[a] It may not only gratify the Reader’s Curiosity, but also be of Use for preventing Encroachments in Time to come, to give the following Account of Mr. Boyle’s Lectures.
Mr. Boyle, by a Codicil, dated July 28. 1691. and annexed to his Will, charged his Messuage or Dwelling-House in St. Michael’s Crooked-Lane, London, with the Payment of the clear Yearly Rents and Profits thereof, to some Learned Divine in London, or within the Bills of Mortality, to be Elected for a Term not exceeding Three Years, by his Grace the present Lord Archbishop of Canterbury (then Dr. Tenison), Sir Henry Ashurst, Sir John Rotheram, and John Evelyn, Esq; The Business he appointed those Lectures for, was, among others, to be ready to satisfie real Scruples, and to answer such new Objections and Difficulties, as might be started: to which good Answers had not been made. And also, To Preach Eight Sermons in the Year, the first Monday of January, February, March, April and May, and of September, October and November. The Subject of these Sermons was to be, The Proof of the Christian Religion against notorious Infidels, viz. Atheists, Theists, Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans, not descending lower to any Controversies that are among Christians themselves. But by Reason the Lecturers were seldom continued above a Year, and that the House sometimes stood empty, and Tenants brake, or failed in due Payment of their Rent, therefore the Salary sometimes remained long unpaid, or could not be gotten without some Difficulty: To remedy which Inconvenience, his present Grace of Canterbury procured a Yearly Stipend of 50l. to be paid Quarterly for ever, charged upon a Farm in the Parish of Brill, in the County of Bucks: Which Stipend is accordingly very duly paid when demanded, without Fee or Reward.
TO THE
READER.
Vid. Bp. Burnet’s Funeral Serm. p. 24.
As the noble Founder of the Lectures I have had the Honour of Preaching, was a great Improver of Natural Knowledge, so, in all Probability, he did it out of a pious End, as well as in Pursuit of his Genius. For it was his settled Opinion, that nothing tended more to cultivate true Religion and Piety in a Man’s Mind, than a thorough Skill in Philosophy. And such Effect it manifestly had in him, as is evident from divers of his published Pieces; from his constant Deportment in never mentioning the Name of God without a Pause, and visible Stop in his Discourse; and from the noble Foundation of his Lectures for the Honour of God, and the generous Stipend he allowed for the same.
Vid. Mr. Boyle’s Will.
And forasmuch as his Lectures were appointed by him for the Proof of the Christian Religion against Atheists and other notorious Infidels, I thought, when I had the Honour to be made his Lecturer, that I could not better come up to his Intent, than to attempt a Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God, in what I may call Mr. Boyle’s own, that is a Physico-Theological, Way. And, besides that it was for this very Service that I was called to this Honour, I was the more induced to follow this Method, by reason none of my learned and ingenious Predecessors in these Lectures, have done it on purpose, but only casually, in a transient, piece-meal manner; they having made it their Business to prove the great Points of Christianity in another Way, which they have accordingly admirably done. But considering what our Honourable Founder’s Opinion was of Natural Knowledge, and that his Intent was, that those Matters by passing through divers Hands, and by being treated of in different Methods, should take in most of what could be said upon the Subject, I hope my Performance may be acceptable, although one of the meanest.
As for others, who have before me done something of this kind; as Mersenne on Genesis; Dr. Cockburne in his Essays; Mr. Ray in his Wisdom of God, &c. and I may add the first of Mr. Boyle’s Lecturers, the most learned Dr. Bently in his Boyle’s Lectures, the eloquent Arch-Bishop of Cambray, (and I hear, the ingenious Mons. Perault hath something of this kind, but never saw it:) I say, as to these learned and ingenious Authors, as the Creation is an ample Subject, so I industriously endeavour’d to avoid doing over what they before had done; and for that Reason did not, for many Years, read their Books until I had finish’d my own. But when I came to compare what each of us had done, I found my self in many Things to have been anticipated by some or other of them, especially by my Friend, the late great Mr. Ray. And therefore in some Places I shorten’d my Discourse, and referr’d to them; and in a few others, where the Thread of my Discourse would have been interrupted, I have made use of their Authority, as the best Judges; as of Mr. Ray’s, for Instance, with Relation to the Mountains and their Plants, and other Products. If then the Reader should meet with any Thing mention’d before by others, and not accordingly acknowledged by me, I hope he will candidly think me no Plagiary, because I can assure him I have along, (where I was aware of it,) cited my Authors with their due Praise. And it is scarce possible, when Men write on the same, or a Subject near a-kin, and the Observations are obvious, but that they must often hit upon the same Thing: And frequently this may happen from Persons making Observations about one, and the same Thing, without knowing what each other hath done; which indeed, when the first Edition of my Book was nearly printed off, I found to be my own Case, having (for want of Dr. Hook’s Micrography being at hand, it being a very scarce Book, and many Years since I read it,) given Descriptions of two or three Things, which I thought had not been tolerably well observ’d before, but are describ’d well by that curious Gentleman.