Htoryofthe Puritans, examin'd. 9ç Heré we have a long Train of Miftakes ; Dr» Bedell is ca11'd Dr. °Beadle, and Bifhop Eleaof Kil- more. He was Bifhop of Kilmore and Ardagh, when this Letter was wrote, which bears Date April t. 163o. when he fubfcribes himfelf, Will. Kilmore and Ardagh. Bedell's Life, p..47. And in Sir James Ware's Book, de Prefulibus Hibernia', '[p. 89. Edit. Lugd. Bat. 1717.] we are told that Gulielmus Bedellus, S. T. D. Dublinii Prepofitus, ad s,.trumque Epifcopatum promotus 1629. Poft Quadriennium, Epifcopatu Ardacbbadenfife fponte ab- dìcavit. Then he informs us, that this Bifhop Elea ofAil- more (as he calls him) fent this Account of the In- creafe of Popery in Ireland to Archb/hop Laud a- bout this Time. By this Time, he mull either refer to the Proteftation of the frith Bithops againft Po- pery, juft mention'd, which was dated November 26. t626, or to the. King's Anfwer to the Com- mons Remonftrance, (which he fathers upon Bill-lop Laud.) And this was in the Year 1628, two Years íhort of Bifhop Bedell's Account. So that here is an Anachronifm, or (mall Miftake (I had almollc call'd it Blunder) in Chronology, which clears Bifhop Laud of the Accufation laid to his charge. Far- ther, one would almoft imagine from his violent Outcry upon this Occaíion, That this Account had related to the State of Religion, in the whole King- dom of Ireland ; when 'tis apparent from the Let- ter, that it related only to the two Diocefes ofKil- more and Ardagh, which Mr. Collier has remark'd, in the very Place Mr. Neal refers to. And I think a candid Hiftorian could not fairly have left this unmentioned ; had it not been for his wife Re- marks which follow ; which a fair State ofthe Cafe, woul.1 hve rendred uf-lefs and infi nificant. Neal, p.187. The Bifhop [ Laud] obferves in his Diary, that ibisParliament labour''d bis Ruin. H z And
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=