¹ In fact, only a couple of paragraphs have been written about Greene’s sole religious work, A demonstration of the truth and divinity of the Christian religion, Cambridge 1711. See John Gascoigne, Cambridge in the age of the Enlightenment: science, religion and politics from the Restoration to the French Revolution, Cambridge 1989, 167, and John Paul Friesen, ‘The reading of Newton in the early eighteenth century: Tories and Newtonianism,’ unpubl. PhD diss. Leeds 2004, 143–4.

² Greene, Robert, The principles of natural philosophy, Cambridge 1712, [a2v]Google Scholar.

³ Roger Cotes to Isaac Newton, 23 June 1711, in Isaac Newton, The correspondence of Isaac Newton, ed. H. W. Turnbull, J. F. Scott, A. R. Hall and L. Tilling, Cambridge 1959–77, v. 166, 204; Nicholas Saunderson to William Jones, 16 Mar. 1711/1712, ibid. v. 247.

⁴ W. W. Rouse Ball, A history of the study of mathematics at Cambridge, Cambridge 1889, 95; Gerald Charles Lawrence, ‘The assimilation of Newtonian mechanics, 1687–1736’, unpubl. PhD diss, Norman, Ok 1968, 121–30, 141–3; Schofield, Robert E., Mechanism and materialism: British natural philosophy in an age of reason, Princeton 1970, 99, 117–21Google Scholar; Arnold Thackray, Atoms and powers: an essay on Newtonian matter-theory and the development of chemistry, Cambridge, Ma 1970, 126–34; P. M. Heimann and J. E. McGuire, ‘Newtonian forces and Lockean powers: concepts of matter in eighteenth-century thought’, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences iii (1971), 233–306 at pp. 254–61; Gascoigne, Cambridge in the age of the Enlightenment, 167–70; Friesen, ‘The reading of Newton in the early eighteenth century’, 128, 132–3, 137–40.

⁵ Chatterjee, Jacob Donald, ‘Christ Church, Oxford, Anglican moral theology, and the reception of John Locke’s Essay concerning human understanding, c.1689–1725’, in Beeton, Alex, Berstein, Eli P., Kent, Emily and Winkler, René (eds), The mind in its own place? Early modern intellectual history in an institutional context, Oxford 2023, 98–136 at p. 136Google Scholar.

⁶ The critics who will be discussed are referenced in Yolton, John W., John Locke and the way of ideas, Oxford 1956 Google Scholar, and Sell, Alan P. F., John Locke and the eighteenth-century divines, Cardiff 1997, 16–108 Google Scholar. However, their views on the relationship between faith and reason receive little to no attention.

⁷ On Greene’s biography and studies see John Venn and John Archibald Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses: a biographical list of all known students, graduates and holders of office at the University of Cambridge from the earliest times to 1900, i/ii, Cambridge 1922, 257, and John Gascoigne, ‘Greene, Robert (c.1678–1730)’, ODNB at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/11419>, accessed 2 February 2023. See also the preface to Greene, A demonstration, [a8v], where Greene provides a short autobiographical note. After the death of his father, Greene seems to have been supported by his uncle John Pretty during his early years at Clare Hall. On undergraduate life at Clare Hall see W. J. Harrison, Life in Clare Hall, Cambridge, 1658–1713, Cambridge 1958, 35–80. Greene’s date of birth is stated in his will (CCC, ms CCA D/4/1/2/21/3, unfoliated). His will was drafted in 1721 and slightly updated in 1725. A copy is preserved in the Nottinghamshire Archives, Nottingham, DD/4P/48/26.

⁸ Greene Sr’s will, which appears to have been proved on 26 June 1700, is preserved at The National Archives, Kew, PROB 11/457/89.

⁹ Robert Greene, The principles of the philosophy of the expansive and contractive forces, Cambridge 1727, preface, [3]: CCC, ms CCA D/4/1/2/21/3, fo. 2r.

¹⁰ [Robert Greene], ἘΓΚΥΚΛΟΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ or a method of instructing pupils 1707, n.p. 1707; Greene, Principles (1727), [2]. For discussion see Ball, A history of the study of mathematics at Cambridge, 95–6; Hall, A. Rupert, ‘Cambridge: Newton’s legacy’, Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London lv/2 (2001), 205–26 at pp. 211, 21710.1098/rsnr.2001.0139CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Roos, Anna Marie, Martin Folkes (1690–1754): Newtonian, antiquary, connoisseur, Oxford 2021, 35–710.1093/oso/9780198830061.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹¹ Clergy of the Church of England database, <https://theclergydatabase.org.uk>, accessed 8 April 2024; Venn and Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, i/ii, 257.

¹² Greene, Principles (1727), preface, [2].

¹³ Conyers Middleton to Edward Harley, 6 Sept. 1730, Cambridge University Library, ms Add. 70410 (unfoliated).

¹⁴ An abstract of Greene’s will was published by one of his descendants in 1783: Richard Greene, ‘[Untitled]’, The Gentleman’s Magazine liii (Aug. 1783), ii/2, 657–9. A brief description of his will was published in The Norwich Mercury: extracts between Saturday 29 August to Saturday 10 October 1730 [news item for 29 August 1730], 1.

¹⁵ Grigg was Master of Clare College between 1713 and 1726 and vicar of All Saints between 1707 and 1717: Venn and Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, ii/ii, 268.

¹⁶ Rebecca Louise Warner, ‘Stanhope, George (1660–1728)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/26246>, accessed 23 April 2024; George Stanhope, The truth and excellence of the Christian religion asserted: against Jews, infidels and hereticks, London 1702, sermon preached on 2 February 1702.

¹⁷ Rebecca Louise Warner, ‘Moss, Robert (c.1666–1729)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/19403>, accessed 23 April 2024. Moss was later chosen as preacher of Gray’s Inn in 1698. In 1699, he was elected assistant preacher at St James’s Westminster. He served as chaplain to William iii, Anne and George i. In 1713, he was installed dean of Ely.

¹⁸ D. A. Brunton, ‘Jenkin, Robert (bap. 1656, d. 1727)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/14725>, accessed 2 March 2023.

¹⁹ B. W. Young, ‘Waterland, Daniel (1683–1740)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/28815>, accessed 11 April 2024. On Waterland’s scholarly network see Bailey, Natasha, ‘Academic collaboration in the early Enlightenment: Daniel Waterland (1683–1740) and his Cambridge tyros’, English Historical Review cxxxix (2024), 126–5410.1093/ehr/cead210CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁰ CCC, ms CCA D/4/1/2/21/3, fo. 3r.

²¹ CCC, ms CCA B 2/1/4, vol. ii, fo. 266. In Gascoigne, ‘Greene, Robert (cc. 1678–1730)’, it is mistakenly claimed that none of Greene’s wishes were complied with.

²² CCC, ms CCA B 2/1/4, vol. ii, fo. 280; Harrison, W. J. and Lloyd, A. H., Notes on the masters, fellows, scholars and exhibitioners of Clare College, Cambridge, Cambridge 1953, 87–9Google Scholar.

²³ Venn and Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, pt ii/i, 340; Stokes, H. P., The esquire bedells of the University of Cambridge from the 13th to the 20th century, Cambridge 1911, 105–7Google Scholar; Wardale, J. R., Clare College, London 1899, 81, 88Google Scholar.

²⁴ Venn and Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, pt i/ii, 406.

²⁵ Ibid. pt i/iv, 405.

²⁶ CCC, ms CCA D/4/1/2/21/3, fo. 6r.

²⁷ Cragg, Gerald R., Reason and authority in the eighteenth century, Cambridge 1964, 12 Google Scholar.

²⁸ Locke, John, An essay concerning human understanding, ed. Nidditch, Peter H., Oxford 1975, 689 [iv.xviii.2].Google Scholar

²⁹ Ibid. 667 [iv.xvi.13], 705 [iv.xix.15]. For discussion see Wolterstorff, Nicholas, ‘Locke’s philosophy of religion’, in Chappell, Vere (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Locke, Cambridge 1994, 178–98 at pp. 176–7Google Scholar; Lucci, Diego, John Locke’s Christianity, Cambridge 2021, 40–3, 61–2Google Scholar; and Rockwood, Nathan, ‘Locke on reason, revelation and miracles’, in Gordon-Roth, Jessica and Weinberg, Shelley (eds), The Lockean mind, Abington 2022, 545–53Google Scholar.

³⁰ Locke, An essay, 694–5 [iv.xviii.9–10].

³¹ Ibid. 694 [iv.xviii.7].

³² Ibid. 690 [iv.xviii.5]. For a novel account of propositions that are above reason according to Locke see Marko, Jonathan S., John Locke’s theology: an ecumenical, irenic and controversial project, Oxford 2023, 239–5010.1093/oso/9780197650042.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³³ Locke, An essay, 692–3 [iv.xviii.5].

³⁴ Ibid. 694 [iv.xviii.6].

³⁵ Victor Nuovo, Christianity, antiquity, and enlightenment: interpretations of Locke, Dordrecht 2011, 104.

³⁶ Locke, An essay, 687 [iv.xvii.23].

³⁷ Ibid. 694 [iv.xviii.7].

³⁸ For further discussion see Wojcik, Jan W., Robert Boyle and the limits of reason, Cambridge 1997, 27–41, 95–11710.1017/CBO9780511573002.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rehnman, Sebastian, ‘John Owen on faith and reason’, in Kapic, Kelly M. and Jones, Mark (eds), The Ashgate research companion to John Owen’s theology, London 2012, 31–48 Google Scholar; and Marko, Jonathan S., ‘Above reason: propositions and contradictions in the religious thought of Robert Boyle’, Forum Philosophicum xxxix/2 (2014), 23–42 Google Scholar, and ‘Reason and revelation in early modern Protestantism’, in Dana Jalobeanu and Charles T. Wolfe (eds), Encyclopedia of early modern philosophy and sciences, Cham 2022, 1774–84.

³⁹ Locke, An essay, 691 [iv.xviii.4].

⁴⁰ Ibid. 637 [iv.xi.12].

⁴¹ Ibid. 697 [iv.xix.1], 704 [iv.xix.14].

⁴² Ibid. 663–4 [iv.xvi.9–10], 667–8 [iv.xvi.14]. For a discussion see Marcy P. Lascan, ‘Locke’s philosophy of religion’, in Matthew Stuart (ed.), A companion to Locke, Chichester 2016, 469–85 at pp. 484–5.

⁴³ Locke, An essay, 694 [iv.xviii.7]. On Locke’s defence of the divine authority of the Scriptures see Nuovo, Christianity, antiquity, and enlightenment, 53–73.

⁴⁴ Locke, An essay, 694 [iv.xviii.8].

⁴⁵ Henry G. Van Leeuwen, The problem of certainty in English thought, 1630–1690, The Hague 1970, 140.

⁴⁶ For discussions of the role of probability in Locke’s thought see Shapiro, Barbara, Probability and certainty in seventeenth-century England, Princeton 1983, 28, 37, 41–3, 58–61, 100–1Google Scholar, and Daston, Lorraine, Classical probability in the Enlightenment, Princeton 1988, 45, 193–7, 307–8, 32410.1515/9781400844227CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ John Toland, Christianity not mysterious, London 1696, pp. xiii, 6, 12. For discussions of Christianity not mysterious see Justin Champion, Republican learning: John Toland and the crisis of Christian culture, 1696–1722, Manchester 2003, 78–81; Leask, Ian, ‘Personation and immanent undermining: on Toland’s appearing Lockean’, British Journal for the History of Philosophy xviii (2010), 231–56 at pp. 243–510.1080/09608781003643550CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Lancaster, James A. T., ‘From matters of faith to matters of fact: the problem of priestcraft in early modern England’, Intellectual History Review xxviii/1 (2018), 145–65 at pp. 157–810.1080/17496977.2018.1402435CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁸ Toland, Christianity not mysterious, 12, 15.

⁴⁹ Ibid. 38, 40–2, 45, 90, 129–30, 139, 140.

⁵⁰ Ibid. 129–30. Hebrews xi.1 states, ‘Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen’ (KJV).

⁵¹ Venn and Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, pt i/iv, 163.

⁵² Popkin, Richard H., ‘The philosophy of Bishop Stillingfleet’, Journal of the History of Philosophy ix/3 (1971), 303–19 at pp. 310–110.1353/hph.2008.1775CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Carroll, Robert Todd, The common-sense philosophy of religion of Bishop Edward Stillingfleet, 1635–1699, The Hague 1975, 87–100 10.1007/978-94-010-1598-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In Jonathan S. Marko, Measuring the distance between Locke and Toland, Eugene, Or 2017, 13–60, the author argues that Stillingfleet was correct in identifying significant epistemological issues on which the Locke and Toland actually agreed.

⁵³ Edward Stillingfleet, A discourse in vindication of the Trinity, London 1697, 233.

⁵⁴ Popkin, ‘The philosophy of Bishop Stillingfleet’, 313–16; Griffin, Martin I. J. Jr Latitudinarianism in the seventeenth-century Church of England, Leiden 1992, 108–1010.1163/9789004246812CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Greene, A demonstration, 189.

⁵⁵ Stillingfleet, Edward, The bishop of Worcester’s answer to Mr. Locke’s second letter, London 1698, 25 Google Scholar. It is impossible to tell whether Greene was aware of this passage.

⁵⁶ Hutton, Sarah, ‘Science, philosophy, and atheism: Edward Stillingfleet’s defence of religion’, in Popkin, Richard H. and Vanderjagt, Arjo (eds), Scepticism and irreligion in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Leiden 1993, 102–20 at pp. 105–610.1163/9789004246867_009CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁷ Stillingfleet, Edward, A rational account of the grounds of Protestant religion, London 1665, 203 Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Idem, Origines Britannicae: or, The antiquities of the British Churches, London 1685, 262.

⁵⁹ F. M., A free but modest censure on the late controversial writings and debates of the Lord Bishop of Worcester and Mr. Locke, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Locke: the honble Charles Boyle, Esq; and Dr. Bently: together with brief remarks on Monsieur Le Clerc’s Ars critica, London 1698, 4.

⁶⁰ Ibid.

⁶¹ Venn and Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, pt i/ii, 88. On Edwards see C. J. Robinson, rev. Stephen Wright, ‘Edwards, John (1637–1716)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/8545 >, accessed 12 September 2024, and Daniel C. Norman, Saving the Church: John Edwards (1637–1716) as dissenting conformer, Eugene, Or 2022.

⁶² Edwards, A free discourse, 87. Edwards vehemently criticised Locke’s Christology: Socinianism unmask’d, London 1696; A brief vindication of the fundamental articles of the Christian faith, London 1697; and The Socinian creed, London 1697. Edwards also accused Newton of introducing anti-Trinitarian views in the General Scholium: Some brief critical remarks on Dr. Clarke’s last papers, London 1714, 36–40.

⁶³ Idem, Some new discoveries of the uncertainty, deficiency and corruptions of human knowledge and learning, London 1714, 198.

⁶⁴ Idem, Some thoughts concerning several causes and occasions of atheism, especially in the present age, London 1695, 22–3.

⁶⁵ Van Leeuwen, The problem of certainty, 15–48; Leslie, Andrew M., The light of grace: John Owen on the authority of Scripture and Christian Faith, Göttingen 2015, 42–910.13109/9783666550904CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁶ Edwards, Some thoughts, 27, 65, 82.

⁶⁷ Ibid. 98.

⁶⁸ Idem, Some new discoveries, 75.

⁶⁹ Venn and Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, pt i/iii, 62.

⁷⁰ Henry Lee, Anti-scepticism: or, Notes upon each chapter of Mr. Lock’s Essay concerning humane understanding, London 1702, 328. On Lee see Mark Goldie, ‘Lee, Henry (c.1644–1713)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/66369>, accessed 12 September 2024. For a discussion of Lee’s criticism of Locke’s philosophy see Adriaenssen, H. T., ‘An early critic of Locke: the anti-scepticism of Henry Lee’, Locke Studies xi (2011), 17–47 Google Scholar, and Benschop, Hans Peter, ‘Berkeley, Lee and abstract ideas’, British Journal for the History of Philosophy v/1 (1997), 55–66 10.1080/09608789708570955CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A similar criticism of Locke appears in Burnet, Thomas, Second remarks upon An essay concerning human understanding, London 1697, 19 Google Scholar.

⁷¹ Lee, Anti-scepticism, 328–9.

⁷² John Milner, An account of Mr. Lock’s religion, London 1710, 2–9, 60, 20–1, 31–3, 34–8, 179–88. On Milner see H. H. Poole, ‘Milner, John (1628–1703)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/18790>, accessed 12 September 2024.

⁷³ Milner, An account of Mr. Lock’s religion, 64–8, 76–83, 125.

⁷⁴ Greene, The principles of natural philosophy, [a2v]. This first text on natural philosophy was later developed into a more thorough treatise published in 1727: Principles (1727).

⁷⁵ [Robert Jenkin], A brief confutation of the pretences against natural and revealed religion, London 1702, 72.

⁷⁶ Ibid. 52.

⁷⁷ Greene, A demonstration, [a2v]; Ofspring Blackall, The sufficiency of a standing revelation in general, and of the Scripture revelation in particular, London 1708 [1700]. For more on Blackall see John Redwood, Reason, ridicule and religion: the age of Enlightenment in England, 1660–1750, London 1976, 135–8, and Andrew Starkie, ‘Blackall, Ofspring (bap. 1655, d. 1716)’, ODNB, at <https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/2507>, accessed 2 March 2023.

⁷⁸ [Robert Jenkin], Remarks on some books lately publish’d, London 1709, 122.

⁷⁹ Ibid. 50–1, 122; Whiston, William, The accomplishment of Scripture prophecies, London 1708 Google Scholar; Locke, John, A paraphrase and notes on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, London 1707 Google Scholar.

⁸⁰ [Francis Gastrell], Some considerations concerning the Trinity: and the ways of managing that controversie, London 1696, 11, 26. For a discussion see Yolton, John Locke and the way of ideas, 184–9. For a further discussion of Gastrell’s indebtedness to Locke see Chatterjee’s excellent ‘Christ Church, Oxford, and the reception of John Locke’.

⁸¹ Francis Gastrell, The certainty and necessity of religion in general, London 1703 [1697], 193. See furthermore his The certainty of the Christian revelations and the necessity of believing it, established, London 1699.

⁸² Greene, A demonstration, 5.

⁸³ Ibid. [a7v], 202–4 (against atheism), 173–4, 202–4 (against deism), 3–4, 123–8, 134–5 (against Socinianism), 163 (against Catholicism).

⁸⁴ Ibid. [a3].

⁸⁵ Ibid. 173.

⁸⁶ Ibid. [a4]; [John Locke], The reasonableness of Christianity, London 1695; Toland, Christianity not mysterious.

⁸⁷ Greene, A demonstration, [a6v]–[a7r].

⁸⁸ Ibid. 203.

⁸⁹ Ibid. 203–5; Greene, Principles (1727), 734–5. To address this issue, Descartes relied on material construction devices to highlight the causal structure of a series of mathematical relations: Matthew L. Jones, The good life in the scientific revolution: Descartes, Pascal, Leibniz and the cultivation of virtue, Chicago, Il 2006, 28–31; Gal, Ofer and Chen-Morris, Raz, ‘Nature’s drawing: problems and resolutions in the mathematization of motion’, Synthese clxxxv/3 (2012), 429–66 at pp. 452–410.1007/s11229-011-9978-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹⁰ Greene, A demonstration, 188.

⁹¹ Ibid. 200.

⁹² Ibid. 207–8.

⁹³ Ibid. 215.

⁹⁴ Greene’s discussion of the internal and external evidence supporting the truth and divinity of the Scriptures is influenced by Blackall and Gastrell.

⁹⁵ Ibid. 6–7, cf. p. 30. The argument supporting Greene’s contention is at pp. 10–34.

⁹⁶ Ibid. 39.

⁹⁷ Ibid. 41–2.

⁹⁸ Ibid. 44–5.

⁹⁹ Ibid. 51.

¹⁰⁰ Ibid. 57–6.

¹⁰¹ Ibid. 6.

¹⁰² Ibid. 66–73.

¹⁰³ Ibid. 103.

¹⁰⁴ Ibid. 132.

¹⁰⁵ Ibid. 101–86.

¹⁰⁶ Idem, Principles (1727), 720.

¹⁰⁷ For a discussion see Nuovo, Christianity, antiquity, and enlightenment, 53–73, and Lucci, John Locke’s Christianity, 58–67, esp. p. 61.

¹⁰⁸ Locke, The reasonableness of Christianity, 256.

¹⁰⁹ Idem, A second vindication of the reasonableness of Christianity, London 1697, [A8v] (italics added).

¹¹⁰ Greene, A demonstration, 192–3.

¹¹¹ Ibid. 193.

¹¹² Ibid. 194.

¹¹³ Ibid. 194–5.

¹¹⁴ Ibid. 196.

¹¹⁵ Idem, Principles (1727), 714; Edwards, John, A free discourse concerning truth and error, especially in matters of religion, London 1701, 16–17 Google Scholar.

¹¹⁶ Greene, Principles (1727), 601, cf. 728.

¹¹⁷ Ibid. 810.