A04468:4133
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to…A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to…
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to a certain book lately set forth by M. Harding, and entitled, A confutation of &c. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury.A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to a certaine booke lately set foorthe by M. Hardinge, and entituled, A confutation of &c. By Iohn Iewel Bishop of Sarisburie.
Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the sign of the Elephant, by Henry Wykes, Anno 1567. 27. OctobrisImprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Elephante, by Henry VVykes, Anno 1567. 27. Octobris
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
M. Harding.
M. Hardinge.
Such unhonest toys better become Brentius, that shameless railing Heretic. Now to you, Sir Defender. You belie Hosius, as Brentius of whom you borrowed this, belied the Reverent Father Peter a Soto. Either you have readen the place of Hosius, or you have not. If you have not, then are you to blame, to say so much evil, that you know not. If you have readen the place, then is your fault plain malice, in putting that to Hosius, the contrary whereof you find in the place by your self alleged by which you lead us, as it were by the hand, to behold and consider your own dishonesty. How just cause you have to reprehend Hosius, for that he wrote against Brentius in defence of Petrus a Soto, touching the Council in which Christ was condemned by Caiaphas, it should best appear to him, that would read the whole place, where Hosius treateth that matter. The same would I here have rehearsed, to the discovering of your false dealing, and shameless lying, ⟨p. 621⟩were not the same very long.1
Suche vnhonest toies better become Brentius, that shamelesse railinge Heretike. Now to you, Syr Defender. You belie Hosius, as Brentius of whom you borowed this, belied the Reuerente Father Peter ae Soto. Either you haue readen the place of Hosius, or you haue not. If you haue not, then are you to blame, to saie so mutche euill, that you knowe not. If you haue readen the place, then is your faulte plaine malice, in puttinge that to Hosius, the contrary whereof you finde in the place by your selfe alleaged by which you leade vs, as it were by the hande, to beholde and consider your owne dishonestie. How iuste cause you haue to reprehende Hosius, for that he wrote againste Brentius in defence of Petrus a Soto, touchinge the Councell in whiche Christe was condemned by Caiphas, it shoulde beste appeare to him, that woulde reade the whole place, where Hosius treateth that matter. The same would I here haue rehearsed, to the discoueringe of your false dealinge, and shamelesse lieing,