WORD
704
WORLD
Thomas Cobham 1317
Adam de Orlton 1327
Simon de Montecute 1333
Thomas Hemenhale 1337
Wolstan de Brauns-
ford 1339
John de Thoresby 1349 Reginald Brian 1352
John Barnet 1362
Wilham Wittlesey 1363 William Lynn 1368
Henry Wakefield 1375 Tideman de Winch- comb 1394 Richard CUfford 1401 Thomas Peverell 1407 Phihp Morgan 1419 Thomas Polton 1425 Thomas Bourchier 1434 John Carpenter 1443 John Alcock 1476 Robert Morton 1486 Giovanni Gigli (de
Liliis; Gigles) 1497
Sylvestro Gigli (de
Liliis; Gigles) 1498
Giuho de' Medici (afterwards Pope Clement VII) 1521
Girolamo Ghinucci
(de Ghinucciis) 1622 (In 1535 Hugh Lati- mer was schismati- cally intruded into the see and was fol- lowed by John Bell (1539-43), Nicho- las Heath (1543- 1550), and John Hooper (1552-53) Nicholas Heath 1553
Richard Pates 1555- 1565, the last Cath- olic Bishop of Wor- cester, d. at Lou- vain, 22 Nov.,1565.
The diocese included the County of Worcester and part of Warwickshire, and being of no very great extent only one archdeaconry was necessary, under which all the parishes, 241 in number, were included. The arms of the see were argent, ten torteaux.
Britton. History and Antiquities of Worcester (London, 1835); Winkles, Cathedral Churches in England and Wales (London, 1S51); Registrum Prioratus B. Mari(s Wigomiensis (London, 1865); King, The Three Choirs (London, 1866); Noake, The Monastery and Cathedral of Worcester (London, 1866) ; Luard, Annales Monastici, IV (London, 1869); Smith and Onslow. Worcester in Diocesan Series (London. 1883) ; Strange, Worces- ter: the Cathedral and See (London, 1900); Creighton, Italian Bishops of Worcester in Historical Essays (London, 1902); Graves and Harne, Hemingi chartularium Eccl. Wigomiensis (Oxford. 1723); Green. History and Antiquities of Worcester (2 vols., London, 1796) ; Hist. MSS. Comm., 8, 14; Floyeb, Cata- logue of MSS. in Chapter Library of Worcester Cathedral (Oxford, 1906).
Edwin Burton.
Word, The. See Logos, The.
Words (In Canon Law). — To give the right value to words is a very important factor in the proper inter- pretation of law, .and hence canonists give many rules for the exact acceptation of words, in order that decrees may be correctly understood and the extent of their obligation determined. In general, the authentic interpretation of a Law may be made by the legislator, or his siiccessor or superior, but when this is not the case recourse must be had to what is called magisterial, or doctrin.al, interpretation. It is for this latter mode that rules have been formed. The words of a law must be understood according to their
Tilhere
777
Heathured (^thel-
red)
781
Denebeorht
798
Heahbeorht (Ead-
bert)
822
Ealhhun (Alwin)
about
845
Wa;rfrith
873
^thelhun
915
Wilfrith II
922
Coenweald
929
St. Dunstan
957
St. Oswald
961
Ealdwulf
992
Wulfstan
1003
Leofsige
1016
Beorhtheah
1033
Lyfing
10.38
^Ifric Puttoc
1040
Lyfing (restored)
1041
Ealdred
1046
St. Wulfstan II
1062
Samson
1096
Theulf
1113
Simon
1125
John de Pageham
1151
Alured
1158
Roger
1163
Baldwin
1180
William de Narhale
1185
Robert Fitz-Ralph
1191
Henry de SoiUi
1193
John de Constantiis
1195
Mauger
1198
Walter de Grey
1214
Silvester de Eveshaml216
William de Blois
1218
Walter de Cantelupe
12.37
Nicholas
1266
Godfrey de Giffard
1268
William de Gains
.
borough
1301
Walter Reynold
1307
Walter de Mayder
-
ston
1313
usual signification, unless it is certain that the legis-
lator intended them to be taken in another sense.
When the words are not ambiguous, they must not
be twisted into some far-fetched meaning. If the
intention of the legislator is known, the interpretation
must be according to that, rather than according to
the words of a law, even though they seem to have
another sense, because the words are then said not to
be nude, but clothed with the will of the lawgiver.
When a law is conceived in general terms, it is pre-
sumed that no exception was intended; that is, where
the law makes no exception, interpreters are not
allowed to distinguish. In all interpretations, how-
ever, that meaning of the words is to be preferred
which favours equity rather than strict justice. An
argument can be drawn from the contrary sense of
the words, provided that nothing follows which is
absurd, inappropriate, or contradicted by another
law. The provisions of a previous statute are not
presumed to be changed beyond the express meaning
of the words of a new law.
When a law is penal, its words are to be taken in their strictest sense ancl not to be extended to other cases beyond those explicitly mentioned; but when a law concedes favours, its words are to be interpreted according to their widest sense. "In contracts, words are to be taken in their full [plena] meaning, in last wills in a wider [plenior] sense, and in grants of favours in their widest [plenissima] interpretation" (c. Cum Dilecti, 6 de donat.). When there is a doubt as to the meaning of the words, that sense is to be pre- ferred which does not prejudice the rights of a third person. No words of a law are ever presumed to be superfluous. In interpreting a law, the words must be considered in their context. To give a meaning to words that would render a law useless is a false inter- pretation. When the words of a law are in the future tense, and even when they are in the imperative mood concerning the judge, but not concerning the crime, the penalty is understood to be incurred, not ipso facto, but only after judicial sentence. ^VTien the words of a law are doubtful the presumption is in favour of the subjects, not of the lawgiver.
Taunton. The Law of the Church (London, 1906), a. v.; Feriu- Ris, Bibl. can., V (Rome, 1889), a. v. Lex.
William H. W. Fanning.
Works of Mercy. See Mercy, Corporal and Spiritual Works op.
World, Antiquity of the. — Various attempts have been made to establish the age of the world. Two groups of scientists have especially busied them- selves with this question: physicists and geologists. The most notable attempt is that of the physicist Thomson (Lord Kelvin), who based his calculations on Lai)lace's theory that the earth originated in a fiery fluid magma. While in this magniatic state, the earth as a whole must, have reacted to the attrac- tion of the moon as the oceans now do, with ebb and flow. These constant and strong tides must in long intervals have retarded the rotation of the earth to such an extent that 7200 million years ago the eaxth must have rotated with doulilo its present rapidity. Again, the polar flattening of the earth was hkewise caused by this rotation, and Thomson calculated that this flattening could not have been effected to such a degree if the terrestrial crust had been solid, and the rotation of the earth the same as to-day. Conse- quently, from the extent of the flattening a conclusion may ho drawn as to the rapidity of tlie rotation at the time of the superficial soliiliiication of the globe. Thomson reckoned that, so long as the earth revolved double as quickly, the flattening at the poles must have been much greater than now, and thus estimated (hat the solidification of the terrestrial crust occurred less than 1000 million years ago. Thomson later approached the same problem in another way, by
