A detection of sundrie foule errours, lies, sclaunders, corruptions, and other false dealinges, touching doctrine, and other matters vttered and practized by M.Iewel, in a booke lately by him set foorth entituled, a defence of the apologie. &c. By Thomas Harding doctor of diuinitie.

WRITING the Confutation of the Apologie, I had occasion to speake of the Succession of Bishoppes. Thereto M. Iewel in his pretensed Defence hath replied at great length. Wherein bicause he may perhaps to the vnlearned seme to haue some colour of aduantage against vs, the matter being of good weight, I iudge it not vnprofitable to be∣stow some labour, and here to cōfute his whole Defence touching that point, whereby I doubte not it shal ap∣peare, how litle credite he deserueth, if his sayinges be throughly examined, where he blazeth forth most shew of learning. That it maie appeare, how directly he an∣swereth the pointes of this Controuersie, and of what pith his owne sayinges, and how muche to the purpose his testimonies be, and how truly alleged, and that al be made the more plaine and cleere: I wil reherse, first, the place of the Apologie, that gaue me occasion to treat of Succession, then the wordes of my Confutation, against whiche M. Iewel bendeth the force of his De∣fence. After this I wil laie forth his whole Defence sen∣tence by sentence, worde by worde, as I finde it in his

booke, and so briefly as I can, refel the same. I am driuen to reherse that discourse of my Confutation againe, bi∣cause a great parte of the Defence depending thereof, and being directed against the same, onlesse it were againe by rehersal commended to the readers view and memorie, our whole disputation would be obscure, and vncertaine. And this haue I donne also the rather, to thintent the reader might haue that parte of my Confu∣tation intier and whole, whiche M. Iewel hath caused to be set forth in his booke, pared, hewed, dismembred, and altogether disgraced.