Conference unto him, by writing, or not: To which Mr. Cart­wright answered, That he had been so offered, and that he refused the same. Moreover the said Mr. Cartwright did never offer any Disputation but upon these Conditions: viz. That he might know who should be his Adversaries, and who should be his Judges; meaning, such Judges as he himself could best like of. Neither was this Kind of Disputation deny'd unto him, but only he was required to ob­tain License of the Queen's Majesty or the Council, because his Assertions be repugnant to the State of the Commonwealth, which may not be called into Questi­on by publick Disputation without License of the Prince or his Highness's Council.

  • John Whitgift, Vice-Chancellor,
  • John Mey,
  • Henry Harvey,
  • Thomas B----
  • Andrew Pearne.
  • William Chadderton.
  • Edward Hawford.
  • Thomas F---.
[Note, Dr. Fuller says that this Instrument is Re­gistred in Cambridge.]

When I had read and delivered in this Second Pa­per, I expected some Answer thereto, and some legal Notice to have been taken of it. But all to no Pur­pose: The Torrent was too strong to be stopp'd by any such Methods. The Vice-Chancellor pretended, [Page 21] (without the least Regard to what I had said,) that they were agreed that the Positions charged upon me were both plainly contrary to the Churches Doctrine; and were sufficiently prov'd against me; and so they would proceed. I thereupon boldly de­sired to know, whether every one there present, (for they were then the least Number possible that could act in such a Case) had entirely agreed to both these Propositions? And particularly ask'd Sir John Ellis's Opinion. He answer'd, that he agreed that the Pa­per deliver'd to me contain'd Doctrines contrary to those of the Church of England: But whether they had sufficiently prov'd that those Doctrines were chargeable upon me, he did not determine, but left that to others. Yet did they proceed as if Sir John had equally agreed to both those Particulars; which 'tis certain he did not, and that he declared he did not: tho' he had hardly leave given him to finish that his Declaration. I was then very gravely and solemnly ad­monished again by the Vice-Chancellor to leave my Errors, and return to the Church of England, or else he let me know, that on Monday at Three a Clock, they would proceed to execute the Statute against me; without the least Intimation of allowing me so much as one Hours Time to answer the Charge, which not till now was properly delivered to me. As to my Desire of Conference and fair Examinati­on, the Vice-Chancellor said, that the Regius Profes­sor might take me to his Lodgings and discourse with me if he pleased; to which no Answer was re­turned by any Body. The Lady Margaret's Profes­sor also once upbraided me, as if I deny'd Things there which elsewhere I asserted; which he look'd on as no Argument of that Sincerity I pretended to. Up­on this I openly desir'd not to be misunderstood, but that I only requir'd Legal Proof for what was alledg­ed against me, without being ensnared by their Que­stions, and without affirming or denying any Thing [Page 22] my self about them. Whereupon he said no more of that Matter. And the Regius Professor, who un­derstood me so all along, did me the Justice to put that Matter right, and to explain in what Sense he suppos'd I did not now own or assert any of the Things charged upon me. To which I fully assent­ed; and so that Imputation came to nothing. The Margaret Professor farther told me, when I insisted on Examination before Censure, that I knew well e­nough, that when Hereticks arose, it was not usual to argue with them, but to quote some Canon of a Council which condemned them, and so to anathe­matize them immediately. I said to him; But sup­pose that what I said about the Apostolical Consti­tutions, &c. should at last prove to be true? He re­plied, If so, he would come and heartily beg my Pardon. The Master of Jesus thought Time might be allowed me for my Answer. But so ear­nest and vehement was the Vice-Chancellor in his Proceedings, that all such Motions came to nothing. The same Master of Jesus also ask'd me why I cal­led the Constitutions The Most Sacred Book of the New Testament? I answered, because they really were so, and were so esteemed in the first Ages. I also said to him, that they would repent their Severity to me: And that if he had been by, when Dr. Smal­ridge (who had read my Papers, and of whom I believed he had a very good Opinion) and my self lately discoursed upon these Matters, he would scarce have been against their Examination before they censured me on Account of them. Upon which he owned that he had himself also seen some of my Papers: Which I suppose was some Time ago, when Mr. Hughes, and Mr. Townsend of the same College had the Perusal of them: I mean those which con­cern the Trinity and Incarnation only. But find­ing the Master of Sidney exceeding hot against me, [Page 23] I said to him, that I believed he had not studied these Matters. He grew passionate, and said, That was my Impudence. I said, I meant particularly as to the Constitutions. He reply'd, that he had read them; but however that he knew my Assertions were con­trary to those of the Church of England; Which in­deed he all along confin'd himself to: insomuch that when on Monday the Vicechancellor had said, with some Moderation, that my Tenets were Erroneous and contrary to the Churches Doctrine, and that the [...] ­fore I ought to retract them; and I had reply'd, Let them be but once proved to be Erroneous, and I was most ready to retract them; the Master of Sidney, at whose Elbow I stood, told me, they did not mean Ec­roneous, but contrary to the Doctrine of the Church. Nay, when I said to them, Will you condemn or censure while none either will, or dare answer me? Some­body that was offended at that last Word, reply'd, dare? But without any farther Addition. And in­deed great Care was all along taken that the Truth or Falshood of my Doctrines should be wholly wav'd, and all set upon their Contrariety to those of the Church of England, without so much as a Pretence that any body would answer the Arguments and Tes­timonies which I had to produce for them. It was once urged, that my affirming the Constitutions and Doctrine of the Apostles to be Sacred Books of the New Testament, was contrary to the Sixth Article of our Church. I desir'd that Article might be read: which was done by the Master of Pembroke. I said there­upon, 'Tis plain that this Article owns the present Sacred Books, being all the Church then knew; and that had they known of more, they would have set them down also: but that 'tis not affirmed in that Article that there are no other than those, and so my Assertion is not contrary thereto. Yet did this pass as a clear Contradiction to it. And no wonder; when in the Paper given me from the Vicechancellor. the [Page 24] very Nicene Creed is it self quoted as condemning my calling God the Farher the One God of the Chris­tian Religion, while yet that Creed begins with a di­rect and solemn Affirmation of it; I believe in One God the Father, Almighty. After all, when the Vice­chancellor perceived that I began to draw some of the Heads into Arguing and Reasoning about these Matters, he took one of the Candles himself, and saying a few things to me about a Recantation, which I declar'd I could not make with a safe Con­science, he said, He pitied me, and then he fairly conducted me out of the Lodge. And so I took my leave: having before hinted to them, that I did not design to wait on them any more about these Mat­ters, but to leave them to do as they pleased therein. Which Resolution I kept till Monday accordingly. For when on Sunday I was again summon'd by Mr. Atwood, to appear the next Day at three a Clock, I made this Answer, That I saw no occasion for ap­pearing any more. However, for some Reasons, I afterward alter'd my Mind, and came, and appeared again on Monday, in a lower Room of the same Lodge, before the Heads, who were now Twelve in Number, whose Names will be set down presently. And upon Mr. Vicechancellor's enquiring of me, Whe­ther I came disposed to make a Retractation of those my Errors concerning which he had before Admonish'd me? Upon Leave given, I read the following Pa­per, as my Answer; and deliver'd it in as follows, verbatim.

Mr. Vicechancellor,

I did not think to have appeared to Day at all, because I understood that this Meeting was appoint­ed only for my Retractation; for which I have neither had any considerable Time, nor any proper Motives for Conviction afforded me; and so to be sure I cannot be disposed for any such thing. Nay, indeed [Page 25] I cannot allow that any Doctrines contrary to those of the Church of England, and within your Cogni­zance by the 45th Statute, have been Legally proved upon me. However, I have thought fit to appear ac­cording to the Summons giuen me Yesterday. What I have at present to alledge against these Proceedings, besides my former Exceptions, is, That the Advice for the Study of Divinity quoted against me, was writ­ten about February 1707/8, and that the Depositions as to what I said in St. Clement's Church, belong to the Year 1708, and that if I committed any Offences in either Case, they are fully and compleatly forgi­ven by the last Act of Her Majesty's most Gracious, General, and Free Pardon: Which therefore I do here Plead, in Bar to all farther Proceedings. And I do think the Molestation already given me, is Pe­nal by that Act. As to Part of Mr. Thackham's De­position, which may seem to be a little later than that Act, it is not at all charged upon me in the Paper deliver'd to me as the whole Charge against me; and so is of no force at all. And as to the remaining Charges, that from the other Part of Mr. Thackham's Deposition, is only that I would not use a Doxology which our Church, I think, never uses, nor enjoins; and which stands on the alone Footing of Dr. Brady and Mr. Tate, or such-like private Persons. And the other, concerning the stiling God the Father the One and Only God, 'tis so expresly the Language of our Church in the Nicene Creed, and in the Collect for the 18th Sunday after Trinity, that I am surprized at its being in this manner alledged against me. But since you have given no time for the Examination of my Legal Exceptions, nor for my own Answer, I publickly Protest against your Proceedings; and de­sire that my Protestation may be entred into the Re­cords of the University.

WILL. WHISTON.

[Page 26] Assoon as I had delivered this Paper, and had owned to the Vicechancellor that it contained all that I had to say at present, I took my Leave. Whereupon, the Vicechancellor and the Heads soon came to a Resolution to Banish or Expel me; as the following Publick Act will inform the Reader: A true Copy of which shall be here set down.

Whereas it hath been proved before us, That Wil­liam Whiston, Master of Arts, Mathematick Profes­sor of this University, hath asserted and spread about in Cambridge, since the 19th Day of April, 1709. di­vers Tenets against Religion, receiv'd and establish'd by Publick Authority in this Realm, contrary to the Forty Fifth Statute of this University; And whereas the said William Whiston being required and exhorted by Mr. Vicechancellor, to confess and retract his Er­ror and Temerity in fo doing, did refuse to make any such Confession and Retractation; It is therefore agreed and resolved by Us, the Vicechancellor, and Heads of Colleges, whose Names are here under­written, that the said William Whiston hath incurred the Penalty of the foresaid Statute, and that he be Banished from this University, according to the Te­nour of the same. C. Roderick, Vicechancellor; Jo. Ellys, Humf. Gower, Hen. James, S. Blithe, Joh. Covel, Jo. Balderston, Gabr. Quadring, Tho. Richardson, Ch. Ashton, Bardsey Fisher, Edw. Lany. Unde venerabilis vir Dr. Roderick, Dominus Procancellarius, assidentibus & consentientibus Johanne Ellys Milite, Doctore Gower, Do­ctore James, Doctore Blithe, Doctore Covel, Doctore Bal­derston, Doctore Qnadring, Doctore Richardson, Doctore [Page 27] Ashton, Doctore Fisher, Doctore Lany, Collegiorum Prae­fectis, sententiam ferendo decrevit, declaravit, & pronun­ciavit prout sequitur. In the Name of God, Amen. I Charles Roderick, Vicechancellor of this University, do decree, declare, and pronounce, that Mr. William Whiston, Mathematick Professor of this University, having asserted and spread abroad divers Tenets con­trary to Religion receiv'd and establish'd by Publick Authority in this Realm, hath incurred the Penalty of the Statute, and that he is Banished from this University.

Lata fuit hujusmodi sententia per dictum Dominum Procancellarium, praesente me Roberto Grove, Not. Pub. & Almae Universitatis praedictae Registrario.

Now the Reader is here to Observe, that since all the Depositions concerning St. Clement's Church are here given up, as being long before the 19th of A­pril, 1709. the Date for the Act of Pardon: Since the Passages quoted out of the Advice for the Study of Divinity, were written still earlier; and there is no Pretence of the least Evidence that I any way pub­lish'd it in Cambridge; and since one Part of Mr. Thackham's Evidence is made no use of at all in this Matter, 'Tis plain that this Banishment or Expulsion is solely grounded on these Three Things. (1.) My affirming with our Saviour, St. Paul, the Nicene, and all the Original Creeds, and most ancient Fathers, that the One and Only God of the Chri­stians, is God the Father, John XVII. 3. 1 Cor. VIII. 6. (2.) My Asserting an un­doubted Matter of Fact, that the Original Christian Doxology was not the Common One, but Glory be to the Father, through the Son, or, and the Son, in the Ho­ly Ghost, (3.) My Proposing to prove that the Con­stitutions and Doctrine of the Apostles, are Sacred Books of the New Testament; and the former of them, the most Sacred of the Canonical Books: Which in [Page 28] time will appear to be undoubtedly true also. And all this is done without the least Offer at any Exami­nation into the Truth or Falshood of the same Asser­tions, and so without knowing whether the whole Proceeding be not directly Fighting against God, and Opposing and Persecuting the Gospel and Religion of Christ Jesus. And if it prove so at last, the Authors had need to think of that timely Repentance and Re­traction, which they requir'd at my Hands: Lest their present Authority, and Pretence of an University Statute, should be too little to excuse them at the Day of Judgment.

But who should be the secret Movers, or what should be the secret Reasons why, after so long a Forbearance, the Vicechancellor and the Heads should all on a sudden, in this violent manner, re­solve to Censure and Expel me, is too deep a Myste­ry for me authentickly to dive into; and so I must leave it to another Tribunal. For certainly it could not be the Vicechancellor's own Motion originally; since he had forborn me all along, and was now in a manner out of his Office, and was ever remarkable for Caution and Deliberation in all his Proceedings: Especially when I suppose that neither himself, nor indeed the Major Part of his Assessors, do at all pre­tend to have particularly Examin'd the Matters themselves, concerning which they took upon them to be Judges; but went plainly at Random, by their own Interpretation of an Old Statute, to Persecute an Innocent Person for the sake of what they rashly call Orthodoxy. I venture to stile my self an Innocent Person, notwithstanding this their Sentence against me; because I believe that every one of my Judges acquits me in his own Conscience, from any base or sinister Design; and is satisfy'd, that I did no other than what is certainly every Christian's Duty; viz. The Declaring plainly what, upon the most com­pleat Examination, I was satisfy'd were the certain [Page 29] Truths and Duties of Christianity: For which yet, without such Examination, they have now ventur'd to Censure and Expel me. Which things I own I durst not have had a Hand in, in any like Case, for any Consideration whatsoever. But tho' they were my Judges, I am not theirs; To their own Master they must stand or fall. Rom. XIV. 4. And therefore I can only commit my Cause to God, the just Judge of all the World, and leave it in his righteous Hands to deter­mine between us. However, I do heartily wish and hope, that as soon as my Papers are publish'd, they will still seriously consider them, and soberly recon­sider this whole Matter; and that their sineere Re­pentance and Retractation will prevent the Danger of any future Punishment from God upon them, from that God who desireth not the Death of a Sinner, but his Repentance.

Thus ended this University Prosecution and Ba­nishment of me; at least, this is all that has been done till the Date of these Papers; without the least regard to Mr. Lucas's Statutes, or to my Mathematick Professorship depending thereon: And so without the direct affecting me as Mr. Lucas's Professor: How plainly soever they have depriv'd me of that Mem­bership of the University, which till now, either by Right or by Courtesy, I was entitled to. So I shall go on no farther with this Narration. I say in the main, affecting me as Mr. Lucas's Professor only, meaning thereby that I claim still, notwithstanding this Expulsion or Banishment, to be Professor of the Mathematicks of Mr. Lucas's Foundation; and have accordingly a just Right to the Profits thereof, upon my doing that Duty by a Deputy, (as my Statutes direct on a long Absence) which I cannot so well do in Person. Otherwise, this Expulsion must affect me sensibly enough, in respect of my Maintenance: Since the Allowance to a Deputy, and the Loss of [Page 30] the Advantages formerly arising from the Courses of Experiments, to say nothing of those from Teaching privately in Cambridge, and the Charges and Losses of a Removal, cannot well be estimated under 50 l. a Year; which is a great Deduction out of a small Subsistence. Nay, there want not those who would strain this Expulsion from the University to a Depri­vation, as to my Professorship, and so would deprive me of almost all, but what the Charity and Kindness of Friends might afford me. Which last Method of Sup­port is also by some envied, and complained of be­fore-hand. As if there were no way to satisfy their Zeal against me, but my seeing me and my Family re­duc'd to the utmost Poverty and Distress, without a Friend to support and relieve me. But before I conclude, I can hardly avoid saying here, that I take the true Ori­ginal Cause of this Severity to be plainly this, That I have written several Unanswerable Books; which are therefore a terrible Eye-sore to those who are more concern'd for Modern Orthodoxy, and the pretend­ed Power of the Church in Controversies of Faith, than for the pure and undefil'd Religion of Christ Je­sus. So that when it appear'd, as it has done for a considerable time, that none of the Learned could or durst undertake the Answering me, in the way of Reason, Argument, and Testimony, This Method of Ensnaring me by an Old Statute was thought of. And I venture to say this, the rather, because that Open, that Unanswerable Challenge I made in the Post­script of Ignatius to the Orthodox, to shew but one sin­gle Catholick Testimony before the Days of Athanasius, which affirm'd the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be One God, or the One God of the Christian Religi­on; while I promis'd above an hundred Testimonies in the same time, that God the Father was that One God, appears to have been the principal Evidence a­gainst me, and that which was most publickly and solemnly read to me by the Master of Pembroke, as [Page 31] the main Article of my Charge; and for which chiefly, I am Censur'd and Expell'd. I call it an Open and an Unanswerable Challenge: And I here again make it to the whole Body of the Christian World; and do venture, in the most solemn manner, to Ap­peal to the Consciences of all the truly Learned, whether what I have affirm'd on this Head, be not undoubtedly and indisputably true; and so whether I am not Censur'd and Expell'd, for owning my self a Christian; nay, I may add, for asserting the first and most Fundamental Doctrine of the whole Chri­stian Religion. I know this repeated Challenge may be most easily Answer'd, in the same way that the former was, by a repeated Censure: For in any other way, I am sure it cannot. And if that be a­gain put in Practice by any such-like Body of this Church, I shall only beg one Favour, That those who do it, will deal plainly, and declare that they are not, nor do pretend to the Christians, but Mem­bers of the Church of England only: Or at least that they are just so far Christians, as the Original Do­ctrines, and Duties of Christianity, are agreeable to those that the XXXIX Articles, the Book of Homi­lies, and the Common-Prayer-Book contain, but no farther. And then it will be some small Satisfaction to have the World know, that as in Popish Countries Christianity is generally no farther believ'd and o­bey'd, than it is agreeable to the Decrees and Practi­ces of the Church of Rome; so that in this Prote­stant, this Reform'd Country, the Case is the very same. Only with this Difference, that the former pretends to that Infallibility and Dominion over Conscience, which the latter disclaims; and by con­sequence, that the latter is, of the two, in this Mat­ter, the most plainly unjustifiable and inexcusable. However, as to my being condemn'd for asserting what was undeniable and unanswerable, we have a fa­mous Parallel Example in the Sacred History. For truly [Page 32] just so it was in the Case of the Protomartyr St. Ste­phen, all due Allowance for the great difference of the Persons concern'd, and of their Circumstances, being still made. For when the Jews were not able to resist the Wisdom and the Spirit by which he spake, Act. VI. 10, &c. they drew him into their Con­sistory, and Accus'd him there. And when they could not find any fair Reply to the force of his Reasoning, They were cut to the Heart, and gnashed upon him with their Teeth. VII. 54. And immediately, without any other Formality of Law, put him to a violent Death. Then they cried out with a loud Voice, and stopped their Ears, and ran upon him with one accord, and cast him out of the City, and stoned him. v. 57, 58. Whether this Violence towards me, may not end in some Attempts not very different from that Case, I cannot tell. However, I shall venture to use his dying Petition for all my Persecutors; Lord, lay not this Sin to their Charge. v. 60.

But now, if, after all, the Reader be desirous to know what sort of Answer I should have made to the present Accusation, had I had competent time al­low'd me, I shall plainly tell him in a few Words. I intended therein to have stated some of my Opinions more fully and clearly than the Evidence produc'd did inform my Judges: And in order to shew that then they were not so contrary to the Doctrine and Settlement of the Church of England as they sup­pos'd, I design'd to have insisted on such Heads as these:

To have shew'd,

(1.) That the Protestant Religion in general, and the Church of England in particular, were begun up­on this Foot; I mean the Acknowledgment of the Churches Errors, and the Attempt for the Correction [Page 33] os the same, even with the Hazard of the very Lives themselves of the Reformers.

(2.) That they are both built on the Foundation of the Holy Scriptures, and most Primitive Writers; and always own that all Errors, when discover'd, are to be amended by those Original Standards.

(3.) That all Protestants, and particularly the Members of this Church, do unanimously own the Fallibility of all Councils and Churches; and so can­not be surpriz'd, if, in Points never yet brought to a fair and publick Examination, some Errors be sup­pos'd still remaining among them.

(4.) That accordingly they have generally found Reason to alter their Opinions in several Doctrines of Consequence; as our Church has in particular a­bout the Predestinarian Points: Nay, they have ge­nerally, even our Church her self, found Reason to alter several Practices of Consequence also, since the time of the Reformation. And so it can seem no Wonder, if there should appear Occasion for the like farther Enquiries and Alterations at this Day.

(5.) That in the grand Point before us, that of the Trinity it self, Our Church sometimes speaks ac­cording to those ancient Notions which I advance; nay, commonly Prays and Practises agreeably thereto. So that the Corrections I plead for would rather be the rendring the Church's Language and Practice all of a Piece, than the entire Subversion and Alteration of the same.

(6.) That the most Learned and Impartial, both Papists and Protestants, and those of our Church in particular, have in this last Age been forc'd to leave the vulgar Notions in that Matter, and to come still nearer and nearer to that most Primitive and Ratio­nal Account which I Plead for. As appears by Eras­mus, Grotius, Petavius, Huetius, Dr. Cudworth, Bp. Pearson, Bp. Bull, the Bp. of Gloncester, Mr. Locke, and many others. So that my Notions are so far [Page 34] from New, that they are rather the proper and last Result of the Enquiries of the Learned since the Re­formation.

(7.) That since I have taken all along the most Peaceable, Christian, and Inoffensive Methods of bringing these Important Points to a fair Examina­tion; and have still laid my Papers before the Go­vernors of the Church, and the Learned Members of it, for their Consideration, and the necessary Corrections; I have no way offended against the Laws of the Land, or even the Statutes of the Uni­versity, as to their main Design and Intention; which can never be suppos'd to be the Punishment of an Honest and Innocent Man, when in so fair, qui­et, and open a manner, he Proposes Sacred Books, Doctrines, and Duties of the Gospel, to the serious Consideration of the Christian World. However, if the Laws of the Kingdom, or Statutes of the Uni­versity be so Expounded, as to forbid any thing that the Laws of God, and of the Gospel require, I know which I am to obey. Whether it be right in the sight of God, to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. Act. IV. 19. 20.

These were such Heads as I intended more largely and fully to have pursu'd, had I had time allow'd me for my Answer. But since I was not afforded that, I shall wave the farther Prosecution of them: And conclude, not only with the Declaration of the Rea­diness of my Submission to any Punishment, which my Governors in any sort do Legally inflict upon me; but with my hearty Thanks to the Divine Pro­vidence, which has dispos'd of me into this Kingdom of Freedom and Liberty, where 'tis not very much that by the Laws can be laid upon me sor the sake of my Conscience: Where therefore with small Legal Ha­zard I can greatly promote the true Religion os Christ Jesus. And that I am not in Spain or Portugal, or the [Page 35] like Countries, subject to the Terror of a Popish In­quisition; wherein the speaking or writing a small Part of what I have here spoken and written, would certainly have condemned me to a loathsom Dunge­on, and to an Ignominious Death. The utmost Se­verities of which I hope I should yet, by God's Grace, have endur'd, rather than have retracted and renoun­ced what, upon such full and undoubted Evidence, I am entirely satisfy'd, is part of the Revelation of God by his Son Christ Jesus. If any Man come to me, and hate not his Father, and Mother, and Wife, and Children, and Brethren, and Si­sters, yea, and his own Life also, He can­not be my Disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his Cross, and come after me, cannot be my Disciple. Lu. XIV. 26, 27. I End the whole with our Saviour's own Words, which in some small degree do now plainly belong to me; Blessed are they which are persecuted for Righteousness sake, for theirs is the King­dom of Heaven. Matt. V. 10. Which Blessedness, I own I had rather have a Share in, than in all the dangerous and ensnaring Pomp of this Vain and Tran­sitory World.

WILL. WHISTON.

APPENDIX.

When the University had thus Banished me, they seemed somewhat at a loss what they should do far­ther. Nor did they come to any Resolution for near a Year: In which time I took the best Advice I could what was fit for me to do: And according to that Advice, and the Power I had by Mr. Lucas's Statutes, I made a sufficient Deputy, Mr. Christopher Hussey, Fellow of Trinity College, to perform those Duties of my Place in the University, which my Ba­nishment made it not fit for me to do my self. Who yet found the University in such a Temper, that he [Page 36] never durst venture actually to Read for me. Dr. Jenkins indeed, the New Master of St. John's College, was so fair, upon my worthy Friend Mr. Biller's Ap­plication to him on my account, for his Consent to my Deputy's Reading for me, that He Declar'd He would Consent, if the rest of the Heads were willing; but not otherwise. Which Answer I took very kind­ly from him; as I think I had reason to do; especial­ly when I compare this civil Treatment of his with that of some others. For when I once, during this interval, and I think at the same time, stayed at Cambridge a few Days, and endeavour'd to make the Heads easy in the admission of my Deputy, I had a Beadle presently sent to me by Dr. Lany, Master of Pembroke Hall, the then Deputy-Vicechancellor, to know How I durst venture to appear even in the Town of Cambridge under my Banishment from the Univer­sity? Nay, I was inform'd, that One of the Heads said, I might be laid by the Heels for my presumption. About a Year after my Banishment, Dr. Lany, who was again Deputy-Vicechancellor, (for Sir Nathaniel Lloyd the Vicechancellor would never himself con­sent to it;) Resolv'd to Proceed to the Election of another Professor, and accordingly put up a Paper upon the Doors of the Publick Schools, appointing a Day for the filling up my Professorship: Which was therein Declared to have been vacated, per bannitio­nem Gulielmi Whiston, as I think the Words were; without any other Deprivation according to Mr. Lu­cas's Statutes, by which yet alone surely I could be Legally Depriv'd thereof. The Person who was Chosen was Mr. Nicolas Sanderson; who has ever since taken upon him to be the Mathematick Profes­sor in my room. Thus far the Proceedings of the University were by their own Authority. But be­cause they were not of themselves able to eject me out of the Possession of the Lands and Profits of my Professorship, which tho' Legally Vested in Trustees, [Page 37] were yet in Fact ever under the Management of the Professor himself; They soon apply'd for assi­stance to the High-Court of Chancery. And after the necessary Bills and Answers were over, the Cause it self, and its real Merits seem'd at last ready for a fair, full, and publick Hearing; for which I justly hoped, and had prepared my self accordingly. The Points of Law, as I all along ap­prehended, were these two; First, Whether an hasty Banishment, by an Old University Statute, without hearing any Legal Exceptions, or affording any Council or Time for a proper Defence and Answer to an Accusation was Statutable and Legal? Secondly, Whether such Banishment, by an Old University Statute, if Legal, could Vacate a Professorship which stood on an intirely different Foundation; and where I had the Opinion of Council Learned in the Law, that it could have no such effect? But instead of any such Hearing, we soon feared, and found that the Lord-Chancellor Harcourt would take it for granted, without a distinct Hearing, that what the Heads of the University had done, was within their Power to do, and so was done Legally. Nay, He was pleased, tho' unwillingly, to give the Uni­versity Costs against me for this very and only Rea­son, as he told the Court, that I had Obliged the University to bring a Cause before him in Judgment, which He could not Hear; which was all the Hear­ing and Determination I had there, as to the Le­gality of my Banishment. And as to the other Question, which was to me and my Family of much greater moment, viz. Whether such a Banishment would vacate my Mathematick Professorship or not? It never came to any thing like a Hearing. Only the Lord Chancellor had been pleas'd, on a former Occasion, to Declare in Court, that Altho' He could not determine a Cause He had not heard, Yet He could not but think it strange that a Professor of an [Page 38] University should be one that [by Banishment] was no Member of that University. However, Finding soon that the Torrent was then too strong against me; and being promised, if I submitted, great good Offices with the University, by the beforementioned Dr. Lany, who then acted on their behalf, I was pre­vailed on not only to deliver up my Writings, and to suffer the Decree to pass against me; which were done immediately; but also to cast my self wholly upon the Mercy of the University; which I did a little after by the following Petition; which indeed Dr. Lany undertook to present and to sup­port on my behalf. It was in the Words following:

To the Worshipful the Vice-Chancellor, and the Reverend the Heads of the University of Cambridge, the Humble Representa­tion and Petition of William Whiston, late Professor of the Mathematicks in the said University.

Sheweth,

THAT your Petitioner (in Order to render him­self capable of being admitted Mathematical Pro­fessor) did long ago surrender and lose the Vica­ridges of Lowestoft and Kessingland in the Diocese of Norwich, of a considerably greater Yearly Value than the Lands settled sor the Maintenance of such Professor.

That by reason of Land-Taxes while your Petitioner was Professor, his Income was corsiderably less than either of his Predecessors receiv'd; and yet your Petitioner ex­pended in Repairs, during the same time, near 50 l.

That when (with [...]t any Prejudice to the Estate) your Petitioner had caused Timber to be cut sufficient for rein­bursing the Moneys so by him expended, as well as for the [Page 39] Repairs then and now necessary, your Petitioner was hindred from disposing of any part thereof, or Reimbur­sing himself thereby by the Injunction of the Court of Chancery: So that your Petitioner has now been near 50 l. out of Pocket for some Years; which has been a great Hardship on him, added to his other Misfortunes.

That by your Petitioner's Interest and Application, the said Estate has been for these last four Years, or thereabouts, freed from the former Taxes; which tho' it has been of little or no Advantage to himself, may be very much so to those that succeed him.

That during the Time your Petitioner was Mathema­tical Professor, and before he had the Misfortune of in­curring the Displeasure of the University, and was Ba­nished from thence, He is humbly Confident, That (ac­cording to his Abilities) He duly performed the Office of Mathematical Professor.

That your Petitioner's Banishment was not from any Neglect of his Duty, as Mathematical Professor, but meerly for certain Opinions in Religion; which He taking and believing to be True, could not Retract, with­out doing the greatest Violence to his Conscience; nor without being sensible (if he had so done) that He should have deserved a much greater Punishment from God than hath, or can be inflicted on him by Man.

That the University having shewn a Zeal, which possibly might have been expected from them for the Established Opinions, by Banishing your Petitioner; Yet well hoping (so long as he bumbly and quietly submitted to their Sen­tence of Banishment) it might have been consistent with the Goodness of the University, to have permitted him to enjoy part of the Profits of the said Lands, He ap­pointed a sufficient Deputy to perform the same Office; as your Petitioner apprehended, and was advised by his Council, He had a Power to do by the Statutes of the Founder. And when the University had thought proper to appoint another to Read the Mathematical Lecture, your Petitioner readily offered to have named him his Deputy, and to have made a competent Allowance for his Pains therein.

[Page 40] That altho' your Petitioner was not indulged so far, yet He has not sought any Relief against the said Sentence, but has submitted thereto; altho' the said Sentence (it continuing in force) was the only Ground of any Advan­tage to be taken against your Petitioner, as He was advised.

That your Petitioner's defending the Suit in Chancery against him, was not out of any Obstinacy or ill Will to those that prosecuted it, or to him for whose Benefit that Suit was brought, but out of a Sense of that Justice and Care which your Petitioner owed to his Family, whose main Support the Rents of the Lands in Question were; and for Preservation whereof your Petitioner was advised by his Council to make such Defence, not without Hopes of Success therein.

That yet your Petitioner's Friends advising him to re­linquish all Legal Advantages, and to cast himself upon the Mercy of the University, rather than to Contend with them any further; And your Petitioner's Council not be­ing averse thereto, your Petitioner, with all Readiness complied with that Advice, and gave Orders accordingly, and immediately delivered up the Principal Writings be­fore any Decree for so doing.

That your Petitioner does now (in pursuance of that Resolution) submit to the Decree of the High Court of Chancery in the Premises; in humble Confidence, That according to the Hopes then given to your Petitioner's Friends, that the Vicechancellor and the Heads of the same University will have Regard to the Premises, and consider his Case. To which End your Petitioner maketh this humble Representation thereof. And further, in all humble manner sheweth,

That there is a Clause in the Statutes of Mr. Lucas's Foundation which directs, That such Moderation should be shewed to his Professor, that should be deprived with­out his own Fault. That if he had behaved himself Worthily during his Continuance in the Place, and had not One Hundred Pounas a Year of his own Estate, that He should have a third Part of the Annual Salary during [Page 41] his Life. As by a Copy of the said Clause underwritten appears.

That whatever Fault the University has judged your Petitioner Guilty of with Relation to his Opinions in Re­ligion, or publick Profession thereof; yet your Petitioner having performed the Office of Professor unblameably, as He humbly hopes, and the said Sentence of Banishment regarding only his said Opinions, and not the Discharge of his Office; And your Petitioner not having any thing like such Yearly Income, as mentioned in the aforecited Clause;

Your Petitioner therefore humbly Hopes the University will Judge his Case to come with­in the Equity of the said Clause; and will make him the Allowance therein mentioned, or somewhat Equivalent thereto; which will be a great Comfort and Relief to your Peti­tioner and his Family in their present Cir­cumstances.

And moreover, Your Petitioner humbly Prays, That in Regard of the Premis [...]s aforesaid, the University would be pleased to Remit the Costs Decreed against him; and the rather, for that the the Court, on making the said De­cree, was pleased twice to Declare, That the University ought not to ask Them; or to that Effect. And for that your Petitioner hath chearfully referred himself, and doth hereby Refer himself wholly to the Equity and Mer­cy of the University: And He cannot but be in Expectation of a favourable Answer.

And Your Petitioner shall Pray, &c.

[Page 42] And now, if the Reader enquire what Kindness and Relief I met with from the University upon this Petition, I mean besides this, that they have not yet demanded of me the Costs of the Suit for turning me out, as by the Rigor of the Decree in Chancery they might have done, he will easily guess at it, when I solemnly affirm, (and I appeal to the Conscience of every Member of that Body now alive, that were then concern'd, Whether that Affirmation, and this whole Account be not the exact Truth) that to the best of my Remembrance I neither then, nor any other time since my Banishment, have been once vouchsafed an Answer to any such Applications I have made the Vicechancellor and Heads of the Uni­versity, whether it were for Justice or Mercy, to this very Day.

WILL. WHISTON.

A COPY of Mr. Lucas's Statutes. Confirmed by the Royal Authority.

N.B. The Clause referr'd to in the forementioned Petition, is Noted by inverted Comma's.

OMnibus Christi Fidelibus ad quos hoc praesens Scriptum pervenerit: Robertus Raworth de Grayes-Inn in Co­mitatu Middlesex Armiger, & Thomas Buck de Can­tabrigia in Comitatu Cantabrig [...]e Armiger, Executores ulti­mi Testamenti dignissimi Viri Henrici Lucas de London Ar­migeri nuper defuncti, Salutem in Domino sempiternam. Sciatis, quod cum praedictus venerabilis & consultus Vir Hen­ricus Lucas Armiger, ex propenso suo in Academiam Canta­brigiensem, & in rem literariam affectu, a praefatis Roberto Raworth, & Thoma Buck, Executoribus suis terras compa­rari ad valorem centum librarum annuatim supremo testa­mento mandaverit, in annuum Professoris, sen Lectoris Mathe­maticarum Scientiarum in dicta Academia stipendium, vel salarium perpetuo cessuras, sub ejusmodi constitutionibus & regulis, quas Executores sui, adhi ito Procancellarii, & Prae­fectorum Collegiis dictae Academiae consilio, tam honori mag­ni [Page 43] istius corporis, quam hujusce literaturae, omni hactenus praemio destitutae, incremento ac promotioni judicaverint sum­mopere accommodatas; Nos praedicti Executores, pro ratione fidei nobis commissae de exequendo praeclari Benefactoris vo­luntate solliciti, rogato prius & impetrato dictorum Procan­cancellarii & Praefectorum consilio, habito (que) ad id consilium praecipuo respectu, Ordinationes infra-scriptas promovendis istis studiis Mathematicis, uti arbitramur, apprime conducen­tes approbamus, omniq, per dictum Henrici Lucas Testamen­tum nobis concessa authoritate ratas volumus & declaramus. Itaque Statuimus imprimis & Ordinamus, quod perpetuis fu­turis temporibus quicquid annui reditus (deductis necessariis expensis) [...]ex praenotatis terris ad usum praedictum acquisitis vel acquirendis quacun (que) justa ratione accreverit, id integre cedet in subsidium & praemium Mathematici Professoris, modo infra-dicendo & sub conditionibns mox exprimendis electi & constituti. Quod officium attinet dicti Professoris Mathema­tici, ut horum studiorum qua publice, qua privatim excolen­dorum, ratio habeatur, Volumus & Statuimus ut dictus Pro­fessor teneatur singulis intra uniuscujus (que) termini Academici spatium septimanis semel ad minus aliquam Geometriae, A­rithmeticae, Astronomiae, Geographiae, Opticae, Staticae, aut alterius alicujus Mathematicae Disciplinae partem (pro suo arbitratu, nisi aliter expedire Procancellario visum fuerit) per unius circiter horae spatium legere at (que) exponere, loco & tempore a Procancellario assignandis, sub paena quadraginta solidorum pro singula lectione omissa ex stipendio ipsi debito per Procancellarium subtrahendorum, & Bibliothecae Acade­micae, pro coemendis libris, vel instrumentis Mathematicis, applicandorum; nisi ex gravi corporis infirmitate officio suo satisfacere non poterit: quam tamen excusationem nolumus ultra tres septimanas valere, ut nisi elapsis tribus septimanis alium substituat idoneum Lectorem, Procancellarii judicio ap­probandum, sciat sibi pro qualibet lectione praetermissa viginti solidos de stipendio suo per Procancellarium subtrahendos, & usui praedicto applicandos. Quo autem dictus Professor ad munus hoc legendi non perfunctoric praestandum efficacius astringatur, praestiti fideliter ab ipso officii certius extet in­dicium, & studiorum praesentium fructus quadantenus etiam ad posteros derivetur, Statuimus ut dictus Professor semel quot­annis, proxime ante festum sancti Michaelis, non pauciorum quam decem ex illis, quas praecedente anno publice habuerit, Lectionum exemplaria nitide descripta Procancellario exhi­beat, in publicis Academiae archivis asservanda: quod si ante tempus praescriptum facere neglexerit, cous (que) carcat stipendio suo, donec effectum det; & quanta suerit rata portio tempo­ris [Page 44] postea elapsi, usquedum id perfecerit, tantam reditus sui, vel salarii annui partem Procancellario teneatur exolvere, Bibliothecae Academicae ad usus praedictos applicandam. Quin etiam decernimus, ut dictus Professor teneatur duobus per sin­gulas cujus (que) termini hebdomadas a Procancellario praestituen­dis diebus (uno (que) extra terminum die, quandocun (que) dictus Professor in Academia praesens fuerit) per duas horas itidem praefigendas omnibus illum consulturis vacare, liberum adeun­tibus aperto cubicuso accessum praebere, circa propositas ipsi quaestiones, & difficultates haud gravate respondere, in eum finem globos, & alia idonea instrumenta Mathematica penes se in promptu habere, in (que) omnibus ad illud propositum spectantibus studiosorum pro sua virili conatus adjuva [...]e: quorum aliquod si ultro neglexerit, corripiatur a Procancel­lario; & si de neglecto officio saepius admonitus neutiqu [...]m se emendaverit, paenam incurrat intolerabili negligentiae in­ferius decretam. Porro, ut horum observatio fortius muniatur, & ne quis ex dicti Professoris absentia oboriatur neglectus, statuimus ne dictus Professor intra praefinita terminorum in­tervalla Academia excedat, aut alibi extra Academiam per sex dies continuos moretur, nisi gravissima de causa per Pro­cancellarium approbanda, id (que) petita prius & impetrata a Procancellario venia: sin secerit secus, quanta fuerit rata por­tio temporis ab egressu suo praeterlapsi, tanta salarii sui parte penitus excidat. Quod si forte diutioris ab Academia absen­tiae, quae dimidii termini spatium excedat, causa, acciderit necessaria, Procancellario & duorum (qui Collegiorum Prae­fecti fuerint) seniorum Doctorum judicio approbata, aliquem interea idoneum substituat, qui suo loco legat, & reliquis muniis fungatur, modo supradicto, & sub paena consimili. Quinimo pari causa, ne dictus Professor ab officii sui debita executione distrahatur, nolumus omnino & prohibemus, ut is ulla quavis Ecclesiastica promotione gaudeat, quae animarum sibi curam adnexam habeat, aut residentiam exigat hisce Statutis adversan­tem; sub paena amissionis, ipso facto, omnis juris, quod in hac sua professione praetendere valeat. Quoad personam vero & qualitatem Mathematici Professoris, volumus & injungimus, ut qui huic Provinciae admovetur, sit Vir Bonae famae, & Con­versationis honestae, ad minimum Magister Artium, probe [...] ­ruditus, & Mathematicarum praesertim Scientiarum peritio instructus. Ejus autem nominandi & eligendi jus ac potestas esto penes nos praedictos Executores Venerabilis Viri Henrici Lucas, durante nostra utriusque vita, aut uno supremum diem obeunte, penes alterum e nobis qui in vita superstes permanse­rit. Postea vero perpetuis suturis temporibus ejus eligend plena potestas sit penes Procancellarium, & Praefectos omnium [Page 45] Collegiorum dictae Academiae, vel illam partem Praefectorum, qui Electioni interfuerint, & peragatur tunc Electio in hunc modum. Postquam Mathematici Professoris locum quacunque ex causa vacare contigerit, Procancellario incumbet quam cito fieri poterit Schedula Scholarum publicarum ostio per octo dies continuos affixa, cum de dicta vacatione, tum de tempore ad futuram electionem destinato significare (tempus autem electionis ultra trigesimum a prima significatione diem extrahi nolumus) quo tempore dicti Electores publicis in Scholis in unum Congregati juramento semetipsos obstringant, seposito omni privato respectu, affectuque sinistro se nominaturos, & suo comprobaturos suffragio quem, conscientia teste, ex peti­toribus, (vel ex iis qui ab Electorum quolibet nominantur) maxime secundum praenotatas qualitates idoneum censuerint ad id munus obeundum; is vero, in quem plura suffragia con­spiraverint, pro electo habeatur: quod si duobus forte vel plu­ribus paria obvenerint suffragia, Procancellario jus erit unum ex illis, qui aliis (si quando id contigerit) plura & inter se pa­ria suffragia obtinuerit, pro suo arbitrio eligendi. Electus autem proximo opportuno tempore admittatur a Procancella­rio, p [...]aestito ante admissionem juramento se munus Professoris Mathematici a dignissimo Viro Henrico Lucas in hac Acade­mia institutum, juxta Ordinationes & Statuta officium suum concernentia [...] pro suo posse fideliter executurum. Denique quo praedicius Professor intra debitos honestatis atque modestiae limites contineatur, neque de ulla criminum ultro admissorum impunitate praesumat, starnimus ac decernimus, ut si dictus Professor Convictus fuerit vel propria Confessione, vel per te­stes idoneos, vel per Evidentiam facti de crimine aliquo gra­viore (puta de Laesa Majestate, Haeresi, Schismate, homicidio voluntario, fu [...]to notabili, adulterio, fornicatione, perjurio) vel si intolerabiliter negligens fuerit, neque paenis superius expressis poterit emendari; per Procancellarium, & Collegio­rum Praefecto [...] (vel majorem eorum partem) a sua amoveatur Professione, sine spe regrediendi, aut commodum aliquod ul­terius percipiendi. ‘'Quod si senio, morbo diuturno, aut incurabili, impotentia, seu debilitate corporis, vel animi fra­ctus suae Professioni (modo & forma praedictis) perficiendae non suffecerit, abrogetur ei Professio per Procancellarium & dictos Praefectos (vel majorem eorum partem) hoc tantum adnibito moderamine, ut illi (sic [...]a Professionis munere non sua culpa dimisso) si tempore Professionis suae laudabiliter se gesserit, neque alias ipsi de proprio ad valorem centum librarum annuatim provisum fuerit, tertia pars stipendii re­maneat usque ad mortem suam; reliquis partibus Successor [Page 46] sit tantisper contentus, integrum post ejus mortem percep­turus.’ In cujus rei Testimonium nos Praefati Robertus Ra­worth & Thomas Buck Sigilla nostra Praesentibus apposuimus. Dat. 19 die Decembris Anno Regni Domini nostri Caroli Se­cundi Dei Gratia, Angliae, Scotiae, Franciae, & Hiberniae Re­gis, Fidei Defensoris, &c. Decimo Quinto, Anno (que) Domini 1663.

  • Robertus Raworth.
  • Thomas Buck.
Sigillat. & Deliberat. in praesentia
  • Jacobi Windet M.D.
  • Isaaci Barrow
  • Richardi Spoure
  • Michaelis Glyd
  • Gulielmi Player.
FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.