POPE JOAN. A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A PROTESTANT AND A PAPIS●.  
Manifestly proving, that a woman called JOAN was Pope of Rome: against the surmises and objections made to the contrary, by Robert Be●●●●mine and Baronius●●●dinals ●●●dinals: Florimandus Raemondus, N. D. and 〈◊〉 Popish writers, impudently denying the same.  
By ALEXANDER COOK.  
LONDON, Printed for ED. BLUNT and W. BARRET. 1610.   

TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD, TOBIAS, MY LORD Archb. of York his Grace, Primate and Metropolitan of England.  
IT is lamentable to consider how many stars are fallen of late from heaven, how many Goddesses on the earth have departed from the faith, and given heed unto the spirit of errors, and doctrines of slanderers, to wit, the Papists. Yet me thinks it is no matter of wonderment, because we read, That if men receive not the love of the truth, 
2. Thess. 2. 10, 11  that they might be saved, God in his justice will give them strong delusions to believe lies, that they may be damned: for few, or none, of these late Apostates, for any thing I can learn, were ever in love with the truth. Among us they were, but they were not of us, as now appears by their departing from us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; doubtless they would never have fallen to Popery. For though Popery be managed after the most politic manner, yet in itself it is a gross Religion: and the Perfiters thereof, as shameless men in avowing manifest untruths, and denying known truths, as ever set pen to paper. All which it is as easy to prove, as to object, against them. But my purpose at this time is, to lay open their shame in denying known truths: which though it may be showed by divers particulars, as namely by 
b N. ●. in his wa●nword to S. Franc. Hastings watchword, ●ncounter. 1. ca 2.  Parsons and 
c In his reproof of D. abbots defence o● Mr. Per●●●s. Preface to the Reader. p 10.  Bishops denying that they call their Pope their Lord God: by 
d Apology ad lib. jacob. mag. Britann regis cap. 15. p 208.  Bellarmine's denying that any jesuit had any hand in the powder treason: by their 
e Bell 〈◊〉. Baron. P● ghius, etc.  general denying that Pope Honorius the first was an heretic, and by such like: yet most apparently their impudehcy appears in denying the report of Pope joan, which is proved by a cloud of witnesses in this discourse (which I make bold to present unto your Grace:) for they are driven to feign, to forge, to cog, to play the fools, and in plain English, to lie all manner of lies, for the covering of their shame in this. Onuphrius, Harding, Saunders, Cope, Genebrard, Bellarmine, Bernartius, Florimondus, Papyrius Maso, Baronius, Parsons, and divers others, who have joined hand in hand, with purpose to carry this cause away by strong hand; are so entangled in it, that it is with them, as with birds in the lime twigs, which stick the faster in, by how much they flutter the more to get out. Which if your Grace upon perusing (at your best leisure) shall find true, my humble desire is, that you will give me leave to publish it under your Grace's name: partly, that by it the simpler sort (for I write not for the learned) may have a taste by this of the honesty, or rather the dishonesty of Papists in handling of points in controversy: and partly, that it may be a testimony of that reverent respect, which I acknowledge due to such Church-governors as your Grace is, who give attendance unto reading, which the 
f 1. Tim. 4. 13.  Apostle willed Timothy to do: and after the example of the ancient Bishops, preach often: drawing on others, not by words only, but by example also, to performance of like exercises. Hereafter, if it please God, that health, and means of books serve, I shall light on some more profitable argument. In the mean while, I pray God strengthen your Grace's hands to the finishing of the Lords work, in the Province wherein you sit, as one of the seven Angels in the seven Churches mentioned in the Revelation: that by your Grace's means, the Epha, wherein Popish wickedness sitteth, may be lift up between the earth and the heaven, and carried out of the North, into the land of Sinar, and set there upon his own place.  
Your Graces at commandment ALEXANDER COOK.   

TO THE POPISH, or Catholic Reader.  
PApist, or Catholic, choose whether name thou hast a mind to: (for though I know that of later years thou art proud of both, even of the name 
a Baron annot. in Martyol. Ro. Octob. 16. b. Lorinus in Act. Apost. c. 20. v. 30 Anastasius Cochelet Palaestrita honoris D. Hallensis pro Lipsio cap. 1. pag. 6.  Papist, as well as of the name 
b Bellar. lib. 4. de Ecclesia, cap. 4. Rhem. annot. in Act. 11. 26.  Catholic; yet I envy thee neither: only I would have thee remember, that that firebrand of hell Hildebrand, commonly called Gregory the 7. 
c Baron. annot. in Martyrol. Rolan. 10 c.  was the first man who challenged it as his sole right, to be called Papa, that is, Pope, whence thou art called Papist: and that divers are of opinion, as 
d Annot. in 1. ad Cor. 13.  Hugo de Victore noteth, that in some sense the devil may be called a Catholic) I offer unto thee here a discourse touching Pope joan (if thou darest read it, for fear of falling into thy Pope's curse) whose Popedom I will make good unto thee, not by the testimonies of Pantaleon, and Functius, and Sleidan, and Illyricus, and Constantinus Phrygio, and john Bale, and Robert Barnes, because thou 
e In Indice lib. prohibit.  hast condemned their persons, and their books too, to hell: but by the testimonies of thy brethren, the sons of thine own mother, because, as 
f Novatian. de Trinitate, ca 18 nu. 86. inter opera Tertulliani  one saith, Firmum est genus probationis quod etiam ab adversario sumitur, ut vertias etiam ab inimicis veritatis probetur: that is a strong proof which is wrong out of the adversary, when the enemies of truth are driven to bear witness unto the truth. And as 
g Vi●es de Instrumento probabilitatis.  another, Amici contra amicum, & inimici pro inimico invincibile testimonium est: which sounds as I conceive it, thus. The testimony of a Papist against a Papist, and the testimony of a Papist for a Protestant, is without exception. The reason why I have framed it in way of Dialogue, was, that I might meet more fully with all the cavils which thy Proctors use in pleading of this case: and that it might be better understood of common Readers, who are sooner gulled with continued discourses. If I have spoken truly, I would have thee bear witness with me unto the truth; if otherwise, I am comeent thou strike me. For though I hold thy Papism, in some respect, to be worse than Atheism, agreeably to a speech fathered upon Epiphanius: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Heresy is worse than Infidelity, and by consequent thyself a dangerous neighbour to dwell by, because, as one of thine own 
h Maldonat. in joh. 4. 9  Doctors writes, Certè periculosius est cum haereticis, quam cum Samaritanis, quam cum gentilibus, aut Mahumetanis agere: It is questionless more dangerous to dwell by an heretic, then to dwell by a Samaritan, by an heathen, by a Turk: yet I am not so far out of love with thee, but I can be content to learn of thee, as 
i Lib. 2. Retract. cap. 18.  S. Austin did of Tyconius the heretic, if thou canst teach me. Yea I profess, that though it may be gathered out of 
k Ratio. 10.  Campian, thy Champion, and Tiburne-Martyr, that thou believest one heaven cannot hold thee, and such as are of my opinion; though 
l Fieri nequit ut Lutheranus more riens saluetur, gehennam evadat ex aeternis ignibus eripiatur. Si mentior, damner ipse cum Lucifero, saith, Co●terus, Resp. ad refutationem Lucae Osiandr. Propostr. 8. pag. ult.  Costerus wish strangely, that he may be damned both body and soul, if any of us be saved: yet that hath not estranged me so far from thee, but that I wish thee well, even eyes to see the truth, and ingenuity to acknowledge it.   

POPE JOAN. A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A PROTESTANT AND a Papist, manifestly proving, that a woman called joan, was Pope of Rome.  PROTESTANT. 
WEll met, and welcome home Sir. What new book have you brought us down from London this Mart?  PAP. 
Oh, I have an excellent book, which discourseth at large about Pope joan, whose Popedom you cast in the catholics teeth so often.  PROT. 
What language is it in, I pray you? French? or Latin? or English? and who made it?  PAP. 
It was 
a An. 1602. Possevin in errat. & praetermis. 1. to. quae habentur ad finem To. 3 Apparat. sac.  first written in French, but I have it in Latin. The Author of it is one Florimondus Raemondus.  PROT. 
Florimondus Raemondus? what is he, that I never heard of him before? Is he, and his book, of any credit?  PAP. 
He himself is reputed 
b Vir, cum primis illustris ac pius, & doctrina insignis. Baronius Annal. Tom. 10. ad An. 853. Nu 62.  a very famous man for life and learning, so that, at this present he is one of the French Kings Council at Bordeaux; and as for his book, it is of wonderful esteem.  PROT. 
With whom I pray you?  PAP. 
Even with Cardinal Baronius. For 
c Praecaeteris commendandus fama nobilis Florimundus: Baronius loco citato.  he holds it the worthiest discourse that ever was made of that argument; He professeth, that he could have found in his heart to have inserted it into his Annals, but that it is somewhat too large. For by it as the Cardinal further 
d Sic confecit monstrum istud, ut nouat●●es pudeat, quae scripserunt vel somniasse. Ibi d.  noteth, he hath so confounded all the pack of Heretics, who heretofore upbraided the Catholics with it, that now they are ashamed of that which they have said,  PROT. 
But hath any man else the like opinion of it?  PAP. 
Yea marry, Possevin is of the same mind. For 
e Prorsus confodit haereticos q●i commentum illud spar●erunt in vulgus, ut amphus ea de fabula hiscere non audeant. In Apparatu sac. verbo, Florimondus.  Possevin saith, that he hath killed the heretics outright. That since the publishing of that book the heretics are wished, they dare talk no more of a Pope joan.  PROT. 
This is much: but have you read it?  PAP. 
Read it? Yea I have read it again and again. Besides, I have compared it with that which is written of the same argument, by Buchingerus in Germany: by Charanza in Spain: by Onuphrius, and Bellarmine, and Baronius, in Italy: by Turrian, and Bernartius in Belgia: by Pontacus in Aquitania: by Genebrard, and Papyrius Massonus, in France: by Sanders, by Cope, by Harding, by Father Parsons, and others of our own country.  PROT. 
And what say you now (after the reading of all these) to the story of Pope joan, tell me in good earnest, and dissemble not.  PAP. 
I say, the very truth is, that the whole story of Pope joan, is 
f Onuph. Annot. in Plat. in vita joh. 8.  a fable; a 
g Harding in his answer to jewels Apology.  fond and vain fable, a 
h N. D. part. 2. c. 5. Nu. 21. pag. 391. of the 3. Conuers.  mere fable, an 
i Idem nu. 36. pag. 403.  heretical fable, a 
k Ibid.  ridiculous fiction: and so 
l Idem nu. 21. pag. 391.  known to the learneder sort of Protestants among you, but that you will not leave to delude the world with it, for lack of other matter. Yea 
m Idem. Nu. 36. pag. 403.  I say further, there are so many improbabilities, and moral impossibilities in this tale, as no man of any mean judgement, discretion, or common sense, will give credit thereto: but will easily see the vanity thereof. And in a word, 
n Impudentissimè ficta, stul. tissimè credita Bernartius de utilitate legendae hist. lib. 2. p. 105. in marg.  I say, he was a knave that devised it, and he is fool who believeth it.  PROT. 
Now this is excellent in good truth: I see there is metal in you. But what reason have you on your side, that you are so peremptory? Did it not run for currant without controlment till within these forty years, or thereabout: to wit, till the year 1566, that Onuphrius the Friar began to bogle at it? Was not Onuphrius the first, that ever by reason sought to discredit the report of it? And yet doth not even 
o Multos & magni nominis viros historiam hanc suscipere, came quoque vulgo verum existimari Loco supra citato.  he confess, that many men of worth, as well as of ordinary sort, believed it for a truth? Is it not to be found in Marianus Scotus, in Sigebert, in Gotefridus Viterbiensis, in johannes de Parisiis, in Martinus Polonus, in Petrarch, in Boccace, in Ramulsus Cestrensis, in johannes Lucidus, in Alphonsus è Carthagena, in Theodoricus de Niem, in Chalcocondilas, in Platina, in Palmerius, in Nauclerus, in Sabellicus, in Trithemius, in Volateran, in Bergomensis, in Schedel, in Laziardus, in Fulgosus, in Textor, in Gassarus, in Mantuan, in Crantius, in Charanza, and a 
p Batthol. Cassa. 2. part. Catal. gloriae mundi, nona Consideratio. joh. Turrecremat. in Summa lib. 4. part. 2. cap. 20. Carolus Molinaeus. comment. in Parifiens. consuetud. Tit. 1. nu. 26. Caelius Rhodigin. Antiquarum lect. lib. 8. cap. 1.  number more of your own faction, and of your own friends? of which some were Grecians, some Italians, some Spaniards, some French, some Germans, some Polonians, some Scots, some English; and yet never a one of them a Lutheran. Yea do we not find it in some of your stories set down in pictures? And is not so much to be gathered by that image of hers, which is set up amongst the rest of the images of the Popes in the renowned church of Sienna in Italy, and is to be seen there at this day: which the Bishop of that place would not suffer to be defaced at the last repairing of that Church, though your Jesuits did earnestly request him to deface it? Was there not made of old (for fear of such like afterclaps) a stool of easement, on which they were set at their creation, for proof of their humanity? Was there not a marble image set up as a monument thereof in that place where she miscarried? to wit, in one of the chiefest streets in Rome? which monument was to be seen likewise within these few years, even in Pius the 5. his time. And is it not written by men among yourselves, that your Popes, when they go in procession, refuse to go through that street, in detestation of that fact, and go further about? How say you, is it not even thus?  PAP. 
It is written (I 
n Philip. Bergom. in Supplem. chron. lib. 11. ad a●. 858.  confess) that our Popes, in detestation of that fact, when they go in procession to the Lateran Church, refuse to go through that street: but they who write so, mistake the matter. For the true reason why they turn out of that street, which is the nearer way, is, for that, that street is angusta & anfractuosa, a narrow street, and such a one as winds this way and that way: and in that respect, unfit for so great atraine, as ordinarily accompanies the Pope to pass orderly through: as 
o Loco supra citato.  Onuphrius, and 
p Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine, and 
q Fabula joannae, c. 21. p. 184.  Florimondus, have observed.  PROT. 
Say you so? why, but if it be true which Philippus Bergomensis hath storied, this observation is false: for Eo omisso (ᶜ saith he) speaking of the Pope's turning out of that place of the street, 
r In Supplement Chron. ad An. 858.  wherein Dame joan was delivered) declina ad diverticula, vicosque & sic, loco detestabili postergato, reintrantes, iter perficiunt quod coeperunt: that is, Leaving that way, they turn into by-lanes and by-streets; & as soon as they are beyond that detestable place, they turn into their way again, and so go on in their procession. For if upon their leaving that street, they enter into by-lanes and by-streets, and as soon as they are passed that ominous place turn in again; the reason why they leave that street cannot be, for that it is narrow, and winding in and out. For no question, but those by-lanes, are as narrow: and by their turning out, and returning into the same way again, they wind as often in and out, as if they went along through the same street, though it were very crooked. But howsoever, shift it among you: for it sufficeth me, that you cannot deny, but that which I told you concerning this point, is written by men of your own religion: especially seeing 
s De vitis pont. in vita joh. 8.  Platina, who knew Rome well enough, and was desirous to cover the Pope's nakedness herein, as much as he could with any honesty, confesseth, that this is probable enough. What have you to say to the rest of my speech?  PAP. 
Much. For whereas you say Onuphrius was the first who by reason sought to discredit the report of it: that is not so. johannes de Columna a good writer of Chronicles, long before Onuphrius, hath likewise utterly rejected the vanity of this fable as D. 
t Confutat. of the Apology, part. 4. fol. 166.  Harding noteth.  PRO. 
johannes de Columna his history is extant in Latin in the University library at Oxford: and in French, in New College library. But there is not one word, good, or bad, for, or against Pope joan in it. If he rejected it, he rejected it by silence.  PAP. 
But 
u Annalium Boiorum lib. 4.  johannes Aventinus, rejected it in plain words. And he wrote a good many years before Onuphrius.  PROT. 
johannes Aventinus (I grant) rejects it as a fable in one word, but he gives no reason of his rejecting of it. Besides, 
x joh. Aventinus author parum probatae fider: saith Bell Append. ad ●o. de sum. Pont cap. 10.  Bellarmine casts him off as a writer of small credit: and 
y Infectan haeresis scabre bestiam pietate & doctrina omnino desertam. Baron Annal To. 10. ad 996. Nu. 54.  Baronius brands him, not merely for a skabd sheep, but for an heretical skabby beast, destitute both of honesty and learning: and divers of your Popes have 
z In Indicibus lib. prohibitorum.  cried down his history, as unworthy of reading; wherefore I see no reason, that his reasonless rejecting of it, doth any way prejudice the truth of it. What have you else to say?  PAP. 
First I would know who told you there was such a marble image in one of the streets at Rome?  PRO. 

a Lib de privilegijs & iuribus Imperij.  Theodoricus de Niem, who was Secretary to one of your Popes, told me that: for Adhuc vetus statua marmorea illic positafiguratiuè monstrat hoc factum, saith Theodoricus de Niem: that is, Unto this day an old marble image erected in that place showeth the matter under a figure.  PAP. 
Indeed 
b Florimond. lib citato. cap. 21. nu. 2.  I cannot deny but that in former ages many have said so, and (to confess a truth) I myself have read as much in Antoninus' Archbishop of Florence, and in Peter Mexia. But verily that image resembled no such thing. For neither was it like a woman lying in childbed, nor was the boy which was graven by her, like a child in the swaddling clouts, but like one of some years.  PRO. 
This your exception is to no purpose; for that age was a learne-lesse and a witless age. And therefore perhaps had no more skill in graving, carving, and painting, than they had, 
c Aelian de varia hist. lib. 10.  who were driven to set either under, or above their pictures, Hoc est bos: illudequus: hoc arbour: that men might know what kind of creature it was that they had painted. Questionless 
d Epist. 120.  Aeneas Silvius, pointing to a better time than that of Pope joanes, condemns the painters and carvers thereof for notorious bunglers, saying thus; Si ducentorum, trecentorúmue annorum, aut sculpturas intu●beris, aut picturas: invenies non hominum, sed monstrorum portentorumque facies: that is, If thou observe the graven or painted images which were made two or three hundred years agone, thou shalt find, that they are faced more like monsters, and hobgoblins, than men. Now if they were such, what marvel, though intending to engrave a woman traveling, or rather newly delivered of a child, they did it but untowardly? But what I pray you doth that Image represent, if it represent not Pope joan?  PAP. 

z Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap. 24.  Cardinal Bellarmine seems to like of their opinion, who guess that some heathenish priest, who was about to offer sacrifice, and had his man before him, is denoted thereby. But I am rather of 
a Cap. citat. nu. 6  Florimondus' mind, who thinks it was an idol, even an image of some of the gods of the heathen.  PROT. 
If it had represented a sacrificing priest, and his man: the man should have been graven behind, and not before his master. For the servant followeth his master, 
b 1. Sam. 14. 12. 13.  as the young man that bare Jonathan's armour, followed jonathan, wherefore you have reason to leave Bellarmine in this. But why do you incline to Florimondus? doth he give you any reason for this opinion? or allegeth any Author of his opinion?  PAP. 
Yes, 
c Cum Onuphrio Panuino antiquitatis perscrutatore diligentissimo vetus aliquod idolum existimavi. Florim. ibid.  he professeth, that he followeth Onuphrius therein, who was a most diligent Antiquary.  PROT. 
But he lies in that. For Onuphrius speaks not one word good or bad of this marble Image. He passeth it over in silence, as though no man had ever spoken of it.  PAP. 
I marvel if that be so. But yet I rest persuaded upon Florimondus next reason, that that Image resembled not Pope joan. For if the engraver had purposed to express such a matter, and to continue thereby the memory thereof to the world's end, he would have set some 
d Inscriptionem praefixisset. pag. 188.  inscription over it; for so do all men who erect monuments for remembrances.  PROT. 
That is not so, for we read in 
e Lib. 7. hist. cap. 14.  Eusebius, that the 
f Mat. 9 21.  woman who was cured by our Saviour Christ of her issue of blood, etc. erected (after the custom of the heathen) an image of him, no doubt for remembrance sake. But we read of no inscription written upon it. In the book of 
g Cap. 4. 7. 8.  josua we read, that the Israelites were commanded to lay 12. stones upon an heap, as a memorial unto their children for ever. And yet it is plain by the circumstances they set nothing thereon in writing. When you paint S. Peter, you paint him with keys in his hand, and set no inscription over his head, nor under his feet, as 
* Obserat. in Annal. tom. 1 ad an. 57 apud Possevin. in Apparat sac. verbo. Caesar Baron.  Baronius confesseth. Wherefore for any thing I yet hear, it is most probable that it was set up for a monument of Pope joan.  PAP. 
Enjoy your conceit. But 
h Sixtus quintus hunc vicum rectiorem duci curavit, quo factum est ut imago illa sublata sit. Florim. cap. 21. p. 189.  I can tell you one thing. That image is now removed out of that place. For Sixtus Quintus, that great builder and mender of high ways, when he made that street strait, wherein that image was, was forced to remove that Image.  PROT. 
Belike, that image would have been some blemish unto the street, if it had remained: and that made him move it.  PAP. 
Yea marry would it.  PROT. 
Now well fare his heart that was so careful to rid the streets of such a cumbersome monument. But who told you that Sixtus Quintus removed it upon that occasion?  PAP. 

l Loco citato.  Florimondus.  PROT. 
Was it he? Then know him for a liar whilst you live: for it was Pius Quintus, and not Sixtus Quintus, who removed it. And Pius Quintus removed it, and cast it into Tiber, not for that it disgraced the street: but ut memoriam historiae illius aboleret: that he might extinguish the memory of that shameful act. And this is witnessed not only by some travelers, who were at that time in Rome; but by 
n Historia jesuitici ordinis, cap. 10. de jesoitarum patre & matre.  Elias Hassenmuller, one (once) of your fiery order of jesuits. Your Florimondus will not deserve (I fear) half the commendation you have given him.  PAP. 
I doubt not but he will acquit himself like a man, of whatsoever you can say against him. But whence had you that of the stool of easement, I pray you? for 
o Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap 24.  in Bellarmin I read, that de sede ad explorandum sexum nulla usquam mentio. Of a stool of easement, to try the Pope's sex, there is no where any mention: and in 
p Fabulosum, & ab imperito vulgo fictum. Annotat. in Plat. in vit. joh. 8.  Onuphrius, that it is but a mere toy, and an idle conceit of idle people.  PROT. 
That of the stool of easement, is recorded by Philippus Bergomensis, 
q Nobiliter doctus, historiographus celeberrimus. Trith. de Script. eccles. verbo. jacobus Bergomensis.  a man of great worth in his time as Trithemius witnesseth. For upon mention made of Pope joanes story, Ad evitandos similes errores statutum fuit (
r In Supplement. Chron, ad An. 858.  saith he) ne quis de caetero in B. Petri collocaretur sede, priusquam per perforatam sedem futuri Pontificis genitalia ab ultimo Diacono Cardinale attrectarentur. That is, For avoiding like error in future times, it was decreed: that no man should be held for Pope, till the youngest Cardinal Deacon had found by trial, while he sat upon a stool of easement, that he was a man. which is likewise testified by 
s De rebus Turcicis, l. 6. pag 98.  Laonicus Chalchondylas. For upon relation of that story, he goes on thus: Quapropter ne decipiantur iterum, sed rem cognoscant, neque ambigant: Pontificis creati virilia tangunt, & qui tangit, acclamat: Mas nobis Dominus est: that is, Lest they should be deceived again, they make proof by feeling; and he that feeleth makes it known by crying out; We have a man Pope. And you may find as much in a later Papist, who within these few years, writ a book of the Harmony of Romish magistrates, and in it this.  PAP. 
You say true indeed. For I now remember 
t Cap. 18. p. 159. In ridiculorum authorum grege anumerandus est.  Florimondus confesseth so much, yet he reproveth the Author for writing so. But let us go on: for I long to hear of whom you heard that such a chair was to be seen, in the Pope's palace, within these few years.  PRO. 
I heard that of 
u Aencid 9 lib. 1.  Sabellicus. For writing of the same matter, Spectatur adhuc in Pontificia domo marmorea sella (saith he) circa medium inanis, qua nonus Pontifex continuò ab eius creatione resedit, ut sedentis genitalia ab ultimo Diacono attrectentur. That is, There is to be seen at this day in the Pope's palace, a chair of marble, wherein the new Pope presently upon his election is set down, that as he sits, the lowest Deacon may make trial of his humanity by touching. And you may find as much in William Brewin, who lived in the year 1470. for in 
* Wilhelmus Brewin in codice manuscripto de 7. Ecclesijs principalibus v●bis Romae.  Capella salvatoris (saith he) sunt duae vel plures cathedrae de lapide marmoreo & cubio, cum for aminibus in iis sculptis, super quas cathedras, ut audivi ibidem, est probatio Papae, utrùm sit masculus, an non. That is, In the chapel of our Saviour there are two or three marble chairs with holes in them, wherein, as I heard there, they make proof whether the Pope be a man or no.  PAP. 

x Cap. 20. pag. 176.  Florimondus acknowledgeth there is yet such a chair, wherein the Popesits after his election. But that he sits therein to such an end as you speak, that he utterly denies.  PROT. 
And what is his reason?  PAP. 

y Ibid p. 181.  Because he sits therein not in a corner, but in the great Church of S. john Lateran, whither all the world (almost) comes to see him; where he is attended by the whole College of Cardinals, and whereat there are many Ambassadors of kings and Princes: for a closer place were fitter for such a purpose. They might more conveniently have made trial of his humanity in the conclave where he was chosen.  PROT. 
And so they did, it seems: for presently upon their electing of him before they proclaimed him Pope, they set him in a chair in their conclave, as you may read in the book of holy ceremonies dedicated to Leo the 10. Whereby you may see how idly 
a Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine talks, who taking upon him to clear the point, never speaks of his sitting in the chair in the conclave, but only of his sitting in certain other chairs at S. john Lateran's, as though he had been chaired only in public, and not in private: and that he himself had said sufficiently to the point in question, by proving that in public there was no such conclusion tried with the Pope: whereas the conclusion was tried in secret. But can you tell me what the end is why the Pope sits in such a chair in public?  PAP. 
Marry to the end that thereby he may be put in mind, that he is not God, but man: in as much as he stands in need of a close stool as well as others: for so saith 
b Cap. 20. p. 177. and 188.  Florimondus.  PROT. 
I promise you and he had need to be put in mind thereof. For though 
c N. D. in his Warn-word to Sir Fr. Hastings Encounter 1. cap. 2. fol. 30.  some Papists shamefully deny it, there have been popish clawbacks, 
d Cap. Cum inter. Extrau. joh. 22. impress. Paris. 1513. & Lugduni. 1555  who in plain words have termed the Pope, as 
e joh. 20 28.  S. Thomas termed Christ: their Lord and God: and there are still 
f Planè supremum in terris numen. Stapleton princip. fid. doctrine praefat ad Greg. 13.  who give him such titles as are due to God, and ascribe like power to him and God. But me thinks, they should not need to have set him in such a chair to such a purpose; for his own necessity would have driven him to set himself thereon ordinarily every day: and his chamber-pot would have served to put him in mind of his humanity sufficiently. For Antigonus the elder knew by that, that he was man and not a God, as 
g Part. 2. Moral. lib. de Iside & Osi●●de.  Plutarch writeth. Besides, me thinks they should not have intended such a mystery by such a ceremony, because they set him therein before he was in his pontificalibus: for till he be mitred, till he be crowned, till he have received the keys, whereby is denoted his power to bind and loose: and a rod, whereby is denoted his power to punish the obstinate: me thinks there should be no fear of forgetting himself. For till such ceremonies be performed, he is not in his ruff. Again, had it not been better think you, if they had aimed at any such mark, to have caused a boy to come every morning unto the Pope's chamber door (after the example of 
h Stobaeus serm. 19 ex Aeliano.  Philip king of Macedonia) who should have whoopt him out of his bed, and bid him remember, that he was mortal?  PAP. 
If you like not Florimondus conjecture touching that ceremony, what say you to 
i Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine's, which is: That he is set on such a stool, to signify how he is raised from base estate, to supreme honour?  PROT. 
I say Bellarmine's conjecture is as improbable, and fond as Florimondus. For your Popes, since Pope joanes days, have been chosen for the most part out of the number of your Cardinals. And your Cardinal's estate is not so base, as that he who is advanced from that unto the Papacy, can be truly said, to be taken in any sort from off a close stool. For they are generally 
k Cardinalatus celsitudo ac splendour, dignitati regiae comparatur Sixtus. 5. in constitut. 5. in princip. & sect. Praeterea. joh. Franciscus Leo. in Thesauro fori Ecclesiastici, part. 1. cap. 2. nu. 1.  Princes fellows. Yea some of them (you cannot but know) have not been ashamed to prefix their own names before their own kings, using these words: I and my king. Wherefore unless you can render me some better reason, why your Popes are set on such a seat, I shall remain persuaded that in former times it was for proof of their humanity, upon the accident aforesaid.  PAP. 
Enjoy your opinion for me. But where read you that there was such an Image in the Church of Sienna, which the Jesuits would have defaced, but that the Bishop of the place would not suffer them?  PROT. 
That I have heard by many travelers, and read in master Bel; both in his book of 
m Lib. 2 cap. 6 Conclus. 3. pag. 80  Motives concerning the Romish religion, and in his 
n Part. 3. cap. 2. p. 191.  Survey of Popery: whereunto never a Papist of you all dare answer.  PAP. 
Yes we dare, though we do not. But I can tell you news. 
o Florim cap. 22. p. 194.  That Image of Pope joan, which was set up in the Church of Sienna, is cast down by the commandment of Clement the 8. by the means of Caesar Baronius, at the request of Florimondus. Caesar Baronius hath certified Florimondus so much by a letter, and for joy, 
p Pag. 195.  Florimondus hath published it unto the world.  PROT. 
What? is that Image cast down too? Florimondus might do well, to make request to the present Pope, that those books which write of Pope joan may be burned; in hope, that the present Pope will as readily burn the books, as Clement the 8. threw down that Image, and Pius Quintus the other. And so in time to come, when all evidences are embezzled, and all monuments defaced, and made out of the way, it will be a plain case there was never any Pope joan.  PAP. 
Oh! this angers you I perceive. And yet why should you be angry at the throwing down of this? For suppose it had stood still, is there any sense that because of such an Image, we should be bound the rather to believe there was such a Pope? 
q Si ea quae ab artificibus manu finguntur, credamus esse vera, interdum veteris & novi Testamenti historiam pervertemus, etc. Florim p. 193.  I can tell you if we believe Painters and carvers we may soon mar all: for in Saint Andrew's Church at Bordeaux, one of the excellentest Churches in all France, our Saviour Christ is described ascending up to heaven upon the back of a flying Eagle: which stands not well with the Scripture.  PROT. 
That's true, if we believe your painters and carvers, we shall soon mar all indeed. For we find the Trinity painted by you, sometimes in the likeness of a man with three faces: sometimes in the likeness of a man, with two heads, having a dove between them; both which fashions of painting the Trinity, are monstrous in 
r Lib. 2. de Imag. cap 8.  Bellarmine's opinion. We find our Saviour Christ painted with long hair, as though he had been a Nazarite by vow: which conceit is controlled by 
s For Nazarites must drink no wine. Numb. 6. 3. yet our Saviour did, Mat. 11. 19 & 26. 29.  Scripture. We find him set on a weathercock upon the top of the Temple of jerusalem, as though that Temple had had a spire steeple like ours: 
t Tho. de Truxillo. Ord. praedic. Domin. 1. Quadrag. conc. 1.  which is neither so, nor so. We find the virgin Marie treading on the Serpent's head, which the 
u Gen. 3.  Scriptures foretold, that Christ himself should do. We find her set out in a gown of wrought gold: whereas (no question) she was meanly appareled: and with a pair of Beads in her hand, whereas of a thousand years after Christ there were 
y Teste Polydoro Virgilio de Invent. rerum, lib. 5. cap. 9  no Beads in the world. In like sort we find 
z Hieron. ab Oleastro in Exod. 34. & Aug. Steuchus in recognit. vet. Test. ad Hebraicam verit. in Exod. 34.  Moses painted with two horns; 
a jansen. Concord. evang. cap. 13.  john Baptist, in a raw Camel's skin; 
b In novis Biblijs Sixti Quinti & Clem 8. yet he writ it 90 aetatis annum excedens, ut docet Baron. Annal To 1 ad An. 99 nu. 2.  john the Evangelist, like a beardless boy, when he writ his Gospel; c Marie Magdelen in a loose gown; 
d Scultingus Confessio Hieronymiana. Polyd. Virg. de Invent. rerum, lib. 4. cap. 9  S. Jerome in his Cardinal's robes: all which is false as God is true. Besides, your painters recommend unto us a Saint on horseback, whom they call George. And an other Saint on foot, as big as a Giant, whom they call Christopher: and a she Saint, broken upon a where, whom they call Catharin: and a fourth drawn in pieces with horses, whom they call Hippolytus: whereas in all antiquity, 
e For proof whereof see D. Rayn. de Ro. Ecclesiae Idololat. lib 1. c. 5. nu. 21. etc.  there is no mention of any such Saints. So that you never spoke a truer word in your life, than this, that if we believe painters and carvers, we shall soon mar all. But what if book proof concur with painting and carving? may we not then without fear of marring all, give credit to painters and carvers? your 
f Lib. 2. de Ro. Pont. cap. 11.  Bellarmin is of opinion that there can be no error in substance, as long as besides booke-proofe, there be monuments of stone, or of brass, for the proof of any ancient report. And if he speak the words of truth, the truth is with us; for besides monuments of stone, we have the testimonies of many writers.  PAP. 
But not so many as you brag of, I believe. And beside, 
g Si huius commenti authores spectes, nihil illis vilius. Florim. c. 31. nu. 1.  those you have are but paltry writers.  PROT. 
That shall be seen by a more particular view of them. Wherefore first, what say you to Charanza, the last of them whom I named, who was a ah divinity reader among you, & afterwards 
i Possevinus Apparat. sacro. verbo. Barth. Caranza.  Archbishop of Toledo in Spain? was he a paltry writer? or hath he not this story, in your opinion?  PAP. 
I think he hath it not. For 
k Cap. 31. nu. 6.  Florimondus names Charanza, among them who disproved the story of Pope joan, before he himself fell to disprove it.  PROT. 
Doth he so? doubtless than he belies Charanza. For this is all that 
l In Sum. Conc. P. 370. edit. Paril 1564.  Charanza writes of that argument. lohannes 8. Papa. 105. sub Petro, sedit An. 2. mens. 1. dies 4. De hoc ferunt, quod malis artibus pontificatum adeptus est, quoniam cum esset foemina, sexum mentitus est; & postea à servo compressa, doloribus circumnenta, mortua est. Which in english is this. john the 8. the 105. Pope from S. Peter, sat 2. years 1. month, and 4. days. They report of this person that he got the Papacy by evil means, because he feigned himself to be a man, whereas in truth he was a woman; who being afterwards begot with child by one of her servants, fell in travel and died thereon. And this is not disproving of it. Is it trow you?  PAP. 
No verily if he say no more of it, but perhaps he saith more, and you conceal it from me?  PROT. 
Not a word I warrant you. Wherefore let us go on, and observe, who, and what manner of men the rest are, who bear witness with us in this case. What say you to Krantius? hath he not this story? or is he but a paltry writer?  PAP. 
Krantius is commended by 
m Chronograph. lib. 2.  Pontanus, for a famous historiographer. And seeing he wrote before Luther's days there is no reason (
n Krantius, homo Germanus, & qui ante Lutheranas contentiones scripsit: proinde nec odio nec amore ducebatur. lib. 2. de effectu Sacram. cap. 18.  as Bellarmine notes upon another occasion) that he should be suspected to write any thing for love or hatred. But hath he this story?  PROT. 
Yea. 
o Metrop. lib. 2. edit. Colon. 1574. & Francofurt. 1590.  For these are his own words. johannes Anglicus, ex Moguntia mulier, mentita sexum, quum acutissimo ingenio & promptissima lingua doctissmè loqueretur, adeò inse convertit omnium animos, ut pontificatum adipisceretur, uno famulo sexum eius cognoscente, à quo compressa pregnans efficitur: & fertur peperisse apud Colosseum An. 2. necdum expleto, in partu moritur: which in effect sounds thus: john English, a woman of Mentz dissembled her sex, and being of a quick wit and glib tongue; & one that could speak very scholarlike, she won the hearts of all men, that she got the Papacy, no man knowing any other but that she was a man, save one of her servants, who afterwards got her with child. They say she was delivered near the Colossuses, before she had sitten full two years. Thus Krantius.  PAP. 
And hath Mantuan the same, whom you cited next before Krantius?  PROT. 
Yea Mantuan, who is commended by 
p De Script. Ecclesiasticis. verbo. Baptista Mantuanus.  Trithemius for a great Divine, an excellent Philosopher, and a famous Poet, the only man in all Italy in his time: Mantuan, 
q Philip. Beroaldus Hieron. Carmelitae, ad initium To. 2. operum Mantuani.  at whom the people pointed as he went in the streets, and said, This is he; which was wont to be held a matter of extraordinary credit. Mantuan, of whom Picus Mirandula, Pontanus, Beroaldus, Baronius, Possevin, and diverse others, 
r Possevin. in Apparatu sacro, Tom. 1. verbo. Baptista.  give honourable testimony. This Mantuan hath this story. For, falling to describe hell, and what manner of persons were in hell, 
Hic (
s Tom. 3. lib. 3. Alphonsi. fol. 44. edit. Francof. 1573.  saith he) pendebat adhuc sexum mentita virilem  
Foemina, cui triplici Phrygiam diademate mitram  
Extollebat apex, & Pontificalis adulter.  Which in effect sounds thus much▪ Hear hanged the woman who went like a man, and came to the Popedom. And here hanged he that committed adultery with her.  PAP 
You say right: for I remember now that 
t Cap. 22. nu. 3.  Florimondus confesseth the tale is in Mantuan. But Mantuan deserves no credit in this: for he writes worse of her then ever any did before him: and 
u Stabuli pontificij praefectum eum illa, laqueo in collum inserto suspensum, commentatur. Flor●m. Ibid. & cap. 23. nu. 6.  feigns, very ridiculously, that her horse-keeper who got her with child, and she were both hanged together.  PROT. 
Mantuan talks of no horse-keeper of hers, but in general of one who committed adultery with her, nor of any hanging, save of their hanging in hell, which is likely enough to be true. Your Florimondus can lay his finger upon nothing, but he grimes it. He can comment upon no man's words, but he wrists them. There is not a word in Mantuan more (concerning her) then that which is comprehended in the three verses cited.  PAP. 
At better leisure I will examine your words more narrowly. In the mean time, what hath Achilles Gassarus for your purpose?  PROT. 
Achilles Gassarus, in his Epitome of all Histories and Chronicles, collected out of the best historiographers, 
x Achilles. Gassarus in Epit. hist etc. impres. Antuerp. in aedibus Stelsij. 1536.  hath these words: johannes octaws, natione Anglicus, officio Papa, sexu tamen foemina, sedit annos 2. & mens. 6. turpissimè. Which is: john the eight, by country of England, by calling a Pope, yet by sex a woman, sat shamefully as Pope two years and six months. Is not this plain?  PAP. 
Yes: but what find you in Ravisius Textor?  PROT. 
Scitum est ex Chronicis, & à maioribus scriptum (saith 
y In Officina Tit. Mulieres virilem habitum mentitae.  Ravisius Textor) johannem Anglicum ab Ephebis sexum virilem simulasse, & tandem fato nescio quo, aut fortuna certè volente, ad Pontificatum pervenisse, in quo annos circiter duos sederit, post Leonem 4. neque prius innotuerit facti veritas, quam à quodam ex domesticis impregnata, tandem emiserit partum. That is, It is a thing well known by the Chronicles, and written by our ancestors, that john English from her youth up carried herself as though she had been a man, and at length, by I know not what destiny, certainly by very great luck, she became Pope, & sat about two years, after Leo the fourth, and no body knew her cozenage till she was with child by one of her menial servants, and delivered thereof.  PAP. 
What find you in Fulgosus?  PROT. 
Marry I find in 
a De Dict. factisque memorabilibus. lib. 8. c. 3 Tit. de foeminis quae doctrinâ excel.  Fulgosus, 
b So saith Allen cap. 5. of his defence of the Seminaries, and Possevin. Apparat. sacr. verbo. Baptista Fulgosus  who was a noble and learned man, and sometimes Duke of Genua, that john the eight was found out to be a woman.  PAP. 
And what in Laziardus?  PRO. 
johannes Anglicus in cathedra Petri sedit annis duobus, mensibus septem, diebus quatuor, saith 
c Epitome. histor. universalis. cap. 111.  Laziardus. Hic, ut fertur, foemina fuit, etc. that is, john English sat in S. Peter's chair two years, seven months, and four days. This, as the report goeth, was a woman, etc.  PAP. 
And who was the next you cited before this?  PROT. 
Hartmannus Schedel, a Doctor of physic, yet not ignorant of holy Scriptures, a very witty and well spoken man, as 
d Lib. de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis.  Trithemius witnesseth.  PAP. 
Oh: Schedel (I confess) 
e In Chron. aetatum mundi, aetate 6.  reports this. 
f Schedel de hac joanna verba facit, sed ita ieiunè, ita exiliter, ita incertè, ut de ea re dubitasse videatur. Florim. lib. cit, cap. 4. nu. 3.  But he reports it so coldly, so fearfully, so faintly, that a man may well see he doubted of it. For he confesseth, that he knew not whether it was so or no; and therefore fathers it upon one Martin, I know not whom.  PROT. 
Fie, that you should say so. Doth he not use the very words without change, which Platina useth in relating the same, whereof we shall have occasion to speak ere we part? and against which you can take no exceptions? And doth he not (to imprint the matter deeper into the reader's memory) set her picture down with a child in her arms?  PAP. 
Yes indeed I cannot deny that. But to be plain with you, I care not what he saith of it. For as 
g Loco citato.  Florimondus noteth, 
* Ex impura Hussitarum familia, etc.  he was one of the stinking brood of the Hussites, and lived in Nurinberge, what time Nurinberge was infected with Husses heresy. And therefore no marvel, if to curry favour with them, he touched by the way the supposed Popedom of joan the woman.  PROT. 
See how you lavish. This Hartmannus Schedel borne in Nurinberge, was 
h Ego Hartmannus Schedel, doctor Patavinus, etc. circa An. 1440. fol. 252 b.  student in Padua, where he was created Doctor of Physic by the great Mathiolus. And he was so far from Husses mind, that in the same 
i Circa. An. 1410. fol. 238. a.  book he hath one whole chapter entitled, De haeresi Hussitarum, & eius origine. That is, Of Husses heresy, and of the original thereof. Wherein he follows Aeneas Silvius step by step, 
k Historia Bohemica, cap. 35.  who speaks spitefully and bitterly against hus and all his followers. It seems Florimondus of whom you learned this, is one of some stinking brood of liars.  PAP. 
Well, who is next?  PROT. 
jacobus Bergomensis, a man well seen in Scripture, and an excellent humanitian, witty, eloquent, of good conversation, & a most famous Historiographer, as 
l Lib. de Ecclesiasticis scriptoribus.  Trithemius reports of him. This jacobus Bergomensis (I say) writes thus of this point: 
m Supplement. chron. lib. 11. ad An. 858 impress Venetijs, An. 1486.  johannes 7. Papa, natione Anglicus, post Leonem Pontificem Pontifex factus, sedit ann. 2. men's. 5. Hunc tradunt fuisse foeminam, quae adolescens admodum, ex Anglia, Athenas ●um quodam doctissimo aniasio suo profecta, ibidem bonarum artium praeceptores audiendo, tantum profecit, ut Romam veniens paucos admodum etiam insacris Literis haberet pares. Ea quip legendo, disputando, docendo, orando, tantam benevolentiam & gratiam sibi comparavit, ut mortuo Leone praedicto Pontifice, in eiusdem locum, ut multi affirmant, omnium consensu Pontifex crearetur: verùm postea à familiari compressa, gravidatur, & Papa existens peperit. Nam ex Vaticano ad Later anensem Basilicam aliquando ad Litanias profecta, inter Colosseum & S. Clementem, praeter spem doloribus circumuenta, sine obstetrice aliqua publicè peperit, & eò loci mortua ibidem, sine ullo honore cum foetu misera sepulta est. Adcuius detestandum spurcitiem, & nominis continuandum memoriam, in hodiernum usque, summi Pontifices rogationem cumpopulo & clero sacram agentes, cum locum partus, medio eius in itinere positum, abominentur, eo omisso, declinant ad diverticula vicosque: & sic loco detestabili postergato, reintrantes iter perficiunt quod coeperunt. Et ad evitandos similes errores statutum fuit, ne quis de caetero in B. Petri collocaretur sede, priusquam per perforatam sedem futuri Pontificis genitalia ab ultimo Diacono Cardinale attrectarentur. That is: john the seventh, by country English, was created Pope next after Leo, and sat two years and five months. They say this was a woman, and that she went very young out of England to Athens with a certain great clerk who was in love with her: and that there by hearing of good professors, she profited so much, that when she came to Rome she had few like her in Divinity. Whereupon, by her reading, disputing, teaching, and praying, she got herself so much favour, that upon Leo his death she was chosen Pope into his room (as many men say) by common consent. But see the luck of it; a while after she was got with child by one of her acquaintance, and delivered thereof in the time of her Papacy. For going upon a time from the Vatican to S. john Lateran's in procession, between the Colossuses and S. Clement's, ere ever she was aware, she fell in travel, and was delivered in the high street without the help of any midwife. But she died presently, and was buried without any solemnity in the same place, with her little one by her. Now in hatred of her filthy dealing, and for continuing of the memory of so lewd a part, the Popes to this day when they go in procession, in respect of their dislike of that place of her travel, which was in the midst of her way, forsaking it, do turn into by-lanes and by-streets, till they have left that on their backs; and then returning into the same street again, they go forward with their procession. And for avoiding of like mischief in time to come, it was decreed: That none should be consecrated Pope, before the youngest Cardinal Deacon had tried by touching (whilst the party to be consecrated sat on a close stool) that he was a man. Thus Bergomensis.  PAP. 
Is not this he that wrote Supplementum Chronicorum, in the year 1503?  PROT. 
No. But this is he who wrote Supplementum Chronicorum in the year 1486. as 
n Lib. de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis  Trithemius witnesseth, and the book itself convinceth. Your 
o Lib. citato pag. 37.  Florimondus was deceived, who seeing (perhaps) that it was printed in the year 1503, thought it was written the year 1503.  PAP. 
That error is not so great, though an error. But if it be he that I mean, I say with 
p Ibid.  Florimondus, That his reporting of it is an argument of his ignorance, and so let him go.  PROT. 
So you may cast off all the rest if you be disposed, and make short work of our conference, for you may say of every one: His reporting of it, is an argument of his ignorance. When 
q Anthropologia. lib. 22. pag. 503. edit. Basil. An. 1559.  Volateran an historiographer of good note, shall be brought in saying: johannes. 7. Anglicus, quem dissimulato viri habitu dicunt foeminam alioquin doctissimam fuisse, deprehensamque in via apud S. Clementem, quando peperit: that is, john English, the 7. of that name, who (as they say) carried himself like a man, when as indeed she was a notable well learned woman; and discovered so to be by her delivery of a child in the way near to Saint Clements: you may reply, volateran's reporting of it, is an argument of his ignorance.  PAP. 
And what if I did so? yet you shall know anon, that I have a better answer to him, and to the rest. But mean while go on, and tell me what Trithemius saith to the matter.  PROT. 
Thrithemius 
r Reverendus & undecunque doctissimus vir. Paulus Langius in chron. Citizense ad An. 1515.  Abbot of Saint Martin's Monastery in Spanhiem, a reverend and an exceeding great learned man, writes 
s In chron. Monastern ●irsaugiensis.  thus: Sancto Leone Papa mortuo, eodem anno johannes Anglicus successit 2. annis, & mensibus 5. quem ferunt quidam foeminam extitisse, & uni soli familiari cognitan, & ab eo compressam, peperisse in strata publica. Et ob id eum nonnulli inter Pontifices ponere noluerunt, quasi indignum facinus abhorrentes. That is, In the same year that Pope Leo died, john English succeeded for 2. years and 5. months. Now some say she was a woman, and that she was known so to be but to one only, by whom at length she was begot with child, and delivered thereof in the high way. And for this cause some would not reckon her among Popes in disliking her villainous fact. Thus Thrithemius. With whom in substance agreeth Sabellicus, 
t Sabellicus 〈◊〉 undecunque doctissimus— claret hody apud Venetos maximo in precio. Trithem. lib. de script. Ecclesiasticis.  a man of great reckoning in Venice, yea one of the famousest men in his time for all manner of good learning: of whose books 
* Papir. Mason. de urb. Episc. lib. 6. in Pio 3.  Pius the third professed he made as much reckoning as Alexander did of Homer's Iliads. johannes Anglicus huius nominis 7 fit inde Pontifex, saith 
u Aenead. 9 l. r.  Sabellicus. Fuit is Moguntiaco oriundus.  PAP. 
Stay you there, and save a labour. For I confess with 
x In similem impudentiam incidit Sabellicus, etc. saith Florimondus, loco supra citato.  Florimondus, that Sabellicus by relying too much on Platina, hath put it in his history, doing therein very indiscreetly.  PROT. 
And what think you of Wernerus Rolevink, who is reckoned by 
y In chron. Citizense, post An. 1493.  Paulus Langius, among the famous Scholars of the order of Carthusians, and commended by 
z Lib. d● script. Ecclesiasticis.  Trithemius, for a man of good learning, and much devotion, 
a Fascicul remporum, aetate. 6. ad ●n. 854.  whose words are these: Iste johannes Anglicus cognomine, sed natione Maguntinus, circa haec tempora dicitur fuisse. Et erat foemina habitu vestita virili: sic in divina Scriptura profecerat, ut par ei non inveniretur, & in Papam eligitur. Sed pòst impregnata, cumpulicè in processione pergeret, peperit & moritur. Et hic sextus videtur fuisse Papa, qui nomen sanctitatis sine re habuit usque h●c. Et similiter sicut alij à Deo plagatus fuit: nec ponitur in Catalogo Pontificum: that is, This john, by his Surname English, by his country of Mentz, is reported to have sit as Pope about this time. And she was a woman. But went in man's apparel. She profited so well in divinity, that she had no fellow, and so was chosen to be Pope. But after a while being great with ch●ld, as she went in public Procession, she was delivered thereof, and died. And this seems to be the sixth Pope, which to this day was called holy, and proved nought. And therefore he was plagued by God, as the rest before him were plagued. Neither is she in the Register of Popes. How say you? did not Wernerus indiscreetly in relating it thus plainly?  PAP. 
Yes marry did he. But I wonder not at him, for relating of it: because in the same place (as 
b Lib. citato cap. 7 pag. 64 & 65.  Florimondus observes) he writes, that in as much as she was a German, no German could ever since be chosen Pope. Which is a lie with a latchet. For divers Germans since that have been advanced unto the Popedom, as Damasus the second, and Victor the second, with others,  PRO. 
True: divers Germans have been Popes since joan the woman's Popedom; and if Wernerus writ the contrary, Wernerus lied shamefully. But he hath no rule of his tongue, who chargeth Wernerus with such a matter. For these are Wernerus words, which follow presently upon the former: Nugantur aliqui, hac de causa nullum Almannum in Papam eligi, quod falsum esse constat. Some prattle, that for this cause no german may be chosen Pope, which is apparently false. Whereby you may see that he reproveth that in others, for which he is injuriously reproved by your Florimondus. Your Florimondus may be a man in office, but if he go on as he begins, he will hardly prove himself honest.  PAP. 
Good words I pray you sir. Florimondus may be honest enough for any thing you say against him. For he 
* Loco citato.  writes, that he hath two editions of this Wernerus, the one bearing date what 
* Viz. 1480.  year it was printed, the other without date, but very ancient. And these two (as he saith) do differ in reporting the story of Pope joan, and in nothing else. Now it may be that though in yours it be as you say, yet in his it is otherwise.  PROT. 
I myself have seen two editions of Wernerus aswell as Florimondus; yea I have seen four; one 
* By Henry Quentel.  printed in the year 1479. another printed by Nicolas God's of Seltestad, I know not when, for it carries no date: a third without note either of the printer, or of the place where it was printed, or of the time when it was printed. But questionless very ancient: a fourth printed at Frankfurt, 1584. In the 3 ancient ones there is not a word different in the narration of Pope joan: nor in the 4, saving that the words Nugantur aliqui, etc. are in the fourth, and not in the other. But in none of them is there any such thing as Florimondus chargeth him with. But will you hear what the next man saith to the point in question? He is Matheus Palmerius, 
c Math. Palmerius, natione Italus.— qui in Conc. Florentino (quod Eugenius Papa 4. contra Basil. Synodum celebravit) inter praeclarissimos viros annumeratus fuit. Trithem. de script. Eccles.  an Italian, and one of the choice men which were at the Council kept by Eugenius the 4. against the Council of Basil. Pontifex 106. johannes Auglicus (saith 
d In chron. ad An. 853.  Palmerius) sedit annis 2, mensibus 3. Fama est hunc johannem foeminam fuisse, & uni soli familiari cognitam: qui eam complexus est, & gravis facta, peperit Papa existens: quamobren eum inter Pontifices non numerant quidam, ideò nomini numerum non facit. That is: john was a woman, yet not known so to be but to one of her familiars, who lay with her. She was delivered in the time of her Papacy: and because some reckon her not among the Popes, there are no more johns for her, then if she had never been. Thus Palmerius.  PAP. 
Be it so. But what saith Platina, I pray you, for your purpose?  PROT. 
Platina, 
e Bartholomaeus Plat●na Apostolicus abbreviator, vir unde cunque doctissimus, etc. Trith. de script. Eccles.  keeper of the Library in the Vatican, a man of great wit and learning, 
f De vitis pontif.. in joh. 8.  writes thus: johannes Anglicus, ex Maguntiaco oriundus, malis artibus (ut aiunt) Pontificatum adeptus est: mentitus enim sexum cum foemina esset, adolescens admodum Athenas cum amatore docto viro proficiscitur, ibique praeceptores bonarum artium audiendo tantum profecit, ut Romam veniens paucos admodum etiam in sacris Literis pares haberet, nedum superiores. Legendo autem, & disputando doctè, & acutè, tantum beneuolentie & authoritatis sibi comparavit, ut mortuo Leone, in eius locum (ut Martinus ait) omnium consensu Pontifex crearetur: verùm postea à servo compressa, cum aliquandiu ventrem occultè tulisset, tandem dum ad Lateranensem Basilicam proficisceretur, inter theatrum (quod Colosseum vocant à Ner●nis Colosso) & S. Clementem, doloribus circumuenta peperit: eoque loci mortua Pontificatus sui anno 2. mense 1. diebus 4. sine ullo honore sepelitur. The meaning of which is: john English, borne at Mentz, got the Popedom (as men say) by evil means. For he dissembled his sex, being a woman indeed: and when she was very young, she went to Athens with a scholar, who was in love with her. Where by hearing good Readers of all good learning, she profited so well, that when she came to Rome, she had few fellows, but never a one her better. Now by reading, and disputing, learnedly and wittily, she got so much credit, that upon Leo his death she was chosen in his room (as Martin writes) by common consent. But within a while after she proved with child by one of her servants; & though she carried all closely for a time, yet at length as she went to S. john Lateran's, between the Theatre (called the Colossuses) and S. Clements, she fell in travel, and was delivered of a child, and died in the place. Which was in the second year, first month, and fourth day of her reign. And she was buried without any solemnity. How like you this?  PAP. 
So and so. But Bernartius is of opinion, that this was never written by Platina, but was foisted into him. For I have heard (
g Impudens a●quis nebulo interpolavit scripta Platinae. Audivi ex Antonio Heetueldio, amplissimo laudatissimoque viro, Consulari Lovaniensi, dixisse sibi saepius Engelbertum Boonium— vidisse ●e Romae in Bibliotheca Vaticana, antiquissima Platinae exemplaria manuscripta, sedulò examinasse, & de joanne foemina ne lite●am quidem reperisse. Bernartius de utilitate legendae hist. lib. 2 p. 111.  saith he) by Antonius Hetweeld, a man of good report, and an Alderman of Louvain, that one Engelbertus Boonius, a reverend man, and Deane of a great Church in Germany, had oftentimes told him, that he had seen many ancient manuscripts of Platina in the Vatican at Rome, and perused them diligently, and yet found never a word in any of them touching Pope joan.  PROT. 
That Deane had the luck of it, if he light on such ancient manuscripts, as the Alderman of Louvain told Bernartius of. But how chanced it, that neither Onuphrius, nor Bellarmine, nor Baronius, who have had as free access into the Vatican library as any, could never light on these manuscripts? How chanceth it, that none since Bernartius thought good to except in that sort against Platina? Onuphrius, Bellarmine, and Baronius acknowledgement, that this story is in Platina, persuades me, that either Bernartius belied the Alderman, or the Alderman belied the Dean, or the Deane made a fool of the Alderman. For questionless if there had been any such manuscripts, some of them would have found them out, and made it known to the world ere this. For they are glad of narrower figtree leaves to cover their nakedness withal, than such manuscripts, if they were forthcoming. But perhaps you have some better answer behind then this.  PAP. 
I have. For what could you reply, if I answered that which 
h To. 2. de Poenitentia, lib. 3. cap. 13.  Bellarmine hath upon another occasion, to wit, that Platina wrote not by public authority, nor took his history out of the public Registers of the Church?  PROT. 
I could quickly tell you, that both Bellarmine and you spoke without book. For, beside that Platina himself 
i Prooemio lib. de vitis Pontif. in epistola ad Zistum 4.  professeth, that he writ by the commandment of Sixtus the fourth, 
k Annotat. in Plat. in vit S. Petri Apostoli.  Onuphrius confesseth, that he followed Damasus, Anastasius, and such Historiographers as had written before of the same matter.  PAP. 
But what say you to 
l Lib. citato, ca 4. pag. 36.  Florimondus, whose answer is, That Platina reported it rather to show his reading, then for that he thought it true?  PROT. 
What is Florimondus reason for that?  PAP. 
Marry if he had thought it true (saith 
m Si haec vera sibi persuasisse●, tanquam unguis in ulcere fuisset, & odium quod in Pontifices conceperat, audacius evomuisslet.  Florimondus) he would have exaggerated it, and made the worst of it, that thereby he might have revenged himself of the Popes at whom he was angry. For Paul the second (as all men know) racked him, and deprived him of all his dignities, and justly cast him into prison, and kept him there as long as himself lived.  PROT. 
That Paul the second racked Platina, and deprived him of his dignities, and kept him long in prison, is very true. But that he cast him justly into prison, is false. For 
n De script. Ecclesiasticis. verbo, Bartholomaeus Platina.  Trithemius witnesseth, that Paul the second dealt 
* Crudelissimè.  cruelly therein. Yet suppose all to be true: doth it follow in your Florimondus logic, Paul the second wronged Platina, Ergo Platina hated all Popes? And why not them: Sixtus the fourth gratified Platina many ways: Sixtus the fourth set Platina at liberty, and restored him to his dignities: Ergo Platina loved all Popes? If one man's kindness could not work love towards all: it is not likely that one man's unkindness should breed an heartburning against all: wherefore, notwithstanding this, we may well think that Platina wrote as he thought. And the rather for that in the words following, 
* Apparet. ea quae dixi. ex his esse, quae fieri posse creduntur.  he professeth, that such a thing might well enough happen. What say you to Chalcocondilas the Athenian, whom I named next before Platina, as a witness for us in this controversy?  PAP. 
I say, Chalcocondilas hath not this tale.  PROT. 
What man? are not these 
o De rebus Turcicis. lib. 6. pag. 98.  his words? Constat mulierem quandam in pontificatum esse subvectam, quia sexus ignorabatur. Nam Italiae Occidentales penè omnes barbam radunt. Cum autem illa mulier gravida esset facta, & ad festum sive sacrificium prodijsset, peperit infantem inter sacrificium in conspectu populi. Quapropter ne decipiantur iterum sedrem cognoscant, neque ambigant, Pontificis creati virilia tangunt, & qui tangit, acclamat: Mas nobis dominus est. That is, It is well known that a certain woman was made Pope, by reason they knew not her sex. For all (almost) in the western parts of Italy, shave their beards. Now when she was great with child, and came abroad to solemnize some day, or to say Service: as she was at service, she was delivered of a child in the sight of all the people. Wherefore lest hereafter they should be deceived in like sort, 
Quamuis apud Chalcocondilum Latinè red ditum, eiusmodi fabula reperitur esse descripta; non tamen ab ipso authore positum scias, sed ab impostore Clausero fraudulenter appositum.  they make trial of his manhood by touching, & he that toucheth proclaimeth: We have a man to our Pope.  PAP. 
I confess these words are in Chalcocondilas translated into Latin. But I say with 
p Annal. Tom. 10 ad An. 853. ●u. 66.  Baronius, that though it be in the Latin, yet that was by Clauserus the translators bad dealing, who foisted it in. It was not written in the Greek by Chalcocondilas.  PROT. 
How proves Baronius that?  PAP. 
Nay he meddleth not with proving of it, but refers you over to Florimondus for it. For Florimondus hath excellently well (as 
q Ibid. Imposturam egregiè detexit Florimondus.  Baronius saith) discovered Clauserus cozenage therein.  PROT. 
How I pray you? for I know you have Florimon● at your finger's end.  PAP. 
Why, 
r Florim. fabula joannae, cap. 6. nu. 2.  Florimondus compared Clauserus translation into Latin with a French man's translation of the same into French: and by that he saw this tale was not in Chalcocondilas, for ●e found nothing of it in the French man's translation.  PROT. 
And is this Florimondus reason so much commended by Baronius, whereby he discovers Clauserus cozenage? Now the Vicar of S. fools be ghostly father to them both: for why might not the French man aswell leave it out, as Clauserus put it in?  PAP. 
Oh, a faithful translator (as 
s Ibid. Fidus interpres praetermittere non ausus fuisset, si in Graeco exemplari exaratum invenisset.  Florimondus notes) durst not have left it out, if he had found it in the Greek.  PRO. 
Nor put it in, if he had not found it in the Greek: durst he? And why may not we hold Clauserus as faithful an Interpreter, as the French man? yea why may not we hold him more faithful, seeing the French man was a Papist? for 
t Gretser. lib. 2. de iure etc. prohibendi lib. malos, cap 10.  Papists hold it lawful, in translating to omit offensive matter: and so doth no Protestant. If Florimondus or Baronius could have named the place where a man might have seen a Greek copy, in which it is not, they had said somewhat to purpose; but going about to disprove it by a translation of one of their fellows, they deal ridiculously.  PAP. 
Well, if this answer please you not, know further, that it matters not what Chalcocondilas writes of this matter. For in rendering the reason why she could not so well be known to be a woman, he writes: That in the western parts of Italy all (almost) shave their beards: wherein he was grossy deceived, as 
u In eo quod de barba radenda asserit, turpiter lapsus est. Florim. cap. 6. nu. 1.  Florimondus observes. And if in that, why not in the other?  PRO. 
He was not deceived in that of shaving. For by the Pope's Canons, the Italian Priests, yea all the Priests of the Western Church, are to be shaven: Hic Papa (Anicetus) clericos comam & barbam radere in signum clericatus jussit, saith 
x Chronograph. lib. 2.  Pontacus. That is, Pope Anicetus commanded the Clergy to shave both their heads and their beards, in token that they were of the Clergy. And, Occidentalis Ecclesiae Clerun, ab ipsis Ecclesiae Christianae primordiis, barbam radendi morem tenuisse, 
* Greg. 7. lib. 8 Regist. Epist. 10 ut refert. Salmeron, disput. 18. in 1. Cor. 11. pa. 147. and Baron. Annal. tom. 1. ad An. 58. num. 142.  asserit Gregorius 7. Pope Gregory the 7. avoucheth, that from the Apostles days, the Western Clergy did shave their beards. To whom 
y Rational. divin. office lib. 2. de Ministris, etc.  Durandus, who lived about the year 1280. subscribeth: for he acknowledgeth, that before, and in his time they were shaved, proving the lawfulness of it out of Ezechiel, and showing the mysteries that are imported by it. Yea 
z Pro sacerdotum ba●bis.  johannes Pierius Valerianus, (as you shall hear hereafter) witnesseth the same, imputing your error in electing Pope joan, to the ordinary shaving of beards: because by that means a man could hardly know a man from a woman. Will not Florimondus lin lying? What think you of Theodoricus de Niem one of your Pope's Secretaries? is it doubtful whether I wrong him in calling him to be a witness in this case?  PAP. 
I think you wrong him. For 
a Cap. 10. nu. 5. & 6.  Florimondus reckons him among them who would readily have taken up such a tale against the Popes if he had heard of it, and yet did not.  PROT. 
Florimondus is like himself, to say no worse, for these are 
b Lib. de privilegijs & iuribus Imperij.  Theodoricus his own words: johannes vocatus de Anglia, & fuit mulier de Moguntia nata, quae studuit Athenis sub virili habitu, & in tantum profecit in artibus ipsis, quòd tandem veniens Romam, & per biennium in eadem schola artes ipsas liberales legit: & adeò sufficiens fuit, quòd etiam maiores & nobiliores urbis, eius lectiones frequenter audierint. Ea postea in Papam concorditer eligitur à Romanis, & Papatum biennio & amplius tenuit: sed tunc divitijs, ocio, & d●licijs vacans, non potuit continere sicut prius fecit, dum ardenter in paupertate posita literarum studio insistebat: unde dum quadam die in Rogationibus cum clero Romano, sicut tunc moris erat, in solenni processione incederet, Papalibus ornata divitijs & ornamentis, edidit filium suum primogenitum, ex quodam eius cubiculario conceptum, prope templum Pacis in urbe, ut adhuc vetus statua marmorea illic posita figure atiue demonstrat. unde summi Pontifices, dum ad Lateranensem de Basilica Principis Apostolorum, & è contrà vadunt, illud rectum iter non faciunt, imò per alios vicos, per indirectum transeunt, illud aliquantulum prolongando. That, is john called English, was a woman borne at Mentz, and she studied at Athens going in man's apparel, where she profited so well in the arts, that coming to Rome she read there the liberal sciences, and was held so sufficient a reader, that many of the better sort became her ordinary hearers. Afterwards with one consent she was chosen Pope, and lived in it two years and upward. But betaking herself more than before to idleness and pleasure, she could not live continently as she did in her poor estate, when she plied her book diligently: whereupon one day as she went with the Clergy and people of Rome (according to the custom of that time) in solemn procession, being attired in Papal manner, she was delivered of her first begotten son, begotten by one of her chamber, near the temple of Peace, which stands in the city; as is evident by an old marble Image which stands there to this day, to denote so much in a figure. And hereupon it is, that when the Popes go from the Vatican to Saint john Lateran's, and back again, they go not the direct way thither, but by other streets further about, and so make their journey longer. Thus Theodoricus de Niem.  PAP. 
I do not remember any particular answer unto this man's testimony. Wherefore go on, and let me hear what the rest say. Yet if you will for brevity sake, you may pass over the testimonies of Petrarch, and Boccace, and Lucidus, and of our country man Higden, and some such others, because 
c Cap. 3. & 4.  Florimondus acknowledgeth that they speak to it.  PROT. 
Content. What think you of john of Paris, 
d Trithem. de Script. Eccles. verbo, joh. Paris. & Possevinus in Apparat sac. verbo, joh. Paris.  who lived about the year 1280, and read publicly with great commendation in the University of Paris, both divinity and humanity. Believed not he this story?  PAP. 
I cannot tell. What say you?  PROT. 
I think he did. For showing how sometimes a man may lawfully dispute and take exception against the Pope, in respect of his person, he 
e De Potestate Regia & Papali, cap 23.  notes, That such a person may be chosen as is not capable: ut si esset foemina, vel haereticus, sicut fuerunt aliqui, qui ob hoc non enumerantur in Catalogo Paparun. As for example, saith he, if he prove a woman, or an heretic, as some have done, who in that respect are not reckoned in the catalogue of Popes.  PAP. 
It seems by his words (I cannot deny) that he alludes to such a matter. But did you not allege Gotfridus Viterbiensis for proof of the same? I pray you let me hear him speak. for 
f Answer to B. jewels Apology  D. Harding reckons him among them who say nothing of her.  PROT. 
True, D. Harding doth so. But so doth no man else of his side, to my remembrance. Which is a great probability that Harding belies him. But not to stand upon probabilities, the history itself puts the matter out of doubt: for between Leo the 4. and Benedict the 3. we 
g Gotefrid. Viterbiensis Chro. part. 20. in Catalogo Ro. Pont.  read thus (not in the margin, nor in any other letter, but in the currant of the text, and same letter) Papissa joanna non numeratur. That is, joan the she Pope is not registered. Whereby it is manifest that he knew of her, though he said little of her.  PAP. 
When lived this Gotefridus? and what manner of man was he?  PROT. 
He lived, as 
h De Script. Ecclesiasticis, verbo, Godefridus Viterb.  Trithemius witnesseth, in the year 1185. and was a priest well seen in the holy Scripture, and not ignorant of human knowledge: 
Godefridus was Imperialis aulae Capellanus, & Nota●ius. Possevin. Apparat. sac. verb. Godefrid. Viterb.  so that you have little cause to except against him either as a late writer, or a rash writer. But shall we at length hear what evidence Martinus Polonus affords us in this case?  PAP. 
With all my heart: for there are 
i Veriùs dixerim, haec omnia ex Heroldi officina manasse, etc. Florim. c. 2. nu. 6.  divers who hold opinion that that which is in Polonus touching Pope joan, is cogged into him by Heroldus, who first printed him, or some such like fellow.  PRO. 
Do they say so? And can they show me any book written or printed, wherein it is not in 
k Polonus in Chro. ad An. 855  Polonus, thus? Post hunc Leonem johannes Anglus, natione Maguntinus, sedit an. 2, mens. 5, diebus 4. Hic, ut asseritur, foemina fuit, & quum in puellari aetate à quodam suo amasio in habitu virili Athenas ducta fuit, in diversis scientijs ita profecit, ut nullus sibi par inveniretur: adeò ut post Romae 
* Gra. loquitur. Dia. vera docet. Re. verba collocat. Mu. canit. Ar. numerat. Goe ponderat. As. colit astra. The three first make T●●uium. The four later, Quadrivium.  trivium legens, magnos magistros, & discipulos & auditores haberet. Et quum in urbe, & vita & scientia magnae opinionis esset, in Papam concorditer eligitur. Sed in Papatu per familiarem suum impregnatur: verùm tempus partus ignorans, quum de Sancto Petro in Lateranum tenderet, angustiata inter Coliseum & S. Clementis ecclesiam peperit, & postea mortua ibidem (ut dicitur) sepulta fuit. Et propterea quòd Dominus Papa semper eandem viam obliquat, creditur omninò à quibusdam, quòd ad detestationem facti hoc faciat. Nec ideo ponitur in Catalogo sanctorum Pontificum, tam propter muliebris sexum, quam propter deformitatem facti. Which in effect sounds thus in English: After this Leo, john English, by her countrev of Mentz, sat two years, five months, and four days. This Pope (as they say) was a woman, & being carried in her youth in man's apparel to Athens, by one who was in love with her, she profited so much in diverse kinds of learning, that she had no fellow: in so much that coming to Rome, and reading there Grammar, Logic and Rhetoric, she had of the greatest Rabbins there many auditors and scholars. And being much esteemed of in that City, both for her life and learning, with one voice she was chosen Pope. Now in the time of her Papacy, she was got with child by some of her familiars: and not knowing she was so near her reckoning, as she went from Saint Peter to Saint john Lateran, between the Colosse and Saint Clement's Church, she was delivered of a child; but died thereon, and was there (as they say) buried. And because the Lord the Pope doth always shun that way, it is thought by some, that he doth it in dislike of the accident. And she is not numbered among the Popes: partly because of her sex, partly because of the filthiness of her fact. Can they, I say, show me any book written or printed, wherein it is not in Polonus thus? Doth not Onuphrius, and Bellarmine, and Bernartius, and Baronius, and N. D. with many others of your side, who show more wit than honesty in pleading this case, confess that Polonus writ this? & that this is to be found in Polonus?  PAP. 
Yes, the most do. But some, as I told you before, suspect the worst, and namely 
l In his Reply to D. Fulke. cap. 10. Demand 45. pag. 373.  D. Bristol; for he reports that many years ago, a Protestant (who was counted a great historian) brought out the same Martinus in a fair written hand, to show him this story. And behold, she was not in the text, but in the margin, in an other hand. Whereupon when he saw that: Now I perceive (quoth he) that this Author also faileth you.  PROT. 
What Protestant was that, who had Martinus in so fair a written hand? Can you tell me his name, or the place where he abode, that I may inquire further, for satisfying myself in the truth of this matter?  PAP. 
Nay, I know no more than I have told you. For the Doctor names no particular circumstance. But I make no question of the truth of it. For I presume that such a Doctor would not lie.  PROT. 
Oh no. A popish priest lie? that is not credible, no more than it is credible that 
m Dixerunt: homo sacerdos de semine Aaron venit, non decipiet nos. 1. Mac. 7. 14. in vulg.  a priest of the order of Aaron would deceive. But you know what a long story that 
n Motive 5.  Doctor tells, of one Margaret jesop, who was cured of her lameness by the Sacrament of miracle that was kept at Saint gudila's Church at Brussels: and how he amplifies every point, and sets it out with all the circumstances, as though it were as true as the Gospel; whereas 
o Meterran hist. Belg. lib. 10.  the Senate of Brussels, by way of proclamation within a few years after, did discover all to be but a pack of knavery. And therefore you must pardon me, if notwithstanding I give him not the lie, yet I believe him not in this, considering it is an old said saw: Qui versatur in generalibus, versatur dolosè: He that speaks only in generality, means falsely.  PAP. 
Well; be it that Polonus writ this, yet know you that as 
p Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine and 
q 3. Conuers. part 2. c. 5. nu. 29 p. 399.  N. D. note, he was a very simple man: and that his manner of writing was vain and nothing like to be true in 
r Answer to B. jewels challenge.  D. Hardings judgement. Yea know, that he was only famous for tales, for that is 
s Martinus Polonus fabulis tantum celebris, caetera obscurus homo. lib. 2. de utilitate legend. hist. p. 113.  Bernartius censure of him.  PROT. 
See the rashness of our later generation of Papists. Polonus was an 
t Archiep. Cosentinus, & Poenitentia●ius Papae. Possevin. Apparat. sacer. verbo, Martinus Polonus.  Archbishop, and the Pope's Poenitentiary. 
u Trithem. de Script. Ecclesiasticis, verbo, Martinus.  He was learned in the holy Scriptures, and not ignorant of secular learning, he was one whom 
x Vi● magnae doctrinae singugularis●ue vitae. Platina in vita Victor. 3.  Platina relied on much, for matters of history, and thought worthy the commendation of great learning, and singular good life. He was the man, whom the Author of Fasciculus temporum, and jacobus Bergomensis, two good historiographers, professed that they followed especially. And yet with our present Papists he is but a simple man, etc. Are you not ashamed of this exception?  PAP. 
No. For I will prove his simplicity by many arguments.  PROT. 
And how I pray you?  PAP. 
Why first by this, 
a Bernart. lib. citato, pag. 113. Florim. cap. 2. nu. 6.  That he would needs persuade us that Pompilius, who was Numa his father, succeeded next to Romulus. For this is a mere tale, and yet he writes it is as a truth.  PROT. 
Away, Away. Post Romulum regnavit Numa Pompilius, 
b Lib. de quatuor maioribus regnis, & Rom. urbis exordio. Cap. de Rectoribus & regimine urbis, pag. 10.  saith Polonus. That is, Numa Pompilius reigned next after Romulus: but not Pompilius who was Numa his father.  PAP. 

c Bernart. & Florim. locis citatis.  Secondly he would persuade us that Numa of a Tribune of the people, was made a king, which is another tale.  PROT. 
He would not. For he 
d Suoputat post exactos Reges ad Christum usque. Cap de binis Coss. pag. 12  writes plainly, that Tribunes were ordained 16. years after the reign of the Roman kings, when the people complained of the hard measure that they received at the hands of the Consuls and of the Senate. He knew no such officers in the time of the kings.  PAP. 

e Bernart. & Florim. locis citatis.  Thirdly, he would persuade us, that the Church which is now called Sancta Maria Rotunda, and in old time Pantheon, built by one Agrippa, was before that the house of one Cybele, supposed to be the mother of the gods: which is a toy, and a conceit of an idle head.  PROT. 
This is false too. For 
f In Chron. in Domitian. p. 38.  he saith only, that Pantheon was built by Agrippa at Cybeles motion, who was the mother of the gods, which is confirmed for true by many others: he saith not, that it was first Cybeles, and afterwards turned to the honour of all the gods.  PAP. 

h Bernart. & Florim. locis citatis.  Fourthly, he would make us believe, that that famous Theatre made by Titus, was the temple of the Sun; which is mere foolery.  PROT. 
No, No, Ante Coloseum fuit templum Solis, saith 
i Lib. de 4. maioribus regnis, & cap. de Templis idolorum, pa. 8.  Polonus: before the Colosse there was a temple of the Sun. But that Titus Theatre was that temple, Polonus saith not.  PAP. 

k Bernart. & Florim. locis citatis.  Yet he saith, That the temple of Peace, commonly called the everlasting Temple, fell the same night that Christ was borne: whereas it is plain by all ancient histories, that it was not built till Vespasians days, a good many of years after Christ was borne.  PROT. 
The ancient histories witness, that Vespasian built a temple of Peace: but that doth not argue, there was no Temple of Peace before. Some write, that Romulus built a temple of Peace. And 
a Stromat lib 5.  Clemens Alexandrinus writes, that Numa built a Temple of Peace. But it concerns not Polonus credit, whether there was any or none: for he saith not, that the Temple of Peace fell the same night that Christ was borne. He only 
b In Chron. ad An. Christ 1.  saith, that the golden Image which Romulus set up in his palace, avowing, that it should not fall down till a virgin was delivered of a child, fell down in the night wherein Christ was borne: though if he had said the other, the matter had not been great. For he was neither the first, nor the last; 
c Fabeha de collapso Romae Pacis templo, tempore Christs ortus, multiplicium haud vulgarium fuit scriptorum authoritate firmatum. Baron. Annal. tom. 10. ad an. 853. nu. 61  many of good note both before, and since, have written as much: namely 
d Hom. quae legitur apud Lip. to. 8. & Sur. to. 6.  Petrus Damianus, 
e In cattle. Sanct. lib. 2. cap. 1.  Petrus de Natalibus, 
f Ser. 2. de die Nativit. Dom.  jacobus de Voragine, and the Author of that first sermon upon Christ's Nativity, which is extant among the Sermons ascribed to 
g Fol. 297. edit. Paris. 1517.  Bernard. If you have no better arguments to prove his simplicity, you may soon prove yourself a malicious slanderer.  PAP. 
My arguments are good enough against him, as you shall hear more fully anon. But for the present tell me, what Marianus Scotus hath that makes for you. For I cannot think it is true, that Marianus Scotus hath this story.  PROT. 
You jest I am sure. For do we not read thus in 
h Marian. Scotus in Chron. aetate 6. ad An. 854  him? Leo Papa obijt Kalend. Augusti. Huic successit joanna mulier, An. 2. mens. 5. dieb. 4. That is, Leo the Pope died in the Kalends of August. After him succeeded joan the woman, who sat 2. years, 5. months, and 4. days. And, which I would have you note by the way, this Marianus 
i So he himself writeth in Chro. ad An. 1028.  was borne in the year 1028. and 
k Ab omnibus honore habebatur, & non sine opinione sanctitatis sepelitur. Trithemius de Script. Eccles. verb. Marianus. joh. Mayor, de gestis Scotorum lib. 3. cap. 5.  lived in great credit in his life time, and when he died was held a Saint: and at this day is reputed by your 
l Annal. tom. 1. ad ann. 34. num. 149.  Baronius, Nobilis Chronographus, a worthy Chronologer.  PAP. 

m N. D. lib. cicato. nu. 27. pag. 397.  I do not deny but that you may read so in some printed copies. But I deny, there is any such thing to be read in the more ancient handwritten originals, found in Flanders and other places.  PRO. 
Do you not deny but that we may read so in some printed ●●pies? verily you might have yielded unto me, that I may read so in all printed copies, for you are not able to produce any printed copy (except it be of yesterdays printing) wherein it is not. But you deny it to be in the more ancient handwritten originals found in Flanders and other places. And upon what ground (I pray) deny you that? for 
r In scripto codi ce ex quo prodijt prima editio ita legitur. Baro. Annal. to. 10. ad ann. 853. nu 60.  Baronius your Cardinal Historiographer; confesseth, that that ancient handwritten original which the first printed copy followed, hath the story. And it is so ordinary with you Papists to belly hand written originals, that he, who knows you, cannot in wisdom believe any of you upon your bare words.  PAP. 
I have good ground of that which I deny, I would you should well know. But first I challenge you to make proof that we Papists, as you call us, bely any handwritten originals, for me thinks you therein charge us deeply.  PROT. 
The proof of that is plain. For first one of your Bishops, even 
f De Opt. gen. interpret. lib. 2. cap. 6.  B. Lindan, to make good his own conceit of the right reading of the text joh. 21. 22. (about which you know there hath been hot contention) which he maintained to be this. If so I will he remain till I come, what is that to thee? alleged for proof thereof the testimony of an ancient handwritten original kept at Aix in Germany: whereas in truth, it is not so read in that copy, but according to the Greek: If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to thee? as 
t Notat in joh. 21. 22.  Francisous Lucas a man of your own coat witnesseth. Again the same B. Lindan 
u Lib. citato. cap. 3. & 5.  protested that he saw an ancient handwritten original of the Psalms in Hebrew, found in England: whereby it was apparent, that the Hebrew Bible is defective at this day in some points. Yet the same 
x Notat. in Psal. 13.  Lucas, who came to the sight of the same copy, assures us: That that Psalter makes rather to the contrary. In like manner 
y Annot. in Platin. in Honorio. 1.  Onuphrius your Friar above named, alleged certain handwritten originals of Maximus a Monk, by which it is manifest, as he saith, That Honorius the first condemned the Monothelites: yet Turrian the jesuit, who had access to the self same manuscripts, confesseth (as 
z Defence. fidei Trident lib 2.  Andradius relateth) that Maximus make no mention of Honoruas' condemning them, And whereas your great Goliath of Gath, 
a Lib. 4. de Ro. Pont. cap. 11.  Bellarmine I mean, to prove that Honorius name was thrust by fraud into the sixth general Council among the Monothelites, affirmeth: that Anastasius (which was then in written hand only) did testify so much, now, that Anastasius is 
b Moguntiae, Ann. 1602.  printed, we set Bellarmine's fraud. For Anastasius testifieth no such thing. 
c In Leone 2.  Anastasius himself reckons Honorius for a Monothelite. In this controversy about dame joan, diverse of your 
d Onuph. Bell. Bernart locis supr. cit. & Florim. cap. 14. nu. 1. & Sanders de visibili Monarch. lib. 7. pag. 412.  proctor's plead as out of the handwritten originals of the same, Anastasius, that upon Leo the 4. his death the sea was void but 15. days, and then Benedict was chosen. Yet our printed Anastasius makes it evident, they belied the handwritten Anastasius: for in the printed, there is not a word of the number of days between Leo his death, and Benedict his election. Lastly, whereas your grandhistoriographer Baronius, was informed by letters, from such as yourself, that Zoticus was shot through with darts, and so martyred: and he who certified him thereof, assured him that he sent a true copy out of the handwritten original acts of Zoticus, whereupon Baronius put it in print: 
e Quod arundinibus percussum martyrium consummasse Zoticum dixerimus, emendamus. Haud enim fidelem nacti sumus testem, qui ea se ex Actis eius descripsisse, per li teras ad me datas, testatus est. Accepi post haec Acta Martyris, & nihil tale in allis reperi. In Martyrologium Rom. lan 12. f.  Baronius was glad to retract it since; because (though he light upon the same Acts) he could find no such thing in them. How say you? do not these particulars prove, that many of you are excellent at facing matters out under pretence of handwritten originals: which when they come to viewing, make nothing for you?  PAP. 
If all be true you say, 
g Si ita sit ut ipsi fingunt, qui post Marianun de joanna scripserunt, nun ipsum Marianum in suae sententiae patrocinium afc●uislent, & suam hac arce opinionem munivissent. ●lworim c. 2. nu. 4.  it will prove (I grant) some bad dealing in some few persons among us. But you shall never be able to prove as much by me: for I will prove whatsoever I say.  PROT. 
Go to then: Make you proof unto me that this story is not in the more ancient handwritten Originals of Marianus Scotus: and if you do so, I will yield.  PAP. 
Will you so? Then I argue thus: ᵃ if this story had been in the most ancient handwritten Originals of Marianus Scotus, they who writ since his time would have alleged him for proof of it. But no man till now of late alleged him for proof of it. Wherefore this was not in the most ancient handwritten Originals of Marianus Scotus.  PROT. 
I deny the consequence of your proposition, viz. They who writ since Marianus his time would have alleged him for proof of it, if so be it had been written in the most ancient handwritten Originals. For first, till of late, there was no controversy about it, which made men less careful to avouch their authors for it. Secondly, Marianus chronicle, till printing came to some perfection, was rare (it seems) and hard to come by. For 
b Praefat. in Chron.  Polonus reckoning up the books out of which he took his story, names not Marianus among them. No more doth 
c Annot. in Plat. in vit. B. Petri.  Onuphrius where he reckons up the Authors whom Platina followed. Onuphrius (I say) doth not reckon Marianus among them. jacobus Bergomensis, and Wernerus Rolevinck, in their prefaces to their histories, wherein they show whom they followed, pass by Marianus as a man unknown unto them. And so do others. But for making of this matter plain, tell me, have you not heard, 
e Anastasius Papa voluit occultè revocare Achatium Constantinop Epise. damnatum, quare divino nutu percussus est.  that Anastasius the second, one of your Popes, would have restored Acatius the Bishop of Constantinople, who stood excommunicated by some of your Pope's predecessors, but that God prevented your Pope, and struck him with a fearful death?  PAP. 
Yes, I have heard so much. But 
f Bell lib. 4. de Ro. Pont cap. 10 & Append. add lib de summo Pont. & Pighius Eccles. Hierarch lib 4. c. 8.  I take it to be as vain a fable as this of Pope joan.  PROT. 
Yet you cannot deny but that it is recorded for true, by 
g De vit. Pontif. in Anastas. 2.  Anastasius Bibliothecarius, by 
h Chron. lib. 1. ad ann. 414.  by Rhegino, by 
i Aetate 6. ad ann. 499.  Marianus Scotus, by 
k In Chron. ad ann. 491.  Sigebert, by 
l De vit. Pont. in Anastas. 2.  Luitprandus, by 
m De vit Pont. in vita Anastas. 2.  Albo Floriacensis, by 
n Dist. 19 c. Anastasius.  Gratian, by 
o In Chron. ad ann. 498.  Polonus, by 
p De vit. Pont. in Anastas. 2.  Platina, by 
q Lib. 22.  Volateran, by 
r Supplé. Chron ad ann. 495.  jacobus Bergomensis, by 
s Fascic. Temp. ad ann. 484.  Wernerus Rolevinck, by 
t De script. Eccl. verbo Anastas.  Trithemius, by 
u Summa. Conc.  Charanza, by 
x Summa de Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 103.  johannes de Turrecremata, and 
y Nauclerus, Antomnus, locis infra ci●.  by others.  PAP. 
No indeed I cannot deny that, for all these (I know) report it as true.  PROT. 
Yea, and that in their most ancient handwritten Originals: do they not, for ought you have seen òr heard to the contrary?  PAP. 
Good. But what of all this?  PROT. 
You shall see anon. In the mean time tell me only whether they who writ since Rhegino, and Marianus his time, allege Rhegino, or Marianus for the author of it?  PAP. 

a Locis suprà citatis.  Bergomensis, Rolevinck, Trithemius, Turrecremate, 
b Nauclerus vol 2. Chronogr. generat. 17 Antoninus part. 2. hist. Tit. 11. cap. 1. sect. 8.  and such like, allege Gratian for the author of it. But I do not remember that any historiographer allegeth Rhegino, or Marianus Scotus, for it.  PROT. 
If this touching Anastasius the second, may be in the most ancient handwritten Originals of Rhegino, and Marianus Scotus, though they, who have written since their times, allege them not for authors of it: why may not the other touching Pope joan, be in the most ancient handwritten Originals of Marianus Scotus, though they who writ since his time, allege not him for the author of it? Have you not another argument?  PAP. 
Yes: 
c Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont cap. 24.  for Bellarmine writes: That he who set forth Krantius Metropolis at Colen in the year 1574. doth witness, In antiquissimis exemplaribus Mariani Scoti non haberi joannem foeminam. That in the ancient copies of Marianus Scotus there is no mention of joan the woman.  PROT. 
And what was he that set forth Krantius, can you tell me that? doth Bellarmine, or 
d Lib. citato nu. 27. pag. 397.  N. D. (who twangs on the same string with Bellarmine) name him?  PAP. 
No, but what is that to the purpose? He, whosoever he was, witnesseth so much. And is not that enough?  PROT. 
No believe me: No reason that a nameless fir should be credited against all printed copies, especially if it be true, which 
e Lib. 4. de Ro. Pont. cap. 13.  Bellarmine saith, in another case: Author sine nomine, est sine authoritate, A man without a name, is without credit; 
f Lib. 1. de Matrimonio. ca 17.  and, Canon à concilio cuius ne nomen quidem extet, facilè contemni potest. A Canon out of a Council whose name is not known, may very well be scorned. But would you know why Bellarmine and N. D. did not name him? Questionless, not for that they knew not what his name was: but because he was but a base fellow, a Printer, a poor Bachelor of the law. A man of small esteem in the world: for he is named in the first page of the book, Gerwinus Calenius Lippiensis, and his whole style is no greater, than Legum Licentiatus. And what was such a fellow, to carry away such a matter as this, upon his bare word? But which is more to be marked, this fellow barely saith (without any proof in the world) that the manuscripts of Marianus Scotus, which are extant, discover the falsehood of them who put this story into the printed Marianus implying, that all Manuscripts, not the ancient only, want it. Which neither Bellarmine, nor N. D. durst or dare avouch, the contrary being confessed directly by Baronius, and may out of themselves be gathered by consequence. Besides, he saith as much for clearing of Sigebert, as Marianus Scotus, for 
g Annot. in lib. 2. Krantij Metrop.  these are his very words: Quae hic Author de johann foemina refert, in odium Romanorum pontificum conficta fuisse ab illis, quos ipse deceptus sequitur, ut alios omittamus quos Onuphrius in Platinam scribens recenset, testantur Marianus Scotus & Sigebertus, quorum quae supersunt M. S. exemplaria, fraudem illorum detegunt qui eorum impressis voluminibus id inseruernt. That this, which the author hereof reports touching Pope joan, is but counterfeit stuff, devised to make the Pope odious: to say nothing of such proofs as Onuphrius gives in his Annotations upon Platina, Marianus Scotus and Sigebert do testify: whose Manuscripts remaining on record, discover their falsehood, who have chopped this tale into their printed volumes. And yet neither Bellarmin, nor N. D. durst allege him to prove that Sigebert is corrupted.  PAP. 
Peradventure they durst have alleged him so that purpose also, though they did not: for doubtless there is no such story in Sigebert.  PROT. 
Why? But all the printed copies do convince you of shameless lying, in so saying. For thus 
h Sigebert Gemblacensis in Chronico ad an 854 printed at Paris. 1513.  they read: johannes Papa Anglicus, fama est hunc johannem foeminam fuisse & uni soli familiari cognitam qui eam complexus est, & gravis facta peperit Papa existens. Quare eam inter Pontifices non numerant quidam, ideo nomini numerum non facit. john the English Pope. The report is, that this john was a woman, and that one only, who used to lie with her, knew so much: and that at length, even in the time of her Papacy she was delivered of child. Whereupon it is that some reckon her not among the Popes, and that there is not one Pope john the more in number for her. What say you, is it not even thus?  PAP. 
I confess the printed copies make for you in this also. But in the ancient, true, and approved copies of Sigebert in writing, this which you talk of is not. Aliquis impudens nebulo interpolavit scripta eius. Some paltry fellow hath been tampering with his writings, 
i Lib. suprà citato. pag. 110.  as Bernartius notes. Marry whether it was Geffrey the Monk, or one Robert, who continued the story of Sigebert for some years, I know not: but between them it is as 
k Annot. in Plate in vit. joh. 8.  Onuphrius supposeth. And I am sure Sigebert never writ it. 
l Bernartius loco citato.  Cui rei adserendae fidus, & adpositus mihi testis est Gilbertus Genebrardus, which is witnessed very fully by Genebrard.  PROT. 
The 
m 9 q. 3. patet. in Glossa joh. Andreae Familiaris est haec probatio quum Papa alium Papam adducit in testen.  Canonists, when Popes allege Popes for proof, do note: that it is, familiaris probatio. Meaning such belike, as that in the proverb, Ask my fellow if I be a thief. And so me thinks is this of yours, which is fetched from your fellow Genebrard. But what saith Genebrard for your purpose?  PAP. 

n Lib. 4 Chronolog. ad ann. 855.  Genebrard saith, there be many Manuscripts of Sigebert, wherein this is not.  PROT. 
Yea, but that is the question. And how doth Genebrard prove it? Name's he any place where they are, or any person who hath seen them?  PAP. 
No not he, but 
o Lib. citato nu 27. pag. 397.  N. D. doth, for in the Monastery of Gemble in Flaunders, there is extant (saith N. D.) the original of Sigebert, which wants this story.  PROT. 
What? the original of Sigebert? Who told N. D. that the original of Sigebert was in that Monastery? or was he there and saw it with his own eyes?  PAP. 
N. D. saith nought of that. But you may have further proof thereof out of 
p Lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine: for he writes that Molanus a Doctor of Louvain saw the copy.  PROT. 
But Bellarmine saith not, that Malanus judged it to be the original of Sigebert: which yet N. D. avoucheth as confidently, as if he had held the candle while Sigebert wrote it. Neither doth Bellarmine tell us, to whom Molanus told this: or in what book he writ this. So that yet there is no just proof brought, that so much as one copy wants it, much less that it is foisted into such copies as have it.  PAP. 
Is there not? hearken then to Florunondus, 
a Protasius Franciscani or dinis decus, ad stringendam fidem prius iurciurando devinctus, mihi obtestatus est, etc. Florim. cap. 5. nu. 5.  who writes, that one Protasius, the credit of the order of Franciscans, swore to him, that he saw such a book in that Monastery; and that reading it all over, he found no word touching such a Pope.  PROT. 
This would have moved me somewhat to believe, that the copy in that Monastery wants this, if Florimondus had sworn for the satisfying of his reader, touching the truth of his report: as he urged the Franciscan to swear to him for the justifying of that which he told. But Florimondus delivers it barely of his word. And I have found him oft false of his tongue. Wherefore I cannot trust him. 
b Cap. 27 nu 6. extat adhue Michaelis ad Nicolaum epistola, etc.  Florimondus would make us believe, that Michael the emperors letter sent to Pope Nicolas, wherein the Emperor objecteth whatsoever might found to the disgrace of the Roman sea, is extant to this day: yet 
c Annal. tom. 10 ad an. 865. nu. 75. Non extant ipsae blasphemae Michaelis ad Imperatorem literae— traditae sunt igni.  Baronius testifieth that they are not extant. He writes, that the Pope burned them. Yea Florimondus himself in another 
d Chap. 10 nu. 4.  chapter (forgetting the proverb, Mendacem esse memorem oportet) confesseth, that they are lost. Yet be it so, that the copy which is in that Monastery wants this. Unless Florimondus can prove that it is the original, or truly copied out of the original, he speaks not to the point, as I shall show by and by.  PAP. 
Yea but he proves that it is the very original itself. For there (as 
e Florimond. cap. citat. nu. 5.  he saith) Sigebert lived, there he wrote this book with his own hand, there he left it at his death as a monument of his love. There it is showed by the Monks to such as come thither, for arare and ancient monument.  PROT. 
Sigebert lived not there, when he writ that book. He writ both that, and many others, in the Monastery of S. Vincentius, within the city of Metensis. Which I speak not of mine own head, as Florimondus doth, but out of 
f Sigebertus' eum in coenobio S. Vincentij. Metensi ad instruendos pueros esset positus, scripsit Historiarun lib. Trithen. de script. Ecclesiasticis, verbo, Sigebertas.  Trithemius. For in Trithemius you may read so.  PAP. 
Yet you cannot disprove Florimondus in that which he saith of his dying there: and bequeathing of that booké by his will, to that Monastery for a legacy.  PROT. 
No indeed. But neither can he prove his own saying. Now you know that Actori, non reo, incumbit probatio: The plaintiff, & not the defendant, must bring in his proof. That which is nakedly affirmed, is sufficiently answered when it is barely denied. Si dicere, probare est: pari ratione, inficiari, refutare est: as you may read in 
g Lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 20.  Bellarmine.  PAP. 
Why, but the Monks of that house do show it to all comers as Sigebert's own.  PROT. 
That I believe. For I have 
h Vergerius an notat in Catalogum haeret. Romae conflatum. An. 1559. fol. 17.  read of a Monk, who gave out, that he had brought from the East some of the sound of the bells which hung in Salomon's temple. 
i Ibid.  And that he could show among other relics, some of the hairs which fell from the Seraphical Angel, when he came to imprint the five wounds of Christ in S. Francis body. And I have 
k Bellonius observat. lib. 2. cap 83.  read of others, who show the Pilgrims that go to jerusalem a three cornered stone, and bear them in hand that it is that very stone whereof 
l Psal. 118. 22.  David spoke, saying, The stone which the builders refused, is the head of the corner.  PAP. 
Tush, those Monks do but cozen folks.  PROT. 
No more do the Monks of Gemble, in my opinion: though it may be, they are rather cozened, than cozeners. For many a Papist persuades himself he hath that, which indeed he hath not. As for example. Many Papists are persuaded they have that Syndon wherein Christ's body was lapped, when it was interred, wherein (as they say) is to be seen to this day the picture of Christ: whereas indeed (
m Gret● er. lib. ●. de Cruc●, cap. 85. pag. 240.  by some of their own men's confessions) they have but one made after that fashion. Again, many are persuaded, they have one of those nails, wherewithal Christ was nailed on the cross: 
n Idem lib. 1. cap. 20. pag. 50.  whereas they have but one fashionèd after that nail; or at most, some nail wherewithal some Martyr of Christ was tormented. And in like manner are they themselves deceived in their conceit of other relics. But that which makes me most suspicious of your Monks of Gemble, is this. I have read, that among many other goodly relics which are showed at Rome by the Pope's commandment, there is a Bible showed, which they say was written by S. Jerome himself, even with his own hands: and yet one of your own profession professeth freely, that he perusing it thoroughly, found it was written by the commandment of one king Robert, and by a bungling scrivener. Illum ego diligentius inspectum comperiscriptum esse jussu regis (ut opinor) Roberti, chirographo hominus imperiti, saith 
a De donatione Constantini.  Valla. Now I suppose, if we had access to Gemble in Flanders, perhaps we might find as much for discovering of their falsehood, in that which they report of the original of Sigebert: as your fellow found for the discovering of the others falsehood, who gave out, that the Bible which they showed was of S. jeroms writing.  PAP. 
Suppose it be not the original of Sigebert which is at Gemble: yet you will not deny (I hope) but that it is some ancient copy, which they esteem so much of.  PROT. 
Be it so. But will you thereupon conclude, that the Author never writ it? I presume you are not so ignorant, but you know, that words, sentences, and memorable accidents, have sometimes by negligence, sometimes by wilfulness, been left out of copies: as for example, the words (no not the Son of man, Mark 13. 32. whereon your 
b apology 〈◊〉 defence of Ecclesiastical subordination in England, cap. 12 fol. 200.  Jesuits as upon a chief foundation, build their doctrine of equivocation) were wanting in many Greek copies, as 
c Lib. 5. de fide, cap. 7.  S. Ambrose testifieth: and yet both you and we do hold opinion, that they were set down by the Author in the first copy. In like sort, the story touching Christ's sweeting agony, and the Angels comforting him, Luke 22. 43. 44. was not to be found in many copies, as 
d De Trinitat. lib. 10.  Hilary and 
e Lib. 2. contra Pelag.  Jerome witness: which came to pass, not for that it was never written by S. Luke, but (as 
f Lib. 1. de verbo Dei. cap. 16.  Bellarmine in part, and 
g Bibl. sanctas lib. 1.  Sixtus Senensis more fully notes) for that some simple Catholics, fearing it made for the Arians, razed it out of their books. So the story of the adulterous woman, in john the 8. was 
h jansen Concord. evang. cap 76.  wanting in many Manuscripts both Greek and Latin, and namely in a Manuscript of 
i Euseb. lib. 3. hist. cap. 39 teste Bella●. lib. 1. de verbo Dei, cap. 16.  Eusebius: yet that doth nothing prejudice the truth of our printed copies at this day, in which it is: no not in the opinion of you that are Papists. For as 
k Ibid.  Bellarmine proveth out of Austin, this history was blotted out of many books, by the enemies of God's truth. In much like sort (it seemeth) as the words of Aelfricus, which make against transubstantiation, were cut out of a fragment of an Epistle of his, in the library of Worcester, as 
l Acts and Monuments allegations against the 6. artic. pag. 1304. edit. 1570.  M. Foxe proveth evidently. And as this story of Pope joan is cut out of a very fair 
* Lib 5.  Manuscript of Ranulfus Cestrensis, which is to be seen 
l An. 1606.  at this day in the library of New College in Oxford.  PAP. 
Is this story torn (indeed) out of Ranulfus Cestrensis in New College in Oxford? Who think you was so mad?  PROT. 
Why, who but a Papist? For do not 
m Index lib. prohib. per Clementem 8. De correctione lib.  they give direction, that quae famae proximorum, & praesertim Ecclesiasticorum, & Principum detrahunt, corrigentur at que expurgentur? That such things should be altered or put out, which tend to the discredit of the Clergy? And doth not this touch at quick their Ecclesiastical state? Doth not Posseuine advise, that the 
n joh. Neuisanus Sylua N●ptialis. p. 319.  note in john Nevisan the Lawyer, which mentioneth Pope joan, should be razed out? Deal (
o In Apparat. sacro verbo, Ioh Neuisanus.  saith he) quia johannes haec foemina chimera est, & impostura calumniatorum: Blot it out, or rend it out, quoth Posseuine: for it is but a fiction, and a forgery.  PAP. 
You are too suspicious of Papists. But if these answers, whereon I have hitherto insisted, please you not, let it be as you would have it, that all these Historians writ so. 
p Onuph. annot. in Platin. in vit. Ioh 8. per ut aiunt, & tradunt earn relert. ●●  yet I deny, that any credit is herein to be given unto them, because they report it but by hearsay, with ut asseritur.  PROT. 
That is false. For Marianus Scotus reports it simply without ut asseritur, as before I showed. And Laonicus Chalcocondylas reports it as a certain truth, saying, Constat, etc. So doth Ravisius Textor, and 
q Barthol Cassa●aeus 2. part. catalogi gloriae mundi, non a consideratio. Turrecremat. sum. de Eccles. part. 2. lib. 4. cap. 20. Caelius Rhodiginus Antiqua● Lectionun. lib. 8. cap. 1.  others.  PAP. 
That which you say of Marianus Scotus, is true, if we were to be judged by the printed copy, which Heroldus set out. But I can assure you, that Heroldus unconscionably corrupted this place, and many others. For it is thus 
u Leo Papa ●bijt. Kal. Aug. Huic succesit loanna mulier an. a 〈◊〉 5. dieb. 4. Haec in codice impresso Heroldi opera qui mala fide locum hunc cum aliis multis corrupit. Name in scripto codice ex quo prodijt prima editio ita legitur: johannes qui, ut asseritur, fuit mulier  written in the written copy, after which the first edition was printed. Ioh anne●s ●ui ut asseritur, fuit mulier. john, who as the report goes, was a woman.  PROT. 
So your 
x Annal. to 10. add an. 853. ou. 60.  Cardinal Baronius would make us believe, (I grant) but he brings no other proof thereof then teste meipso. Which how ever it may go for proof among Princes, yet is no proof among scholars. And for my part without proof, I believe nothing, whosoever he be that speaks it, especially if he be a Papist. For as 
y Rerum memorabilium paraleipomen. Hist. Abbot. Vrspergens. annex a. p. 394.  Sigismond the Emperor said of judian the Cardinal, Legate at the Council of Basil, when one commended him highly to him: Tamen Romanus est. Yea but he is a Roman: so I may say of any Papist, reporting things unknown: yea, but he is a Papist. Yet be it so, as Baronius saith it is. Why may it not be true though it be delivered with ut asseritur?  PAP. 
Why? 
z Harding loco supra citato.  Because lies are commonly so soothed.  PROT. 
Indeed many lies pass in such general terms. As for example: Men say, 
a Golden Legend in the life of S. Patrick.  saith your Legend, that S. Patrick drove with his staff all the venomous beasts out of Ireland: and that he obtained of the Lord, that no Irish man should abide the coming of Antichrist. The former of which 
b Dial lib. 3. cap. 28.  Harpsfield Cope confesseth to be a lie: and so I think all the generation of you Papists think of the later. Else, why do none of your great Masters allege it to clear your Pope from being Antichrist? Men say, saith Nangiacus as 
* Chronol. lib. 3. ad an. Christ. 595.  Genebrard reporteth: that Kentish-men have tails like bruit beasts, because their ancestors mocked Austin the Monk when he came to preach unto them. Now that this is a lie well worthy of a whetstone, yourself (I hope) will acknowledge. Yet truth now and then is so delivered. When Boniface the Martyr was demanded on a time, whether it was lawful at the administration of the Lords Supper, to use a wooden chalice: it is said he answered thus, saith 
c De sacris Eccl. benefic. ac Minist. lib. 2. cap. 4.  Duaren: Olim aurei sacerdotes ligneis vasis, nunc lignei aureis utuntur. In old time golden Priests used wooden chalices, now wooden Priests use golden chalices. Mark, (fertur) it is said, saith Duaren, yet 
d Alciat. parerga juris lib. 7. cap. 24. & de consecrat. dist. 1. c. vasa  no question but he answered so. In like manner, it is written, that Pius the 2. was wont to say, Marriage was upon just reason forbidden Priests, but now upon better reason to be restored to Priests. 
e Pius 2. dixisse fertur sacerdotibus magnaratione sublatas esse nuptias, maiori restituendas videri. Platina in vita Pij. 2. Fulgos. de dict. etc. lib. 7. cap. 2.  Of which his saying there is made no question, as may appear by this, that a 
f Pisanus de Continentia. cap. 11.  jesuit replieth only to it, That it was recanted by him, and denieth not that it was spoken of him. That Alexander the 3. trampled the Emperor Frederick under his feet, and commnded one to say that which is in the 
g Psal. 91. 13.  Psalms, Thou shalt walk upon the Lion and Asp, the young Lion and the Dragon shalt thou tread under thy feet: is 
h Duaren. de sac. Eccl. Minist. lib. 1. cap. 2.  recorded by some with, ut fertur: and yet 
i See To●tu●a Torti. p. 262. & the B. of Lincoln's book against a nameless Catholic. pag. 282.  they have little to say for themselves, who call the truth thereof in question. That merry Cardinal, who seeing after the death of Clemens the 4. that his fellow Cardinals called still for the assistance of the holy Ghost, and yet could not agree upon the election of a new Pope, 
k Onup. Annot. in Plat. in vit. Greg. 10.  cried out: Domini, discooperiamus tectum camerae huius, quia spiritus sanctus nequit ad nos per tot tecta ingredi. My good masters, I pray you let us untile the roof of this room: for I fear the holy Ghost cannot get to us thorough so many slates: is merely 
l Onuph. ibid.  reported upon election of Gregory to have made these verses.  
Papatus munus tulit Archidiaconus unus,  
Quem patrem patrum fecit discordia fratrum.  
Yet who doubts but he made them? 
m Disput. super matter. Conc. generalis, quae habetur in Fasci culo rerum expetend. impress. Colon. 1535. fol. 201. b. Et in Bibl. sanct patrum Bygnaei. to. 8. edit. Paris. 1576.  Nicolas Clemangis Archdeacon of Baion in France, doth write upon hearsay. That when Balthasar commonly known by the name of john the 23. held a Council at Rome, and caused, as the manner is, before the first Session, a Mass to be said for the assistance of the holy Ghost: presently upon the Counsels setting of themselves down, and Balthasar's advancing himself into his chair of estate: a dreadful Owl (which is ordinarily thought to presage some evil towards) comes out of her hole, crying after her evil favoured fashion, and flying to the middle balk of the Church, staring just in Balthasar's face, to the great astonishment of Balthasar himself, and all the whole Council, so that he was glad to break off for that time. Yea he writes, that at the next Session she appeared again, staring in the Pope's face as before, and could not be feared away with flinging of sticks, or with whooping, till one field her with a stick, and so killed her. Yet no man hath cause to doubt of the story, for he had it of a trusty man, and a faithful friend of his, who assured him, of his credit, that it was true. That 
o Aene as Silvius hist. Bohem●ca, cap. 13.  S. Cyril entreated the Pope, he might say the Moravians their service in a known language: and that when there was some sticking at the motion, a voice was heard, as it were, from heaven, saying, Omnis spiritus laudet Dominum, & omnis lingua confiteatur ei: Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord, and let every tongue confess his holy name: upon hearing whereof, the Pope granted S. Cyril his suit: is but reported with, ferunt. And yet though 
p In Enchirid. controu. cap. 19 de precibus latinèrecitandis.  Costerus in that respect make some question of the truth of it, 
q De divin. scrip quavis lingua non legend. cap. 33.  Ledesma, and 
r Lib. 2 de verbo Dei, cap. 16.  Bellarmine receive it for true. That the worst Christians in Italy are the Romans: that of the Romans, the Priests are the most wicked; and of the Priests, the lewdest are made Cardinals; & of the Cardinals, the badst chosen to be Pope; it is 
s Sir Edw. Sands in his relation of the religion used in the West pag. 91.  written, but with asseritur. Yet to them that are skilled in histories, and have observed the course of the world at Rome, there are not many things more certain. In Bavaria palàm ferunt, jesuitas dolium in Collegium subvexisse, è cuius fundo effracto, meretrix in publicas plateas prolapsa sit, faith 
t Historia jesuitici ordinis, cap. 6.  Hassen Muller. They say openly in Bavaria, that the Jesuits caused a tub to be carried unto their College, which breaking by the way, a wench dropped out of the one end of it, in the midst of the street. And why may not this be true, though it go but by report? The Papists believe as true, far more incredible reports then this, which concern Protestants. But to conclude this point. Doth not 
u Cope dialog. 3. cap. 11. pag. 355.  Harpsfield Cope avouch, that if men reject stories upon this quirk, that they are related with ferunt & dicitur, they will soon mar all? You had best devise a better answer than this, for fear that you be one of them who mar all.  PAP. 
Take you no care for that. Yet in way of further answer to Polonus, who is taken as 
x Nu. 27. p 397.  N. D. writes) to have been the first relator of this fable. 
y N. D. Pag. 399. & 400.  I say, there are so many incongruities, simplicities, absurdities, varieties, and contrarieties in his very narration of it, as it discovereth the whole matter to be a mere fable, and fiction indeed, and him a very simple man. For he begins his narration thus: Post Leonem sedit johannes Anglus, natione Margantinus, After Leo the 3. john English, by nation a Margantine. But where this country of Margantia is, no man can tell.  PROT. 
N. D. whose words you use, doth Martinus Polonus open wrong, in reporting this of him. For first, he saith not that she sat after Leo the 3. but Leo the 5. Secondly, he calls her not Margantine, but Maguntine, which is witnessed by 
z Annot. in Plate in vit. joh. 8.  Onuphrius himself, who cities his words to his best advantage, that he might have the rather whereat to cavil. If any blind book have Margantine, it is but the scriveners fault, such as is committed once and again in that book of N. D. whence this sweet cavil is taken. 
a Pag. 396.  Where for Magdeburgians, we read Magdebugians. For in Polonus there is an, r, too much, and in N. D. there is an, r, too few. Now where Maguntia is every can man tell, to wit, in Germany.  PAP. 

b N. D pag. 400  Yea but it followeth in Polonus: Quae alibi legitur fuisse Benedictus 3. which otherwhere is read to be Benedict the 3. So as this man seemeth to confound him with Benedict the 3. and consequently ascribeth to him the same time of his reign that is assigned to Benedict, to wit, 2. years and 5. months. And yet presently after he saith, that Benedictus was a Roman, son to Prateolus, etc.  PROT. 
The substance of this your answer is false, and feigned of N. D. his own head: for in Polonus there are no such words as (Quae alibi legitur fuisse Benedictus 3.) neither ascribeth he to her the same time of reign that is assigned to Benedict. For he ascribes to Benedict 2. years and 5. months: whereas he ascribes to Pope joan 2. years 5. months and 4. days, or (as some 
c Onuph. loco citato.  of you say) but 2. years, 1. month and 4. days. N. D. might with as great reason charge Anastasius to confound Leo the 2. and Benedict the 2. his next successor: because 
d Anastas. de vit. Pont. in Leo. 2 & Benedict. 2.  he ascribeth to Leo the 2. the same time of his reign (within 5. days) which he ascribes to Benedict the 2. Questionless, 
e Chron. ad an. Christ. 94. & 103  Polonus ascribes to Cl●mens, 9 years, 2. months, and 10. days: and so he doth to his next successor Anacletus, without difference: yet he confounds them not. Polonus ascribes to Celestinus primus, 8 years, and 9 days: and so he doth to Sixtus the 3. his next successor, and yet confounds them not.  PAP. 

f Onuph. Hard. and Bellar. locis supra citatis.  Why, but what a foolish speech is it of Polonus, when he saith, john an English man, by nation of Maguntia. For Maguntia is in Germany, as you told me before. And how could she being an English woman, be of Maguntia?  PROT. 
You run counter: she was no English woman, neither doth Polonus say she was: she was joan English (as 
g Nu. 30. pag. 400.  N. D. truly translated, johannes Anglus, in Polonus) but not joan, or john of England. English was her surname, as 
h See before.  Fasciculus Temporum observed; but England was not her country, her country was Maguntia, that is, Mentz. There are many who carry the name of Scot, French, Gascoigne, Westfaling, Holland, Welch, which were not born in those countries, but in several shires in England. Guitmundus, who wrote against Berengarius, was 
* Guitmundus Normanus cognomento, non natione.  Norman by name, but not by his country, saith 
i Apparat. sac. verbo Guitmundus.  Posseuine.  PAP. 

a Florim. cap. 10. nu. 1.  Such writers as lived the very time wherein this matter is pretended to have fallen out, (that is to 
* Hoc est ab an. 847. ad ann. 858.  say) with Leo the 4. and with Benedict the 3. from the year 847, to 858. write nothing hereof at all. Ergo, there was no such matter.  PROT. 
Who are these writers (I pray you) of whom you speak?  PAP. 
The 
b Florim. loco citato.  first and chiefest is Rabanus Maurus, Abbor of the Monastery of Fulda, wherein this Pope joan of yours (they say) lost her maidenhead. Rabanus Maurus writes nothing of her.  PROT. 
Nor of any other particular Pope: doth he? Rabanus 
c Trithem. de script. Eccl verbo. Rabanus.  wrote commentaries upon the whole Scripture, and some other Treatises: but he wrote no history. Though if he had, yet could he not have written of this Pope joan, for her knavery was not discovered till after the year 855. in 
* Trithem. ibid.  which Rabanus died. Rabanus lived not to hear of her delivery of a child, as she went in progress.  PAP. 
Rabanus died in the year 856. and not in the year 855. as 
d Annal. to. 10. ad an. 856 nu. 26 Possevin. Apparat. sac. verbo. Rabanus.  Baronius notes. Trithemius who noted out the year 855 for the year of his death, was deceived, and so are you.  PROT. 
Whether Trithemius was deceived in assigning the year 855. for the year of Rabanus death, I mean not to stand arguing with you, because it is all one to my purpose though he died in the year 856. For Pope joan was not discovered till after the year 856. And therefore sith he died in that year, by Baronius and your own confession, he could not write of her.  PAP. 

e Florim. loco citato.  Strabus, whose fellow Monk bereaved her of her maidenhead, as the tale goes: Strabus (I say) writes nothing of her.  PROT. 
Strabus writes nothing of his fellow Monks, who by the instigation of the devil, wearied Rabanus of his Abbotship, through their continual grumbling against him, for giving himself more to the study of Divinity, then to pleading about their worldly businesses. Yet we read thereof in 
f De script. Eccles. verbo Rabanus.  Trithemius and in 
g Sixt. Senensis Bibli. sanctae, l. 4. verbo. Rabanus. & in Possevin. Apparat. sac. verbo. Rabanus.  others. Wherefore it doth not follow, Strabus wrote not of Pope joan: Ergo there was no Pope joan. Especially if it be considered, that Strabus wrote no history, but glosses upon the Bible, and lived not till Pope joanes days, but died about the year 840. For how could he write of that which fell out after his death? Who is your next man?  PAP. 

h Florim. p. 84.  Haimo, who writ a book of virtue and vice, writes nothing of her.  PROT. 
No marvel: for he died in the year 834, at least twenty years before she was Pope. If Haimo had written of her, his writing had been as strange, as her delivery of a child.  PAP. 
How prove you that Haimo died in the year 834? For by 
i Annal. to. 10. ad an. 853. nu. 71  Baronius, it should seem, he died in the year 853.  PROT. 
Though Haimo had died in the year 853, it helps not you in this case. For till after that time, this joan was not made Pope. But that Haimo died in the year 834, it is witnessed by 
k De script. Eccl verbo. Haimo.  Trithemius, and acknowledged by 
l Bibl. Sanct. lib. 4. verbo. Haimo. Apparat. ●acer. to. 2. verb Haim.  Sixtus Senensis, and by Posseuine. Wherefore go on.  PAP. 
Anastasius Bibliothecarius, 
m N. D. part 2. cap. 5. pag. 392.  a man of great reputation, that lived in both these Pope's times, and 
n Florim. p. 84.  was Secretary to them both, and was present at both their elections, and wrote the particulars thereof, writes nothing of her, but showeth among other points, that Leo the 4. died the 16. day before the Kalends of August, and that all the Clergy of Rome gathered together, and with one consent did choose Benedict the third, etc.  PROT. 
Where read you that Anastasius was Secretary to both these Popes? or that he was present at their elections? 
o In vita joh. 8. nu. 110. Anastasi● à job. (v●. 8) praefectus est Bibliothecae S. Rom. Ecclesiae. Baron. annal. tom. 9 ad an. 787. nu. 9  Platina writing of an accident which fell out in the year 884, notes, that Anastasius at that time was a man of good account in Rome. But neither he, nor any man else notes that he was Secretary to Leo the 4. and Benedict the 3, or that he was present at their elections. 
p Lib. 3. de Rome Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine himself durst say no more, but that he was present at the election of many Popes, who either lived before or after this woman Pope. He durst not say, that he was at the election of these, as you say. Again, who told you that Leo died the 16. day before the Kalends of August? Anastasius 
q In vita Leonis 4. pag. 293.  writes, that Leo the 4. Papa obdormivit in domino 16. Calend. August. But that is but the 15. day before the Kalends of August, and not the 16. Thirdly, whereas to win credit to this your Author, you commend him as a man of great reputation, it is worth the noting, (which is noted 
r Ioh Albinus Typographus Mogunt. praefat. ad an icum Lectorem, quae praefigitur Anastasio. Qui sciret tantum Grammaticam isto seculo rudi, doctissimus habebatur. Baron. annal. tom. 9 ad an. 802. nu. 12.  by one of your own friends) that in the age wherein he lived, doctissimi censebantur, qui velsolam Grammaticam callerent: they were counted great Clerks, who were skilled so much as in the Grammar. 
s Albinus loco citato.  That in this Chronicle of Anastasius, the phrase is harsh, rude, and barbarous. That many things are avowed therein, which are far from true. That therein there are many errors in the account of time, and some things wherein he crosseth himself. Which censure, for the main point, is approved by many of your own mother's children. For many Papists, in many particulars condemn it. As for example, 
t Anastas de vit. pontif. in vita An●ceti, etc.  this man of great reputation reckons Anicetus before Pius, and Anterus before Pontianus. Whereas 
u Platina de vitis pontiff in vita Aniceti, & Onuph in Chron. Rom. Pontif.  your Chroniclers reckon Pius before Anicetus, and Pontianus before Anterus. 
x In vita Marcel.  This man of great reputation records, that Marcellinus (one of your Popes) was brought to offer incense unto Idols, and that he did so: whereas your 
y Annal to. 2. ad an. 302 nu 95. 96 etc.  Baronius inclines rather unto the contrary. This man of great reputation 
z In vita Liberij  records, that the priests of Rome, by the advice of Liberius, chose Felix a priest to be a Bishop in stead of Liberius: whereas 
a Ba●on to. 3. ad an. 355. nu 57  your Chroniclers of greatest esteem maintain, that Felix was chosen priest by heretics only, and not by consent of Liberius. This man of great reputation 
b In ●ita Liberij.  records, that Liberius subscribed to the Arian heresy: which neither 
c P●gh. hierarch Eccles. lib. 4. c. 8.  Pighius nor 
d Annot in Platin. in vit. Fel. c. 2.  Onuphrius can abide to hear of. This man of great reputation 
e In vita Anast. 2  records, that Anastasius the second Pope of that name, communicated with Photinus the heretic, who was all one with Acacius the Eutychian. And that he purposed with himself to restore Acacius, who was deposed by his predecessors: but could not effect it, because God struck him with sudden death. All which is false and fabulous in 
f Lib. 4. de Rome Pont. cap. 10 & Append. ad. lib. de summo Pont cap. 14.  Bellarmine's opinion. This man of great reputation 
g In vita Marcellini: cessavit Episco● at. ann. 7m. 6 dieb. 25.  records, that after Marcellinus, the Bishopric of Rome lay lea, seven years, six months, and five and twenty days: whereas by 
h Annal to. 2. ad an 304. nu. 25. & 26.  Baronius it lay lee but 25 days in all. This man of great reputation 
i In vita Euseb.  records, that the Cross of Christ was found in Eusebius the Pope's days, about the year 310: whereas by 
k Annal. to. 3. ad an. 326. nu. 41.  Baronius it was not found till the year 326. This man of great reputation 
l In vita Hono. 1  reckons Honorius the first among the heretics called Monothelites: whereas the 
m Onuph. annotat. in Plat. in vit. Honorij 1. etc.  most of your side, and by name 
n Lib 4 de Ro. Pont. cap. 11.  Bellarmine, would gladly clear Honorius from this imputation. This man tells us, that Alexander the first sa●e but eight years, and a few odd months: whereas 
p Baron annal. to. 2 ad an. 132. nu. 1.  Baronius tells us, that he sat ten years and odd months. 
o In vita Alex. 1.  This man 
q In vita Pij 1.  giveth to Pius, 19 years, four months, and three days: whereas 
r Baron. to. 2. ad an. 167. nu. 1.  Baronius gives him but ten years. This man 
s In vita Soteris  makes Soter sit nine years, and upward: whereas by 
t Baron to. 2. ad ann. 179. nu. 51.  Baronius he sat not full four years. This man 
u In vita Anteri.  saith, that Anterus sat 12 years, 1 month, and 12 days: whereas 
x Baron. to. 2. ad ann. 238. nu. 1.  Baronus saith, he sat not a whole month. This man 
y In vita Dionysij.  alloweth Denis but two years and a little more, whereas 
z To. 2. ad ann. 272. nu 21.  Baronius allows him 11 years and more. This man 
a In vita Stephani. 5.  writes, that Stephen the fifth sat 7 years, and 7 months: whereas by 
b Annal to. 9 ad ann. 817. nu. 1.  Baronius reckoning he sat but seven months, and two or three odd days. And so in many other things, this man of great reputation alloweth of that, whereof you allow not, & disalloweth that which you allow. And therefore what reason have you to press us with his authority in this controversy?  PAP. 
Great reason. For though he miss sometimes the truth, yet he aimed always at it: and though he was unkindly dealt withal by some of the Popes, yet he was not carried away with malice, and moved thereby, as many are, to write an untruth,  PROT. 
What? Was Anastasius, the man of great reputation, unkindly dealt withal by some of the Popes? Who told you that tale?  PAP. 
I had it of 
c Florim. cap. 14. nu. 1.  Florimondus. And I think he was induced to say so, because we read in Leo the 4. his time, our Anastasius was degraded by Pope Leo, and a Council of 67. Bishops.  PROT. 
That Anastasius, who was degraded by Leo the 4. and the Council, was he (as 
d De vitis Pont. in vita Bened. 3.  Platina showeth) who stood up Antipope against Benedict the 3. It was not this Anastasius, Which you may learn of him, who made the Index Alphabetical, for the more ready finding out of the most memorable points in Anastasius Chronicle: for 
e In Indice littera a. verbo Anastasius.  he distinguisheth Anastasius Bibliothecarius, from Anastasius degraded by Leo, and set up in opposition against Benedict the 3. But let Anastasius be of as great reputation as you are disposed to have him of. How soon after Leo his death, doth Anastasius report, that the clergy chose Benedict the 3? Can you tell me that?  PAP. 
Yea. The Sea was void after Leo the 4. just 15. days, and no more. And then, not joan, but Benedict the 3. was chosen.  PROT. 
Who told you so?  PAP. 
Marry, 
p Annot, in Plat. in vit. Ioh 8.  Onuphrius, 
q Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine, 
r De vtilitate Le gend. hist.  Bernartius, 
s Cap. 14. pag. 123.  Florimondus, and 
t De urbis Episc in Benedict. 3.  Papyrius Massonus. For they say that these are Anastasius his own words: Sanctissimus Leo Papa 4. obdormivit in Domino 16. Calend. Aug. sepultus ad Sanctum Petrum, & cessavit Episcopatus dies 15. Quo mortuo, mox omnis Clerus Romanae sedis, universi proceres, cunctusque populus ac senatus congregati sunt, etc. uno conamine Benedictum Pontificem promulgaverunt. That is, The most holy Pope Leo the 4. died in the Lord the 16. of the Calends of August, and was buried at S. Peter's, and the Bishopric was void 15. days. Now presently upon his death, the whole Roman Clergy with all the nobles, and commons, and officers of the city met: and as one man agreed that Benedict should be their Pope.  PROT. 
They all lie falsely. For the words (Et cessavit Episcopatus dies 15.) are not to be found (as before I told you) in Anastasius. So that whatsoever they build upon this circumstance (as the most of their building is) is built upon a false foundation, and therefore cannot stand. Yet beside I would have you know that Anastasius purposely passed over in silence divers things, which touched the Popes. For, Multa de Sergio desiderari videntur apud Anastasium, 
u Annal. to. 10. ad ann. 847. nu. 6.  saith Baronius. Anastasius wants many things touching Sergius. Again, johannis 8. res gestae desiderantur apud Anastasium, fortassis praetermissae ob odiosam Photij restitutionem, saith the same 
x Annal to. 10. ad an. 882. nu. 7.  Baronius. The acts of john the 8. are wanting in Anastasius, perhaps because he was loath to record that odious restoring of Photius.  

y Multa praetermissa ab Anasta sio inveniuntur, & inter alia depraedatio Basilicae S. Petri quae in vaticanis collibus extra urbis maenia posisita erat. Baron. Annal to. 9 ad ann. 739. nu. 6. Plurima de eodem rege (viz. Luitprando) P. Diaconus praetermisisle convincitur. Sed haud rerum ignoratione, sed ne tanto vito no tam inureret, etc. Baron. Annal. to. 9 ad ann. 744. nu. 22.  Anastasius forbears to speak of Luitprandus sacking S. Peter Church, which is without the walls of Rome. And so doth Paulus Diaconus too. Not for that he was ignorant of that fact, sith he lived in the same time, but for that he was loath by telling truth to discredit Luitprandus. Wherefore let us leave Anastasius, and come unto the next, who living in those days, passeth over Pope joan in silence.  PAP. 

z Bell lib. 3. de Ro. Pont. cap. 24. N. D. nu 24. p. 393. Et alij.  Ado Bishop of Vienna, who lived at the same time, hath not a word of this your Pope jone.  PROT. 
Ado lived not at the same time, nor near the same time, if either 
a In Bibliotheca verbo. Ado.  Gesner, or 
b Apparatus sacer. verbo. Ado.  Possevinus, or 
c In hist. vet. patrum. edit. Paris. 1583. ad initium. Chron. Adonis  Laurentius de la Bar, or 
* In Bibliot. vatican. impress Romae. an. 1591. Tit. Author q. in opere citantur nomina.  Angelus Rocca may be credited. For he (as they say) wrote a brief Chronicle from the beginning of the world to his own time, to wit, to the year 1353. Wherefore it is not much material whether he miss her, or mention her. Say on.  PAP. 

d Florim. p 84.  Theophanus Freculphus wrote in those days an history from the beginning of the world to his own time: and yet he writes nothing of her.  PROT. 
If Freculphus had written an history of that length, yet there was little reason why he should have mentioned her. For we 
* Freculphus floruit. an. 830. & quod excurrit. Poslevin. Ap parat. lac. verbo. Freculphus.  read not that he lived above the year 840. But indeed his history goes not so far. He writ only to the year of Christ 550, as 
e In Metho hist. Freculph historicus ab orb. condito ad ann. Christi. 560. Chron, digerit.  Bodin observeth: or to the year 560, as 
f Chron. l. 2. p. 110  Pontacus noteth: or at furthest to the year 600. For having spoken a few words of Gregory the great & Boniface who succeeded him, he ends presently his story. Who is your next man?  PRO. 

g O●uph. annot. in Plat. in vita joh. 8. Harding. loco in initiocitat. Florim. p 84  Aimonius, A Monk of S. Germans, and a famous French writer, speaks nothing of her.  PROT. 
Aimonius, or Ammonius, or Annonius, (for he is diversly named) your famous French writer, drew out his story, by 
h Annonius usque ad ann. 820 historiam texurt, saith Vasquez de Adorat. lib. 2 cap. 9 disput. 7.  your own men's confession, but to the year 828, or at furthest to 
* Gencbr. Chron. lib. 4. ad an. 44  844, which fell nine or ten years short (at least) of Pope joanes time. And therefore me thinks that you should not look that he should write of her.  aeAP. 

i N. D. nu. 24. p. 302.  Audomarus the Parisian omits her also in his history.  PROT. 
Where might a man see Audomarus I pray you? 
k Episco●us qui dam nostras eos authores citavit interdum, quos nulla unquam habuit aetas. Canus. Loc. Com. lib. 11. c. 6. fol. 327.  Canus tells of a Bishop in his country which was wont to cite Authors that never were. Now I wish you be not of kindred to him in this: for I find no mention of any such historiographer in Trithemius, or in Gesner, or in Possevinus. Neither doth Bellarmine nor Baronius cite any such in their disputes about this matter. When you can tell me certain news of such a writer, you shall have a more certain answer. In the mean time proceed.  PAP. 
Nay stay a little: for though neither Bellarmine nor Baronius mention Ademarus, (for so is his right name, and not Audomarus, as it is erroneously printed) where they speak of this matter: yet Ademarus is mentioned by Genebrard and Onuphrius, where they treat of this matter, as B. C. observed well, in his 
l Pag. 296. and 297.  doleful knell of Thomas Bel: where he taxeth Sutcliffe for captious quarreling with father Parsons (as he calls him) for citing Ademarus, calling him a counterfeit.  PROT. 
B. C. is a fit patron for father Parsons: but an unfit match to deal with Deane Sutcliffe. Deane Sutcliffe (no doubt) scorns him. And good cause why. For who but a fool would appeal to one of his own fellows for trial of his truth? Are not Genebrard and Onuphrius as like to cite a counterfeit Author as Parsons!  PAP. 

m Florim. p. 84.  Lupus Seruatus saith nothing of her.  PROT. 
Why? what occasion had he to speak of her, sith he writ no books of history? Besides, Lupus Seruatus migravit ad Dominum anno 851, saith 
n In Chron. More nasterij Hirsaugiensis ad ann. 851.  Trithemius: that is Lupus Seruatus died in the year 851. So that, though as a Prophet he might have foretold of her delivery, yet as an Historian, he could not have reported her delivery.  PAP. 
Yea but Lupus Abbot of Ferrara in an 
o Epistola 103. quae habetur apud Baro. anna. to. 10. ad an. 856 nu. 8. & Florim. cap. 14. nu. 4.  Epistle of his to Benedict the third, calls Leo benedict's predecessor: and thereby showeth, as 
p Annal. to. 10. ad ann. 853. nu. 69.  Baronius gathereth, that there was no such Pope as Pope joan, between Benedict and Leo.  PROT. 
What? doth Baronius gather such a conclusion of such premises? Verily he gathereth where no man streweth. For I pray you, doth this follow. john the 9 speaking of Stephen the 6. 
q Baron. to. 10. ad an. 900. nu. 8.  calls him his predecessor. Ergo, there was no Pope between john the 9 and Stephen the 6? If not, as indeed it doth not, for there were two Popes who came between them, the one called 
r Baron. to. 10. ad ann. 901. nu. 1.  Romanus, the other 
s Ibid.  Theodorus) than neither will it follow, that because Leo is called benedict's predecessor, therefore there was no such Pope, as Pope joan, between Benedict and Leo.  PAP. 

t Baron. to. 10. ad an. 853. nu. 69  Yea, but this Lupus in diverse of his Epistles, doth complain of the miserable estate of the Church in his time. And therefore if any such horrible matter, as this of Pope joan, had fallen out, 
* Cetè si quod tam nefandum see lus accidislet, di cere minimè omisisser, said in placabili luctu vir zelo plenus planxisset.  doubtless he would have spoken of it, and mourned pitifully for it.  PROT. 
Doubtless, Baronius, if you give any credit to him, will make a fool of you. For doth not 
u To. 10. ad ann 846. nu. 10. 11. 12. 14. 15. 17.  he mention diverse of his Complaining Epistles, sent to great personages? wherein yet he complains of nothing, but that Courtriers robbed his Corban; I mean his Monastery. 
x Ad ann. 855. nu. 14.  That he wanted an ambling Nag to ride to Rome on. 
y Ad ann. 856. nu. 10.  That he wanted Tully de Oratore, Quintilian, and Donate upon Terence. And 
z Ad ann. 856. nu. 20.  that there was such licentiousness in France (among the Laity) that the people neither feared God nor the devil. Of faults among the Clergy, Lupus complains not at all.  PAP. 

a N. D. p. 392. Florim. p. 84.  Luitprandus, who writ an history, speaks nothing of her.  PROT. 
What history of Luitprandus do you mean? That which is entitled De vitis Pontificum, that is, of the Pope's lives? which was printed the 
b Anno. 1602.  other year at Mentz with Anastasius: or his history of such accidents as fallen out through Europe?  PAP. 
I mean the latter. For I see the former, though it carry the name of Luitprandus, 
c joh. Albinus praefar. ad Lectorem.  cast off by the Printer, as none of his.  PROT. 
Now than you are a wise man, to tell me that Luitprandus mentions not Pope joan. For Luitprandus Ticivensis Diaconns, historiam per Europam gestarum libris 6, ab An. 858. ad ●0. usque Othonis magni fere continuat, 
d Chron. lib. 4. ad ann. 955.  saith Genebrard. That is, Luitprandus Deacon of such a Church in Italy, continues his history of accidents which fell out in Europe, from the year 858. to the 30. year (almost) of Otho the great. By which you may see that he began his history after Pope joanes time. And therefore had no cause to speak of her.  PAP. 

e N. D. and Florim. locis citator  Lambertus Schafnaburgensis hath not a word of her.  PROT. 
To this I answer, first that he lived not in the same time with her: he lived anno 1077. Secondly I say, that this Lambertus did but touch by the way. all ages from the beginning of the world to the year of Christ 1040. as 
f Lib. 2. chron.  Pontacus truly observed: though he discoursed at large of the 37 years that followed. Thirdly, this Lambertus doth not so much as name Stephen the 4, or Paschalis, or Eugenius, or Valentinus, or Gregory the 4, or Sergius the 2, or Leo the 4, or Benedict the third, or Nicolas, or Adrian the second: and therefore what marvel if he speak not of this Pope joan?  PAP. 

g Florim. p. 85. Onuph. in Plat. in vita joh. 8.  Otho Frisingensis, who lived about the year 1150. makes no mention of this story.  PROT. 
But he doth. For john the seveuth (
h Lib. 7. cap. 35. re●um in orb gestarum. Impress. Argentorati, An. 1515.  saith he) was a woman.  PAP. 

a Qui paul● post illius aetatem floruerunt, nihil de ea scripserunt. etc. Florim. cap. 10. pag. 84.  They who lived within a few years after her, and writ at length of all other accidents, write nothing of her: and that is another presumption, it is but a fable which is reported of her.  PROT. 
Who are they you mean?  PAP. 
The first is 
b Florim. loco citato.  johannes Diaconus, who in the year 870. writ of the Pope's lives.  PROT. 
That johannes Diaconus w. it S. Gregory the great his life, 
c For so I read in Trithem. de script. Ecclesiast. verbo, joh. Diac.  I grant; and 
* Possevin. in Ap parat. sac. verbo. joh. Diaconus.  as some say Clement's: but that he writ of any more Popes, I utterly deny. You have a pretty gift in alleging writings that never were. But say on.  PAP. 

d Florim, loco citato.  Milo Monachus who lived Anno 871. saith nothing of her.  PROT. 
Milo Monachus I believe saith nothing of her, nor any other Pope: for he writ no history. They who commend him, 
e Trithem. lib. citato, verbo Milo. Sigebert. ad an 879.  do commend him for a Rhetorician, and for a Poet, and for a physician, but not for an Historiographer.  PAP. 

f Florim. loco citato.  Passeratius Rabertus who lived in the year 881. saith nothing of her.  PROT. 
This Passeratius is (surely) some author of your own devising. For no man can tell any news of him. But (perhaps) you would say Paschatius Ratbertus, for 
g Trithem. lib. citato. Poslevin. appa. sac. verbo. Paschasius.  such a one lived about the time you speak of. Yet this writ no history. This writ neither at length, nor in brief, of any of the Pope's lives.  PAP. 
Yea but 
h Florim. loco citato.  Rhegino, who lived in the year 910. and comprehendeth briefly all the choice matters which fell out in the time of this supposed Pope joan, writes nothing of her.  PROT. 
Rhegino writes nothing of john the 2, nor of Boniface the 4, nor of Deusdedit, nor of Boniface the 5. He writes not a word of Sergius the 2, nor of Leo the 4, nor of Benedict the 3: and therefore no marvel though he write nothing of this joan the woman Pope.  PAP. 

i Cum o●●es scribendi principes, quorum alij haeretici, alij schismatici, alij anathemate separati— quaecunque odium suggessit, in Pontifices ex omni vitae praeteritae causa collecta probra turpiter evomuerint— nihil autem de Ioannae Pontificatu dixerint: Existimandum est quaecunque de ea postea diwlgata sunt, posterorum haereticorum fraud fuisse excogitata. Florim. cap. 10. nu. 5. & 6.  Why, but the greatest enemies that ever the Popes had, who lived in, and after those times, and were ready to cast in the Pope's teeth whatsoever they knew, or knew not, to the end they might disgrace them, yet never objected this of Pope joan. Which confirms me much in my opinion, that this is but a tale, devised long after by some crafty headed heretics.  PROT. 
Who are these I pray you?  PAP. 

k Florim. nu. 4.  john Bishop of Ravenna is one of them, Methodius Illyricus another, and Michael Palaeologus the Emperor of Constantinople a third.  PROT. 
How know you, that these never objected Pope joanes lewdness to the disgrace of the Roman Papacy? Have you read all that they writ, and all that they spoke?  PAP. 
Nay: their writings are not extant, 
l Florim. ibid.  I confess. But a man may know how they slandered the Popes by the answers of many godly men, made in defence of the Popes. For as we Catholics at this day are forced to make mention of your objections, when we undertake to answer your books: so in those days the Catholics were driven to make mention of the slanders which they refuted. Now in their refutation of slanders, there is no such thing as this of Pope joan.  PROT. 
Why, peradventure they knew, that in this they were slandered with a matter of truth; and therefore they held it best to pass it over in silence. Questionless your fellows at this day do so often. When Beza objected this very matter in the assembly of Poysy, before the Cardinal of Lorraine, and the Sorbonists of Paris: who answered him? Do not your 
a johannes Sam martinus in fabulam Ioannae pseudo pontiff. Romanae è corrupto historiarù albo erasam à Flor. etc. and Florim cap. 6. pag 58.  own men confess, that no man said a word to him? When the Hussites (as you call them) objected the same at the Council of Constance; 
b Silentio satisfecerunt Catholici doctores, etc. Florim. cap. 6. nu. 6.  was not silence their answer? We read in a 
c Synodus Parisiensis anno Christi 824. Francofurti impress. apud haeredes Wecheli 1596. pag. 145.  book lately set forth, entitled Synodus Parisiensis, that 
d In epist. Pauli ad Rom.  S. Ambrose asked, Quaratione, quáue authoritate, imagines Angelorum vel aliorum Sanctorum ador and sint, cum ipsi sancti Angeli vel sancti homines vivos se ador ari noluerunt? What reason or what warrant men had to worship the images of men or Angels, seeing the Angels themselves and holy men alive refused to be worshipped? Now the two great Cardinals, 
e Append ad lib de cultu Imag.  Bellarmine and 
f Annal. tom 9 add an. 825. nu 3.  Baronius, snarl at this book, seeking by all means to disgrace it. 
g Loco citato, in initio  Bellarmine expressly professeth the confuting of it: and 
h Nu. 5. etc.  Baronius sets the most of it down in his Annals even word for word, making glosses here and there upon it, in way of answer to it. But both of them pass slily by the words of Ambrose. If we had not had the book itself, we should never have known by their answers, of such an argument of S. Ambrose his making, against Images. In like manner these 
i Bellar. lib. 2. de Purge cap. 8. Baron. Annal. to. 8. ad an. 604. p. 182 etc.  two Champions undertake to answer such arguments as are made to iustistifie the report of Gregory, delivering trajan out of hell. Yet there is one argument made by their 
k Alphons. Salmeron in 1. Cor 15. disput 27.  opposites, which they never touch; and that is this: that in S. Gregory's Church at Rome, the sum of that story is engraven in an ancient stone. Upon which argument the jesuit 
l Cuius rei extat ensign Romae monumentum lapidi antiquissimo inscriptum in aede sacra ipsius Gregorij— quod ego proprijs oculis hausi. etc. Salmeron loco citato, p. 239 & 240.  Salmeron stands much. If their opposites writings were not extant, by their answers, we had never heard of such an objection. Wherefore if you would persuade me that these eager enemies objected not this against the Pope, you must bring better proof thereof then this, that you find no foot-stepping of it in the answers made unto them. But go on with your argument: what other enemy's silence persuades you that this story is a fable?  PAP. 

m Florim. cap. 10. pag. 87.  Hincmarus' Archbishop of Rheims, Theodoricus de Niem, Waltramus Bishop of Norinberge, Benno the Cardinal, bitter enemies unto the Pope, pass this ever in silence. And that is a great argument to me, there was no such thing.  PROT. 
That Hincmarus Archbishop of Rheims should have lived at enmity with your Popes, it is not for your Pope's credit it should be known. For he was singularly well learned, very wise, and very honest, as 
p Vir in diuini● Scriptures singulariter doctus— sapientia & honestate morum conspicuus. Trithem, de script. Eccles verbo. Hincmarus.  Trithemius witnesseth: in so much that your great Cardinal 
q To. 9 ad ann. 760. nu. 3.  Baronius, when he hath occasion to cite him, entitles him 
* S. Hincmarus.  Saint Hincmarus: wherein his 
r joh. Gabri. Bisciola Epit. Baron. ad an. 760.  Epitomiser follows him.  PAP. 
Well: 
s Florim. p. 87.  what say you to Theodoricus de Niem?  PROT. 
I say (which before I proved) that he mentions the story.  PAP. 
And what say you to Waltram Bishop of Norinberge?  PROT. 
I say, there are few of his works extant: and in 
t De Inuestitura Episcoporum. printed at Basil anno 1566.  those which are extant, he shows no gall against the Pope: only he proves that the Emperor hath right to the investiture of Bishops.  PAP. 

u Florim. cap. 10. nu. 5. & 6.  Why, but do you not think that Benno the Cardinal, who spoke so much evil of Gregory the seventh, and other Popes, would have noted this, if he had known of it?  PROT. 
No. Benno (no doubt) knew much foul matter by many other Popes, which he did not touch. There are many shameful things reported in other stories by many of your Popes, which Benno hath not in his story. But do you think in good earnest, that Benno the Cardinal was the author of that book which goes under his name, and is entitled Vita & gesta Hildebrandi?  PAP. 
Nay indeed I do not. I rather think it was made by some Lutheran, and falsely fathered on Benno. And of that mind is 
x Lib. 4. de Ro. Pont. cap. 13.  Bellarmine in part, and 
y Florim. p. 88  Florimondus wholly.  PROT. 
So was not Orthuinus Gratius, who set it out at Colen, in the year 1535. For he, though as hot a Papist as any of the crew, held it for Benno his own, and 
z Malo magis huic Benoni Case dinali quam Platinae, etc. crederc. Epist ad Lector, fol. 39 in Fascie. rersi expetend. & fugiend.  professed that he rather believed him then Platina, and Stella, and Sabellicus. But see you not by the way your own folly, in that you conclude there was no Pope joan, because the writer of that story makes no mention of any such joan. I hope (if he were a Lutheran that made it) he knew there was a common fame of such a matter. And therefore if he had been disposed to have disgorged himself of all that lay on his stomach, he would have cast up that with the rest. But go forward.  PAP. 

a Florim. p. 88 & 89. Rupertus Episc. Angl.— quaecunque potuit excogitare convicia est ementitus.  Rupertus the English Bishop, who because he was excommunicated by the Pope, devised and raked together all manner of lies against the Pope, did not for all that object this.  PROT. 

b Magnus habetur Philosophus Latinis & Graecis ad plenum eruditus, lector in Theologiae scho lis, praedicator in populo, etc. Math. Paris. hist Angl. in Hen. 3. pag. 1162.  Rupertus the English Bishop, whom you mean was the man commonly called Grosthead. 
c Quis est iste senex delius, surdus, & absurdus, saith Innocent. 4. Math Paris. ibid.  A great Philosopher, excellently well seen both in Greek and Latin, a Reader of Divinity in the Schools, a famous Preacher in the pulpit, a man of holy life and conversation: even so holy, that in the opinion of the whole clergy of France and England, there was not such another among the Prelates of that time: though it pleased your Pope Innocentius the fourth, to call him old fool, furred, and absurd companion, and to threaten he would make him a byword and an astonishment unto the world. And to say truth, this man had many bicker with the Pope, insomuch that in one letter he 
d Apud Math. Paris. pag. 1161.  signified unto him, that by his writs with (non obstante) he brought upon the world a Noah's flood of mischiefs, whereby the purity of the Church was defiled, and the quietness of the common wealth hindered. That by his Reservations, commenda's, Provisions of Benefices for Persons, who sought to fleece, and not to feed the flock of God, he committed such a sin, so contrary to the doctrine of the Apostles, and the Evangelists: so hateful, so detestable, so abominable to Christ jesus, as never sin was, but the sin of Lucifer: nor never shall be, but the sin of Antichrist, whom the Lord shall destroy with the breath of his mouth at his coming. He signified unto him, that no man could, with a good conscience, obey any such mandates as he sent, though they came from the highest order of Angels. For they tended not to edification but the utter undoing of the Church. Are these the lies by reporting whereof he sought to revenge himself on your Pope? Alas, the 
c Vt vera fateamur, vera sunt quae dicit, said the Cardinals. Math. Paris. p. 1162.  College of Cardinals confessed before the Pope, that they could not blame him for writing thus, for he said nought but truth.  PAP. 

f Impuro ore alter Anglus no mine Mat. Paris. omne iniuriarum genus conflavit. Florim. cap. 10. pag. 89.  Another Englishman, Matthew Paris by name, made a hodgepodge of all the villainies he could remember, and yet he hath not this.  PROT. 
Matthew Paris, indeed tells many foul tales of the Popes and the Papists. As for example: 
g Hist. Angl. in Guil. conquest. anno. 1072. p. 10.  He reports how Satanas, & omne contubernium inferorum. That is, The devil of hell, and all his hellish crew, writ letters gratulatory to the whole rabblement of the Popish Clergy, acknowledging their kindness, in that following their pleasures, and giving over preaching, they suffered more souls to go to hell then ever went before.  

h Ibid an. 1074.  He reports how Gregory the 7. set the whole Church on a hurry, by deposing married Priests from their priesthood, and forbidding the Laity to hear their service; because he had no precedent for such his proceeding, and because (as some thought) it was an unadvised part, contrary to the opinion of the ancient Fathers, who wrote that the Sacraments of the Church, by the invisible working of the spirit, have like effect, whether they be administered by good or bad men, etc.  

i In Hen. 1. ad ann 1125. p. 93.  He reports how a Cardinal Legate, at a Council held in London, inveighing against Priests Lemons, was taken the same night after in bed with a whore.  

k In Hen. 3. pag. 617.  He reports how Germanus Archbishop of Constantinople, signified unto the Cardinals of Rome: that the Grecians stumbled much at this, that the Cardinals desired to be accounted his disciples, who said: Silver and gold I have none: and yet were wholly set upon gathering of silver and gold.  

l In Hen. 3. pag. 712. ad an. 1240  He reports how the Pope enjoined by one mandate to the Bishops of Canterbury, Lincoln, and Salisbury, that they should provide for 300 Romans in benefices next vacant. And they should give no benefice till they had provided for so many competently.  

m In Hen. 3. ad ann. 1251. pag. 1089.  He reports how Hugh the Cardinal bragged, when Innocentius departed from Lions, that whereas there were four stews at his coming thither, he had left them but one. Marry that reached from the one end of the town to the other.  

n In Hen. 3. ad an. 1249. p. 1017 & pag. 539. & 757.  He reports how the Franciscans and Minorites, by commandment of the Pope, appointed all sorts of people, young and old, men and women base and noble, weak and strong, sound and sick, to go for recovery of the holy land. And yet the next dare, yea sometimes the same hour, for money, they dismissed them again.  

o In Hen. 3 p. 1100. add an. 1251  He reports how Pope Innocentius the fourth, stirred up the Christian people of Brabant and Flaunders to war against Conradus the Emperor, promising them for their labour forgiveness of all their sins. Yea he promised such warriors not only forgiveness of sins for their own use, but forgiveness of sins for their parents also. The fathers and mothers of such as warred against Conradus, had all their sins forgiven them, as well as the warriors themselves.  
These and many such like tales he tells by the Pope, which the truth itself enforced him to do. But he meddles not with any thing which was done by any Pope within 1000 years after Christ. And therefore no marvel though he spoke nothing of Pope joan.  PAP. 

p Florim. ca 10. pag. 89.  john of Calabria, a man famously known for a railer against the Popes, spoke nothing of this.  PROT. 
john of Calabria 
q Roger Hove. Annal. pars posterior in Rich. 1. pag. 388.  told our king Richard the first, that Antichrist was as then borne in Rome, and that he should be made Pope. 
r Posleum. Apparat sacer. verb Cyrillus Carmelita.  john of Calabria was generally reputed a Prophet, & a man of great learning. Yet john of Calabria was so far from railing against your Popes, that (if 
s Append. ad lib de Summo Pont. cap. 11.  Bellarmine say true) he spoke very honourably of them. And therefore his silence, in this case, doth not help you.  PAP. 

t Florum. loco citato.  Yea, but Dantes the Italian Poet, would surely have touched this story, if he had heard any inkling of it.  PROT. 
Why so? Dantes found fault only with six of your Popes, viz. with Anastasius the 2, Nicolas the 3, Boniface the 8, Clement the 5, john the 22, and Celestine the 5, as 
u Append. 2d l, de Summ. Pont cap. 14.  Bellarmine notes. Whereby it is plain that he never purposed to rave up all the filth which he found written of your Popes. Questionless, he might well have heard of this, for 
x Polon. Dante antiquior, Bell, ibid.  he lived after Martinus Polonus, and in Martinus days the report of this was common. Have you any more to say? 
y N. D. p. 393.   PAP. 
Yea And not only the Latin writers, but even the greek Historiographers, Zonaras, Cedrenus, Curopalatas, and others, that wrote before Martinus Polonus, of matters concerning the Latin Church in those days, and were no friends to the same, and would have been content of such an advantage against it, write nothing thereof at all. Which is an evident proof there was no such matter.  PROT. 
What? an evident proof?  PAP. 

z B. C. In his doleful knell of Thomas Bell lib. 2. pag. 296.  Yea: an evident proof, which you may perceive by sutcliffe's answer to father Parsons (as he calls him) for he never, I warrant you, so much as once names these Greek Historiographers, but suppresseth that cunningly, or rather maliciously, because he could frame no colourable answer unto it.  PROT. 
D. Sutcliffe, whom you scornfully call Sutcliffe, never intended to trouble himself, or his reader, with laying open Parson's foolery in every particular. Otherwise assure yourself, he would not have passed by this. For it is a matter of no great cunning to shape this argument his answer. For tell me. Had you not once a Pope called Mark, who sat, as divers of your own 
a Plat. de vit. Pon. in vita Mar Flores. Hist. ad ann. 341.  histories note, 2 years 8 months, and 20 days? And had you not another Pope called Marcellus, 
b Plat. in vit● Marcell. 1. Onu. in Chron. ad an. 304.  who sat above 5 years?  PAP. 
We had. But what of that?  PROT. 
Your 
c Lib a Chronogr  Pontacus, and 
d Chronol lib. 3  Genebrard confess, that all the Greek writers in a manner, omit to speak of the former. And 
e Pontac. & G●neb. locis citatis  that all Greek writers without exception, omit to speak of the latter. Now if you, notwithstanding their passing by of these, be yet persuaded that these were Popes, why may you not rest persuaded that there was a Pope joan, though they do pass by her, and write not one word of her? I hope you believe many things, whereof they write nothing. We read in your 
f Aurea Legend. Exaltation of the holy Cross.  Legend, yea In your 
g Breutar. Rom. in officio Exaltat. S. Crucis.  Mass books, that Heraclius the Emperor when he would have entered in by the gate, by which our Saviour went to his passion, clad like a king, with the cross on his shoulders: that he was miraculously hindered, and could not get through till he had cast off his princely attire, and put off his hole and his shoes. Do not you believe this? I am sure you do. Yet 
h Lib. 1. de Cruse, cap. 57 pag. 170.  Gretzer acknowledgeth, that the Grecians, such as Cedrenus and Zonoras', write nothing of this, professing that he likes it never a whit the worse for their silence. For they (as he further notes) omitted many other matters of truth, whereof no man doubts. But how know you, that no Grecian ever writ of such an accident? It seems that they did: because Chalcocondylas a Grecian of later years hath writ thereof, as ⁱ before I have showed you. For, from whence could he have it, but from the Grecians his ancestors? You must bring more evident proof than this is, or else you will never persuade any man offence and reason, that the story of Pope joan, which is commended to us by so great a cloud of witnesses, is fabulous.  PAP. 

k N. D. pag 393  Why, but Hermannus Contractus, and Conradus Abbas Vrspergensis, and others more, write nothing of this joan of yours.  PROT. 
And what of that? will you conclude thereupon, that there was never any such woman Pope? Tell me in good earnest, do arguments taken from authority of a few men, hold negatively? Is it a good argument, S. Paul, S. Luke and Seneca, do not say that Peter was at Rome? ergo Peter was not at Rome? Bellarmine denies this argument. Respondeo saith 
l Lib. 2. de Rome Pont. cap. 8. vide lib. 2. de I●dulg. cap. 20.  Bellarmine: Nihil concludi ex argumentis ab authoritate negatiuè. Non enim sequitur, Lucas, Paulus & Seneca, non dicunt Petrum fuisse Romae, igitur non fuit Petrus Romae. Non enim isti tres omnia dicere debuerunt; & plus creditur tribus testibus affirmantibus, quam mill nihil dicentibus; modò isti non negent, quod alij affirmant: that is, I answer: negative arguments are nought worth. For it follows not, that S. Peter was never at Rome, because Luke, Paul, and Seneca do not report that he was at Rome. For these three were not bound to report all that was true. Besides, three witnesses speaking to a cause, deserve more credit than a thousand who stand mute, not denying that which is witnessed by the three. And in another place, Certè (saith 
m Lib. 1. de extrema unctione cap. 6.  Bellarmine) magis credi debet tribus testibus affirmantibus, quam infinitis nihil dicentibus: that is, Verily a man should rather believe three witnesses speaking to a cause, then infinite, who neither speak pro nor con. Again, tell me whether Denis Bishop of Athens, was not afterward B. of Paris; though. Ado B. of Triers in Germany, and Suidas a Greek writer, make no mention of that his second Bishopric? Your Lipomanus resolves upon Metaphrastes, and one Michael Syngelus his word, that Denis was B. of Paris, though Ado and Suidas speak not of it. Their passing it over in silence, doth not prejudice Metaphrastes and Syngelus report, who say he was B. of Paris, in 
n To. 1. de sanc. Hist. praefat. in Martyrium S. Dionysij per Metaphrasten.  Lipomanus opinion And why then though these and many more, say nothing of Pope joan, might there not be such a Pope, sith as many and as learned as they do reckon her among the Popes? 
o Prolegom. 6. in evang.  Salmeron, one of your prime Jesuits, notes, that when one Historian reports a matter, and another passeth by it, the latters silence doth not prejudice the truth of the other historians relation. Ealex apud historiographos obseruatur (saith he) ut quando unus ex duobus historicis aliquid affirmat, quod alius supprimit, non deroget affirmanti qui tacet.  PAP. 

p Onuph. and Harding locis supra citatis.  Yea but there are in the Pope's library six or seven tables of Popes, wherein there is no mention of her.  PROT. 
And what of that? Your Pope's Library is compared b 
q Omnis copiosa bibliotheca (in particular he means the Vatican) refert similitudinem sagenae missae in mare, ex omni genere pi cium congregantis, bonos & malos continens libros probatos & improbatos, utiles & inutiles simul amplexans, saith Baron. annal. 10. 8. ad an. 604. nu. 50.  Baronius to a draw net, which gathers together good and bad. Your Pope's Library hath in it books of all sorts, approved, disproved: profitable, unprofitable. 
r Ro. Biblioth habet libros tum suppositos, tum improbatae lectionis. Cope. Dial. 4. cap. 19 p. 567.  It hath counterfeit and forbidden books, as well as books of better reckoning. They are simple people (
* Loco supra citato.  as we read in Baronius) who believe reports the rather, for that they are to be found in books which are in the Pope's Library. Yet suppose these seven tables be of best note: will you yield thus much to me, that he who is numbered in these seven tables, or at least in as many, as authentical as these, as a Pope; was a Pope?  PAP. 
No, not I For I know that Leo the 8. is numbered as a Pope in 
n bristol printed with his Demands  many tables, and in 
o Onuph annot. in Plat. in vitam Alex. 3.  some of those seven, if not in them all. And yet. I am of 
p Non dignus qui Pontifex numeretur, sed intrusus & occupator potius nominandus. Annalium tom. 10. ad an. 964.  Baronius mind, that Leo the eight was an intruder and an usurper: and that he was not worthy to be called a Pope. But why asked you of me this question?  PROT. 
If this be no good argument: Leo the eight is numbered among thee Popes in seven tables that are in the Pope's Library, or in seven as authentical as these in the Pope's Library, ergo Leo the 8. was a Pope: What reason have you to think yours good, which is this in effect: joan the woman Pope is not numbered among the Popes in seven tables which are in the Pope's Library: Ergo there was no such joan a woman Pope? If seven tables speaking out for a Pope, do not convince the being of such a Pope: why should their silence convince the not being of a Pope? Might they not as well leave out one who had been Pope, as put in one who never was Pope?  PAP. 
But why should they have left her out?  PROT. 
Partly for her sex's sake, because she was a woman; and partly in regard of the filthiness of her fact. For so your stories note. And this need not seem strange to you, if you would but observe that other Popes, upon other occasions, have been passed by, by divers, as no Popes. As for example: Felix the 2. was a Pope and a Martyr, as 
q Lib. 4. de Ro. Pont. cap. 9  Bellarmine teacheth. For Felicem 2. ut Papam & Martyrem Ecclesia Catholica veneratur, saith Bellarmine. And the sat in the Popedom one year, four months, and two days, as we read in 
r In vita Felicis 2  Platina. Yet by 
s Chronol. lib. 3. ad an. 368.  Genebrards' confession, Marcellinus omits to speak of him in his Chronicle, because he was suspected of heresy. And for the same cause, or some such like cause, 
t Epist. 165.  S. Austin and 
u Lib. 2.  Optatus mention him not among the Popes, in their memorial of Popes. Nor yet Bristol in his table of Popes, which is printed with his wise demands. In like manner, that one Cyriacus was Pope, it is acknowledged by 
x Golden Legéd in the life of Ursula. Polon. ad. an. 238. Supplen. chron. ad ann. 235. Ranulf. Cestrens. in Poly chron. lib. 4c. 20. Petrus de Nata. talibus in cattle. Sanct. lib. 9 c. 87  divers. Yet it is rar● to find him in any catalogue of Popes. For as a 
y Ioh de Parifijs de potestate reg●a & papali. pag. 217. cap ult. In Sext. lib. 1. 'tis 7 de renunciatione. in glos●a.  great Papist writeth, Iste Cyriacus in catalogo paparum non annumeratur, quia credebant ipsum non propter devotionem, sed propter oblectamentum virginum dimisisse Episcopatum. Cyriacus is not in the register of Popes, because it was thought he left the Popedom, not for devotion, but for the love that he bore to certain wenches. Damasus the second, hath his place in 
z Plat. in vita Damasi 2. Polonus in Chron. circa ann. 1040.  many popish Chronicles in the throng of Popes: yet there are 
a Censent nonnulli hunc inter Pontifices nequaquam numerandsi esse, saith Plat. loco citato.  many on the other side, who let him go for one that is nought, and never number him. And in much like sort they 
b Felix 4. teste Maslono de urbis Episcop. lib. 2. in vita lohan. 1 p. 85.  deal with others.  PAP. 

c Florim cap. 22 pag. 190.  If Pope joan were omitted for the filthiness of her fact, why was that close stool reserved; and that monument of hers, whereof you told me before, set up in one of the high streets in Rome? For the stool and the image were as like to continue the memory of her, as any record in writing. To be plain with you, I do not see how you can rid your hands of contradiction in this point.  PROT. 
Well enough. For may not some be of one opinion, some of another? May not some think good to continue the memory of that, which others, for shame of the world, would have forgotten? 
d See Le Frane discourse, printed anno. 1602.  Did not some of your fellow Papists in France deny, that john castle was taught by the jesuits to murder Henry the 4. of France, because they were loath to make the jesuits odious: and yet did not others help to erect a pillar of stone near to the king's palace, whereby so much was notified? If any man should affirm, that the same man who omitted Pope joan for the filthiness of her fact, erected such a monument of her in the streets, and prescribed such a stool to be kept for such a purpose, I know not how he could deliver himself from contradiction. But speaking of divers men, his speech hangeth well enough together: there is no show of contradiction in it. For further proof where of, it is worthy your consideration, that when Paul the third, moved with the spirit of God (as 
e In his Rejoinder to M. luel about the Mass pag. 177.  Harding saith) and desirous to reform the Church, gave charge to his best learned, wisest and most godly zealous men that he knew, 4 Cardinals, three Bishops, and two others, to inquire and search out what abuses and disorders were in the Church, and especially in the Court of Rome: which they did, offering up unto him a libel containing the sum of all their proceedings. Some thought their labours worthy of registering: others thought them fitter to be burnt, which appears by this, that the libel is printed in Crabs edition of the Council, anno 1551. and yet put into the Index librorum prohibitorum, by Paul the 4, (one of those four Cardinals who exhibited it to Paul the 3:) and left out of Dominicus Nicolinus his edition of the Counsels at Venice, auspiciis Sixti Quinti, in the year 1585. and out of Severinus Binnius his edition at Colen, 1606.  PAP. 

c Bell. lib, 3. de Ro. Pon. c. 24.  Yea, but give me leave I pray you. If Pope joan were omitted for the filthiness of her fact: yet should there have been mention made of the vacancy of the Sea, for that time she was Pope, or else there will be a manifest error in Chronologie.  PROT. 
A manifest error in Chronology? A foul absurdity indeed, to miss two years in reckoning. But I trow there are fouler than this, how ever the matter willbe salved. For Onuphrius and Bristol reckon 230 Popes to Gregory the 13, and 
* So doth Massonus de urbis Episcopis.  Genebrard 234. Whereas by Platina his account, there should be 235. for he reckons to Zistus the 4. with whom he ends 221. Pope's: after whom, to Gregory the 13. every man reckons 14. which makes up the number of 235. Yet Versteganus in his table, printed at Antwerp 1590., numbers no more than 231. Again, do not 
d Anastas. in vita Euaristi.  some of your Chronologies record, that Eu●●ristus sat 13 years, whereas 
e Baron Annal. to. 2, ad an. 121. nu. 1.  others say, he sat but nine year? Do not 
f Baron. Annal. to 2. ad ann. 272 nu. 21.  some of them say, that Denis sat 11 years. 
g Anastas. in vita Dionysij.  Others that he sat but 2. years? And do not these differences, and such as these are, whereof we have spoken before in part, argue manifest errors in your Chronologies? If no further inconveniences follow upon Pope joanes omission then a manifest error in Chronology for that space she lived, we may well enough believe that some omitted her, not for that she was not, but that they were ashamed of her. For 2. years and odd months break no square in your Chronologies, no more than an inch with a bungling Carpenter.  PAP. 

l Florim c. 1. p. 6.  Yea, but no body within 400. years after mentions her Popedom. 
* B. C. in his doleful knell of Tho. Bell. p. 295. and 296.  And is it possible, that all writers should so conspire together, that the truth thereof could never be certainly known, till 400. years after?  PROT. 
You lavish, when you talk of 400. years after. For I have proved unto you already, by the books that are yet extant, that it was known sooner. But suppose we had no writer who lived within 400. years of Pope joan, to produce for proof: will you (in that respect) deny the story? Do not you Papists commend unto us many stories as true, for which you can bring us no proof out of any writer, who lived within 400. years after? 
m Bell. lib. 2. de Imag. c. 10.  You tell us of an Image of Christ, which was made by Nicodemus, who came to our Saviour by night, for fear of the jews: and of it you report wonderful things. But you are not able to name the man, (shall I say within 400. years of Nicodemus? nay not within 600. years of Nicodemus) who writeth any such thing. Again, 
n Bell. loco citato, & Gretser. de Cruse. l. 2. c. 1.  you tell us, that S. Luke drew certain pictures of the virgin Marie. But 
o Lib. 1. Collectaneorum.  Theodorus Lector is the ancientest man, that your friends allege for proof of this. And he Plived at least 500 years after. Thirdly, 
q Bell. loco citato. & Baro. Annal. to. 1. ad ann. Christ. 31. nu. 61  you write that our Saviour Christ, wiping his face with an handkerchief, imprinted his Image therein: and sent it to Agbarus for a token. But you can name no Author for this, but 
r Lib. 4. cap. 26.  Euagrius 
s See Baro. Annal. 10. 8. ad ann. 594. nu. 30.  who lived 600. years after Christ. Fourthly, 
t Bellar. lib. 1. de Clericis. cap. 9 Pamelius annot. in Cypr. epistolam 52. nu. 29. Carerius de potestate. Ro. Pont. l. 1. c. 18. Pet. de Natal. in Catal. sanct. l. 8. c. 53.  the most of you hold it for a certain truth, that Adrian the Pope was content that Charles the great should nominate the B. of Rome, and other Bishops of his dominions: and yet there are among yourselves, who write, that there can be no proof made thereof out of any writer who lived within 400 years of Charles the great his time.  
That the virgin Marie made that coat of our saviours, which was without seam, our 
u Annot. in joh. 19 23. in marg.  Rhemists teach, and 
x Ludolphus de vita Ie●u, part. 2. cap. 63. p. 221. Col. ●.  Others of you add to that, that as our Saviour grew in height & in breadth, so the coat on his back grew. Do you think that there is an Author within 400. years after our saviour's time that taught so.  

y Turrian lib 1. contra Magdeburg cap. 25.  Turrian reports, and 
z Gretser. lib. 2. de Cruse. cap 1. To. 1.  Gretser after him: That the Apostles made this Canon in a Council which they kept at Antioch: Ne decipiantur fideles ob idola, sed pingant ex opposito divinam humanamque, manufactam, impermixtam effigiem Dei veri, ad salvatoris Domini nostri jesu Christi, ipsiusque servorum, contra idola & judaeos, neque errent in idolis, neque similes sint judaeis. That is, Let not the faithful people be deceived by idols: but let them on the contrary part, make the image of our Saviour Christ both God and man, and the images of his servants; and let them not be deceived by idols, nor show themselves like unto the jews. But I do not believe that this can be proved to be a Canon of that Council, by any writer within 400. years of that time. Your 
a Bellar. lib 2. de Ro. Pont c 26. Baro Annal. ●●. 10. ad ann. 963. nu. 35.  Rabbins allege 
* Concilium Romanum & Synuestanum.  two Counsels, the one kept (as they say) in the year 303. the other in the year 324. both sounding much to the Pope's praise, and advancing of his authority. But for any thing I read, the most learned among you can bring no proof within 400 years after, that any such Counsels were then kept. Nicolas 1. who lived in the year 860, is the first, whom 
b Loco suprà citato.  Bellarmine names for that purpose.  PAP. 

a N. D. nu. 25. pag. 393.  Why, what say you● to our ancient English histories written in the Latin tongue, to wit, William of Malmsburie, Henry Huntingdon, Roger Hovedon, Florentius Vigorniensis, and Matthew of Westminster? For I have one argument of no small moment, 
b B. C. student in divinity, in his doleful knell of Thom. Bell, printed 1607. lib. 2. pag 297. commends this for a very excellent argument.  (as it seemeth to me) taken from them, 
c N. D. nu. 25.  for the overthrowing of the fable of Pope joan.  PROT. 
When lived these writers, from whence you draw your argument?  PAP. 
The first four lived 500 years agone, and the latest of them 300. years.  PROT. 
Fie, 500 years agone? 
d Scripsit historiarum libros ad an. 1142. saith, Possevin. apparat. sac. verbo. Guiliel. Malms. but by the book itself (fol. 108.) it is plain he continued it to the year 1143.  William Malmsbury continues his story to the year 1143: and 
e Vide histor. l. 8. in fine.  Henry Huntingdon his story till the reign of Henry the second, which was 1154. and 
f Fol. 464. ●.  Roger Hovedon continues his story to the year 1201. which argues that the first four lived not 500 years agone. But what is your argument out of them?  PAP. 
No one of them all makes mention of this Pope.  PROT. 
Oh, is that your argument? Why, I say to that, that our English histories might omit her upon like reason as others, of other countries, omitted her for her sex's sake, and for the filthiness of the fact. And do not you think, this probable?  PAP. 
No, by no means, 
g N. D. p. 394.  For our English writers above others should have mentioned her, if any such had been.  PROT. 
And why, I pray you.  PAP. 

h N. D. p. 395.  Because king Alfred living in Rome when Leo the 4 died, and when Pope Benedict the 3. was chosen, must needs have known also Pope joan, if any such had entered and lived two years and a half between them.  PROT. 
How know you that king Alfred lived in Rome when Pope Leo died, and Benedict was chosen?  PAP. 

i N. D. p. 394.  Because we read that his father delivered him into the hands of Pope Leo the 4. to be instructed, and brought up by him. And that the Pope received him with great kindness, and detained him there with him.  PROT. 
That alfred's father sent him to be anointed king, and that the Pope anointed him at his father's motion, we 
k Roger Hovedon. Annal. par● prior. pag. 132. edit. Lond. and Florentius in Chron. ad ann. 853.  read indeed. But that his father delivered him to Leo to be instructed & brought up by him, we read not in Malmsbury, nor Huntingtŏ, nor Hovedon, nor Florentius: nor yet that the Pope detained him there with him. But perhaps you can prove he stayed at Rome, though it be not recorded that Leo detained him with him. Now therefore let me hear your argument.  PAP. 

l N. D. p. 395.  That Alfred lived in Rome some number of years, seemeth evident. First, for that he returned more learned, and otherwise better qualified then any Saxon king had been before him.  PROT. 
This argument is framed out of your fingers ends, and not out of the stories. For the 
m Houedo● & Florentius locis citatis.  stories mention two journeys which Alfred took to Rome: the former, when he was five years old, in the year 853. in which he was accompanied with the nobility: the second when he was six years old, in the year 854, in which he went in his father's company, who stayed in Rome a year. Now though I find it not set down in particular, that he returned with his father: yet it is likely by the circumstances. For 
n In regio Curto semper inseparabiliter nutriebatur, saith Florent. lib citato. p. 308. & joh. Asser Episcop. Shyreburnensis in hist. Alfredi. pag. 7. which history was printed at London 1574. with Tho. Walsingham.  the stories note, that he was always brought up in the Kings Court. And it is without all doubt, whensoever he returned, that he returned not better learned, nor better qualified. For at 12 years old and upward, he knew not a letter on the booke● which the 
o Vsque ad 12 aetatis annum, proh dolour, illiteratus permansit. Asser & Florent. loc. cit.  stories with great grief report. What is your next argument?  PAP. 

p N. D. p. 395.  That Alfred lived in Rome some number of years, seemeth evident, for that we find no mention of his acts in England until the reign of his third brother Athebred. upon the year 871. at the famous battle of Reading in Berkshire fought against the Danes.  PROT. 
Alfred was but 22 years old in the year 871. and therefore no marvel, though being in England we read nothing of his acts. Yet, not to speak of his hawking and hunting in England, in his younger years, 
q Math. Westm. Flores hist. ad an. 871. fol. 245.  whereof the stories speak much: we 
r Math. Westm. lib. citato. ad an. 868. fol. 236.  read of his marriage three years before the battle of Reading, and of his going to aid the King of Mercia the same year. So that this proceeds of a false ground, as doth the former. Wherefore unless you have better arguments to disprove the story of Pope joan, you may prove yourself a fool, but never it a fable.  PAP. 
I am able to prove it a fable. 
s N. D. p. 396.  For our foresaid writers do not only not make any mention of Pope joan, that came between Leo the fourth and Benedict the third: but do expressly exclude the same, by placing the one immediately after the other, and assigning them their distinct number of years before mentioned, to wit, eight and three months to Leo, and two years and six months immediately following, to Benedict the third.  PROT. 
Who is your first witness of the truth of this?  PAP. 

t N. D. p. 396. in marg.  Malmsbury in Fastis reg. & Episcop. Angl. 847. & 855.  PROT. 
Where might a man see that book of Malmsburies'? for I never read nor heard before of any such book made by him. True it is, that in the end of Malmsbury, Huntingdon, Hoveden, Ethelwerdus, and Ingulphus, (
u At Frankford anno 1601.  which are all printed in one volume) there is such a treatise. But that was made by Sir Henry Savile, who set them out. It was not made by Malmsbury. You may as well say, that Malmsbury made the Index rerum & verborum, which follows after it. But who is your next witness?  PAP. 

x N. D. pag. 396. in margin.  Florentius in his Chronicle.  PROT. 
Doth Florentius in his Chronicle give eight years and three months to Leo? Now for shame of the world leave lying. Florentius notes, that Leo began his papacy 853. and Benedict the 3,858: whereby it is apparent, that in Florentius opinion Leo sat but five years. So is it apparent, that in his opinion Benedict sat five years: for Benedict, according to Florentius reckoning, began 858, and Nicholas his next successor began 863. Now from 858. to 863. there cannot be fewer than five years. So that in prosecuting of this argument, which is of your own devising, you have scarce spoken one true word.  PAP. 

a Florim. cap. 30 nu. 4.  I pray you tell me how they called this joan when she read publicly in the Schools at Rome?  PROT. 
They called her john. How else?  PAP. 
What? john? and was she called john after her election to the Popedom too?  PROT. 
Yea: why not?  PAP. 

b Florim. ibid.  That's not likely, For Sergius a few years before had brought in a laudable custom: that the Pope elect should not step out of the Conclave, before he had changed his proper name.  PROT. 
Indeed there are 
c Fascic. Temp. add an. 844. Polyd Virg. de invent. rerum, lib. 4. cap 10. joh. Stella in vit. Pont. in Sergio 2.  who say, that because Sergius had a filthy name before his election, to wit, the name of Swines-snout, he changed it after his election.  PAP. 

d Florim. ibid.  Yea, but they who say so, are greatly deceived. For Swines-snout was not his proper name: but the surname of a noble family, whereof he was descended.  PRO. 
So are they greatly deceived, who say, that he changed his proper name. For, ex paterno nomine à principio Sergius est appollatus: from his birth he was called Sergius after the name of his father, as 
e Annal tom. 10 ad an. 844. nu. 1.  Baronius notes. The first who changed his name, was 
* He would have said Sergius the 4, as appear Annal. to. 11. ad an. 1009.  Sergius the third, and yet not for the filthiness of his name, but in reverence to S. Peter. Cum enim ille Petrus vocaretur, indignum putavit se vocari eodem nomine, quo Christus primum eius sedis Pontificem, Principem Apostolorum, ex Simone Petrum nominaverat. For his name being Peter, he thought it was not meet that he should be called by that name whereby Christ called the first Bishop of that Sea, even the prince of the Apostles, whose name he changed from Simon to Peter, as we read in Baronius in the same place.  PAP. 
I never heard this before. But I● like it the better if it be in Baronius. For I cannot 
f Baronij laudan di sinem prorsus invenio nullum Florim. cap. 22. nu 6.  say too much good of that man. Marry I had rather thought you would have taken exception against me, in respect that Platina ascribes this custom of the Popes, in changing their names, to john the 12. who being called Octavian before his Papacy, 
Non ignoro Plat tinam, qui saepius in aliis etiam rebus lapsus est, hanc consuetudinem joh. 12. acceptan refer, etc. Florim. cap. 30. nu. 5.  thought that name too warlike for him after he was made Pope, and therefore took the name of john. Now I could easily have replied unto this. For besides that Platina speaks amiss in many other points, it is not likely that john the twelfth made any conscience by what name he was called, seeing he lived as licentiously after he was Pope, as before.  PROT. 
You have your learning at the second hand. Have you not?  PAP. 
I have this out of Florimondus I confess. But what of that?  PROT. 
Your Leare-masters deceive you, and especially Florimondus. For 
g De vit. Pont. in vita Sergij 2.  Platina is one of them who ascribes the original of this papal custom to Sergius the second; for which he is reproved by Onuphrius. Onuphrius, and not Platina, ascribes the original hereof to john the 12. johannem hunc 13. primum esse inveni qui nomen in pontificatu mutarit, saith 
h Annot. in Plat. in vitam Sergij 2 & joh. 13.  Onuphrius. Nam cum antea Octavianus vocaretur, gentili nomine omisso, tanquam parùm maiestati & religioni pontificis idoneo, se johannem appellavit: that is, john the 12. was the first (as far as I can learn) who changed his name when he was made Pope. Whereas before he was called Octavian, he left that heathenish name, as little beseeming the Pope's majesty and religion, and called himself john.  PAP. 
Onuphrius must pardon me, though I believe him not in this.  PROT. 
Yet Onuphrius, in 
i Onuphrius antiquitatis perscrutator diligentissimus. Flo trim. cap. 21. nu. 6  Florimondus' opinion, was a most painful Antiquary. But what if Baronius say as much? will you not believe him for Baronius sake?  PAP. 
How can Baronius say so much, if you wronged him not before, when you told me that he referred this custom of changing names to Sergius the third? If Sergius the third begun it, than not john the twelfth: if john the 12 began it, than not Sergius the third.  PROT. 
Look you and Baronius to that, how both tales will hang together. But assure yourself, Baronius saith both. For notwithstanding the former assertion, coming to speak of john the 12, he 
k To 10. annal. ad an 955. nu. 4.  useth these words, Hic revera primus inventus qui mutavit sibi nomen, ut qui ex Octauiano vocari volverit johannes, pro mutata, non exuta tyrannide. Nam qui dictus est à patre, ob temporale urbis dominium, Octavianus: obspirituale, nomine johannis appellari idcirco voluit, vel quòd eo nomine eius patruus johannes 11 Papasit appellatus: vel ut in nomine saltem benè posset audire in adulatorijs acclamationibus, quibus malé usurpatum proferri soleret sacrum illud eloquium [Fuit homo missus à Deo, cuius nomen erat johannes:] that is, This (in truth) is the first who changed his name, who of Octavian would needs be called john: and not for that he meant to leave his tyranny, but for that he resolved to use another kind of tyranny. For he, who was called by his father Octavian, in respect of his temporal authority in the city, would now in respect of his spiritual be called john, either for that his uncle john the 11. was called so, or for that he desired to hear well, at least for his name's sake, whilst in clawing and fawning acclamations, the people fond applied unto him that good speech, There was a man that was sent from God, whose name was john. 
l Quisnan huius Pseudopontificis pater, & c? Flor. ca 8. nu. 5.  Thus Baronius. Have you not another question to ask?  PAP. 
ᵉ Yes. Who was Pope joanes father?  PROT. 
What is that to the purpose?  PAP. 
Much. 
m Aliorum quidem pontificum parents, ut Lini Cleti, & omnium caeterorum in Annalibus leguntur. Florim. c. 7. nu 5.  For the histories expressly set down, who was the father of Linus, of Cletus, of Clemens, and of all the rest of the Popes. And would they not have done as much for her, if she had been Pope?  PROT. 
It is false, that the histories expressly set down the fathers of all the rest of the Popes. For by the histories, you cannot tell me, who was the father of Higinus, or Denis, or of john the 19 And that I will prove unto you by the histories: for in 
n Anastas. de vit. Pont. in vita Higini. Polon. in Chr. ad an. 154.  them we read, that Higini genealogia non invenitur. No man knows of what parentage Higinus was. And 
o Anastas. in vita Dionysij. Polon. in Chron. ad an. 257.  Dionysii generationem invenire non potuimus, we could not find out Denis the Pope's Ancestors. And 
p joh. Stella de vitis Pont. in Ioh 19 add ann. 999.  johan. 19 cognomen & patris ignoratur. It is unknown of what surname, or country, john the 19 was. Again, In the 
q Onuph. annot. in Plat. in vita urbani. 4.  histories it is expressly written, that urban the fourth was begotten, ex patre sutore veteramentario: that is, of a Cobbler. That 
r Paulus Langius in Chron. citizen. ad ann. 1316.  john the 22. was filius veteramentarij, resarcitoris videlicet sotelarium. That is, the son of a Butcher. That 
s Idem ad ann. 1303.  Benedict the 11. was filius lotricis pauperculae. The son of a poor laundress. That 
t Papyrius Massonus de urbis Episcopis, l. 6. in Benedicto 12.  Benedict the 12. was Molitoris filius: the son of a Milner. 
u Patre ortus qui semper nauticam exercuit. Papyr. Mass. lib. cit. in Sixto. 4.  That Sixtus the 4. was the son of a Mariner. That 
x Onuph. Addit ad Plat. in vita Adriani. 6.  Adrian the 6. was a Clothworkers son, or else a Brewers. That 
y Cicarellus in vita Sixti 5.  Sixtus Quintus was a base and beggarly fellows son, even the son, as is said, of a Swincheard. But what the names of these men's fathers were, that is not expressly written. You may peruse many histories, and find nothing to that purpose. Your Alexander the 5, 
z Papyr. Masson. de urb. Episc. lib. 6. in Alex. 5.  confessed, Se nec parents, nec fratres, aut aliquem ex agnatis, cognatisue suis unquam vidisse. That he never saw either his father, or mother, or brother, or any of his kindred. And can you tell me, what was his father's name?  PAP. 
Well Sir, to be brief with you, I prove it a fable thus: 
a N. D. nu 35. p. 40 2. and 403.  Either this Pope joan was young or old when she was chosen. If she were young, that was against the custom to choose young Popes, as may appear by the great number of Popes that lived in that dignity, above the number of Emperors that succeeded often in their youth. But if she were old when she was chosen, then how did she bear a child publicly in procession, as you heretics affirm? Answer me this: for to this Sutcliffe saith nothing in his answer to Parsons, as he calls him. And no marvel, for nothing can with any colour be pretended, as B. C. assures himself, in his 
b Lib. 2. p. 303.  doleful knell of Thomas Bell.  PROT. 
I deny the ground of this your reason, to wit, That this Pope joan was either young, or old, when she was chosen. For 
c De Galeni sententia universae vitae sex sunt omnino aetates, Leonard. Fuschius Institut. Medicine lib. 1. cap. 5.  learned men divide the whole course of man's life, not into youth, and old age, as you do: but into pueritiam, pubertatem, adolescentian, iwentutem, constantem, mediamue & senectutem. Now middle age is from 35, to 49: whereof she might have been, and so neither old, nor young: for Leo the 10. was chosen Pope at 38. years of age. For he was not 46. years of age when he died, and yet he sat as Pope 8 years, 8 months, and 20 days. And Gregory the 11, fuit dum eligebatur in Papam forsitan circa 35. annos: was about 35 years old, as 
e Nem. vnioni● Tract. 6. c. 39  Theodoricus de Niem, and 
f De urbis Episcop. lib. 6. in Greg. 11.  Massonus witness. Again, she might have been chosen young, for any custom you Papists have to the contrary. For Boniface the 9 (as 
g Masson. de urbis Episc. lib. cit: in Bonifac. 9 Plat. in Bonif. 9  some write) erat annorum 34. dum eligebatur in Papam: was but 34. when he was chosen Pope: and 
h Masson. lib. 3. de urb. Episc. in Innocent. 3.  Innocent the 3, was but 30. Yea she might have been one of the youths of the parish: for (not to speak of the boy-Pope: I mean, Benedict the 9, 
i Glaber Radulphus. hist. lib. 5. c. ult. & Masson. l. 4. in Bened. 9  who was chosen Pope about 12 years old:) john the 13, alâs 12, 
k Paulus Langius in Chron. Citizense ad an. 1389.  In iwenili & florida aetate creatur Pontifex: was made Pope when he was in his prime: that is, about the 18 year of his age, as 
l Annal. to. 10. ad an. 955. nu. 3.  Baronius gathereth by circumstances. But why might not she have been old, sith we read, that old women have borne children? Henricus Suews Imperator ex uxore quinquagenaria genuit Fridericum 2, 
m De urbis Episcop. lib. 5. in Celestin. 3.  saith Massonus. Henry the Emperor begot Frederick the 2 of his wife, who was fifty years old. Machutus Episcopus ortus est matre plusquam Sexagenaria, 
n in Catal. sanct lib. 10. cap. 64.  saith Petrus de Natalibus. Bishop Machutus his mother was above threescore years old when she bore him. Hîc in Palatinatu ante annos aliquot vidi meis oculis, & vocatus interfui partui cuiusdam foeminae ampliùs annos 56. natae, quae binos mares enixa est eodem partu, 
o Annotat Biblicis in Ruth. 1. ed●. ult.  saith Franciscus junius. A few years since, I was entreated to see a woman in this county, above fifty and six years old, who was delivered of two boys at a birth. N. D. whose steps you follow, hath one good property: for he is always like himself; he is no changeling. He began with lies, and goeth on with fooleries; yet in giving the reason why it was not the custom to choose young Popes, he shows himself most fool. For the multitude of Popes above the Emperors, came not by reason of their age, but by other accidents. In the first 300 years, while the Popes were generally good, they were cut off by martyrdom. For though it be not true, (as 
p Annotat. in Plat. in vita Higini.  Onuphrius notes well) that all the Popes from S. Peter's time to Sylvester, were martyrs: which yet is confidently avouched by 
q Bristol in his table of Popes.  some Papists: it is true (I grant) that the most of them were martyrs. Now in succeeding times, their number grew the greater by their poisoning, and evil entreating one of another. If you peruse diligently the stories of their lives, you shall find that of forty Popes, already dead and gone to their own place, there was not one that sat a full year: you shall find that within compass of nine years, or little above, 
r See Fasciculus Temp. ad ann. 904.  there were nine several Popes: you shall find, 
s Teste Bennone Cardinale in vita Hildebrand  that one man, in 13. years, poisoned six Popes: you shall find, that God in his justice cut them off, for their wicked and abominable lives.  
Liberius sat about some six years, 
t Sum. de Eccle. lib 4 part. 1. c. 9  saith Cardinal Turrecremata, and then died an evil death. Mala morte precibus sanctorum extinctus est. He died not for age, but with cursing.  
Anastasius the second, sat not two years, but God struck him suddenly for his naughtiness, and he died. Yea he died (some say) as Arius the arch-heretic died. For, Sunt qui scribunt eum in latrinam effudisse intestina dum necessitati naturae obtemperat, saith 
u Plat. in vita Anastasij. 2.  Platina, and 
x De vit. Pont. ad ann. 498.  johannes Stella the Venetian. Clemens the 2, kept the Popedom but nine months, not for that he was old when he was chosen, but because he was poisoned, as we 
n Genebrard. Chronol. lib. 4. ad an. 1046. Aeneas Silvius in Decad. Blond. Epit. lib. 3.  read in your own writers.  
Damasus the 2, 
o Platina in vita Clem. 2.  who had a hand in poisoning this Clemens, kept the papacy but 23 days, not for that he died of age, but by the just judgement of God, that he might be an example to others (as 
p In vita Damas'. 2. Supplement. Chro. lib. 12. ad ann. 1042. joh. Stella de vit. Pon. ●d an. 1040 in Damaso 2.  Platina notes) who clime to that dignity by bribery, and unlawful means, to which they should ascend by virtue.  
Benedict the sixth, reigned but a year and an half, and then died, either of strangling, or famine, in close prison, as we read in the same 
q In vit. Bened. 6  Platina, yea in 
r Annal. to. 10. ad an. 974. nu. 1.  Baronius.  
Victor the 3, kept the papacy but one year, and 4 months, and died of poison, say 
s In vit. Victor. 3.  Platina, 
t Chron. lib. 4. ad ann. 1087.  Genebrard, and 
u In Sum. Conc.  Charanza, and 
x In Chron. ad ann. 1095.  Polonus.  

y Pla. in vit. Pij 3  Pius the 3, died within a month, not without suspicion of venom.  
john the 13, (alias 12,) 
z Kran. Metrop. lib. 5. cap. 1.  while he was committing adultery, was slain: whether 
a Platina in vita Ioh 13. Blond. decad. 2. lib. 3.  thrust through by some, who took him in the act, or 
b Luitprand. Ti cinens. l. 6. c. 11. Sigeber. in Chr. ad an 963. Trith in Chron. Monast Hirsaug.  stricken by the devil, historians agree not. But your 
c Turrecremat. Sum. de Eccles. l. 2. c. 103. & l. 4. c. 9 part. 1. and so doth Walthramus Episc. Naumburgens. Tract de investitura Episcopotum.  Cardinal takes that as more likely, which is more dreadful. For because (saith he) the life of Pope john was detestable, and marvelous offensive to the Christian people, therefore Christ himself gave out the sentence of condemnation against him. For while he was abusing a certain man's wife, the devil struck him suddenly into the temple of his head. And so he died without repentance.  
Boniface the 7, sat but 7 months, and a few odd days, and then the beast died, saith 
d Metrop. lib. 5 c. 1.  Krantius.  
Marcellus the second lived but 22. days in the Popedom: not for that he was full of years when he died, for he was but 55. years old, but for that he was poisoned. And (which is strange) it is 
e Obijt die 22. non sine veneni suspicion, quòd nimiùm rectus quibusdam videretur. Gen●b. Chron. lib. 4 ad ann. 1555.  observed, that he was poisoned because some thought he would prove an honest Pope.  
That Sixtus Quintus, after the sixth year of his reign, was fetched away by the devil, by whose help he came to that place; 
f In his declaration made at Vendosme. jan. 28. anno 1601.  Sir Francis Breton a Monk of the order of the Celestines, protested, that a Prior of S. Benet's order assured him at Rome. And 
g Relation of the Western church by Sir Ed. Sands.  they say, your Jesuits report as much under hand in Italy. But to end this point in a word: 
h Pontifices tanquam monstra quaedam è medio brevi Deus sustulit. Platina in vita Christophori. Paucorum labes sinceris maculam, & univers. Eccles in famian ingerit. Et in mea opinione ideo frequentius moriuntur Pontifices ne totam corrumpant Ecclesiam. joh. Salisb. de Nugis Curialium. lib. 6. c. 24.  your own men tell us in plain terms, that many Popes were of short continuance, because God saw they proved monsters, and shamed the true religion: God in his justice would not suffer them to live. And so this argument of years hath his answer.  PAP. 
Yea, 
i N. D. nu. 35. pag. 403.  but it is a most unlikely thing, that the whole Roman Clergy would choose a Pope without a beard, especially a stranger.  PROT. 
And why might not the Roman Clergy, as well as the Clergy of Conftantinople (
k N. D. nu 28. p. 396. Bell. lib. 3 de Ro. Pon. c. 24.  whom you upbraid with such a fact) do such a deed? especially if all your Clergy in those days (as some of you write) were shaven? For men by shaving may make themselves look like women, and women by often shaving may make themselves look like men. Certainly a 
l johan. Pierias Valerianus pro sacerdotum barbis. fol. 21. add Cardinal. Medicen. printed at London in aedib. Tho. Bertholet. anno 1533.  learned man among yourselves, imputes the error of joan the woman's choice to this, that your Clergy were then shaven. For by the means of shaving (saith he) the people were so disguised, that men and women were scant known asunder. And by this it happened that a woman was chosen Pope of Rome, to the perpetual rebuke of that same holy order. The same reason is given also by 
m Lib. 6. de reb. Turcicis.  Chalcocondylas. And by it is another of your arguments answered, which by 
n N. D. nu. 35. p. 403.  N. D. is touched in these words: How did they not discern her to be a woman or an Eunuch, seeing she had no beard in her old age? For it being ordinary, that the Clergy should be shaven, why should they dislike her the more for want of a beard?  PAP. 

o Onuph. annot. in Plat. in vita joh. 8. Florim. cap. 23. pag 197.  Yea but was there none, that either by countenance or voice, or other actions of her, could discern the fraud?  PROT. 
Look you to that. But this is sure, if your stories be true, that divers women have lived longer among men in men's apparel unknown, than dame joan lived in the Popedom. For Marina (
p Ravis. Textor in officina. Tit. Mulieres habitum virilem mentitae.  they say) lived all her life among Monks, and no body knew but she was a Monk. 
q Ibid. & Pet. de Natal. in Catal. sanc. lib. 3. c. 113.  Euphrosina lived 36 years amongst Monks, and was reputed for a Monk. So did 
r Vitas Patrum. lib. 1. Pet. de Natal. lib. 2. cap. 3. Pet. de Natal. in Catal. sanct. lib. 9 cap. 36. & 37.  Eugenia, Pelagia, and Margareta, and no man suspected them of fraud.  PAP. 

s N. D. pag. 402.  Yea, but how happened it, her own lovers had not discovered or her incontinent life?  PROT. 
That her lovers did not discover her, it is no wonder. For partners in mischief, are good at concealments. As for her incontinent life, that discovered her at length. God, according to his 
t job 12. 22.  promise, bringing forth the shadow of death to light, that is, making known her secret naughtiness.  PAP. 

u Onuph. loco. citato. N. D. pag. 402.  Yea, but how could she pass through priesthood, and other Ecclesiastical orders? how by so many under-offices, and degrees, as they must before they come to be Popes, without descrying? 
x Onuph ibid.  For 900 years from S. Peter, no man was chosen Pope, that was not brought up in the Roman Church, and passed through priesthood, and other Ecclesiastical orders.  PROT. 
That's not so. For 
y Platina in vita Dionysij.  Dionysius was made Pope of a Monk: and 
z Idem in vita Valentini.  Valentinus in the time of his Deaconship, before he was priested. And so was 
a Idem in vita Bened. 5.  Benedict the fifth too. And as for 
b Geneb. Chron. lib. 4. ad an. 963. Annal to. 10 ad an 999. nu. 2.  Leo the eight, he was chosen being but a lay man: Per Othonem 1. homo laicus Leo intrusus est, saith Baronius. Your own 
c Chronol. lib 4. add an. 398.  Genebrard did note, that this Note of Onuphrius was worth nothing: yea that it was false, as many other of his notes are.  PAP. 

d Bell. l. 3 de Ro Pont cap. 24.  Yea but Polonus and others say, that this joan brought forth a child as she went in procession. Now it is not credible, that a woman who had gone so many months with child, would then especially go abroad when there was most fear she might be discovered.  PROT. 
This is like the rest. For the time of childbirth is uncertain. For though women go usually ten months, yet sometimes they come sooner, at nine or eight, yea at seven months, as 
e Levinus Lem●ius de occultis 〈◊〉 miraculis lib. 4. cap. 22, 〈◊〉 23.  Physicians have observed. Honester women than Pope joan, have fallen in travel upon the high way, ere ever they were aware, that they were so near their reckoning, as Theophilact observeth: for novit mulier quòd pariet, quando verò, non novit, saith 
f 〈…〉  he: Nam non paucae 8 mense pepererunt etiam in itinere, nihil praescientes: that is, A woman knows she shall be delivered, but the time she knows not: for divers have been delivered in their eighth month, as they have been in their journeys, never dreaming of any such thing towards. What is your next exception?  PAP. 

g 〈◊〉. cap. 23. 〈◊〉.  They say, she was buried without any solemnities in the world. And how is that credible, seeing it is a barbarous and savage part, to deprive them of the honour of solemn burial, which have borne the greatest offices?  PROT. 
Is it so? Do we not read in Scripture, that God in his justice doth use to serve the greatest princes so, who dishonour him? Do we not read, that 
h jer. 22. 18. 19  jehoiachim king of judah was to be buried as an ass is buried? etc. Yea, do we not read in some of your own stories, that some of your Popes have had as small solemnities? Bonifacius 7. post mortem joh. 15. sedit menses 4. repentina morte interijt, & in tantum eum odio habuerunt sui, ut post mortem caederent eum, & lanceis vulnerarent, atque per pedes traherent nudato corpore usque ad campum quiest ante caballum Constantini; ibi proiecere eum atque dimiserunt, saith 
i Annal. to. 10. ad an. 985. è veteri Pontif. Vaticano codice.  Baronius. Boniface the 7. who sat after john the 15. four months, died a sudden death: and he was so hateful to his own followers, that after his death they beat him, and ran him into the body with lances, and dragged him by the feet, all naked, till they came to the field which is near the place where Constantine's horse stands; there they threw him from them, and there they left him.  PAP. 

k 〈◊〉 cap. 2, 〈◊〉  Yea, but it was never heard of before, nor never in use among Christians, to bury a man in the high ways.  PROT. 
No? Is it not written, that 
l 〈…〉  Deborah, Rebeckah's nurse, was buried under an Oak? and that 
m 〈…〉  Rahel, Jacob's wife, a far honester woman than Pope joan, was buried in the way to Ephrath? though if it had not, yet Pope joan was but right served to be buried so: for it was never heard of before, nor never in use among Christians, that a Pope should be delivered of a child. The extraordinariness of the case, deserved extraordinary exemplary usage. Your friend Papyrius Massonus, 
* Papyr. Masso: vir praestans ingenio & pietate.  much commended by your Cardinal 
n To. 10. Annal. add an. 853. nu. 62  Baronius, 
o De urb. Episc. lib. 3. in Bened. ●  holds opinion, that if there had been any such Pope, the Romans could have done no less (in equity) then to have hanged her up in chains after her death. Because he finds not that she was shamefully enough handled after her death, he denies the story.  PAP. 
Papyrius Masso is a worthy man indeed. 
* Vltimo supplicio affecissent.  Vt ventus fumum, evanescere totam in auras fabulam fecit: he hath disproved this tale thoroughly 
p Loco citato.  in Baronius judgement. But yet I think with Florimondus, they should have allowed her Christian burial: they should have made her a tomb: they should have written Epitaphs on her.  PROT. 
What? Epitaphs on such a whore? That had been a jest indeed. Yet perhaps some madcap did so. And how prove you the contrary?  PAP. 
If she had had a tomb made for her, and Epitaphs on her they would have been forth coming. For as 
q Loco citato.  Florimondus writes, Sepulchrorum nunquam intermoritur memoria: Tombestones continue for ever.  PROT. 
Indeed I have 
r Polyd. Virg. de invent. rerum. lib. 6. cap. 10.  read, that by law it was provided, that no man should deface Tombestones. And I have 
s Bellonius lib. 2 observat. cap. 6.  read also, that to this day, hard by Troy, videre licet magna marmorea sepulchra operis antiqui ex uno lapide, instar cistae, excavata, quorum opercula adhuc integra sunt: a man may see many marble sepulchres, wrought after the old fashion, cut hollow, like a chest, out of one stone, the covers whereof are still whole. But I do not read, that men can show, which was Priamus his grave, which Hector's, &c. Yet but for evil fingers, I could have told you where Pope joanes tomb was. Till Pius Quintus cast it into Tiber, it was to be seen in Rome.  PAP. 
They say further, that she died instantly. But though the pains of women be great at such times, yet it comes by thro●●, they have some intermission: their pain is not like to a sudden Apoplexy, on which they die instantly.  PROT. 
Men do not die instantly who are taken with an Apoplexy, they may live long after, and be cured thereof as 
t Felix Platerus Archiater Basil. Pract c. 1. p. 46. edit. Basil. 1608.  Physicians say. Your Florimondus herein is out of his element. Neither did she die instantly, though it seems suddenly. For she was delivered of a boy before her death.  PAP. 
Was she delivered of the boy wherewithal she went? and what was then the cause of her death? Florimondus accounts this as one of the absurdities which follows on this tale. Imò, ut aiunt, (
u Pag. 205.  saith he) masculum pepererat, quid igitur mortem repentinam attulit? If a woman be once delivered of the fruit of her womb, there is no danger of death in his opinion.  PROT. 
Commend me to him, if ever you see him. And ask the Woodcock, if he have not known women die in childbed, as well as in childbirth. 
x Gen. 35. 17. 18  Rahel was delivered of her son Benjamin, and yet died shortly. 
y 1. Sam. 4. 20. 21.  Phineas wife was delivered of her son Ichabod, and yet died presently after. And if they died so: why not Pope joan? I pray you let me hear what exceptions some wiser men take against this story. For I am weary of Florimondus' fopperies.  PAP. 

z N. D. of 3. Conuers. part. 2. c. 5. nu. 36. Florim. p 202. Bell. l. 3. de Ro. Pont. c. 24.  How is she said to have gone from the palace of S. Peter to S. john Lateran, whereas the Popes lay not then in the Vatican, but at S. john Lateran itself?  PROT. 
How prove you that the Pope lay not then in the Vatican?  PAP. 

a Florim. loco citato.  Platina witnesseth that the Popes lay not in the Vatican till Boniface the 9 his days, to wit, till the year 1350.  PROT. 
Boniface the ninth, lived in the year 1390. not 1350. wherefore in that circumstance you fail. And so you do in fathering such a fancy upon Platina. For 
b In vita Bonif. 9  Platina reports only that the Vatican was repaired by Boniface the ninth. He saith not, it was first inhabited by Boniface the 9 though if he had, yet the Pope might well have gone to see the Lateran; for he had other houses to solace himself, and his Courtiers in, besides the Lateran. He dwelled not always in that: for 
c De vitis pontiff in vita Greg. 4.  Gregory the fourth, made two goodly houses even out of the ground, for the Pope's use, as your Anastasius testifieth. And Leo the 3. (as we read in the same 
d In vita Leon  Anastasius) made another goodly house near to S. Peter's Church, which stands in the Vatican, 
e Idem in Leone. 4.  wherein Leo the fourth gave entertainment to Ludouike the Emperor. But beside, the stories do not report she went from S. Peter's palace to the palace of the Lateran: but from S. Peter's Church to the Lateran Church. For she was delivered as they went in procession. Now she might go from S. Peter's Church to the Lateran Church, and yet dwell in the palace by the Lateran. For Popes began not always their processions at the next Church to them. 
f Platina in vita Leon. 3. & Anastas. de vit. Pont. in Leone 3.  Leo the third appointed to go in procession three several days before ascension day. And he began the first day, at one of S. Mary's Churches, and ended at Saint saviours Church. The second day he began at Saint Sabina the martyrs Church, 
* Ecclesia Dei genitricis ad praesepe.  and ended at S. Paul's. The third day he began at S. Crosses Church in jerusalem, and ended at S. Lawrences without the walls. So that this question of yours is answered. Let me know if you have any more to say.  PAP. 
You shall: and first 
a Baron. Annal. to. 10. ad ann. 853. nu. 67.  I will prove it a fable out of their own mouths that report it.  PROT. 
That's a piece of cunning in good earnest. But how I pray you?  PAP. 
Marry, even as 
b Mark 14. 59  Saint Mark the Evangelist proved the jews liars, by the inconvenience of their testimonies.  PROT. 
What mean you by the inconvenience of their testimonies?  PAP. 
Their disagreeing one from another.  PROT. 
But so did not S. Mark. For those false witnesses, whose testimony (as he notes) was inconvenient, agreed well enough in their tale. 
c Testes quidem inter se rectè conveniebant, cum eadem uterque verba, & eodem sensu recitaret.— sed quamuis affirmarent, Christum dixisse: Ego dissoluam etc. non iudicabant Pontifices posse proptereà Christum ad mortem condemnari. Maldonat. in Math. 26. 61.  They only failed in this, that the matter which they witnessed against him was not capital, though it had been true. For to promise the re-edifying of a Church in three days, is neither felony nor treason. And in this respect S. Mark observes that their testimony was inconvenient, meaning to condemn him to death. But what great disagreement have you observed among the relators of this tale?  PAP. 

d Baron. Annal. to 10. ad ann. 8●3. nu. 67.  Infinite. Insomuch that a man may well think God hath taken anew the same course with these, which he took of old with them who occasioned him to say: 
* Gen. 11.  Come let us confound their language, that one of them know not what another saith.  PROT. 
That's much, I long to hear the particulars.  PAP. 
So you shall by and by. But first I pray you tell me by the way, 
e Marianus eam Ioannam novo adinuento & innovato vocabulo appellavit. Quorsum verò nomen, quod antea solis masculis imponebatur, sola litera mutata, ad mulierem detorsit? Florim. cap. 7. nu. 1.  why Marianus the first broacher of this tale, gave her such a new fangled, and new devised name as joan? Why took he that name which in former ages was proper to men only, and by changing a letter made it a woman's name? Florimondus cannot reach the reason of this.  PROT. 
Florimondus is a proper Squire, and you are a wise man to demand such a question. Read the Scriptures, and you shall find, that the name of joan is no new devised name, nor proper to men only. For 
f Luk. 8. 3. and 24. 10.  they mention one joan, the wife of Chuza. Or, if for fear of proving an heretic you dare not read the Scriptures, read your Legends and Festivals, and in them you shall find that your Sea-saint Nicolas his mother was called joan. 
* Golden Legend and Engl. Festival in the life of S. Nicolas, and Pet, de Natal. in Catal. sanct lib. 1. cap. 33.  If some should hear you demand such a question, they would think the fool rid you. Wherefore no more of this if you respect your credit: fall to show me the manifold disagreement which you promised.  PAP. 
I will. 
g Audi quanta inter eos confusio in confictae foeminae nomine etc. Baron. Annal. to 10. ad ann 853. nu. 67. and Florim c 4. ●u. 5. & c 7. nu. 4  And first observe with me the confusion that is among them, touching her name before her Papacy. Some say she was called Agnes, some Gilbert, some Isabel, some Margaret, some Tutta, or jutta, others Dorothy.  PROT. 
Who calls her (I pray you) either Dorothy, or jutta, or Tutta? who ever called her Margaret, or Isabella? yea who of the ancient sort of writers, called her Gilbert, or Agnes? In some of later time I find some difference, one calling her Gilbert, and another Agnes. But of all those whom I brought in, to give in evidence against her, there is not past one or two, who either before, or after her Papacy, gives her any other name than joan. And for aught I know, there is no man, either old, or young, who ever christened her Dorothy, or jutta, or Isabella, or Margaret. Know you any that have done so?  PAP. 
No. For I find no authors cited for proof of this, neither by Florimondus, nor by Baronius, And I can say no more than I find in them. But what say you to the next difference? 
h Alij eam vocant joh. 7, alij 8, alij vero 9 ●aith Baronius loco citato. Some do feign him to be john the 8 some 9 saith N. D. pag. 401.  Do not some of your witnesses feign her john the 7, some john the 8, some john the 9?  PROT. 
Who feigns her to be john the 9? Not a man that I know. If you bring not some author for the proof of this point, you must give me leave to think you speak over.  PAP. 
Over or short, I follow in this Baronius, and N. D. For some, saith Baronius, call her john the 7, some john the 8, some joan the 9 Some, saith N. D. do feign her to be john the 8, some 9  PROT. 
Baronius and N. D. are as like to speak over as you, for they are Papists: wherefore I neither believe them nor you, further than I see reason. And herein neither they nor you show reason. For none of you cite so much as one author, good or bad for it. 
i Hoc unum eorum animos torquet, utrum joh. 7, aut joh. 8 nomen sibi usurparit. Florim. cap. 7. nu 5.  Besides your Florimondus confesseth, that we are only troubled about this, whether we should call her john the 7, or john the 8. He chargeth us not with naming her john the 9  PAP. 
Well, let that be your difference, that you know not whether to call her john the 7, or john the 8.  PROT. 
That difference is not so great. For the like may be showed in other Popes, which yet you yourselves confess were Popes. But who styles her either john the 7, or john the 8? verily neither Marianus Scotus, nor Sigebert, nor Go●efridus Viterbiensis, nor Polonus, nor Platina, nor Palmerius, nor Trithemius, nor Fasciculus Temporum, nor Krantius, nor Alfonsus è Carthagena, nor Textor, call her either john the 7, or john the 8: but simply john, or joan. For it seems they were of 
k Annot, in 〈◊〉 in vit. joh. 9  Onuphrius mind in this, that numeri notam habere non debuit sacri ordinis non capax. That seeing she was not capable of priesthood, she should not go for one in the number of john's.  PAP. 
Yes, by your leave, Platina styles her john the eight, and the next 9 For which he is reproved by 
l Loco citato.  Onuphrius, and that upon the reason which you mentioned. For these are Onuphrius words. johannes hic omnino 8. non 9 est, ut à Platina describitur: Nam etsi johannes foemina Papa, quam profitetur, fuisset, non tamen numeri notam habere debuisset sacri ordinis non capax: that is, This john questionless is the eighth, and not the ninth, as Platina accounts him: for though john the woman, whom he talks of, had been Pope, yet seeing she was not capable of Priesthood, she should not go for one in the number of john's.  PROT. 
Platina styles her not john the eighth. Onuphrius, or some body for him, hath abused both Platina and you. For proof whereof I appeal to Platina, printed in the year 1481. 
m Platina moritur Romae, anno 1481. Trith. de script. Ecclesiast. verbo Bartholomaeus.  which was the year wherein Platina died; and to the next edition Anno 1485. For speaking of john the woman in those ancient editions, he sets no numeral note upon her head, but begins his story thus, johannes Anglicus, ex Maguntiaco oriundus, etc. john English, borne at Mentz. Neither styles he the next 9 but 8. For coming to that Pope's life, johannes 8. patria Romanus, etc. saith he: john the eighth, by his country a Roman, etc. For further proof of which later point, I appeal to the 
n Such as that of Colen, anno 1574.  later editions, whereunto Onuphrius annotations are annexed. For though we read thus in them, johannes nonus, patria Romanus, etc. john the ninth, by his country a Roman, etc. yet, that that reading is false, and the ancient reading true, it appears by that which is written of the next Pope's life, to wit, Martin the second, even in those later editions. For 
o De vit. Pont. in vita Martini 2  Platina showing how Martin lived in the time of Charles the third, adds presently, quem ab johann 8. coronam accepisse scripsimus, that is, who was crowned by john the eighth, as we have written. Now Charles the third was crowned by john next before Martin, according to 
p In vita eiusdem joh.  Platina. Wherefore the next before Martin was john the 8. in Platina his account, and not john the ninth, as Onuphrius would make us believe. Which oversight, or fraud of Onuphrius, was not so great, but that by this means he is forced to alter Platina his numeral note, set to all the johns that follow, to call him john the tenth, whom Platina calls john the ninth; to call him the eleventh, whom Platina calls the tenth; to call him the thirteenth, whom Platina calls the twelfth, and so unto the last Baldesar Cossa, who was in number of john's according to the ancient editions, the 23, and not the 24, as he is numbered in the editions with Onuphrius notes. But say on, what other disagreement have you observed among the reporters of this story?  PAP. 

q Alij ponun● hoc anno 853. alij anno sequent, alij 857. octa. alij, quidam 904 praeter eos qui ponunt eum post Martinum 1. anno 653. alij post joh. 5. anno 686. Baron loco citato, and Florim. cap. 7. nu. 4.  Some say, she began her Papacy in the year 853, some in the year 854, some in the year 857, some in 858, some in 904, some in 653, some in 686.  PROT. 
Why name you not the Authors that write thus? For to this day I never read or heard of any who placed her either about the year 653. or 686. or 904. All the abovenamed Historiographers mention her within the compass of five years. Till you bring forth your proof, there is great reason to suspect your truth.  PAP. 

r Florim. loco citato.  Peradventure you will suspect my truth, if I tell you that some say, she succeeded Leo the fourth, some Leo the fifth, ●me Benedict the third, some Martin the first, some john the fifth.  PROT. 
I shall indeed. For I read in 
s Lib. 3. de Rome Pont. cap. 24.  Bellarmine, that Omnes qui istum johannem admittunt, dicunt eum sedisse post Leonem 4, & ante Benedictum 3. All who acknowledge such a woman Pope, place her after Leo the 4, and before Benedict the 3.  PAP. 
Yea, but you have little reason to believe Bellarmine therein, For 
t In chron. ad an. 855. collat. cum anno 847.  Polonus writes, that she succeeded Leo the 5. And so doth 
u In chron. ad an. 847. collat. cum anno 854.  Sigebert too.  PROT. 
That Leo, whom Sigebert placeth next before joan the woman, is numbered the fifth, it is some error in the print. For 
x Sigebert names Leo the first, ad an. 441. Leo the 2. add an. 684. Leo the 3. add an. 796 and the next is that Leo who sat add an. 847.  he names but three Popes of that name before that Leo. Wherefore when Sigebert is corrected, you have no colour of exception from him. No more have you from Polonus. For though according to his account, Leo before this woman Pope, be Leo the fifth: yet he is the same man whom others call Leo the fourth. Polonus reckons one Leo, as Pope in the year 698, whom others reckon not at all, which is the cause of the difference between him and others in the account of Leoes that follow. But in the persons all agree. What is the next disagreement?  PAP. 

y Alij eum sedisse tradunt anno 1. & men●e 1. & d●eb. 4. Alij an. 2. tondemque men sibus & d●eb 4. Alij 2 annis cum dimidio: Duob. tantum annis alij: alij vero 4 tantum men●es. Baron. loco citato. Florim. cap 7. nu. 4.  Some say, she sat Pope one year, one month, and 4 days. Some two years, two months, and 4 days. Some two years and a half. Some but two years full. 
z This is in Florim. and not in Baronius.  Very many say, she sat one year, five months, and three days. And they are no small number who say, she sat but barely four months.  PROT. 
If this be true, Bellarmine was far wide. For 
a Lib. 3. de Ro. Pont cap. 24.  he writes, that Omnes qui istum johannem admittunt, dicunt eum vixisse in Pontificatu duobus annis, & quinque mensibus. All that acknowledged such a woman Pope, say, she sat as Pope two years, and five months. He knew none (no more than 1) that gave her so little time as four months. He knew no such difference herein as you talk of. Yet among the later writers, I confess there is some difference of some few months: but Marianus and Polonus, which are two of the principal, agree upon the point. They write uniformly, that she sat two years, five months, and four days. And Platina is not far short of that sum. For by his reckoning, she sat two years, one month, and four days. But suppose the differences in these circumstances were great, and many: what is that to discredit the substance of the story? We find great difference among them who have written of Pope Lucius. For 
b Platina de vit. Pont. in vita Lucij 1. Onuphr. in Chron. Rom. Pont. ad ann. 253.  some say, he was a Roman, 
c Anastasius in vita Lucij.  some a Tuscan; 
d Idem ibid.  some say he was the son of Lucinus, 
e Plate & Onuph loco citato.  some of Porphirie: 
f Onuph. loco citato.  some say he was chosen Pope in the year 253, 
g Math. Westm Flores hist. ad an. 254.  some in the year 254, 
h Marian. Scot & Polon. in chron ad an. 255.  some in the year 255, 
i Abbas Vrspergen●. ad an. 259.  some in the year 259, 
k Compilatio Chronologica ad an 275.  some in the year 275. 
l Polon. & Math Westm. locis citatis.  Some say, he sat Pope 3 years, 3 months, and 3 days; 
m Marian. Scotus loc. citat.  some 3 years, and 5 months: 
n Albo Floriacens. de vit. Pont. in Lucio.  some 3 years, 7 months, and six days; 
o Onuphr. loco citato.  some but one year, 3 months, & 13 days; 
p Euseb. lib 7. hist. cap. 3. & Abbas Vspergensis loco citato, & Hermannus Contractus circa ann. 260.  some but 8 months, and no longer. And yet there is no man denies that Lucius was Pope.  
Again, do we not read, that Sergius the third began his reign in the year 905. as 
q Math. Westm. Flores hist. ad an. 905.  some say: as 
r Polon. in chron. ad an 907.  others, in the year 907: as a 
s Baron. annal. to. 10. ad an. 907 nu. 2.  third sort, in the year 908? Do not 
t Herman. Contract. circa ann. 907.  some also write, that he succeeded Benedict the 4, 
u Luitprandus, teste Baron. ad an 908 nu. 2.  others that he succeeded Formosus, 
x Baron ibid.  others, Christopher? And is not there difference also about the time of his continuance in the Popedom? while 
y Polon. ad ann. 907.  some say he sat 7 years, 3 months, and 16 days; 
z Baron. tom. 10 Annal. add an. 910. nu. 1.  some 3 years only; yet who ever denied that there was such a Pope?  
We 
a Baron. annal. to. 10 ad an. 897 nu. 2.  read, that Formosus carcase was taken up out of his grave, by one of his successors, and brought into judgement before a Council of Bishops, and that it was spoiled of his papal robes, and clad with a lay man's garment: that it was indicted, arraigned and condemned. But among them who report this, there is great disagreement. For 
b Luitprand. l. 1. cap. 8. & Abbas Vrspergensis in Chron. ad an. 897.  some say, it was taken up by Sergius the third, of whom I spoke even now: some say it was taken up by 
c Platina in vita Steph. 6.  Stephen the sixth, whom many call Stephen the 7: 
d Wernerus Rolevink in Fa●cic. temp. ad an. 904  some say it had two fingers cut off, 
e Luitprand. loco citato.  some three: 
f Abbas urspergen. loco citato.  some say the head was chopped off, 
g Luitprand. & alij.  some seem to deny that: 
h Papyrius Massonus lib. 3. de urbis Episcop. in Bonifacio 6.  some say, the trunk of the body was cast into Tiber, 
i Platina in vita Steph. 6.  others say, it was allowed lay-man's burial. I pray you now, dare you deny the truth of this story, by reason of these differences?  PAP. 
Why not? Doth not 
k Annotat. in Plat. in vita Formosi.  Onuphrius upon that reason deny it, saying: Quae de Formosi cadavere ex sepultura à successoribus eruto dicuntur, procul dubio fabulae magis quam vero similia sunt, quod illorum qui de ea re scripserunt diversitate & repugnantia facilè liquet: that is, The speeches which go touching the digging up of Formosus body out of his grave, by some of his successors, are questionless fabulous, not true: which is apparent by the disagreements and disconveniences which are to be found among them that write of it.  PROT. 
Now see you then the disagreement, and disconveniences that are among you Papists. For though 
l Intentatum hactenus s●elus.  Baronius confess, 
* Prae sui immaniate omnib●s incredibile. Annal. 10. 10. ad an. 897. nu. 3.  it was such a villainous prank, as was never played before: though he confess, 
* Erroris convincuntar qui isla. de Formoso negant, & conficta putant.  it may seem incredible, by reason of the barbarousness of it: yet he grants it true, and avows that they err foully, who deny that such things befell Formosus: who hold the reports for fables. Notwithstanding the manifold differences in some circumstances, he durst not cast it off as Onuphrius doth. Neither could he indeed upon Onuphrius reason. For 
m Lib. 2. de Ro. Pont. cap. 5.  Bellarmine saith true in this, (though he miss the truth often) that saepissimè accidit ut constet de re, & non constet de modo, vel alia circumstantia. It oftentimes falls out that men are sure such a thing is done, when yet they are not sure of the manner how it was done, or of some other such like circumstance. The difference among writers about circumstance, doth not weaken any man's argument touching the substance. If it do, (to give one instance more) blot out for shame, S. Ursula and her fellows holiday, out of your 
n Octob. 21.  Calendar: and all the prayers which you make to them in your Primers, Portesses, and Breviaries. For there was never greater diasgreement among the relators of any story, then among the relators of that. Some 
o Pet. de Natal in Catal. sanct. lib. 9 c. 87.  say, that Ursula was the king of Scotland's daughter: but 
p Galfridus Monumentens hist. Brit. lib. 5. cap. 15 & 16.  others say, she was the king of cornewal's daughter. 
q Petrus de Natal loc. cit.  Some say, her father was called Maurus: but others say, he was called 
r Herman. Flien in vita S. Vrsulae Octob. 21.  Dionethus, or 
s Ponticus Virunius hist. Brit. l. 5.  Dionotus, or 
t Baron. Annot. in Martyrol. Ro Octob. 21. b.  Dionocus, or 
u Incertus author apud Surium to. 5. de vitis sanct. Octob 21  Deo notus; for so diversly do they christian him. And which concerns the husband, to whom she should have been married, 
x Pet. de Natal. loco cit.  some write, that he was king of England: 
y Baron. loc. cit.  others, that he was king of little Britain. And 
z Elizabetha Abbatissa Schonaugien. in princip. Revelationum.  one calls him Aetherius, another 
a Frater T. in Revelat. scriptis an. 1185. ut refert Flien. loc. cit.  Holofernes, a 
b Flien, loc cit.  third, Conanus. Now in her company, as ᶜ some say, there were only 11000 Ladies and gentlewomen, virgins: but as 
d Ponticus Virunius & Gali ridus locis cit.  others say, there were 6000. country maidens over and above those 1100. of better rank. Besides, 
e Pet. de Natal. loc cit.  there were divers Bishops, and Lords of the Temporalty who accompanied them. Yea Cyriacus the Pope of Rome, like a good fellow, left his Papacy, and followed these pilgrims say 
* Vide supr. p. 67  some, though others deny it. For 
f Hangerus Abbas Lobiensis in Catalogue. Episco. Tongerensium in Metropol.  some say, that they went in Pilgrimage to Rome, though 
g Flien. Annot. in vitam Vrsulae.  others hold not that probable. 
h Martyro Ro. and Baron. Annot. in Martyr. Octob 21.  Some say, they were martyred on the sea coast: 
i Flien loco citato.  some, before the gates of Colen. And 
k Author Chron. Colon. fol. 68 & Harig. Abbas loco cit. etc.  some say, that all this fell out in the year 238. some, in 
l Baron. in Martyr. Oct. 21.  Maximus time: 
m Sigebert in Chron. ad ann. 853.  some, in the year 453. Last of all, 
n Lindan. apud Baro●um Annot. in Martyr. Oct. 21.  some say, that if any be buried in S: vrsula's Church, though they be infants newly baptised, the ground will cast them up again: whereas 
o Flien. loco cit. fabulam a●lem esse didici.  others say, that that is a tale of a tub.  PAP. 
I know not what to reply to this. But learneder Catholics will answer you, I hope. And in the mean time I will go on. 
a Onuph Annot in Platin. in vit. Ioh 8. & Hard. Answer to B. luels' Apology.  By the reporters of this story she was first carried to Athens. Now there was no Athens standing at that time.  PROT. 
Yes that there was. For 
b Lib. 8.  Paulus Aemilius writes, that Gotefridus was made Duke of Athens, and Prince of Achaia, about the year 1220. And afterwards, That certain Pirates invading the country of Grecia, slew the Duke of Athens, who was of the house of Brennus, and took the city. In like manner we read in 
d In Hen 3 ad ann. 1252. pag. 1112.  Matthew Paris, that johannes de Basin stocks Archdeacon of 
* johan. de Legria vir in Trivio & quadrivio experientissimus.  Legria who died in the year 1252. studied at Athens, and that he learned of the learned Grecians, many matters unknown to men of the West-Church: especially of one Constantia, the daughter of the Archbishop of Athens. Besides, Aeneas Syluins, who lived since that, doth justify, that in his time Athens was not quite razed, but carried the show of a pretty town. For Civitas Athenitensis (quoth he) quondam nobilissima fuit, etc. eadem nostro tempore parvi oppidi speciem gerit. The noble city of Athens at this time carries but the show of a little village. 
c Lib. 6.  Wherefore neither doth this your exception prejudice the truth of this story. Your next had need be better.  PAP. 
By the reporters of this story she was not only carried to 
e Consmograph. de Europa. cap. 11.  Athens, but to Athens for learning. Now it is a plain case, as 
f Constat eo tempore neque Athenis, neque usquam alibi in Grecia ●uisle ulla Gymnasia literarum. l: 3. de Ro. Pont. c. 24.  Bellarmine writes, that there were no schools at that time, neither in Athens, nor in any place of Grecia.  PROT. 
What? no schools in any place of Grecia at that time? Notes Bellarmine that? and that as a plain case? and doth he prove it too?  PAP. 
Yea, 
g Loco citato.  he proves it by divers writers. And first by 
h In Epist. ult ad fratrem suum Synesius scribit Athenis nihil ●uisse nisi nomen Academiae.  Synesius who lived a little after Basil and nazianzen's time. For Synesius writes unto his brother, that Athens retained only the bare name of an University.  PROT. 
And doth tha● import (think you) that in Synesius opinion there was no university at Athens? I for my part do rather think the contrary: I think Synesius meant thereby that Athens was an university, though nothing so flourishing as formerly. Questionless, when 
i Petrus Abailardus nihil habens de Monacho praeter nomen & habitum Bern. Epist. 193.  Bernard writ, that Peter Abailard had nothing of a Monk, saving the name and the cowl, his meaning was not that Peter was no Monk, but rather that he was a Monk, though a sorry Monk. And I am the rather persuaded to understand Synesius words so: because Athens, in S. Basils' time (about some 40. years before Synesius) 
k Baron. Annal. to 3. add an. 354. nu. 25. & 26.  was held the mother of learning: and in regard thereof termed golden Athens by 
l In Monodia in Basilij magni vitam.  Gregory Nazienzen. For who can think, in so few years learning should quite be quenched, and that so famous an university should in so short time be utterly decayed? But let us suppose there was no university at Athens in Synesius time. What is that to prove that there was no University at Athens in Pope joanes time, which was 400. years after? That university might get life again in so many years. And in deed it did so: for 100 years after Synesius time, Bocthuis went to study at Athens, as 
m Annal. 10. 6. ad an 510 nu. 2.  Baronius confesseth: noting further, that the study of Philosophy was revived there in those days. Again, to suppose there was no university at Athens in Synesius time, what is it to prove that there were no schools in any part of Grecia in Pope joanes time? Now Bellarmine promised to prove that.  PAP. 
That is proved by 
n Loco citato.  Bellarmine out of 
o In vit. Michael & Theod. Imperat.  Cedrenus, and Zonaras. For they record, that in the sole reign of Michael the Emperor, which fell to be about the year 856. Bardus Caesar restored learning. Cum usque ad illud tempus per annos plurimos ita fuissent extincta omnia studia sapientiae in Graecia, ut ne vestigium quidem ullum extaret.  PROT. 
Bellarmine wrongs Cedrenus and Zonaras, in bringing them in, to witness such a point. For they say no more, but that learning was not regarded of a long time before Bardus Caesar. They say not, it was quite extinct, 
* Philosophia neglecta iacebat ac propè omnino extincta erat. ut nescintilla quidem eius appareret.  but almost extinct. Bardus Caesar added life unto-it, 
* Cuique disciplinae scholas constituit, & do ctores designavit, singulis publica stipendia decrevit.  by setting up schools for every of the liberal sciences, and appointing public professors, and giving them stipends out of the exchequer, as Cedrenus and Zonaras write: but he raised it not up simply to life. For if it had been stark dead, how could he upon such a sudden have gotten professors to furnish his schools? Again, do we not read in the same Zonaras, that at the same time whereof Bellarmine speaks, there was a 
p In philosophicis rationibus incomparabilem, etc.  matchless Philosopher at Constantinople, and many skilful Mathematicians, who were his scholars? And do we not read in 
q Loco supra citato.  Cedrenus, that this Philosopher was called Leo, and that he 
* Literis & poetis Leo (ut ipse fereb at) ●●●itiatus fuit Byzantij. Rhetoricam, Philosophiam, Arithmeticam, & reliquas scientias in Antro Insula didicit.  was brought up in learning at Constantinople, though afterward he learned Rhetoric, Philosophy, Arithmetic, and the other liberal sciences, in the Isle of Antro? And doth not this argue, that Cedrenus and Zonaras do not report, that there was no learning in any place of Grecia? Thirdly, is it not well known, that 
r Bellar. lib. 1. de Conc. cap. 5.  about the year 680. there was kept a general Council at Constantinople, whereat there were many Bishops of Grece and among the rest the 
s Conc. Constantinop. 6. Act. 17.  Bishop of Athens? Is it not well known that there was kept another Council at Nice an 100 years after, viz. 
t Bellar. lib. 1. de Conc. cap. 5.  about the year 780. at which there were more Bishops of Greece then at the former? Is it not well known there was a 3. Council holden at Constantinople, which did exceed in number either of the former 2, 
u Bellar. loco. citato.  about the year 870? And how is it credible so many Counsels consisting of many Bishops should be kept in Greece, 
* 350. teste Bel. ibid.  and yet Greece utterly without learning? Welfare N. D. in comparison of Bellarmine herein, for N. D. durst not (it seemeth) say with Bellarmine: that about Pope joanes time there was no school in any place of Grecia. He was ashamed to run with his master to such excess of lying. He left him in this.  PAP. 
True. But that Athens at that time had no school in it at all, nor many years before 
x Nu. 32. pag. 46  N. D. is as confident as his master Bellarmine. And that circumstance is that which galls you most. Wherefore tell me what more you can say to it?  PROT. 
Nay first tell me how N. D. proves that? for I shall esteem of his position, as I find his proof to be.  PAP. 
His position is evident (
y Ibid.  he saith) by Cedrenus and Zonaras in the places already cited.  PROT. 
He lies falsely. Cedrenus and Zonaras makes as much for Bellarmine's opinion, as for his. For they speak of the decay of learning through Grecia generally, and not in Athens particularly; yet (as you have heard) they make nothing for Bellarmine. N. D. might as well have cast off Bellarmine's witnesses, as Bellarmine's opinion for insufficient. Have you any more exceptions?  PAP. 

z Onuph. and Harding, locis supra citatis.  Yea. For these taletellers report, that she came to Rome, and there professed learning openly, and had great doctors to her scholars. But this is a notorious untruth. For there was no learning openly professed at Rome in those days, as the stories declare.  PROT. 
The 
a Math. Westm. Flores hist. ad au. 727.  stories declare, that Ina one of our Saxon kings did build a school in Rome, a little before Pope joanes days: viz. in the year 727. and that to this end, that the kings of England, and their children, the Bishops, the priests, and the rest of the Clergy, might repair thither, to be instructed in the Catholic faith, and afterwards return home. Which school flourished in 
b Idem ad an. 794.  king Offa his time, viz. 795. and continued at least till alfred's time. For we read, that Marinus the Pope, who sat in the year 883. freed it from all payments at 
c Idem ad an. 883.  alfred's motion. Now is it likely that such a school was built, and maintained for such a purpose, where no learning was publicly professed? Moreover, we read of many other schools kept in the same city, in Stephen the 6. his time, which was about the year 885. For all the schools in Rome concurred in joyful manner, bringing Stephen the 6. to the palace of Lateran, saith 
d Omnes sanctae Rom. Ecclesiae scholae coniunctae eundem (Stephan. 6.) add Lateranense perduxerunt palatium— gravi moerore affecus est, quia quod erogares clero & scholis non haberet. Anastas. in vita Steph. 6.  one of your popish Chroniclers: and Stephen was sorry with all his heart he had not wherewith to gratify the schools. And is it to be thought that all these schools were masterless? that they had no professors, no readers?  PAP. 

e Florim. cap. 7. p. 62. Bernart. lib. 2. p. 117.  If there had been ever such a joan Pope, which some had forborn to speak of, for reverence to that sea: the difference which is found among Historians, in numbering of such Popes as were called by the name of john, should have risen at that time, and by reason of that occasion. But the difference among historians about the number of john-popes', arose not from that time, and about that occasion. It arose in Pope john the 12. his time, about the year 955. Ergo there was never such a joan Pope. Now answer me this argument, if you can, for this is held 
* Omnen hanc de joanna confictan fabulam hoc uno dicto damnarunt. Florim, ibid.  a doughty one.  PROT. 
Is it so? Well, hearken then what I answer to it. I say, first there is no reason that historians should have differed in their account of johns from her time, though some for reverence of that Sea, forbore to speak of her. For they who spoke of her, were not to set any numeral note upon her head, as 
f Pag. 70.  before I showed you out of Onuphrius. They were not to reckon one john the more for her. Neither indeed did any historian before Platina, reckon her in the number of john's, though they called her by the name of john.  PAP. 
Yes, Platina set a numeral note upon her head, and called her john the 7. and so did many since his time.  PROT. 
Many since his time have called her so, I grant, being moved thereto (as I suppose) by this, that they saw her so called in Platina. But Platina hath been corrupted by some of your generation, as 
g Pag. 71.  before I noted. For he neither called her john the 7. nor john the 8. But secondly I say, your minor is false. For the difference which is about the number of john's, arose not from john the 12, but from this woman joan. For since Platina his time, some called her john the seventh, some john the eighth, and so disagreed in the total sum.  PAP. 

h Florim. loco suprà citato.  Nay, herein you are out. For that their disagreement began in john the 12. his days, Lambertus, who lived in those days, witnesseth: and your century writers do confess.  PROT. 
Doth Lambertus witness that? Fie that you should say so. For he hath not one word sounding that way. No more have the century writers.  PAP. 
Yes but they have. For they 
i Cent. 10. ca 10. as Florim. and Bernart. say.  write, that when as john the 12. was deposed by the Cardinals, and Leo the 8. placed in his room: john the 12. got the Popedom again, and kept it four months; which some historians not observing, made two Popes of one.  PROT. 
The century writers do not write this. Your Fl●rimondus and Bernartius, from whence you have this stuff, are shameless fellows to report this by them. They say indeed, that there is great difference in writers about Pope john the 12: meaning by john the 12. not him, into whose room Leo the 8. was chosen, of whom you talk at random, but another john, who was son to Sergius, commonly called john the 11. But that historians began to differ in their account by reason of that difference, they say not. Yea it is plain, they impute the difference among the historians to this, 
k joh. 7. ut Sabellicus vult, aut 8. ut Platina, vocatus est. Cent. 9 cap. 10.  that some called joan, john the 7. some john the 8. Wherefore you must cast about for a new argument, for this will not serve your turn.  PAP. 
I have arguments good store: whereof, the first shall be taken from the time wherein (they say) she sat as Pope. And 
l Baron. annal. to. 10. ad an. 853 an. 64.  I will deal especially with Marianus Scotus, the first reporter of this matter. For if he be confounded, all the rest must rest confounded.  PROT. 
Well: fall to your work, and be as good as your word.  PAP. 

m Baron. ibid.  If Leo the 4. lived to the year 855, than Marianus Scotus lied falsely in reporting that this joan was chosen Pope in the year 853: for by his confession she succeeded Leo the fourth. But Leo the 4. lived to the year 855. Ergo Marianus Scotus lied falsely in reporting that this joan was chosen Pope in the year 853.  PROT. 
What is that to the main chance, that Marianus Scotus mistook the year of her entering into the popedom? In histories, a year or two break no square. But how prove you that Marianus reports, that this Pope joan was chosen in the year 853?  PAP. 

n Baron. ibid.  By his own wosds. For thus he writes. Anno octingentesimo quinquagesimo tertio Leo Papa obijt Kalend. Augusti. Huic successit joanna mulier annis duobus, mensibus quinque, diebus quatuor. In the year 853. Leo the Pope died on the Kalends of August: and joan the woman succeeded after him for the space of two years five months, and four days.  PROT. 
These are not Marianus words. For he sets not down the year precisely, but in numeral figures, by the side of the text. 
o See Marianus chronicle, & the case will appear to be plain.  And it is plain, by conference of years, that he meant to note out the 855 for her entrance, and not the 853. For Benedict the 3. who succeeded her, entered not (by his account) till the year 857. Now if she had entered 853, she had been Pope four years, or thereabouts. For between 853. and 857. there run four years; whereas in plain words he notes, that she was Pope but two years, five months, and four days. Secondly, it is plain by Marianus Scotus, that Sergius the 2. began his popedom in the year 844. and sat three years. It is plain. that Leo the fourth, next successor to Sergius, began his in the year 847, and sat eight years. Now put these three odd sums 4, 3, and 8, to 840, and they will make 855. So that whosoever succeeded Leo the 4, must begin in the year 855; and that was joan the woman, in Marianus opinion.  PAP. 
Why, but right over against these figures 853, these words are set: Leo Papa obijt Kal. Aug. Leo the Pope died on the Kalends of August. And doth not that argue, that in Marianus opinion, Leo died that year?  PROT. 
No. No more than the words following, Huic successit joanna mulier, etc. which are set just over against these figures 854. do argue that she began her popedom the next year after: or that Leo the 4. began his popedom in the year 852, because right over against that number, his entrance upon Sergius death is mentioned. Is not your next argument better?  PAP. 
The people of Rome, about that time, were evil affected towards the Pope, 
p Florim. cap. 14. nu. 6.  and so was the greater part of all Italy: for that Charles had subdued them, and given them to the Pope. Now if such an accident as this had fallen out, it might have given them just cause to have fallen from the Pope again: for they might have pretended that they would not be subject to a womanish and an whorish government. But we read of no such thing. Ergo.  PROT. 
Charles rescued Italy out of the hands of the Lombard's, with the great good liking both of the Romans and the rest of Italy. But he never turned them over to live under the Pope's government. All his life he kept them in obedience to himself, and by will bequeathed the whole country to his youngest son Pippin, as 
q Annal. to 9 add an 806. nu. 19  Baronius showeth out of the French histories. Ergo this argument is nought: let me have a new one.  PAP. 

r Flor. c 27. nu. 2  The Popes about the time of this your supposed Pope joan did take up roundly both kings and Emperors for their adulteries. Which is a plain argument, there was no Pope joan in that Sea guilty of any such crime.  PROT. 
What kings and Emperors were these, whom the Popes took up so roundly for their adulteries?  PAP. 
Ludovicus the Emperor was one. For Gregory the fifth, turned him into a Monastery for his adultery with one judith: that there he might (apart) do Penance for his sin.  PROT. 
Gregory the fifth lived almost 150. years after Pope joan; 
〈◊〉 5. Luio●●● Imp●ratorem adulterij 〈◊〉 Iudit●a quadam perpetrati reum— cum da ●●●nobij clausius addixit. Flo●●m. ibid.  and beside, there was no Emperor called Ludouike in his time. Perhaps Florimondus would have said Gregory the fourth, for he lived not long before Pope joanes time, and in his days there was one Ludouike an Emperor.  PAP. 
Indeed it may be so, for the numeral figure might soon be mistaken. For Gregory the fourth, a man may easily set down Gregory the fifth. And what say you to it?  PROT. 
I say Florimondus is a palterer. For Ludouike, who lived in Gregory the fourth's time, was never noted for an adulterer, with any judith, nor with any woman else. judith his wife was suspected of that sin with others, and thereupon was veiled, and thrust into a Monastery by some of the Princes of the Empire. And Ludouicke himself, upon other pretences, was for a time deprived of the Empire. But Gregory the fourth had no hand either in her veiling, or in his deprivation, as you may see by 
t Annal. to 9 add an. 833. & 834.  Baronius. Besides, this fell out before Pope joanes time: and therefore doth not hinder but that there was such a joan. Me thinks you should be drawn dry, you talk so idly.  PAP. 

a Flor. c. 25. nu. 3  If there had been such a Pope joan, some historian would have written either good or bad of her. But we read nothing of her in any history.  PROT. 
Do we read nothing of her in any history? whence have we this of her aspiring to the Popedom, and of her lewd behaviour in the time of her Popedom? have I not proved it unto you out of the histories?  PAP. 
Yea, but my meaning is, 
b Florim ibid.  that we read nothing in any history of her reforming the Church: of her determining of causes and questions, usually proposed by Bishops to them that are Popes, of any intercourse or affairs, that she had with King or Emperor.  PROT. 
No more do we read in any historian, of any such act done by Anastasius the third, who sat as Pope two years and upward. Anastasius the third (as 
c Ab Anast●●● nil memori: dignum, g●● est. Plat. in v. Anastasij 3.  Platina witnesseth) did nothing worthy of remembrance. We read nothing of any great Acts done by Leo the seventh. He sat 3 years, and six months: yet he did as 
d Leo 7 〈◊〉 e●gnum memoria gessit. Plat. 〈◊〉 vita Leoni. 7.  little as Anastasius, for any thing we read; he neither reform the Church, nor resolved any Bishop his doubts: nor intermeddled with any Princes.  PAP. 

e Florim. loco supra cit. 10.  Oh but that age, wherein you feign that this joan lived, was an age wherein fell out great variety of matter, both in the East and in the West. In it many Princes and Emperors of great worth reigned. In it many men of great learning lived. And therefore if there had been any such monster then, we could not but have heard of it on all sides.  PROT. 
So we have, as before I proved. But what great variety of matter fell there out in that age more than ordinary?  PAP. 

f Florim. ibid.  In that age there was old holding and drawing between the Eastern and Western Churches about Images. Many Counsels were kept by both sides, and many evil words passed on all hands.  PROT. 
Go, go, I am ashamed of you, and of Florimondus your master. All stories testify that the difference between the Eastern and the Western Churches about Images, began in the former ages: and that, though they continued some few years after the year 800, yet there was no talk of that matter for diverse years before Pope joanes days. Yet I am willing to hear you speak on. Wherefore tell me what store of learned men that age brought out?  PAP. 
Great store, but it were too long to reckon them.  PROT. 
It may be so. Yet you must know that they went for learned men in that age, 
g Qui seiret tan tum Crammaticam isto seculo rudi. doctissimus habebatur. Baron. Annal. to 9 ad ann. 80 2. nu. ●●.  who were but bare Grammarians. And therefore were they never so many, Pope joanes acts might pass unwritten.  PAP. 

h Horim. cap. eit. nu. 6.  Yea but I would gladly know of you, what Dukes, what Princes, what Kings, what Emperors, this joan inaugurated, and crowned: what Ambassadors she entertained, what honours she bestowed upon any persons.  PROT. 
Indeed you pose me now: especially in that which concerns the inauguring and crowning of Dukes, and Princes, and Kings, and Emperor. For I remember none inaugurated or crowned by her,  PAP. 
I thought so. And therefore you do well to confesse●it. I trust at length you will also confess that there was no Pope joan.  PROT. 
Why I pray you? did every Pope inaugure and crown either Dukes, or Princes, or Kings, or Emperors?  PAP. 
Nay I say not so. But in that age the Emperors themselves had such a reverend opinion of the Roman Popes, that they would not take upon them to reign, except they gave them their consent and crowned them.  PROT. 
How prove you that?  PAP. 

i Florim ibid.  By this, that Adrian the first, baptised the two sons of Charles the great, and after that anointed them kings.  PROT. 
This proves not your purpose: for this fell out in the year 781, as 
k Annal. to. 9 ad ann. nu. 2.  Baronius notes: and not in that age wherein Pope joan lived. But do you think that every Pope in that age inaugurated some Dukes or Princes, or Kings, or Emperors? I would gladly know of you what Duke, or Prince, or King, or Emperor was inaugurated, or crowned by Pope Eugenius the 2, who sat in the year 824, or by Pope Valentinus, who sat in the year 827, or by Pope Gregory the 4. who succeeded Valentinus: or by Pope Sergius the second, who fate in the year 844. or by Pope Leo the 4, who sat in the year 847. I am sure never a one of these crowned any Emperor. And I remember not that any one of these anointed any Duke, or King, save Leo the 4, who anointed Alfred the youngest son of Athelwulfus king of England. Which furthered him nothing to the attaining of the kingdom. For till the death of his three elder brethren, for all the Pope's anointing him, he lived like a subject, he lived not like a king. Wherefore to put you in mind of the main point; though Pope joan inaugurated, or crowned no such persons as you speak of, yet you cannot conclude thereupon: Ergo, there was no Pope joan.  PAP. 

m Florim. loco citato.  But if she bestowed no honours upon any persons: if she made no Bishops: if she gave no bishoprics: it is more than probable there was never any such.  PROT. 
Oh but we read, that contulit sacros ordines, promovit Episcopos, ministravit Sacramenta, caeteraque Romanorum Pontificum exercuit munera: she gave orders: she made Bishops: she administered the Sacraments, and she performed all other offices belonging unto the Papacy.  PAP. 
Where read you that? I warrant you, you had it out of Bale: of whom I wish you to see at your leisure, what 
n Florim. cap. 3. nu. 1. & 2.  Florimondus censure is.  PROT. 
john Bale (for aught I know) is far honester man, than Florimondus. And to tell you truth, if Florimondus rail upon him, I shall have the better opinion of him. For as 
o Quiscit illum, intelligere potest, non nisi grand aliquod bonum à Nerone damnatum. Ter tull. Apologet. cap. 5. Euseb. hist. Eccl lib. 2. cap. 24.  Tertullian persuaded himself that whosoever knew Nero, would easily believe Christianity were good because it was disliked by Nero: so I persuade myself, that whosoever knows Florimondus, he will the rather be well persuaded of john Bale, because he is reviled by Florimondus. But yet I would have you know, I read not this in Bale only, but in 
p De vanitate scientiarum. cap. 62. desectis Monasticis.  Cornelius Agrippa: a man much commended by 
q Lib. 1. epistol. Epist 38 te mag nopere commendamus, etc. saith Leo the 10  Leo the 10. and in a 
r Lib de vanitate scientiarum, is mentioned in the emperors privilege.  book of his solemnly privileged by Charles the 5.  PAP. 
Well sir, sith these reasons prevail not with you, I will come a step or two nearer you. And first to prove your story a fabulous fiction, I argue thus. 
s Si eafabula vera suisset, ut Romae hoc tempore sederit foemina, cui in electione ipse Ni colaus tune Cardinalis suffragium oportuerit contulisle qua fronte Photium ted●●guere potuisser quod saepissimè facit) co nomine quòd cum esset laicus ordinari se Episcopum passus esset, etc. Baron. annal to. 10. ad an. 853. nu 70.  If the report of Pope joan be not afabulous fiction, than Nicolas the first Pope of that name, who at the time of her election was a Cardinal, gave her a voice, and so consented to her election. But it is not credible that Nicolas gave her a voice, and consented to her election. Ergo.  PROT. 
First, I deny that Nicolas was a Cardinal at the time of Pope joanes election. For he was made 
t Anastas. Biblioth. in vita Nicolai 1.  Subdeacon by Sergius the second, and 
u Ibid.  Deacon by Leo the fourth. In which order he continued 
x Ibid.  till the death of Benedict the 3, who sat after joan. Secondly, I deny we are bound to believe that he gave Pope joan his voice, though we should grant he was a Cardinal. For it was never required, that all the Cardinals should give consent to any Pope's election. But principally I deny your minor proposition, viz. that it is not credible Nicolas gave her his voice, and consented to her election. And how can you prove it?  PAP. 

y Baron. loco supra citato.  If Nicolas had given her a voice, and consented to her election, then could he not honestly have reproved Photius Patriarch of Constantinople, for that he suffered himself of a mere lay-man to be made a Patriarch. 
z Imperatorem ipsum acerrima reprehensio●● perstingit; quod id agere praesumpsislet Baron. ibid.  Neither could he justly have reproved Michael the Emperor, for that he gave his consent to Photius ordination and election. But (no doubt) he reproved them both honestly and justly. Ergo he never gave Pope joan his voice, he never consented to her election.  PROT. 
Why might not he without note of dishonesty reprove Photius and the Emperor for their dealing, though he himself had a hand in Pope joanes election?  PAP. 
Because he should have been guilty of the same fault, if not of a greater: for a woman (you know) is not capable of holy orders.  PROT. 
Oh is that it? As though there were not a main difference between Nicolas his fact (to suppose he did it) and the fact of Photius and the Emperor. Photius and the Emperor did that wittingly and willingly, which Nicolas reproves in them. Nicolas chose a woman Pope unwittingly. It was with Nicolas (in all likelihood) at the election of Pope joan, as it was with the 
h 2. Sam. 1511.  200 of jerusalem, who were called by Absalon to Hebron: of whom the Scriptures witness that they went in their simplicity, knowing nothing. Now ignorance, invincible ignorance, such as this was, excuseth, though not from all fault, yet from so great fault. Wherefore you must come nearer me yet, if you mean to drive me from my opinion.  PAP. 
Have at you then, and that with a 
i O locus epist. opportunus & auro contra non carus, & quo facile protelem omnia adversariorum tela, etc. Bernart. lib. citato. p. 109.  golden argument, 
k Rario ineluctabilis, saith Genebr chron. lib. 4. Maximi ponderis arg. saith Florim. cap. 25. p. 209.  such as can never be answered, and this is it. 
l Leo 9 epist. ad Michaelen Episc Constantinop. cap. 23.  About 170 years after this devised election of Pope joan (to wit, upon the year of Christ 1020) the Church and Patriarch of Constantinople being in some contention with Rome, Pope Leo the ninth wrote a long letter to Michael the Patriarch of Constantinople, reprehending certain abuses of that Church, and among other, that they were said to have promoted Eunuches to priesthood, and thereby also a greater inconvenience fallen out, which was, that a woman was crept to be Patriarch. 
m N D. lib. citat nu. 29. pag. 398.  Now (no doubt) Leo would never have durst to write thus, if the Patriarch might have returned the matter back upon him again, and said: This was but a slanderous report, falsely raised against the Church of Constantinople, but that a woman indeed had been promoted in the Roman Church.  PROT. 
Is this your golden and unanswerable argument? Truly I am sorry for you, that you have no more skill in an argument: for you presume in this, that Leo would never object that against Constantinople, whereof Rome itself might be convinced; and make that the ground of your conclusion. Now that is a slabbie ground, as may appear by this, that it is ordinary with you Papists to object that against others, whereof yourselves stand most guilty. It is ordinary with you Papists, to call your enemies, whore's first. Do not you complain with open mouths of us Ministers, for want of continency? and yet is it not well known, that your priests and monks, 
n jer. 5. 8.  like fed horses, have neighed after their neighbour's wives: and your Nuns have opened their feet (to 
o Ezech. 16. 25.  use the Prophet's phrase when he speaketh of such like light skirts) to every one that passed by, and have multiplied their whoredoms?  
Taceo de fornicationibus & adulterijs, à quibus qui alieni sunt, probro caeteris ac ludibrio esse solent, Spadonesque aut Sodomitae appellantur: saith 
p De praesulibur Symoniacis: in Bibliotheca sanctorum Patrum, printed at Paris 1576. pag. 655.  Nicolas Clemangis, speaking of your priests.  
I say nought of your priests fornications and adulteries, from which crimes if any man be free, he is made a laughing stock to the rest, and either called an Eunuch or a Sodomite.  
Laici usque adeò persuasum habent nullos coelibes esse, ut in plerisque parochijs non aliter velint presbyterum tolerare, nisi concubinam habeat: quo vel sic suis sit consultum uxoribus; quae ne sic quidem usquequaque sunt extrapericulum, saith the 
q Ibid.  same man.  
The lay people are so conceited of the incontinency of all priests, that willingly they would not have a parish priest, unless he have a whore of his own, that so they might keep their own wives. And yet for all that, they are scarce sure of their own by that course.  
Fornicantur complures Monialium cum suis Praelatis, ac Monachis, & conversis, & in Monasteriis plures parturiunt filios & filias, quos ab iisdem praelatis, Monachis, & conversis fornicarie, seu ex incestuoso coitu conceperunt, saith 
t Nemoris unionis, tract. 6. cap 34.  Theodoricus de Niem, Secretary to Pope Vrban the 6. going on thus, Et quod miserandum randum est, nonnullae ex huiusmodi Monialibus aliquos foetus earum mortificant, & infants in lucem editos trucidant, etc.  
Many Nuns commit fornication with Bishops, and Monks, and Converts, and are delivered of sons and daughters within their Monasteries, which were got by those persons fornicatorlike, if not incestuously. And which is most pitiful, very many of these Nuns kill with saberdisauces the fruit in their wombs: many kill them after they be borne.  
Quid obsecro aliud sunt hoc tempore puellarum Monasteria, nisi quaedam Veneris execranda prostibula, & lascivorum, & impudicorum invenum ad libidines explendas receptacula? ut idem sit hody puellam velare, quod & publicè ad scortandum exponere? saith 
s De corrupto Ecclesiae statu.  Clemangis above named.  
What are Nunneries (I pray you) now, save cursed stews and places for meeting of wanton and shameless youths to satisfy their lusts in? So that now it is all one, to make a wench a Nun, and to make her a whore.  

* Henricus Huntingdon. hist. l. 7. an. Christi 1125. Roger Hoveden annal. pars prior in Hen. 1. ad an. 1126. Math. Paris in Hen. 1. ad an. 1125. pag. 93. Math. Westmon. Flores hist. ad an. 1125.  johannes Cremensis, one of your Romish Cardinals, held a Council at London in the year 1125. wherein he inveighed bitterly against such priests as kept concubines, dicens summumscelus esse à latere meretricis ad corpus Christi conficiendum surgere, saying, it was a damnable sin for a priest to arise from a whore, to go to say Mass: yet he himself loved a whore with all his heart. For as we read in our English stories, ipse cum eadem die corpus Christi confecisset, cum meretrice post vesperam interceptus est: he himself was taken with a whore the same night after he had said Mass. And as it seems, 
* Huntingdon. Hoveden, Math. Paris locis ●tat.  he was taken in the manner: for the historiographers note, Res notissima, negari non potuit: the matter was so plain, it could not be denied.  
Again, do you not condemn us of ignorance, 
t Bristol, Motive 31.  reporting by us, that we are afraid to reason with common Catholics; and that when we do reason, the common sort of Catholics are able to answer all our arguments, and to say also more for us, than we can say for ourselves: as though ye were the people only, and wisdom must die with you. And yet are not we able to prove out of your own mouths, that your Priests and Monks were generally like the 
* jonas 4. 11.  sixscore thousand Ninivites, who had not so much wit, as to discern between their right hand and the left?  
Videas admitti ad sacerdotium caeterosque sacros ordines homines idiotas & illiteratos, vix morose ac sillabatim absque ullo intellectu legere scientes, qui Latinum & Arabicum aequaliter norunt: saith 
u De Praesalibus Symoniacis, in Biblioth sanct. pat edit. Paris. 1576.  Clemangis. Speaking of the ignorance of your Clergy.  
Thou mayst see ignorant and unlettered persons advanced to Priesthood, and the other holy orders: which cannot read without stutting and stammering, who have as great skill in the Arabian tongue, as in the Latin. And in an 
x De corrupto Ecclesiae statu.  other place:  
Quotusquisque hody est ad Pontificale culmen evectus qui sacras vel perfunctorie literas legerit, audierit, didicerit, imò qui sacrum codicem nisi tegumento tenus unquam attigerit?  
How many are there now adays preferred to Bishoprics, who so much as cursorily, have either read, or heard, or learned, the holy Scriptures? yea who have so much as touched the bible except it were on the outside of the covering?  
Hoc seculo Episcopatus & sacerdotia indoctissimis hominibus & à religione alicnis deferri solent— Hodiè Episcopi nostri (paucis exceptis) sacrarum literarum scientia caeteris ex populo longè inferiores sunt, saith 
y De sac. Eccles. Minist & Benefic. lib. 1. c. 11.  Duaren.  
In this age bishoprics and parsonages are bestowed on most unlearned, and irreligious men.— At this day our Bishops (except a few) are more unlearned, than the common people.  
Pudeat Italiae sacerdotes, quos ne semel quidem legisse constat novam legem: apud Thaboritas, vix mulierculam invenias, quae de novo & veteri Testamento respondere nescit, saith 
z Comment. de dict. & fact. Alfonsi regis lib. 2. Apotheg. 17.  Aeneas Silvius. 
* Gravamen 7. nationis Germa nicae, quod habetur in Fasciculo rerum Expetendarum, in press. Colon. 1535. fol. 167. b.   
Fie upon the Priests of Italy, who never read over the new Testament: a man can hardly find a woman among the Thaborits who cannot answer roundly to any thing out of the old and new Testament.  
Ecclesiarum regimina minus dignis (Rome vidcelicet) committuntur, qui ad mulos magis quam homines pascendos & regendos essent idonei.  
The government of the Churches (even at Rome) is committed to unworthy persons: who are fitter to look to the keeping of Mules than men.  
Thirdly, do not you upbraid us with baseness, and vileness: accounting no better of our most reverend Bishops, then uncircumcised Philistines, which (as 
a Allens Answ. to the book of English justice. cap. 3. pag. 44.  you say) were taken out of the rascality of the whole realm? 
b Staplet. in the 4. book of the Counterblast fol. 481 & S. R. in his answer to Bells downfall of Popery. cap. 8. Art 7 nu. 4. pag. 361.  Do not you give out, that a great part of our clergy resteth in Butchers, Cooks, Catchpoles, Cobblers, Dyer's, and daubers, Felons carrying their mark in their hand, in stead of a shaven crown: Fishermen, Gunners, Harpers, Innkeepers, Merchants, and Mariners, Netmakers, Potters, Apothecaries, and Porters of Bilinsgate, Pinner's, peddlers, Ruffling Ruffians, Saddlers, Shearmen, and Shepherds, Tanners, Tilers, Tinkers, Trumpeters Weavers, Wherrimen, & c? Do not 
c Philopater ad edictum Reginae Angliae. nu. 192. sect. 3. pag. 180 alias Stapl. for he is the author, teste Posseuino in Apparat. sac. 10. 1. verbo. Angli.  you report, that so many bankrupts, and infamous, and villainous wretches, are admitted to it, that none, almost, except he be driven thereto by beggary, will enter into it? as though ye only were the sons of Nobles, and we the children of Fools, and the children of ullaines, which were more vile than the earth? And yet are we not abye to prove against you, that you have made Levites, even Bishops, and Priests, of the blind, and the lame, of the flat-nosed, broken footed, broken handed, of the crooke-backt, and blear eyed, of the sciruie and scabbed, of the lowest of the people, tag and rag?  
Si quis desidiosus est, si quis à labore abhorrens, si quis inocio luxuriari volens, ad Sacerdotium convolat: quo adepto, statim se caeteris Sacerdotibus voluptatum sectatoribus adiungit, qui magis secundum Epicurum, quam secundum Christum viaentes, & cauponulas seduli frequentantes, potando, commessando, pransit ando, convivando, cum tessaris, & pilo ludendo tempora tota consumunt: crapulati verò & inebriati pugnant, clamant, tumultuantur, nomen Dei & sanctorum suorum pollutissimis labiis execrantur, sicque tandem compositum, ex meretricum suarum complexibus ad divinum altare veniunt, saith 
d De Corrupto Ecclesiae statu.  Clemangis speaking of your Worthies.  
If there be any lazy fellow, any that cannot away with work, any that would wallow in pleasures, he is hasty to be priested. And when he is made one, and hath gotten a benefice, he consorts with his neighbour Priests, who are altogether given to pleasures: and then both he, and they, live, not like Christians, but like Epicures: drinking, eating, feasting, and reveling, till the cow come home, as the saying is; playing at tables, and at stoolball: and when they are well crammed, and tippled, than they fall by the ears together, whooping, and yelling, and swearing damnably, by God and all the Saints in heaven. And after all matters be somewhat pacified, then arising out of their whores laps they go to the Mass.  
Asciscuntur nunc (saith 
e In vita Sozimi.  Platina) non modò servi & vulgò concepti, ac nati, verumetiam flagitiosi omnes ex flagitioso quóque geniti.  
Now adays not only servants, and they which are begotten and borne under hedges, are admitted to be of the Clergy, but every vile fellow, and every vile fellows brat.  
Ex Aulicis perditissimis & quod omni aetate fuit post Christianorum memoriam inauditum, ex militibus deploratissimis, iisque sanguinariis— Dei loco ad Ecclesiae collocantur, imò repentè intruduntur gubernacula, saith 
f Panopliae lib. 4 cap. 77. p. 405.  Lindan. Quid quod puerulis & adolescentulis creduntur haec tractanda?  
Wretched Courtiers, forlorn and bloody Soldiers (a thing never heard of before among Christians) are all upon a sudden thrust in upon the Church to manage it in God's stead, yea boys and youngsters are made Bishops and Prelates in the Church.  
Bibones, scortatores, aleatores, & qui haec vitia, vultu, cultu, incessu, totoque habitu prae se ferunt: passim (ad Sacerdotium) admittnnt. Erasm. Scholar in epistolam Hieron. de vest Sacerdotali ad Fabiolam.  
Doth not 
g jam reipsa Caluinistis in Anglia mulier est summus Pontifex. De notis Ecclesiae. lib 4. cap. 11.  Bellarmin charge us with that fault, whereof you yourselves stand condemned? to wit, with making a woman a Pope, from which all the world, save foul mouthed Papists, will questionless acquit us? Doth not 
h In the defence of the censure. pag. 13.  Parsons avow railing, and foul scurrility, to be proper unto us, and to our ancestors only; as though he and his were answerable to Moses in mildness, and of so temperate carriage, that butter would not melt in their mouths, when yet the contrary appeareth by their own books.  
The general consent of all that ever have thoroughly conversed with Parsons, is this, (saith 
i Quodlibet of Religion and state. pag. 236.  Watson the Quodlibetting Priest) that he is of a furious, passionate, hot, choleric, exorbitant working humour, busy headed, and full of ambition, envy, pride, rancour, malice, and revenge: whereunto may be added, that he is a most diabolical, unnatural, and barbarous, butcherly fellow, unworthy the name, nay cursed be the hour, wherein he had the name of a Priest, nay of a religious person, nay of a temporal lay man jesuit, nay of a Catholic, nay of a Christian, nay of a creature, but of a beast or a devil: a violater of all laws, a contemner of all authority, a stain of humanity, an impostume of all corruption, a corrupter of all honesty, and a Monopoly of all mischief. And is not this railing? Now if this be thus (to return to the main point) why may we not think the Church of Rome to be faulty in electing Pope joan, though Leo reproved the Church of Constantinople with the same?  PAP. 

k N. D. Loco supra citato.  Yea, but how could Leo have answered the Patriarch of Constantinople, if the Patriarch might have replied truly upon him, that Rome was guilty of such an oversight?  PROT. 
Leo might have answered the patriarchs reply, as Ahab, who charged Elias with troubling of Israel, answered Elias, (when 
l 1. King 18. 17. 18.  he replied: I have not troubled Israel, but thou and thy father's house:) to wit, with silence. For otherwise I know not how he could have answered him honestly. No more than I know how other of your Popes can answer other replies (in other cases) which may be made upon them.  

m In Epistola 1. ad Imperatorem.  Agatho one of your Popes, avoucheth, that the Roman Church never swerved from the tradition of the Apostles, that she never gave ear to novelties; that the Pope his predecessors had ever boldly, strengthened their brethren, according to Christ's commandment unto Peter. For proof thereof he appeals to all the world. In like manner Nicolas another of your Popes, speaking of his fellow Popes, 
n Nicol. 1. epist. ad Michaelem.  braves it out, that never one of them was so much as suspected to have held an error. Now if a man should have replied upon them (as any man might have replied truly) that Victor was suspected to have held, that Christ was a pure man, and not God, which is witnessed by 
o Euseb hist Eccl. lib. 5. cap. 28.  Eusebius. That Zepherinus was suspected of montanism, which is testified by 
p Tertull lib. contra Praxcum.  Tertullian. That Marcellinus sacrificed to idols, which is witnessed by 
q In Pontificali in vita Marcell  Damasus, and acknowledged by 
r Lib. 4. de Rom. Pont cap. 8.  Bellarmine, though denied in some sort 
s Annal. To. 2. ad an. 302. nu. 101, & 102.  by Baronius. That Liberius subscribed to the Arian heresy, which is reported by 
t Lib. citato in vita Liberij.  Damasus, by 
u In epist ad solitariam vitam agentes.  Athanasius, by 
x Descript. Ecclesiasticis, verb. Fortunatianus.  Jerome, and by 
y Hist. lib 4. c. 15.  Sozomen. That Felix, as 
z ●ieron. de script. Ecclesiast. verbo Acacius.  some say, was an Arian, or at least, as 
a Sozomen. lib. 4. cap. 10.  others say, communicated with the Arians. That Honorius the first was a Monothelite, and for that condemned by name in the 
b Act. 16. 17. 18.  sixth and 
c Act. 7. in definite. Synodi.  seventh general Counsels. How could Agatho and Nicolas have answered this reply, think you?  
We read, that Tarasius the Patriarch of Constantinople charged your Pope Hadrian the first, with the crime of Simony. And do you therefore think that he himself was free from simony? or rather do you not know that he himself was grievously suspected of simony?  PAP. 
Yes I 
d See Baronius annal. tom. 9 ad an. 806. nu. 1. & 2.  know that though Tarasius was an holy man in his life, and approved so to be by miracles wrought after his death: 
e Baron. annal. to 9 add an. 787. nu 58, & 59  yet he was very greatly suspected of simony. Wherefore I rather think, that you never read he charged Pope Hadrian with that fault.  PROT. 
The Epistle which Tarasius wrote to Hadrian, wherein he reproveth him, for that is extant in print, so that you yourself may read it also if you will.  PAP. 
I remember 
f Loco proximè citato. Certè quide qui eam primus edidit Theod. Balsamo in suspicionem adducitur inposturae.  Baronius talks of such an Epistle. But he suspects that Balsamon, who first published it, did counterfeit it, to discredit the Roman Sea. And indeed Balsamon loved not Rome.  PROT. 

g Possevin. in apparat sac. verbo Taratius.  Gentian Heruet, who translated the epistle into Latin, was nothing suspicious of it. No more was 
* Nor Papyrius Masson. dev. bis Episcop. lib. 3. in Adriano. fol. 131. b.  Bignaeus, who put it into his Library of holy Fathers. Nor Posseuine, who mentions it in his Apparatus sacer. I see it goeth hard with you, when you are driven to plead, that the evidence I bring is forged. I thought that shift had been proper to us Protestants, for 
h Rhem. annot. in Act. Apost. 17. 34.  you often upbraid us with it: but now I see it is common to us with you. But why is Baronius suspicious of it?  PAP. 
Because it was first set out by Balsamon, who loved not Rome.  PROT. 
Baronius saith therein untruly. For proof whereof I will use no other witness but himself, his own mouth shall condemn him. For 
i Annal. to. 9 ad an. 787. na. 49.  he himself confesseth, that Tarasij epistola ad Hadrianum Pontificem de Symoniaca haeresi profliganda ab Anastasio ad finem septimae Synodi positalegitur, nec non apud Theodorum Balsamonem in Appendice ad Nomacanonem Photii: that is, that Tharasius epistle unto Hadrian the Pope, treating of the rooting up of the sin of Simony, is to be read in the end of the seventh general Council, where it was put by Anastasius: and withal in Theodorus Balsamon, in his Appendix unto Photius Nomocanon. For if Anastasius placed it at the end of the seventh general Council, than was not Balsamon the first that published it. For Anastasius lived about 300 years before Balsamon. For Anastasius lived about the year 860, and Balsamon lived about the year 1180.  PAP. 
You speak probably. 
k Onuph. annot. in Platina, in vita Ioh 8. Harding in his Answer to Iu●ls Apology.  ʰ But me thinks, though men at that time had been so far bewitched and distracted of their five wits, as they could not have known a man from a woman: yet God himself, who appointed and ordained the Seat of Peter, whereof he would the whole Church to be directed; should never have departed so far from his merciful providence, as to suffer the same to be polluted by a woman, which is not of capacity for holy orders.  PROT. 
And why (I pray you) might not God as well suffer that Church to be polluted by a woman, as by so many monstrous men, of whom your own historians write very shamefully? Why might not she sit there, as well as Sabinian, that base and miserable companion, qui formidabili morte, & culpabili vita notatus est: who is taxed by your 
b Fascicul Tem porum ad a● 614.  writers, for his vile life and fearful death? Why might not she sit there as well as 
c Some say it was Se●gus the reason of which d●●●rsine ●ee in D Reyno●ds Co● cr. chap 7. diurn 1. pag. 282. edit. 1534. in marg.  Stephen the 6, who (as 
d Pag.) 1.  I told you before) took up the carcase of Formosus his predecessor out of the grave, brought it into judgement before a Council of Bishops, spoilt it of his papal robes, clad it with a layman's garment, indicted it, arraigned it, condemned it, cut off three fingers of it, and cast it into the stream of Tiber: depriving all them of their orders whom he had ordained, reordaining them again? Why might not she sit there, as well as Boniface the 7, 
e Platina in vita B●●nicacij 7.  who rob S. Peter's Church, and fled for a time to Constantinople; who afterwards by simony and murdering two Popes, made himself Pope; who in mischief outstripped the most notorious robbers and slayers by the high ways, that ever were: which in cruelty went before bloody Sylla and Catiline, and such as sought the ruin of their country, 
f Bonifacius 7. annumerandus interfamosos latrones & potentissimos grassatores atque patriae proditores, Sulla's & Catilinas horumque si●●les, quos omnes superavit sacrilegus iste tur pissima nece duorum Pontificum. Annal. to. 10 ad an. 985. nu. 1.  as your own Baronius confesseth; and who at length died like a beast? Why might not she sit there, as well as Sylvester the 2, that famous conjuror, who gave himself both body and soul to the devil, that he might get the Popedom, and died thereafter? Why might not she sit there?—  PAP. 
Nay, stay a little. They say, it is a sin to bely the devil. Now 
g Florim cap. 24  I persuade myself that you bely Pope Sylvester: for I 
h jodocus Coc●●us in catechiss. Cathol. lb. 7. Art. 15.  read, that he was reputed a notable man, both for his life and learning.  PROT. 
How notable he was, let Platina speak, who 
i Platina de vitis Pont in sylvest  writes, that ambitione & diabolica dominandi cupiditate impulsus, largitione primò quidem Archiepiscopatum Rhemensem, inde Raucunatem adeptus, Pontificatum postremò maiore conatu adiuu●nte diabolo, consecutus est, hac tamen lege, ut post mortem totus illius esset, cuius fraudibus tantam dignitatem adeptus erat: that is, Sylvester the 2. being devilishly ambitious, got first by bribery the archbishopric of Rheims, then of Ravenna, and after that by the devils help the Bishopric of Rome, yet upon this condition, that when he died he should be wholly his, by whose means he attained to such dignity. Have you not cause to believe, that this fellow was notable for life and learning? But perhaps Platina is singular in this. No. 
k In Chron. add an 988.  Sigebert confesseth, that Sylvester was thought to have got the Popedom * ilfavouredly: and that he was 
* Non per ostium intrasle creditur. A quibu●dam negromantiae arguitur.  suspected of necromancy; and that some said, the devil brought him to his end. The same in effect is reported by 
l 〈◊〉 vit. & cest. Hildebrandi.  Benno Cardinalis, by 
m In chron. ad an. 1007.  Martinus Polonus, by 
n De vit. Pont. in sylvest, 2. ad an. 995.  johannes Stella a Venetian, by 
o Supplem. chron ad an 997.  Philippus Bergomensis, by 
p In Polychron. lib. 6. cap. 14.  Renulfus Cestrensis, by 
q Flores hist. an 998.  Matthaeus W●stmonasteriensis, by 
r Ad an. 1004.  Fasciculus Temporum, by 
s In S●ma Conc.  Charanza, and by 
t Comment. de gest. Conc. Basil. lib. 1.  Aeneas Silvius: for, Non nos fugit Syl●estrum secundum diabolica fraud Romanum Pontisicatum ascendisse, saith Aeneas: we are not ignorant that Sylvester the 2. got the papacy by devilish subtlety.  PAP. 
Tut: all this is to no purpose: 
u Bell lib. 4. de Ro. Pont cap. 12 Onuph. annot. in Plate in vit. sylvest 2.  Pope Silvester was learned in the Mathematics, and such was the ignorance of that age, that thereupon they held him for a conjuror.  PROT. 
Indeed 
x Lib. 2. de gestis regum Angl. cap. 10 ●ol. 6.  William●Malmsbury having related the same story in substance with the abovenamed writers, supposeth that some might reply so, saying, Sed haec vulgata, ficta crederet aliquis. But some man peradventure will say, this is but a mad tale, eo quod solet populus literatorum famam laedere, dicens illum loqui cum daemone, quem in aliquo viderint excellentem opere: because the common people are wont to say, that scholars who are singular in any thing do use a familiar: yet he concludes, that he believes it for true. For mihi verò fidem facit de istius sacrilegio inaudita mortis excogitatio, (
y Loco citato.  saith he) I am verily persuaded, Sylucster was such a villain, because of the strangeness of his death. For, Curse moriens excarnificaret ipse sui corporis horrendus Lanista, nisi novi scelcris conscius esset? For why should the butcherly fellow have torn his own flesh (as he did) but that he was guilty of some strange sin? Do not you think there is reason in this question? Doubtless your Onuphrius was afraid to answer it And therefore in his notes upon Platina, where he labours to clear Sluester of the imputation of a conjuror, 
z De morte e●us sieve dia●oli percussione famam alibi commodius convellam Onuph. loco uprà citatò.  he takes day with his reader, to clear him from so fearful a death.  PAP. 

* Bell. lib. 4. de Ro. Pont c. 12. Baron. Annal. to 1● ad an. 999. n● 7.  Yea but Sylvester the second, is commended by Sergius the fourth, a very holy Pope, who lived within five years after him: wherefore it is not 
* Facinorosus homo, quique utfar, & latto ingressus est in ouile omum, laqneo vitam adeo ●fam: exitu, vind●●e Deo, clausit. to 10. Annal. ad ann. 900. nu 5.  credible that he died such a shameful death.  PROT. 
Say you so? Doth not 
* Baronius ibid.  Baronius confess, that though Stephen the sixth, was a wicked fellow: and that as he entered into the Popedom like a thief and a murderer: so he died like a thief: yet 
* Ad ann. 904. na. 4.  Sergius the third, who succeeded within eight years after him, commended him: yea I●hn the ninth his next successor, who in that age was a singular honest Pope, commended him, as a man of blessed memory. Upon 
* Tete●●timum monstrum.  which later confession, he makes this observation: Hic considera Lector, quanta solerent successores Pontifices quantuluncunque reprehensibiles praedecessorem reverentia persequi, ut johannes Stephanum suum praedecessores tum sedis inuasione, tum etiam sessione, in omnibus plane execrandis facinoribus detestabilem, piaetamen recordationis Stephanum appellet. The effect of which Latin is, that it is worthy the observation, that the liue●Popes spoke reverently of the dead-popes', were they never so naughty. Wherefore to go on why might not Pope joan sit there as well as Benedict the ninth, that ugly monster, as 
a In ●it. Greg. 6.  Platina calls him, 
b Rodulphus Glaber quitunc v●●ebat. lust. lib. 5 c. vit. Papynus 〈◊〉 de urb. spise in B●nedicto. 9  who got the room when he was 12. years old, 
c Platina in Benedict. ●igonius 〈…〉 8. ad 〈◊〉 48.  who when he was cast out for his unworthiness, got it again by strong hand within a few days after; and for fear that he could not keep it long, sold it to another for money: who after his death 
d Caput 〈…〉 ●●●na, ut reliquum corpus sicut ursus. Fascic. Temp. ad ann. 1034. Plat. in vita Bewed 9 Polonus in Chron. ad ann. 1042.  appeared partly like an Ass, partly like a Bear, confessing that he carried such a shape, because he lived like a beast in his life time? Why might not she sit as well in S. Peter's chair, as Boniface the eighth, who 
e Petrus Crinitus lib. 8. de honesta disciplina. cap. 23. ut legimu● in Fasciculo rerum expetendarum, etc. fol. 44.  when he should upon an Ash-wednesday (as the Popish manner is) have laid ashes upon an Archbishop's head, and religiously told him: that he was but ashes, and should return to ashes: cast them in the Archbishop's face, and eyes, maliciously telling him, that he was a Gibelline, & that he should die with the Gibellines? of whom Celestinus his predecessor (a man famous 
f Caelestinus vir sanctissimus, & tam ante Pontificatum quam etiam post miraculis plurimis illustris. Bell. Appendix ad lib. de Summ. Pont. cap. 14. & 24.  they say for miracles) 
g Calestinus 5. propheravit in hunc modum ut fertur: Ascendisti ut vulpes, regnabis ut Leo morieris utcanis Et ita sanè contigit. Tho. Walsingam in Edu. 1 & Polichron. lib. 7. cap. 40.  prophesied: That as he entered like a Fox, so he should reign like a Lion, and die like a Dog, which fell out accordingly?  
Why might not she sit there as well as Gregory the 7, commonly known by the name of Hildebrand, 
h Hilde brand. Ecclesiasticum subvertit ordinem Christiani imperij perturbavit regnum, etc. Conventus Episcoporum 50. apud Brixian, teste Abbate Vt pergensi in Chron. ad ann 1080.  who set both the Church and common wealth on fire? 
i Benno Cardinalis lib. supra citato.  who hired a bad fellow to tumble down great stones from the battlements of a Church upon the emperors head, to squeeze him in pieces, whilst he was at his prayers: 
k Ibid.  who cast the Sacrament into the fire: who ordinarily 
l Ibid.  carried about him a conjuring book: 
m Ibid.  who shrewdly bebumd his predecessor Alexander: who wrested the Scriptures to cover his lewdness: 
n Forentinus Vigotniensis in Chron. pag. 641. Math Paris in Guil. Conquest. an. 1086.  who at his death confessed, that the devil set him on work, to provoke God to wrath against the world.  
Why might not she sit there as well as john the 23, 
o Onuph. Append. in Plat. in vita Ioh 24.  who was fitter for the camp, then for the Church; for profane things, then for the service of God: as knowing no faith, no religion at all: 
p Conc. Constant. Sess. 11. Art. penult.  who taught again and again, and maintained it before many of good place: That there was no life after this, but that it was with men as with beasts. Who in a word lived so scandalously, that commonly he was called by them who knew him, a plain devil incarnate. Why might not she sit there as well as john the twelfth, 
r Luitprandus hist. per Europam. gestarum. lib. 6. c. 7, 8. & 10.  who made Deacons in a stable, who made a boy of ten years old a Bishop, who made the Lateran a plain stews, who drunk to the devil: who when he was at dice made his prayers unto jupiter and Venus, and to such Idolatrous Gods of the heathen. Who at length was slain even by the devil himself while he was committing adultery, as 
* Pag. 97.  before 
q Ibid. Art. 6. etc.  I noted. If you cannot deny, but God hath suffered these and many as evil as any of these (except the last) to occupy S. Peter's room, you may well wonder with 
s Part. 2. Tit. 16. cap. 1. sect. 7.  Antoninus, at the story of Pope joan, and say, Oh the depth of the wisdom of God, how incredible be his judgements etc. But you have no cause in this respect to deny it, you have no cause to cast it off as a fable. But give me leave to ask you a question. How should this tale of Pope joan arise, if there was not such a Pope? was there ever such a smoke and no fire? such a report and no probability?  PAP. 
No indeed. 
a Omnia insignia mendacia ab aliqua veri tate originem habent. Onuph. Annot in Plat. in vit joannae. ●uc●s quaedam inest ve●● species. Florim. cap 29. nu. 1.  Great lies arise always out of some truth. And so did this. For john the twelfth, (to confess a truth) was a wenching fellow: and among other wenches which he kept, there was one called joan, who was all in all with him, and ruled the roast. Now the people perceiving what hand she had over him, termed her Pope, and despised him. Whereupon the Church's enemies took occasion to slander the Church, as though the Church had (indeed) had a woman Pope.  PROT. 
This is one of Florimondus' reasons, is it not?  PAP. 
Yes. 
b Loco citato nu. 5.  He mentions this, and likes indifferently well of it. But he mentions it as out of Onuphrius. Wherefore take you it rather as Onuphrius answer to your question, then as Florimondus' answer.  PROT. 
Content: provided that you tell me, how Onuphrius proves that john the 12. had such a maisterfull whore called joan?  PAP. 

c Loco supra citato.  Onuphrius proves that out of Luitprandus Ticinensis, a writer of that age. For he witnesseth (as Onuphrius saith, and Florimondus believes) that john the twelfth had 3. famous whores, of whom the fairest, and therefore the best beloved, was called joan.  PROT. 
Luitprandus, 
d Lib. 6. c. 6. & 7  in the place cited by Onuphrius, witnesseth, that john the 12. kept one famous whore whom he called Raynera, whom he made governor of many cities, and on whom be bestowed many golden crosses, and chalices belonging to S. Peter. In like manner he witnesseth, that he kept another called Stephana, and that he lay with married wives, with widows, with maids, who came to visit the Apostolical Churches. And withal he witnesseth, that he kept a third called Anna (who was a widow) and her niece: making the palace of Lateran no better than a bawdy house. But he nowhere names any joan, on whom that worthy head of your Church, john the 12. doted, Onuphrius (I suppose) mistook joanna, for Anna; and Florimondus justified the proverb, A fool believeth every thing. Have you not another answer to second this?  PAP. 
Yes. I have two or three besides this?  PROT. 
That's well. And what is the first of them I pray you?  PAP. 
This john the ninth, was made Bishop of Bonony, and afterwards Archbishop of Ravenna, and at last Pope of Rome, by the means of one Theodora, a famous whore, who swayed all matters at Rome in those days. Now the people perceiving that this Theodora could turn this john which way she would, and lead him whither she list, they held him worthier the name of a woman then of a man, and therefore called him joan, and not john. Whereupon arose the report of a joan Pope.  PROT. 
And who (I pray you) is the father of this answer.  PAP. 

e Annal. lib. 4  johannes Aventinus, who by reason he was a German borne, knew best (no doubt) the original of this fable, as 
f Pag. 236.  Florimondus showeth.  PROT. 
Then Florimondus believes this too.  PAP. 
He thinks it very probable.  PROT. 
But so did not his countryman Genebrard. For, Aventinus lib. 4. Annalium fabellam esse asserit, à Theodora nobili scorto ortam, 
g Genebrard. Chron. lib. 4. ad ann. 855.  saith Genebrard: Ego vero è recentioribus adulatoribus in Romanae sedis odium. etc. That is, Aventinus holdeth that this tale arose by reason of a noble whore called Theodora. But I think, some latter clawbacks (of the Emperors) devised it to discredit the papal seat. Thus Genebrard. And is not Genebrard's no, as good as Florimondus yea? especially sith Genebrard 
h Diuturno 10. annorum study Geneb. praefat. Chronograph. ad Po●tac●m.  spent upon his Chronicles ten whole years: whereas 
i Fabu●a Ioann● cap 31 p. 253. nu 6.  Florimondus by reason of his Clients, can spare no time for such studies?  PAP. 
Genebrard was a worthy man, I 
k Possevin. apparat. sacer. verbo Gilb●rtus Genebrardus.  know. But I respect no man's person, wherefore give me a reason why you dislike this conceit of Aventinus, approved by Florimondus.  PROT. 
I will. Yet first I would have you know, that though I grant, that john, who was first B. of Bonony, then of Ravenna, and lastly of Rome, came to those Bishoprics by the means of Theodora a famous whore: in respect whereof, your 
l Annal. tom. 10. ad an. 925 nu. 11 si ipse Pontisex est dicendus.  Cardinal historiographer makes question, whether he was a Pope or no; and terms him 
m Ad an. 912. nu. 12.  sometimes Pseudopontifex & Antipapa, a false Pope, and Antipope: 
n Ad an. 928. nu. 2.  sometimes intrusor & detentor iniustus Apostolicae sedis: an intruder and an usurper of the Apostolical chair: yet I deny that this was john the ninth, for he was john the tenth. john the ninth came by good means to the Papacy, as your 
o Annal. tom. 10 ad an. 90 1. nu 1.  Cardinal saith. 
p Idem ad ann. 905 nu. 1. & 2.  He carried himself honestly in it, and died naturally: but so did not this. 
q Frodoard. last. Rhemeus. lib. 4. cap. 19  This confirmed a child under five years old in the archbishopric of Rheims: at which fact 
r Ista nova, turpia, detestanda, solo auditu horrenda atque pudenda. Annal. to. 10. ad an. 925. nu. 9  Baronius stands aghast. 
s Ibid. nu. 11.  Then this, turpior nullus, cuius sicut ingressus in Cathedram Petri infamissimus, ita & exitus nefandissimus. There was never a filthier fellow than this. This entered with infamy, and died fearfully. 
t Idem ad an. 928. nu. 2.  This was stifled with a pillow by the procurement of one as famous for whoredom, as Theodora who preferred him.  PAP. 
This of whom Florimondus speaks, was stifled with a pillow by theodora's own daughter. But it seems you wrong her in her good name. For she caused him to be stifled, because she could not brook his filthy kind of life with her mother, as 
u Cap. 29. nu. 3.  Florimondus' notes.  PROT. 
Florimondus will never be good. The daughter disliked not her mothers and the Pope's course of life at all. She herself 
x Luitprand. lib. 2. cap. 13. agnoscente. Baron. annal. tom. 10. ad an. 908. nu. 5.  played the whore with Sergius one of your Popes, and had by him john the 11. 
y Baron. ad an. 933. nu 11.  She married her husband's brother, and lived with him in incest. The only cause why she procured him to be stifled, was her envy to one Peter the Pope's brother, as 
z Ad an. 928.  Baronius proveth out of Luitprandus.  PAP. 
But in good earnest, was not this john, john the ninth? Florimondus 
a Cap. 29. p. 235 & 236 cap. 30. p. 240, & 241.  again and again calls him john the ninth. And me thinks he should not mistake him so often.  PROT. 
In earnest this was not john the 9 Florimondus was deceived.  PAP. 
Why, but Benedict the 4. succeeded john the 9 did he not?  PROT. 
Yes, that is true. But Benedict the 4. succeeded not this john. john the 11. as 
b Lib. 3. cap. 12.  Luitprandus writes: or rather Leo the 6, as 
c Leo Ostiens. lib. 1. cap. 57 in fine. Baron annal. 10. 10. ad an. 928. p. 702.  others write, succeeded this john.  PAP. 
Florimondus writes, that Benedict the 4. succeeded this john: and observes withal a knack of knavery in those who report this story, in that they fathered this tale upon a john, whom a Benedict succeeded.  PROT. 
Observe you then a knack of foalerie, or knavery, or rather foolish knavery in Florimondus. For I tell you once again, 
d Cap. 30. p. 242  that Benedict the 4. succeeded not this john: all histories are against it. 
e Baron. annal. to. 10. ad an. 901 nu. 1.  But suppose he was john the 9 If his loose carriage of himself with Theodora, gave occasion of the report of a woman Pope, why was it not recorded as happening in his time, but above forty years before his time? john the 9 was made Pope in the year 901: yet this story is recorded as happening about the year 854.  PAP. 

f Florim. cap. 30 nu. 1.  That came to pass by the subtlety of the reporters. For about the year 800. the Empress who in a manner ruled all the world, was called Theodora. Now these trifling taletellers hearing of a Pope joan in theodora's time, chopped it into the time of Theodora the Empress, who lived about thirty years before the harlot Theodora.  PROT. 
This would rather argue simplicity then subtlety in the reporters. For, cui bono, whether it happened in the one, or in the other theodora's time? But it carries no colour of truth with it. For Theodora the Empress never carried any sway in Rome at all. At Constantinople, for a while in the time of her sons minority, she could do something: 
g Baron. annal. to. 10. ad an. 855 nu. 51.  but in Pope joanes time she was turned out of office at Constantinople. She was deposed from her regency, and thrust into a Monastery, where she was kept till her death. What is one of your other answers.  PAP. 
My third answer to your main question is, that perhaps this tale arose from john the 8. For john the 8. dealt not like a man in the case of Photius Patriarch of Constant inople, but sheepishly and like a woman. For john the 8, received Photius into communion, who was excommunicated by his predecessors. john the 8. suffered himself to be overcome by half a man. Whereupon in reproach he was called, non Papa, sed Papissa. And upon that reproachful speech, came this tale of a woman Pope.  PROT. 
Who devised us this answer, I pray you?  PAP. 
This is 
h Annal to. 10. ad an 879. nu. 5.  Baronius answer.  PROT. 
Baronius answer? Is that possible? Is not Baronius one of them who holds, that the rumour of the Church of constantinople's oversight, in suffering a woman to creep in to be Patriarch, occasioned this tale against Rome?  PAP. 
Yes marry is he. For having set down Pope Leo his words touching that rumour: Quae ita erant fama vulgata de Ecclesia Constantinopolitana, conversa in Romanam Ecclesiam à schismaticis eam odio prosequentibus, & calumnijs proscindentibus, quis non intelligat? 
i Annal. to. 10. ad an. 853 nu. 58.  saith Baronius: that is, Who seeth not, that what was reported of Constantinople, the same was turned by schismatics as spoken against Rome.?  PROT. 
And with what honesty can he say both? 
k Cap. 5. nu. 29. pag. 399.  N. D. who holds of this later opinion, professeth, that it seemeth most certain, that in Pope Leo his time, viz. 1020, there was not so much as any rumour or mention of any woman Pope that ever had been in the Roman Church. So doth Baronius himself: for verily (
l Certè si vel levissimus rumusculus per calumniam de his spar sus esset, utique is ab eo suisset antea diluédus, quam ut fama perlatum facinus eiuldem generis obiecisset. Annal. to. 10. ad an. 853 nu. 66.  saith he) if there had been but some flying tale of any such accident at Rome in former days, Pope Leo should first have cleared it, before he had charged the Church of Constantinople with the like. Was there not so much as a flying report of a woman Pope before Leo the 9 his time, in Baronius opinion? How then did john the 8. occasion such a report, who lived an 140 years before Leo? But let Baronius go with this escape. What reason have you to think that the rumour of Constantinople might occasion this tale against Rome?  PAP. 

m Florim. ca 25. nu. 3.  Good reason. For every man knows that Constantinople was called New Rome, and Rome simply. Now a man might easily be deceived, in supposing that to be done in Rome in Italy, which was reported to be done in Rome, but in Rome in Grecia.  PROT. 
That Constantinople was called New Rome, 
n Constantinop. novam Roman iam inde à Constantini tempore Graeci vocabant. Papyr. Masson. lib. 2. de urbis Episc. in Simplicio  I easily yield unto you. But that it was at any time called simply Rome, that your Florimondus is not able to make good. That's his own fancy; and in delivering it he bewrays his own folly. Yet to suppose it true: why did not the relators of it, set it down as happening in Leo his time, but 240 years before: if so be it was occasioned by the report that went of Constantinople in Leo his days? If it had thence begun, it should have been registered as then happening.  PAP. 
Well: suppose it were true: what gain you by it? or what is the Church prejudiced by her? If Pope joan had been, she had not prejudiced the Church, 
a Part 2. of three Conversions, c. 5 pag. 389.  saith N. D.  PROT. 
But she had. For if she was Pope, than it will follow thereon necessarily, that the Church (according to your learning) once hoped headless. For the Church (in 
b Bellar lib. 3. de Ecclesia, cap. 2.  your learning) is defined to be a company of Christian men professing one faith under one head, to wit, the Pope. But she, how ever she carried the name of Pope, was no Pope. 
c Rhem. annot. in 1. Cor. 14. v. 34  For a woman is not capable of holy orders. A woman cannot play the Pope. Ergo all the time of Pope joan, the Church hoped headless.  PAP. 
Indeed the only inconvenience of such a case is, 
d Loco sup. cit.  as N. D. confesseth, that the Church should lack a true head for the time. But that is not so great a matter: for so she doth when any Pope dieth, till another be chosen.  PROT. 
What is that you say? Doth the Church hop headless, when one Pope dieth, till another be chosen? Now alas what a pitiful case is the Church in then? Since Christ's time 
e Cicarellus addit. ad Platinam & Onuph.  there have been above 240 Popes. And therefore by your saying, the Church hath been headless above 240 times. Yea, and sometimes between the death of one Pope, and the choosing of another, there have passed many days, many months, some years. As for example, 
f Anaslasius de vitis Pont. in Cletus.  after Cletus, the Bishopric of Rome was void 20. days: 
g Idem in Clement.  after Clemens, 22. After Alexander the first, 
h or 35. Idem in Alex. 1.  25. 
i Idem in Pelagio 1. 1.  After Pelagius the first, 3, months and odd days. 
k Idem in Pelag z  After Pelagius the second, 6. months & odd days. 
l Idem in Ioh 3.  After john the third, 10. months and odd● days. 
m Idem in Sab ●niano.  After Sabinian, 11. months and odd days. 
n Idem in Honorio 1.  After Honorius the first, one year and more. After 
o Pont●●us Ch●●n g●●l. 2.  Clemens the fourth, two years and more. 
p Ana ●●●● lib citat in Marcellino, & Polonus in codice Manu scripto, & Pontacus Chronog. lib 2.  After Marcellinus, 7. years and more, After Nicolas the 1. (
q Teste Platina invit. Nicol. 1.  as some say) 8. years and more. And after F●lix, sometimes the Duke of Savoy, S. Peter's chair stood empty 10. years, 
r De repub. ib. 6. nu 71.  saith Bodin. Whereupon will follow, that the Church hath often and long together been headless. But that is not so great a matter you say: Is it not? Whence I pray you, should the Church have her wit, when she is bereaved of her head? The saying is, Great head, little wit. But without question: no head, no wit. When the Church is headless, she is witless, and by consequent helpless. And therefore, I take it, you have good cause to beware that you grant nothing whereon it may be concluded: That your Church was once headless.  PAP. 

s N. D. part. 2. c. 5 nu. 1●.  But did not Saint Austin hold opinion, upon supposition of a like case, that the Church of Christ, should not be prejudicated? Did not 
t Au●●●n. Epist. ●65. ad literas 〈◊〉 Downest.  he, having recited up the Popes of Rome from Christ to his days, make this demand: what if any judas or traitor had entered among these, or been chosen by error of men? and answereth presently: Nihil praeiudicaret Ecclesiae, & innocentibus Christianis.  PROT. 
Yes. But considering the body of your doctrine, you may not answer so, nor think so. For you hold that your Pope is head of the Church, and that it is necessary unto salvation to acknowledge him the head: but so did not S. Austin. You hold that in a true Church one Bishop must lawfully succeed another, or all is dashed: but so did not Saint Austin. For he puts the case, that some traitor subrepsisset, that is, had come in unorderly into the Bishop of Rome's Seat: and yet resolves, that that was not prejudicial to God's Church. Conform yourselves in these two points, of the Pope's headship, and succession, to Saint Augustine's judgement: and then you may better say in this case of Pope joan, that which Austin said in the case proposed: That she had not prejudicated the Church of Christ.  PAP. 
We make more reckoning of Saint Austin than you do. But I will not stand wrangling upon his meaning now. 
u N. D. loeo suprà citato.  Because whatsoever inconvenience can be imagined in this case, is more against you, than us. For your Church admitteth for lawful and supreme head thereof either man or woman, which our Church doth not.  PROT. 
Our Church admitteth neither man nor woman for lawful and supreme head of the Catholic Church, as yours doth. Our Church teacheth that Christ only is the head thereof. Our Church admitteth neither man nor woman for lawful and supreme head of a particular Church. For our Church acknowledgeth the king supreme governor only, not supreme head: and so she 
x The oath of the Supremacy. 1. Eliz. 1●  styled Queen Elizabeth in her time, Though if we give our Princes more, yet the inconveniences against us, are not like the inconveniences against you; because the next in blood is to succeed with us; the greatest Symonist, who can make his faction strongest, is to succeed with you.  PAP. 
What other inconvenience follows upon this accident, to suppose it true?  PROT. 
If it be true there was such a Pope, your Church must be discarded as no true Church. For thus I argue: 
a Bristol. Motive. 22.  That is no true Church, which cannot give in plain authentical writing, the lawful, orderly, entire, without any breach, and sound notorious succession of Bishops. But your Church, if joan was Pope, cannot give in plain authentical writing, the lawful orderly, entire, without any breach, and sound notorious succession of Bishops. For by reason of her Benedict the third, could not orderly succeed Leo the fourth. She put in a caveat, or rather, was of herself a bar to his succession. By her a breach was made in the rank of your Popes. She, no fool, but a whore, marred your play.  PAP. 
No, no. For all that you can rightly gather upon her Popedom is, That the Pope's seat stood empty of a lawful Pastor for the space of two years, and a few odd months. Now so it did often by reason of the differences among the Electors, as you yourself showed. And yet no man durst say, nor could truly say, that succession failed, as 
b Nihil praetereà ex ex eater miseri novatotes, lucri capiunt insi ut dic. possit duobus illis annis & mensibus sedem Pontificiam legitimo vacuam ●u●sse pastore— quod & alias ac cidit, ut maiori temporis spacio sedes Pontificia, dilata per discordias eli gentium electio ne vacarit: nec tam● succession's desijsle, quis unquam ausus est dicere, quod nec dici potuit. Sed tantùm esse dilatam nullo verò modo sub latam Baron. Annal. to. 10 ad an. 853. nu. 63.  Baronius notes.  PROT. 
As Baronius notes? If Baronius may be judge, there is nothing that can mar your succession, neither vacancy, nor entrance in by the window. Whether the chair be empty, or full, by irrepsion, or by usurpation, it is all one to Baronius. Baronius will not give over his plea of succession. For though he (not without grief) 
c Quot proh ●pudor proh dolor●m eandem sedem visu horrenda intrusa sunt monstra, etc. To 10. ad an. 900. nu. 3.  confesseth, that many ugly monsters have sat in S. Peter's chair: though 
d Non Apostolici sed Apostatici. to. 10. ad an. co 8. nu. 4.  he confesseth that many Apostates, rather than Apostolical persons, have occupied that room: though 
e Qui non sunt nisi ad consignanda tantùm tempora in Catalogo. Rom. Pontificum scripti. to. 10. an. 912. nu. 8.  he confesseth, that there have been many Popes, which came irregularly to the Papacy, and served for no other purpose than ciphers in Arithmetic, to make up the number; yet he holdeth their succession sound. Though 
f Homo nefarius, iam antea bis gradu depositus etc. non numerandus inter Pontifices, utpotè qui damnatus fuit in Ro. Synodo. to. 10. ad. an. 897. nu. 1.  Baronius writes, that Boniface the 6. who got possession of S. Peter's chair, and kept it 15. days, was a wicked fellow, and not worthy to be reckoned among Popes, in as much as he was condemned by a Council held at Rome. Though he 
g To. 10. ad an. 897. nu. 1.  write, that Stephen the 7, 
* Apostolicae sedis invasor, & fur & latro— indignus nomine Ro. pontif. ibid. an. 900. nu. 6.  such another as Boniface the 6, or rather worse, played at thrust out rotten with Boniface the 6, and kept the Papacy 5. years. Though 
h To. 10. ad an. 908. nu. 1. Ibid.  he write, that Pope Christopher shuffled Leo the 5. out, and by violence installed himself, and kept it 7. months: and that Sergius at the 7. months end shuffled Christopher out, shearing him a Monk, and keeping it to himself, as some say seven years, as 
i Ad an. 910. nu. 1.  Baronius himself saith, three years: yet all this shuffling in Baronius opinion, doth nothing stain succession. Yea, though he cannot deny that Boniface the seventh, who sat as Pope one year and one month, was a 
k Scelestissimus vir ad an. 974. n 1. nefandis simus parricidâ, truculentus praedo, qui ne pilum habuisse dici potest Romani Pontificis, ad an. 985. nu. 1.  wicked varlet, a plain tyrant, a savage beast, an usurper, one that had no good property of a Pope. Though he cannot deny but that Leo the eight, who was a schismatic, and an intruder, and an Antipope, ᵇ in his opinion, kept the place almost two years. Though he cannot deny but that john the twelfth 
m Ostensus fuit tanquam in scena mimus ponti ficem agens. to. 10. ad an. 955. nu. 4.  who was but like a Pope in a play, kept it nine years: and 
n To. 10. ad an. 931. nu. 1.  john the 11, the bastardly brat of Sergius above named, 
l To. 10. ad an. 931. nu. 38.  who came to it by evil means and managed it accordingly, kept it 6. years: and 
o Inuasor & detentor iniustus Apostolicae sedis. ad an. 928. nu. 1.  john the 10. as false a lad as any of his fellows, who entered by fraud, and ruled with violence, kept it 15. years: yet this lessens nothing the credit of his succession. I warrant you, Baronius was of Genebrards' opinion, 
p Chronol lib. 4. seculo. 10. ad an. 904.  who though he granted that fifty Popes together came in unlawfully, and governed as madly, would not yet let his hold of succession go.  PAP. 
Is there any further inconvenience, which may light upon us, if this story be true?  PROT. 
Yea. For if it be granted there was such a Pope, the Popish Priests among you may well doubt of the lawfulness of their mission: & you lay papists of the sufficiency of the absolutions, which they give you upon your Eare-confessions, and of the truth of the Real presence, and Transubstantiation. For 
a In Episcopis de iure divino residet ista potestas creandi sacerdotes. Tolet. Summa casuum Conscient. lib. 1. cap. 1.  unless the Popish Priests be priested by a lawful Bishop, their Priesthood is not worth a rush: 
b Anathema sit qui dixerit non solos sacerdotes esle Ministros absolutionis, Conc. Trid. ●ess. 14. Can. 10.  unless you lay Papists be absolved by a lawful Priest, your absolution is nought worth: & 
c Semper in Ecclesia pro indubitato habitum est, ita necessanam esse ordinatio●● sacerdotalem ad Eucharistian conficiendan ut sinè ea nullo modo confici possit. Bel. l. 4. de. Eucha. c. 16.  unless the words of consecration be uttered by a lawful Priest, intent upon his business, there follows no substantial change in the creatures of bread and wine. Now how can your Priests be assured that they were Priested by lawful Bishops: and how can you lay Papists be assured that you are absolved by lawful Priests: or that your Masses are said by lawful Priests: seeing we read (as 
d Pag. 82.  before I showed) that Pope joan gave Orders, Pope 〈…〉 Deacons, and Priests, and Bish●● 〈◊〉 Abbo●●. For it may be well enough that the Priests 〈…〉 present age are 〈◊〉 from those who were 〈…〉 by her: especially seeing we no where read, that they 〈◊〉 degraded by succeeding Popes, who had their ordin●●● from her. Her successors dealt not with her shavelings, as Pope john the 12. did with Leo the 8. his shavelings. 
e Sigebert. in chron. ad an. 963. Baron. annal. to. 10. ad an. 964. nu. 9 joh. de Turrecrem. Sum. de Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 103.  john the 12. degraded them all, and compelled every of them to give him up a paper, wherein it was thus written: Episcopus meus (meaning Leo the 8.) nihil sibi habuit, ●●hil mihi dedit had nought for himself, and gave me nought: but so did not Benedict the 3. with hers. Unless you say, that communis error facitius, as 
f ff de officio Pra●toris.  Lawyers said in the case of Barbarius Philippus I know not what you can reply with probability to this and yet that will not serve your turn; for though it may be so in matters of the commonwealth, in matters of the Church it cannot be so. For an error in the beginning, in matters touching the Ch●●●h, proves often an heresy in conclusion. In matters of the Church, prescription adds no credit to actions of evil beginning.  
FINIS.   

Errata.  
Page 3. line 1. for Ramulsus read Ranulsus. Page 4 line 5. for 〈◊〉 read declinant pag. 12. in margin, for saviour read saviour p. 19 l. 2. and 〈◊〉 for Thrithemius read Trithemius. p. 20. l. 4. for ch●●d read child. 〈…〉 for 5000. read 50000. and for 1200. read 11000.