length God according to his promise bringing forth the shadow of death to light that is making knowne her secret naughtinesse PAP Yea but how could she passe through priesthood and other Ecclesiasticall orders how by so many vnder-offices and degrees as they must before they come to be Popes without descrying For 900 yeares from S. Peter no man was chosen Pope that was not brought vp in the Romane Church and passed through priesthood and other Ecclesiasticall orders PROT. That 's not so For Dionysius was made Pope of a Monke and Valentinus in the time of his Deaconship before he was priested And so was Benedict the fift too And as for Leo the eight he was chosen being but a lay man Per Othonem 1. homo laicus Leo intrusus est saith Baronius Your owne Genebrard did note that this Note of Onuphrius was worth nothing yea that it was false as many other of his notes are PAP Yea but Polonus and others say that this Ioane brought forth a child as she went in procession Now it is not credible that a woman who had gone so many moneths with child would then especially go abroad when there was most feare she might be discouered PROT. This is like the rest For the time of child-birth is vncertaine For though women go vsually ten moneths yet sometimes they come sooner at nine or eight yea at seuen moneths as Physitians haue obserued Honester women then Pope Ioane haue fallen in trauell vpon the high way ere euer they were aware that they were so neare their reckning as Theophilact obserueth for nouit mulier quòd pariet quando verò non nouit saith he Nam non paucae 8 mense pepererunt etiam in itinere nihil praescientes that is A woman knowes she shall be deliuered but the time she knowes not for diuers haue bene deliuered in their eighth moneth as they haue bene in their iourneys neuer dreaming of any such thing towards What is your next exception PAP They say she was buried without any solemnities in the world And how is that credible seeing it is a barbarous and sauage part to depriue them of the honour of solemne buriall which haue borne the greatest offices PROT. Is it so Do we not reade in Scripture that God in his iustice doth vse to serue the greatest princes so who dishonour him Do we not reade that Iehoiachim king of Iudah was to be buried as an asse is buried c. Yea do we not reade in some of your owne stories that some of your Popes haue had as small solemnities Bonifacius 7. post mortem Ioh. 15. sedit menses 4. repentina morte interijt in tantum eum odio habuerunt sui vt post mortem caederent eum lanceis vulnerarent atque per pedes traherent nudato corpore vsque ad campum quiest ante caballum Constantini ibi proiecere eum atque dimiserunt saith Baronius Boniface the 7. who sate after Iohn the 15. foure moneths died a sudden death and he was so hateful to his owne followers that after his death they beate him and ranne him into the body with lances and dragged him by the feete all naked till they came to the field which is neare the place where Constantines horse stands there they threw him from them and there they left him PAP Yea but it was neuer heard of before nor neuer in vse among Christians to burie a man in the high wayes PROT. No Is it not written that Deborah Rebeckahs nourse was buried vnder an Oke and that Rahel Iacobs wife a farre honester woman then Pope Ioane was buried in the way to Ephrath though if it had not yet Pope Ioane was but right serued to be buried so for it was neuer heard of before nor neuer in vse among Christians that a Pope should be deliuered of a child The extraordinarinesse of the case deserued extraordinary exemplary vsage Your friend Papyrius Massonus much commended by your Cardinall Baronius holds opinion that if there had bene any such Pope the Romanes could haue done no lesse in equitie then to haue hanged her vp in chaines 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 Vt ventus fumum euanescere totam in auras fabulam fecit he hath disproued this tale throughly in Baronius iudgement But yet I thinke with Florimondus they should haue allowed her Christian burial they should haue made her a tombe they should haue written Epitaphs on her PROT. What Epitaphs on such a whore That had bene a ieast indeed Yet perhaps some mad-cap did so And how proue you the contrary PAP If she had had a tombe made for her and Epitaphs on her they would haue bene forth coming For as Florimondus writes Sepulchrorum nunquam intermoritur memoria Tombestones continue for euer PROT. Indeed I haue read that by law it was prouided that no man should deface Tombe-stones And I haue read also that to this day hard by Troy videre licet magna marmorea sepulchra operis antiqui ex vno lapide instar cistae excauata quoruÌ„ 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 couers whereof are still whole But I do not reade that men can shew which was Priamus his graue which Hectors c. Yet but for euill fingers I could haue told you where Pope Ioanes tombe was Til Pius Quintus cast it into Tiber it was to be seene in Rome PAP They say further that she died instantly But though the paines of women be great at such times yet it comes by throâ—â— they haue some intermission their paine is not like to a sudden Apoplexy on which they die instantly PROT. Men do not die instantly who are taken with an Apoplexie they may liue long after and be cured thereof as Phisitions say Your Florimondus herein is out of his element Neither did she die instantly though it seemes suddenly For she was deliuered of a boy before her death PAP Was she deliuered of the boy wherewithall she went and what was then the cause of her death Florimondus accounts this as one of the absurdities which followes on this tale Imò vt aiunt saith he masculum pepererat quid igitur mortem repentinam attulit If a woman be once deliuered of the fruite of her wombe there is no danger of death in his opinion PROT. Commend me to him if euer you see him And aske the Woodcocke if he haue not knowne women die in child-bed as well as in child-birth Rahel was deliuered of her son Beniamin and yet died shortly Phineas wife was deliuered of her sonne Ichabod and yet died presently after And if they
Theodora who preferred him PAP This of whom Florimondus speakes was stifled with a pillow by Theodoraes owne daughter But it seemes you wrong her in her good name For she caused him to be stifled because she could not brooke his filthy kind of life with her mother as Florimondus notes PROT. Florimondus will neuer be good The daughter disliked not her mothers and the Popes course of life at all She her selfe played the whore with Sergius one of your Popes and had by him Iohn the 11. She married her husbands brother and liued with him in incest The onely cause why she procured him to be stifled was her enuie to one Peter the Popes brother as Baronius proueth out of Luitprandus PAP But in good earnest was not this Iohn Iohn the ninth Florimondus againe and againe cals him Iohn the ninth And me thinkes he should not mistake him so often PROT. In earnest this was not Iohn the 9. Florimondus was deceiued PAP Why but Benedict the 4. succeeded Iohn the 9. did he not PROT. Yes that is true But Benedict the 4. succeeded not this Iohn Iohn the 11. as Luitprandus writes or rather Leo the 6 as others write succeeded this Iohn PAP Florimondus writes that Benedict the 4. succeeded this Iohn and obserues withall a knacke of knauerie in those who report this story in that they fathered this tale vpon a Iohn whom a Benedict succeeded PROT. Obserue you then a knacke of foalerie or knauerie or rather foolish knauerie in Florimondus For I tell you once againe that Benedict the 4. succeeded not this Iohn all histories are against it But suppose he was Iohn the 9. If his loose cariage of himselfe with Theodora gaue occasion of the report of a woman Pope why was it not recorded as hapning in his time but aboue fortie yeares before his time Iohn the 9. was made Pope in the yeare 901 yet this storie is recorded as hapning about the yeare 854. PAP That came to passe by the subtiltie of the reporters For about the yeare 800. the Empresse who in a manner ruled all the world was called Theodora Now these trifling tale-tellers hearing of a Pope Ioane in Theodoraes time chopt it into the time of Theodora the Empresse who liued about thirtie yeares before the harlot Theodora PROT. This would rather argue simplicitie then subtiltie in the reporters For cui bono whether it happened in the one or in the other Theodoraes time But it carries no colour of truth with it For Theodora the Empresse neuer caried any sway in Rome at all At Constantinople for a while in the time of her sonnes minoritie she could do something but in Pope Ioanes time she was turned out of office at Constantinople She was deposed from her regencie and thrust into a Monasterie where she was kept till her death What is one of your other answers PAP My third answer to your maine question is that perhaps this tale arose from Iohn the 8. For Iohn the 8. dealt not like a man in the case of Photius Patriarke of Constant inople but sheâ—pishly and like a woman For Iohn the 8 receiued Photius into communion who was excommunicated by his predecessors Iohn the 8. suffered himselfe to be ouercome by halfe a man Whereupon in reproach he was called non Papa sed Papissa And vpon that reprochfull speech came this tale of a woman Pope PROT. Who deuised vs this answer I pray you PAP This is Baronius answer PROT. Baronius answer Is that possible Is not Baronius one of them who holds that the rumour of the Church of Constantinoples ouersight in suffering a woman to creep in to be Patriarke occasioned this tale against Rome PAP Yes marry is he For hauing set downe Pope Leo his words touching that rumour Quae ita erant fama vulgata de Ecclesia Constantinopolitana conuersa in Romanam Ecclesiam à schismaticis eam odio prosequentibus calumnijs proscindentibus quis non intelligat saith Baronius that is Who seeth not that what was reported of Constantinople the same was turned by schismatickes as spoken against Rome PROT. And with what honestie can he say both N. D. who holds of this later opinion professeth that it seemeth most certaine that in Pope Leo his time viz. 1020 there was not so much as any rumour or mention of any woman Pope that euer had bene in the Romane Church So doth Baronius himselfe for verily saith he if there had bene but some flying tale of any such accident at Rome in former dayes Pope Leo should first haue 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 Iohn the 8. occasion such a report who liued an 140 yeares before Leo But let Baronius go with this scape What reason haue you to thinke that the rumour of Constantinople might occasion this tale against Rome PAP Good reason For euery man knowes that Constantinople was called New Rome and Rome simply Now a man might easily be deceiued 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 I easily yeeld vnto you But that it was at any time called simply Rome that your Florimondus is not able to make good That 's his owne fancie and in deliuering it he bewrayes his owne folly Yet to suppose it true why did not the relators of it set it downe as hapning in Leo his time but 240 yeares before if so be it was occasioned by the report that went of Constantinople in Leo his daies If it had thence begun it should haue bene registred as then hapning PAP Well suppose it were true what gaine you by it or what is the Church preiudiced by her If Pope Ioane had bene she had not preiudiced the Church saith N. D. PROT. But she had For if she was Pope then it will follow thereon necessarily that the Church according to your learning once hopt headlesse For the Church in your learning is defined to be a companie of Christian men professing one faith vnder one head to wit the Pope But she how euer she caried the name of Pope was no Pope For a woman is not capable of holy orders A woman cannot play the Pope Ergo all the time of Pope Ioane the Church hopt headlesse PAP Indeed the only inconuenience of such a case is as N. D. confesseth that the Church should lacke 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 headlesse when one Pope dieth till another be chosen Now alas what a pitifull case is the Church in
the Colosse and Saint Clements Church she was deliuered of a child but died thereon and was there as they say buried And because the Lord the Pope doth alwayes shunne that way it is thought by some that he doth it in dislike of the accident And she is not numbred among the Popes partly because of her sexe partly because of the filthinesse of her fact Can they I say shew me any booke written or printed wherein it is not in Polonus thus Doth not Onuphrius and Bellarmine and Bernartius and Baronius and N. D. with manie others of your side who shew more wit then honestie in pleading this case confesse 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 D. Bristow for he reports that manie yeares agoe a Protestant who was counted a great historian brought out the same Martinus in a faire writtē hand to shew him this storie And behold she was not in the text but in the margent in an other hand Whereupon when he saw that Now I perceiue quoth he that this Author also faileth you PROT. What Protestant was that who had Martinus in so faire a written hand Can you tell me his name or the place where he aboade that I may enquire further for satisfying my selfe in the truth of this matter PAP Nay I know no more then I haue 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 then it is credible that a priest of the order of Aaron would deceiue But you know what a long storie that Doctor tels of one Margaret Iesop who was cured of her lamenesse by the Sacrament of miracle that was kept at Saint Gudilaes Church at Bruxels and how he amplifies euery point and sets it out with all the circumstances as though it were as true as the Gospell whereas the Senate of Bruxels by way of proclamation within a few yeares after did discouer all to be but a packe of knauery And therefore you must pardon me if notwithstanding I giue him not the lie yet I beleeue him not in this cōsidering it is an old said saw Qui versatur in generalibus versatur dolosè He that speakes onely in generality meanes falsely PAP Well be it that Polonus writ this yet know you that as Bellarmine and N. D. note he was a very simple man and that his manner of writing was vaine and nothing like to be true in D. Hardings iudgement Yea know that he was onely famous for tales for that is Bernartius censure of him PROT. See the rashnesse of our later generation of Papists Polonus was an Archbishop and the Popes Poenitentiary He was learned in the holy Scriptures and not ignorant of secular learning he was one whom Platina relied on much for matters of historie and thought worthy the commendation of great learning and singular good life He was the man whom the Author of Fasciculus temporum and Iacobus Bergomensis two good historiographers professed that they followed especially And yet with our present Papists he is but a simple man c. Are you not ashamed of this exception PAP No. For I will proue his simplicitie by many arguments PROT. And how I pray you PAP Why first by this That he would needs perswade vs that Pompilius who was Numa his father succeeded next to Romulus For this is a meere tale and yet he writes it is as a truth PROT. Away Away Post Romulum regnauit Numa Pompilius saith Polonus That is Numa Pompilius reigned next after Romulus but not Pompilius who was Numa his father PAP Secondly he would perswade vs that Numa of a Tribune of the people was made a king which is another tale PROT. He would not For he writes plainely that Tribunes were ordained 16. yeares after the reigne of the Romaine kings when the people complained of the hard measure that they receiued at the hands of the Consuls and of the Senate He knew no such officers in the time of the kings PAP Thirdly he would perswade vs 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 he saith onely 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 Fourthly he would make vs beleeue that that famous Theater made by Titus was the temple of the Sunne which is meere foolery PROT. No No Ante Coloseum fuit templum Solis saith Polonus before the Colosse there was a tēple of the Sunne But that Titus Theater was that temple Polonus saith not PAP Yet he saith That the temple of Peace commonly called the euerlasting Temple fell the same night that Christ was borne whereas it is plaine by all ancient histories that it was not built till Vespasians dayes a good many of yeares after Christ was borne PROT. The ancient histories witnesse 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 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 onely saith that the golden Image which Romulus set vp in his pallace auowing that it should not fall downe till a virgine was deliuered of a child fell downe in the night wherein Christ was borne though if he had said the other the matter had not bene great For he was neither the first nor the last many of good note both before and since haue writen as much namely Petrus Damianus Petrus de Natalibus Iacobus de Voragine and the Author of that first sermon vpon Christs Natiuity which is extant among the Sermons ascribed to Bernard If you haue no better arguments to prooue his simplicity you may soone prooue your selfe a malicious slanderer PAP My arguments are good enough against him as you shall heare more fully anon But for the present tell me what Marianus Scotus hath that makes for you For I cannot thinke it is true that Marianus Scotus hath this storie PROT. You ieast I am sure For do we not reade thus in him Leo Papa obijt Kalend. Augusti Huic successit
out of Ranulfus Cestrensis in New Colledge in Oxford Who thinke you was so mad PROT. Why who but a Papist For do not they giue 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 discredite of the Clergie And doth not this touch at quicke their Ecclesiasticall state Doth not Posseuine aduise that the note in Iohn Neuisan the Lawyer which mentioneth Pope Ioane should be razed out Dele saith he quia Iohannes 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 suspitious of Papists But if these answers whereon I haue hitherto insisted please you not let it be as you would haue it that all these Historians writ so yet I denie that any credit is herein to be giuen unto them because they report it but by hearesay with vt asseritur PROT. That is false For Marianus Scotus reports it simply without vt asseritur as before I shewed And Laonicus Chalcocondylas reports it as a certaine truth saying Constat c. So doth Rauisius Textor and others PAP That which you say of Marianus Scotus is true if we were to be iudged by the printed copie which Heroldus set out But I can assure you that Heroldus vnconscionably corrupted this place and many others For it is thus written in the written copie after which the first edition was printed Ioh anneâ—s â—ui vt asseritur fuit mulier Iohn who as the report goes was a woman PROT. So your Cardinall Baronius would make vs beleeue I grant but he brings no other proofe thereof then teste meipso Which how euer it may go for proofe among Princes yet is no proofe among scholers And for my part without proofe I beleeue nothing whosoeuer he be that speakes it especially if he be a Papist For as Sigismund the Emperour said of Iudian the Cardinall Legate at the Councell of Basil when one commended him highly to him Tamen Romanus est Yea but he is a Romaine so I may say of any Papist reporting things vnknown yea but he is a Papist Yet be it so as Baronius saith it is Why may it not be true though it be deliuered with vt asseritur PAP Why Because lies are commonly so soothed PROT. Indeed many lies passe in such generall termes As for example Men say saith your Legend that S. Patrik droue with his staffe all the venimous 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 Harpsfield Cope confesseth to be a lie and so I thinke al the generation of you Papists thinke of the later Else why do none of your great Maisters alledge it to cleare your Pope from being Antichrist Men say saith Nangiacus as Genebrard reporteth that Kentish-men haue tailes like bruite beasts because their ancestors mocked Austine the Monke when he came to preach vnto theÌ„ Now that this is a lie wel worthie of a whetstone your self I hope wil acknowledge Yet truth now and then is so deliuered When Boniface the Martyr was demanded on a time whether it was lawfull at the administration of the Lords Supper to vse a wodden chalice it is said he answered thus saith Duaren Olim aurei sacerdotes ligneis vasis nunc lignei aureis vtuntur In old time golden Priests vsed wodden chalices now wodden Priests vse golden chalices Marke fertur it is said saith Duaren yet no question but he answered so In like maner it is written that Pius the 2. was wont to say Mariage was vpon iust reason forbidden Priests but now vpon better reason to be restored to Priests Of which his saying there is made no question as may appeare by this that a Iesuite replieth onely to it That it was recanted by him and denieth not that it was spoken of him That Alexander the 3. trampled the Emperour Fredericke vnder his feete and commnded one to say that which is in the Psalmes Thou shalt walke vpon the Lion and Aspe the yong Lion and the Dragon shalt thou tread vnder thy feete is recorded by some with vt fertur and yet they haue litle to say for themselues who call the truth thereof in question That merry Cardinall 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 vpon the election of a new Pope cried out Domini discooperiamus tectum camerae huius quia spiritus sanctus nequit ad nos per tot tecta ingredi My good maisters I pray you let vs vntile the roofe of this roome for I feare the holy Ghost cannot get to vs thorow so many slates is meerely reported vpon election of Gregory to haue made these verses Papatus munus tulit Archidiaconus vnus Quem patrem patrum fecit discordia fratrum Yet who doubts but he made them Nicolas Clemangis Archdeacon of Baion in France doth write vpon hearesay That when Balthasar commonly knowne by the name of Iohn the 23. held a Councel at Rome and caused as the maner is before the first Session a Masse to be said for the assistance of the holy Ghost presently vpon the Councels setting of themselues downe and Balthasars aduancing himselfe into his chaire of estate a dreadfull Owle which is ordinarily thought to presage some euill towards comes out of her hole crying after her euill fauoured fashion and flying to the middle balk of the Church staring iust in Balthasars face to the great astonishment of Balthasar himself and all the whole Councel so that he was glad to breake off for that time Yea he writes that at the next Session she appeared againe staring in the Popes face as before and could not be feared away with flinging of stickes or with whooping till one feld her with a sticke and so killed her Yet no man hath cause to doubt of the story for he had it of a trusty man and a faithfull friend of his who assured him of his credite that it was true That S. Cyril intreated the Pope he might say the Morauians their seruice in a knowne language and that when there was some sticking at the motion a voice was heard as it were from heauen saying Omnis spiritus laudet Dominum omnis lingua confiteatur ei Let euery thing that hath breath praise the Lord and let euery tongue confesse his holy name vpon hearing whereof the Pope granted S. Cyril his suite is but reported with ferunt And yet though Costerus in that respect make some question of the truth of it Ledesma and Bellarmine receiue it for true That the worst
you are disposed to haue him of How soone after Leo his death doth Anastasius report that the clergie chose Benedict the 3 Can you tell me that PAP Yea. The Sea was voide after Leo the 4. iust 15. daies and no more And then not Ioane but Benedict the 3. was chosen PROT. Who told you so PAP Marry Onuphrius Bellarmine Bernartius Florimondus and Papyrius Massonus For they say that these are Anastasius his owne words Sanctissimus Leo Papa 4. obdormiuit in Domino 16. Calend. Aug. sepultus ad Sanctum Petrum cessauit Episcopatus dies 15. Quo mortuo mox omnis Clerus Romanae sedis vniuersi proceres cunctusque populus ac senatus congregati sunt c. vno conamine Benedictum Pontificem promulgauerunt 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. Peters and the Bishopricke was voide 15. daies Now presently vpon his death the whole Romane Clergie with all the nobles and commons and officers of the citie met and as one man agreed that Benedict should be their Pope PROT. They all lie falsly For the words Et cessauit Episcopatus dies 15. are not to be found as before I told you in Anastasius So that whatsoeuer they build vpon this circumstance as the most of their building is is built vpon a false foundation and therefore cannot stand Yet besides I would haue you know that Anastasius purposely passed ouer in silence diuers things which touched the Popes For Multa de Sergio desiderari videntur apud Anastasium saith Baronius Anastasius wants many things touching Sergius Againe Iohannis 8. res gestae desiderantur apud Anastasium fortassis praetermissae ob odiosam Photij restitutionem saith the same Baronius The acts of Iohn the 8. are wanting in Anastasius perhaps because he was loth to record that odious restoring of Photius Anastasius forbeares to speake of Luitprandus sacking S. Peters Church which is without the wals of Rome And so doth Paulus Diaconus too Not for that he was ignorant of that fact sith he liued in the same time but for that he was loath by telling truth to discredite Luitprandus Wherefore let vs leaue Anastasius and come vnto the next who liuing in those dayes passeth ouer Pope Ioane in silence PAP Ado Bishop of Vienna who liued at the same time hath not a word of this your Pope Ione PROT. Ado liued not at the same time nor neare the same time if either Gesner or Posseuinus or Laurentius de la Barre or Angelus Rocca may be credited For he as they say wrote a briefe Chronicle from the beginning of the world to his own time to wit to the yeare 1353. Wherfore it is not much materiall whether he misse her or mention her Say on PAP Theophanus Freculphus wrote in those dayes an historie from the beginning of the world to his owne time and yet he writes nothing of her PROT. If Freculphus had written an historie of that length yet there was litle reason why he should haue mentioned her For we reade not that he liued aboue the yeare 840. But indeed his historie goes not so farre He writ onely to the yeare of Christ 550 as Bodin obserueth or to the yeare 560 as Pontacus noteth or at furthest to the yeare 600. For hauing spoken a few words of Gregory the great Boniface who succeeded him he ends presently his storie Who is your next man PRO. Aimonius A Monke of S. Germaines and a famous French writer speakes nothing of her PROT. Aimonius or Ammonius or Annonius for he is diuersly named your famous French writer drew out his storie by your owne mens confessiō but to the yeare 828 or at furthest to 844 which fell nine or ten yeares short at least of Pope Ioanes time And therefore me thinkes that you should not looke that he should write of her aeAP Audomarus the Parisian omits her also in his history PROT. Where might a man see Audomarus I pray you Canus tels of a Bishop in his countrey which was wont to cite Authors that neuer 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 Posseuinus Neither doth Bellarmine nor Baronius cite anie such in their disputes about this matter When you can tell me certaine newes of such a writer you shall haue a more certaine answer In the meane 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 speake of this matter yet Ademarus is mentioned by Genebrard and Onuphrius where they treat of this matter as B. C. obserued well in his Dolefull knell of Thomas Bel where he taxeth Sutcliffe for captious quarelling with father Parsons as he cals him for citing Ademarus calling him a counterfeit PROT. B. C. is a fit patron for father Parsons but an vnfit match to deale with Deane Sutcliffe Deane Sutcliffe no doubt scornes him And good cause why For who but a foole would appeale to one of his owne fellowes for triall of his truth Are not Genebrard aud Onuphrius as like to cite a counterfet Author as Parsons PAP Lupus Seruatus saith nothing of her PROT. Why what occasion had he to speake of her sith he writ no bookes of historie Besides Lupus Seruatus migrauit ad Dominum anno 851 saith Trithemius that is Lupus Seruatus died in the yeare 851. So that though as a Prophet he might haue foretold of her deliuerie yet as an Historian he could not haue reported her deliuerie PAP Yea but Lupus Abbot of Ferrara in an Epistle of his to Benedict the third cals Leo Benedicts predecessor and therby sheweth as Baronius gathereth that there was no such Pope as Pope Ioane betweene Benedict and Leo. PROT. What doth Baronius gather such a conclusion of such premisses Verily he gathereth where no man streweth For I pray you doth this follow Iohn the 9. speaking of Stephen the 6. cals him his predecessor Ergo there was no Pope betweene Iohn the 9. and Stephen the 6 If not as indeed it doth not for there were two Popes who came betweene them the one called Romanus the other Theodorus then neither will it follow that because Leo is called Benedicts predecessor therefore there was no such Pope as Pope Ioane betweene Benedict and Leo. PAP Yea but this Lupus in diuerse of his Epistles doth complaine of the miserable estate of the Church in his time And therefore if any such horrible matter as this of Pope Ioane had fallen out doublesse he would haue spoken of it and mourned pitifully for it PROT. Doubtlesse Baronius if you giue any credite
to him will make a foole of you For doth not he mention diuerse of his Complaining Epistles sent to great personages wherein yet he complaines of nothing but that Courtriers robd his Corban I meane his Monasterie That he wanted an ambling Nagge to ride to Rome on That he wanted Tully de Oratore Quintilian and Donate vpon Terence And that there was such licentiousnesse in France among the Laitie that the people neither feared God nor the diuell Of faults among the Clergie Lupus complaines not at all PAP Luitprandus who writ an historie speakes nothing of her PROT. What historie of Luitprandus do you meane That which is intituled De vitis Pontificum that is of the Popes liues which was printed the other yeare at Mentz with Anastasius or his historie of such accidents as fell out through Europe PAP I meane the latter For I see the former though it carry the name of Luitprandus cast off by the Printer as none of his PROT. Now then you are a wise man to tell me that Luitprandus mentions not Pope Ioane For Luitprandus Ticiuensis Diaconns historiam per Europam gestarum libris 6 ab An. 858. ad â—0 vsque Othonis magni fere continuat saith Genebrard That is Luitprandus Deacon of such a Church in Italie continues his historie of accidents which fell out in Europe from the yeare 858. to the 30. yeare almost of Otho the great By which you may see that he began his historie after Pope Ioanes time And therefore had no cause to speake of her PAP Lambertus Schafnaburgensis hath not a word of her PROT. To this I answer first that he liued not in the same time with her he liued anno 1077. Secondly I say that this Lambertus did but touch by the way all ages from the beginning of the world to the yeare of Christ 1040. as Pontacus truly obserued though he discoursed at large of the 37 yeares that followed Thirdly this Lambertus doth not so much as name Stephen the 4 or Paschalis or Eugenius or Valentinus or Gregorie the 4 or Sergius the 2 or Leo the 4 or Benedict the third or Nicolas or Adrian the second and therefore what maruell if he speake not of this Pope Ioane PAP Otho Frisingensis who liued about the yeare 1150. makes no mention of this storie PROT. But he doth For Iohn the seueuth saith he was a woman PAP They who liued within a few yeares 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 meane PAP The first is Iohannes Diaconus who in the yeare 870. writ of the Popes liues PROT. That Iohannes Diaconus w. it S. Gregory the great his life I grant and as some say Clements but that he writ of any more Popes I vtterly denie You haue a pretie gift in alledging writings that neuer were But say on PAP Milo Monachus who liued Anno 871. saith nothing of her PROT. Milo Monachus I beleeue saith nothing of her nor any other Pope for he writ no historie They who commend him do commend him for a Rhetorician and for a Poet and for a Musitian but not for an Historiographer PAP Passeratius Rabertus who liued in the yeare 881. saith nothing of her PROT. This Passeratius is surely some author of your owne deuising For no man can tell any newes of him But perhaps you would say Paschatius Ratbertus for such a one liued about the time you speake of Yet this writ no historie This writ neither at length nor in briefe of any of the Popes liues PAP Yea but Rhegino who liued in the yeare 910. and comprehendeth briefly all the choice matters which fell out in the time of this supposed Pope Ioane writes nothing of her PROT. Rhegino writes nothing of Iohn 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 maruell though he write nothing of this Ioane the woman Pope PAP Why but the greatest enemies that euer the Popes had who liued in and after those times and were readie to cast in the Popes teeth whatsoeuer they knew or knew not to the end they might disgrace them yet neuer obiected this of Pope Ioane Which confirmes me much in my opinion that this is but a tale deuised long after by some craftie headed heretickes PROT. Who are these I pray you PAP Iohn Bishop of Rauenna is one of them Methodius Illyricus another and Michael Palaeologus the Emperour of Constantinople a third PROT. How know you that these neuer obiected Pope Ioanes leudnesse to the disgrace of the Romane Papacie Haue you read all that they writ and all that they spake PAP Nay their writings are not extant I confesse 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 Catholickes at this day are forced to make mention of your obiections when we vndertake to answer your bookes so in those dayes the Catholicks were driuen to make mention of the slaunders which they refuted Now in their refutation of slanders there is no such thing as this of Pope Ioane PROT. Why peâ—â—duenture they knew that in this they were slandered with a matter of truth and therefore they held it best to passe it ouer in silence Questionlesse your fellowes at this day do so often When Beza obiected this verie matter in the assembly of Poysy before the Cardinall of Lorraine and the Sorbonists of Paris who answered him Do not your owne men confesse that no man said a word to him When the Hussites as you call them obiected the same at the Councell of Constance was not silence their answer We reade in a booke lately set forth intitled Synodus Parisiensis that S. Ambrose asked Quaratione quáue authoritate imagines Angelorum vel aliorum Sanctorum ador ande sint cùm ipsi sancti Angeli vel sancti homines viuos se ador ari noluerunt What reason or what warrant men had to worship the images of men or Angels seeing the Angels themselues and holy men aliue refused to be worshipped Now the two great Cardinals Bellarmine and Baronius snarle at this booke seeking by all meanes to disgrace it Bellarmine expresly professeth the confuting of it and Baronius sets the most of it downe in his Annales euen word for word making glosses here and there vpon it in way of answer to it But both of them passe slily by the words of Ambrose If we had not had the booke it self we should neuer haue knowne by their answers of such an argument of S. Ambrose his making against Images
but one yeare 3 moneths 13 daies some but 8 moneths and no longer And yet there is no man denies that Lucius was Pope Againe do we not reade that Sergius the third began his reigne in the yeare 905. as some say as others in the yeare 907 as a third sort in the yeare 908 Do not some also write that he succeeded Benedict the 4 others that he succeeded Formosus others Christopher And is not there difference also about the time of his continuance in the Popedome while some say he sate 7 yeares 3 moneths and 16 daies some 3 yeares onely yet who euer denied that there was such a Pope We reade that Formosus carkasse was taken vp out of his graue by one of his successors and brought into iudgement before a Councell of Bishops and that it was spoiled of his papall robes and clad with a lay mans garment that it was indicted arraigned and condemned But among them who report this there is great disagreement For some say it was taken vp by Sergius the third of whom I spake euen now some say it was taken vp by Stephen the sixth whom many call Stephen the 7 some say it had two fingers cut off some three some say the head was chopt off some seeme to denie that some say the trunke of the bodie was cast into Tiber others say it was allowed lay-mans buriall I pray you now dare you denie the truth of this storie by reason of these differences PAP Why not Doth not Onuphrius vpon that reason denie it saying Quae de Formosi cadauere ex sepultura à successoribus eruto dicuntur procul dubio fabulae magis quà m vero similia sunt quod illorum qui de ea re scripserunt diuersitate repugnantia facilè liquet that is The speeches which go touching the digging up of Formosus bodie out of his graue by some of his successors are questionlesse fabulous not true which is apparent by the disagreements and disconueniences which are to be found among them that write of it PROT. Now see you then the disagreement and disconueniences that are among you Papists For though Baronius confesse it was such a villanous pranke as was neuer plaied before though he confesse it may seeme incredible by reason of the barbarousnesse of it yet he grants it true and auowes that they erre fouly 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 vpon Onuphrius reason For Bellarmine saith true in this though he misse the truth often that saepissimè accidit vt constet de re non constet de modo vel alia circumstantia It oftentimes fals 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 mans argument touching the substance If it do to giue one instance more blot out for shame S. Vrsula and her fellowes holiday out of your Kalender and all the prayers which you make to them in your Primers Portesses and Breuiaries For there was neuer greater diasgreement among the relators of any storie then among the relators of that Some say that Vrsula was the king of Scotlands daughter but others say she was the king of Cornewals daughter Some say her father was called Maurus but others say he was called Dionethus or Dionotus or Dionocus or Deo notus for so diuersly do they christen him And which concernes the husband to whom she should haue bene maried some write that he was king of England others that he was king of little Brittaine And one cals him Aetherius another Holofernes a third Conanus Now in her companie as c some say there were only 11000 Ladies and gentlewomen virgines but as others say there were 6000. countrey maidens ouer and aboue those 1100. of better ranke Besides there were diuers Bishops and Lords of the Temporaltie who accompanied them Yea Cyriacus the Pope of Rome like a good fellow left his Papacie and followed these pilgrimes say some though others denie it For some say that they went in Pilgrimage to Rome though others hold not that probable Some say they were martyred on the sea coast some before the gates of Colen And some say that all this fell out in the yeare 238. some in Maximus time some in the yeare 453. Last of all some say that if any be buried in S Vrsulaes Church though they be infants newly baptized the ground will cast them vp againe whereas others say that that is a tale of a tub PAP I know not what to reply to this But learneder Catholickes will answer you I hope And in the meane time I will go on By the reporters of this story she was first caried to Athens Now there was no Athens standing at that time PROT. Yes that there was For Paulus Aemilius writes that Gotefridus was made Duke of Athens and Prince of Achaia about the yeare 1220. And afterwards That certaine Pirates inuading the countrie of Grecia slue the Duke of Athens who was of the house of Brennus and tooke the citie In like manner we reade in Mathew Paris that Iohannes de Basing stockes Archdeacon of Legria who died in the yeare 1252. studied at Athens and that he learned of the learned Grecians many matters vnknowne to men of the west-West-Church especially of one Constantia the daughter of the Archbishop of Athens Besides Aeneas Syluins who liued since that doth iustifie that in his time Athens was not quite razed but carried the shew of a prettie towne For Ciuitas Athenitensis quoth he quondam nobilissima fuit c. eadem nostro tempore parui oppidi speciem gerit The noble citie of Athens at this time carries but the shew of a little village Wherefore neither doth this your exception preiudice the truth of this storie Your next had need be better PAP By the reporters of this story she was not only carried to Athens but to Athens for learning Now it is a plaine case as Bellarmine writes that there were no schooles at that time neither in Athens nor in any place of Grecia PROT. What no schooles in any place of Grecia at that time Notes Bellarmine that and that as a plaine case and doth he prooue it too PAP Yea he proues it by diuers writers And first by Synesius who liued a little after Basil and Nazianzens time For Synesius writes vnto his brother that Athens retained onely the bare name of an
not she sit there as wel as Sabinian that base and miserable companion qui formidabili morte culpabili vita notatus est who is taxed by your writers for his vile life and fearfull death Why might not she sit there as well as Stephen the 6 who as I told you before tooke vp the carkasse of Formosus his predecessor out of the graue brought it into iudgement before a Councell of Bishops spoiled it of his papall robes clad it with a laymans garment indited it arraigned it condemned it cut off three fingers of it and cast it into the streame of Tiber depriuing all them of their orders whom he had ordained reordaining them againe Why might not she sit there as well as Boniface the 7 who robbed S. Peters Church and fled for a time to Constantinople who afterwards by symony and murthering two Popes made himselfe Pope who in mischiefe outstrâ—pt the most notorious robbers and slayers by the high waies that euer were which in crueltie went before bloudie Sylla and Catiline and such as sought the ruine of their countrie as your owne Baronius confesseth and who at length died like a beast Why might not she sit there as well as Syluester the 2 that famous coniurer who gaue himselfe both bodie and soule to the diuel that he might get the Popedome and died thereafter Why might not she sit there PAP Nay stay a litle They say it is a sinne to belie the diuell Now I perswade my selfe that you belie Pope Syluester for I reade that he was reputed a notable man both for his life and learning PROT. How notable he was let Platina speake who writes that ambitione diabolica dominandi cupiditate impulsus largitione primò quidem Archiepiscopatum Rhemensem inde Raucunatem adeptus Pontificatum postremò maiore conatu adiuuâ—nte diabolo consequutus est hac tamen lege vt post mortem totus illius esset cuius fraudibus tantam dignitatem adeptus erat that is Syluester the 2. being diuellishly ambitious got first by briberie the Archbishopricke of Rhemes then of Rauenna and after that by the diuels helpe the Bishopricke of Rome yet vpon this condition that when he died he should be wholy his by whose meanes he attained to such dignitie Haue you not cause to beleeue that this fellow was notable for life and learning But perhaps Platina is singular in this No. Sigebert confesseth that Syluester was thought to haue got the Popedome * il-fauouredly and that he was suspected of negromancie and that some said the diuell brought him to his end The same in effect is reported by Benno Cardinalis by Martinus Polonus by Iohannes Stella a Venetian by Philippus Bergomensis by Renulfus Cestrensis by Matthaeus Wâ—stmonasteriensis by Fasciculus Temporum by Charanza and by Aeneas Syluius for Non nos fugit Sylâ—estrum secundum diabolica fraude Romanum Pontisicatum ascendisse saith Aeneas we are not ignorant that Syluester the 2. got the papacie by diuellish subtiltie PAP Tut all this is to no purpose Pope Siluester was learned in the Mathematickes and such was the ignoranâ—e of that age that thereupon they held him for a coniurer PROT. Indeed Williamâ—Malmsbury hauing related the same storie in substance with the aboue-named writers supposeth that some might replie so saying Sed haec vulgata ficta crederet aliquis But some man peraduenture 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 schollers who are singular in any thing do vse a familiar yet he concludes that he beleeues it for true For mihi verò fidem facit de istius sacrilegio inaudita mortis excogitatio saith he I am verily perswaded Sylucster was such a villaine because of the strangenesse of his death For Curse moriens excarnificaret ipse sui corporis horrendus Lanista nisi noui scelcris conscius esset For why should the butcherly fellow haue torne his owne flesh as he did but that he was guiltie of some strange sinne Do not you thinke there is reason in this question Doubtlesse your Onuphrius was afraid to answer it And therefore in his notes vpon Platina where he labours to cleare Sluester of the imputation of a coniurer he takes day with his reader to cleare him from so fearefull a death PAP Yea but Syluester the second is commended by Sergius the fourth a very holy Pope who liued within fiue yeares after him wherfore it is not credible that he died such a shamefull death PROT. Say you so Doth not Baronius confesse that though Stephen the sixth was a wicked fellow and that as he entred into the Popedome like a theefe and a murtherer so he died like a theefe yet Sergius the third who succeeded within eight yeares after him commended him yea Iâ—hn the ninth his next successor who in that age was a singular honest Pope commended him as a man of blessed memorie Vpon which later confession he makes this obseruation Hic considera Lector quanta solerent successores Pontifices quantuluÌ„cunque reprehensibiles praedecessorem reuerentia persequi vt Iohannes Stephanum suum praedecessores tum sedis inuasione tum etiam sessione in omnibus plane execrandis facinoribus detestabilem piaetamen recordationis Stephanum appellet The effect of which Latine is that it is worthie the obseruation that the liueâ—Popes spake reuerently of the dead-Popes were they neuer so naughty Wherfore to go on why might not Pope Ioane sit there as well as Benedict the ninth that vgly monster as Platina cals him who got the room when he was 12. yeares old who when he was cast out for his vnworthinesse got it againe by strong hand within a few daies after and for feare that he could not keepe it long sold it to another for money who after his death appeared partly like an Asse partly like a Beare confessing that he caried such a shape because he liued like a beast in his life time Why might not she sit as well in S. Peters chaire as Boniface the eighth who when he should vpon an Ashwednesday as the Popish manner is haue laid ashes vpon an Archbishops head and religiously told him that he was but ashes and should returne to ashes cast them in the Archbishops 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 they say for miracles prophesied That as he entred like a Foxe so he should reigne like a Lion and die like a Dogge which fell out accordingly Why might not she sit there as well as Gregorie the 7 commonly knowne by the name of Hildebrand who
then Since Christs time there haue bene aboue 240 Popes And therefore by your saying the Church hath bene headlesse aboue 240 times Yea and sometimes betweene the death of one Pope and the choosing of another there haue passed many dayes many moneths some yeares As for example after Cletus the Bishopricke of Rome was voide 20. daies after Clemens 22. After Alexander the first 25. After Pelagius the first 3 moneths and odde daies After Pelagius the second 6. moneths odde daies After Iohn the third 10. moneths and oddâ— daies After Sabinian 11. moneths and odde daies After Honorius the first one yeare and more After Clemens the fourth two yeares and more After Marcellinus 7. yeares and more After Nicolas the 1. as some say 8. yeares and more And after Fâ—lix sometimes the Duke of Sauoy S. Peters chaire stood empty 10. yeares saith Bodin Wherupon will follow that the Church hath often and long together bene headlesse But that is not so great a matter you say Is it not Whence I pray you should the Church haue her wit when she is bereaued of her head The saying is Great head litle wit But without question no head no wit When the Church is headlesse she is witlesse and by consequent helples And therefore I take it you haue good cause to beware that you grant nothing whereon it may be concluded That your Church was once headlesse PAP But did not Saint Austin hold opinion vpon supposition of a like case that the Church of Christ should not be preiudicated Did not he hauing recited vp the Popes of Rome from Christ to his daies make this demand what if any Iudas or traytour had entred among these or bene 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 necessarie vnto saluation 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 dasht but so did not Saint Austin For he puts the case that some traitor subrepsisset that is had come in vnorderly into the Bishop of Romes Seate and yet resolues that that was not preiudiciall to Gods Church Conforme your selues in these two points of the Popes headship and succession to Saint Austins iudgement and then you may better say in this case of Pope Ioane that which Austine said in the case proposed That she had not preiudicated the Church of Christ PAP We make more reckoning of Saint Austin then you do But I will not stand wrangling vpon his meaning now Because whatsoeuer inconuenience can be imagined in this case is more against you then vs. For your Church admitteth for lawfull and supreme head thereof either man or woman which our Church doth not PROT. Our Church admitteth neither man nor woman for lawfull and supreme head of the Catholicke Church as yours doth Our Church teacheth that Christ onely is the head thereof Our Church admitteth neither man nor woman for lawfull and supreme head of a particular Church For our Church acknowledgeth the king supreme gouernor only not supreme head and so she stiled Queene Elizabeth in her time Though if we giue our Princes more yet the inconueniences against vs are not like the inconueniences against you because the next in blood is to succeed with vs the greatest Symonist who can make his faction strongest is to succeed with you PAP What other inconuenience followes vpon 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 That is no true Church which cannot giue in plaine authenticall writing the lawfull orderly entire without any breach and sound notorious succession of Bishops But your Church if Ioane was Pope cannot giue in plaine authenticall writing the lawfull orderly entire without any breach and sound notorius succession of Bishops For by reason of her Benedict the third could not orderly succeed Leo the fourth She put in a caueat or rather was of her selfe a barre to his successioÌ„ By her a breach was made in the rank of your Popes She no foole but a whore marred your play PAP No no. For all that you can rightly gather vpon her Popedome is That the Popes seate stood empty of a lawfull Pastor for the space of two yeares and a few odde moneths Now so it did often by reason of the differences among the Electors as you your selfe shewed And yet no man durst say nor could truly say that succession failed as Baronius notes PROT. As Baronius notes If Baronius may be iudge there is nothing that can marre your succession neither vacancie nor entrance in by the window Whether the chaire be emptie or full by irrepsion or by vsurpation it is all one to Baronius Baronius will not giue ouer his plea of succession For though he not without griefe confesseth that many vgly monsters haue sate in S. Peters chaire though he confesseth that many Apostataes rather then Apostolicall persons haue occupied that roome though he confesseth that there haue bene many Popes which came irregularly to the Papacy and serued for no other purpose then ciphers in Arithmetike to make vp the number yet he holdeth their succession sound Though Baronius writes that Boniface the 6. who got possession of S. Peters chaire and kept it 15. daies was a wicked fellow and not worthy to be reckoned among Popes in as much as he was condemned by a Councell held at Rome Though he write that Stephen the 7 such another as Boniface the 6 or rather worse played at thrust out rotten with Boniface the 6 and kept the Papacy 5. yeares Though he write that Pope Christopher shuffled Leo the 5. out and by violence installed himselfe and kept it 7. moneths and that Sergius at the 7. moneths end shuffled Christopher out shearing him a Monke and keeping it to himselfe as some say seuen yeares as Baronius himselfe saith three yeares yet all this shuffling in Baronius opinion doth nothing staine succession Yea though he cannot deny that Boniface the seuenth who sate as Pope one yeare and one moneth was a wicked varlet a plaine tyrant a sauage beast an vsurper one that had no good propertie of a Pope Though he cannot deny but that Leo the eight who was a schismaticke and an intruder and an Antipope b in his opinion kept the place almost two yeares Though he cannot deny but that Iohn the twelfth who was but like a Pope in a play kept it nine yeares and Iohn the 11 the bastardly brat of Sergius aboue named who came to it by euill meanes and managed