Vniuersitie PROT. And doth tha◠import thinke you that in Synesius opinion there was no vniuersitie at Athens I for my part do rather thinke the contrary I thinke Synesius meant thereby that Athens was an vniuersitie though nothing so florishing as formerly Questionlesse when Bernard writ that Peter Abailard had nothing of a Monke sauing the name and the Cowle his meaning was not that Peter was no Monke but rather that he was a Monke though a sorrie Monke And I am the rather perswaded to vnderstand Synesius words so because Athens in S. Basils time about some 40. yeares before Synesius was held the mother of learning and in regard thereof termed golden Athens by Gregory Nazienzen For who can thinke in so few yeares learning should quite be quenched and that so famous an vniuersitie should in so short time be vtterly decayed But let vs suppose there was no vniuersity at Athens in Synesius time What is that to proue that there was no Vniuersitie at Athens in Pope Ioanes time which was 400. yeares after That vniuersitie might get life againe in so many yeares And in deed it did so for 100. yeares after Synesius time Bocthuis went to studie at Athens as Baronius confesseth noting further that the studie of Philosophy was reuiued there in those dayes Againe to suppose there was no vniuersitie at Athens in Synesius time what is it to proue that there were no schooles in any part of Grecia in Pope Ioanes time Now Bellarmine promised to proue that PAP That is proued by Bellarmine out of Cedrenus and Zonaras For they record that in the sole reigne of Michael the Emperour which fell to be about the yeare 856. Bardus Caesar restored learning Cum vsque ad illud tempus per annos plurimos ita fuissent extincta omnia studia sapientiae in Graecia vt ne vestigium quidem vllum extaret PROT. Bellarmine wrongs Cedrenus and Zonaras in bringing them in to witnesse such a point For they say no more but that learning was not regarded of along time before Bardus Caesar They say not it was quite extinct but almost extinct Bardus Caesar added life vnto-it by setting vp schooles for euery of the liberall sciences and appointing publicke professors and giuing them stipends out of the Excheker as Cedrenus and Zonaras write but he raised it not vp simply to life For if it had bene starke dead how could he vpon such a sodaine haue gotten professours to furnish his schooles Againe do we not reade in the same Zonaras that at the same time whereof Bellarmine speakes there was a matchlesse Philosopher at Constantinople and many skilfull Mathematicians who were his scholers And do we not reade in Cedrenus that this Philosopher was called Leo and that he was brought vp in learning at Constantinople though afterward he learned Rhetoricke Philosophy Arithmetick and the other liberall 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 knowne that about the yeare 680. there was kept a generall Councell at Constantinople whereat there were many Bishops of Grece and among the rest the Bishop of Athens Is it not well knowne that there was kept another Councell at Nice an 100. yeares after viz. about the yeare 780. at which there were mo Bishops of Greece then at the former Is it not well knowne there was a 3. Councel holden at Constantinople which did exceed in nūber either of the former 2 about the yere 870 And how is it credible so many Councels consisting of many Bishops should be kept in Greece and yet Greece vtterly without learning Welfare N. D. in comparison of Bellarmine herein for N. D. durst not it seemeth say with Bellarmine that about Pope Ioanes time there was no schoole in any place of Grecia He was ashamed to runne with his maister to such excesse of lying He left him in this PAP True But that Athens at that time had no schoole in it at all nor many yeares before N. D. is as confident as his maister Bellarmine And that circumstance is that which gals you most Wherefore tell me what more you can say to it PROT. Nay first tell me how N. D. proues that for I shall esteeme of his position as I find his proofe to be PAP His position is euident he saith by Cedrenus and Zonaras in the places alreadie cited PROT. He lyes falsly Cedrenus and Zonaras makes as much for Bellarmines opinion as for his For they speake of the decay of learning through Grecia generally and not in Athens particularly yet as you haue heard they make nothing for Bellarmine N. D. might as well haue cast off Bellarmines witnesses as Bellarmines opinion for insufficient Haue you any more exceptions PAP Yea. For these tale-tellers report that she came to Rome and there professed learning openly and had great doctors to her schollers But this is a notorious vntruth For there was no learning openly professed at Rome in those dayes as the stories declare PROT. The stories declare that Ina one of our Saxon kings did build a schoole in Rome a litle before Pope Ioanes dayes viz. in the yeare 727. and that to this end that the kings of England and their children the Bishops the priests and the rest of the Clergie might repaire thither to be instructed in the Catholicke faith and afterwards returne home Which schoole flourished in king Offa his time viz. 795. and continued at least till Alfreds time For we reade that Marinus the Pope who sate in the yeare 883. freed it from all paiments at Alfreds motion Now is it likely that such a schoole was built and maintained for such a purpose where no learning was publickly professed Moreouer we reade of many other schooles kept in the same citie in Stephen the 6. his time which was about the yeare 885. For all the schooles in Rome concurred in ioyfull maner bringing Stephen the 6. to the pallace of Lateran saith one of your popish Chroniclers and Stephen was sorie with all his heart he had not wherewith to gratifie the schooles And is it to be thought that all these schooles were maisterlesse that they had no professors no readers PAP If there had bene euer such a Ioane Pope which some had forborne to speake of for reuerence to that sea the difference which is found among Historians in numbring of such Popes as were called by the name of Iohn should haue risen at that time and by reason of that occasion But the difference among historians about the number of Iohn-Popes arose not from that time and about that occasion It arose in Pope Iohn the 12. his time about the yeare 955. Ergo there was neuer such a Ioane Pope Now answer me this argument if you can
him there with him PROT. That Alfreds father sent him to be annointed king and that the Pope annointed him at his fathers motion we reade indeed But that his father deliuered him to Leo to be instructed brought vp by him we reade not in Malmsbury nor HuntingtŠnor Houedon nor Florentius nor yet that the Pope detained him there with him But perhaps you can proue he staied at Rome though it be not recorded that Leo detained him with him Now therefore let me heare your argument PAP That Alfred liued in Rome some number of yeares seemeth euident First for that he returned more learned and otherwise better qualified then any Saxon king had bene before him PROT. This argument is framed out of your fingers ends and not out of the stories For the stories mention two iournies which Alfred took to Rome the former when he was fiue yeares old in the yeare 853. in which he was accompanied with the nobilitie the second when he was sixe yeares old in the yeare 854 in which he went in his fathers companie who stayed in Rome a yeare Now though I find it not set downe in particular that he returned with his father yet it is likely by the circumstances For the stories note that he was alwayes brought vp in the Kings Court And it is without all doubt whensoeuer he returned that he returned not better learned nor better qualified For at 12 yeares old and vpward he knew not a letter on the booke◠which the stories with great griefe report What is your next argument PAP That Alfred liued in Rome some number of yeares seemeth euident for that we find no mention of his acts in England vntill the reigne of his third brother Athebred vpon the yeare 871. at the famous battel of Reading in Barkeshire fought against the Danes PROT. Alfred was but 22 yeares old in the yeare 871. and therefore no maruell though being in England we reade nothing of his acts Yet not to speake of his hauking and hunting in England in his yonger yeares whereof the stories speake much we reade of his mariage three yeares before the battell of Reading and of his going to aide the King of Mercia the same yeare So that this proceeds of a false ground as doth the former Wherefore vnlesse you haue better arguments to disproue the storie of Pope Ioane you may proue your selfe a foole but neuer it a fable PAP I am able to proue it a fable For our foresaid writers do not only not make any mention of Pope Ioane that came betweene Leo the fourth and Benedict the third but do expresly exclude the same by placing the one immediatly after the other and assigning them their distinct number of yeares before mentioned to wit eight and three moneths to Leo and two yeares and sixe moneths immediatly following to Benedict the third PROT. Who is your first witnesse of the truth of this PAP Malmsbury in Fastis reg Episcop Angl. 847. 855. PROT. Where might a man see that booke of Malmsburies for I neuer read nor heard before of any such booke made by him True it is that in the end of Malmsbury Huntington Houeden Ethelwerdus and Ingulphus which are all printed in one volume there is such a treatise But that was made by Sir Henry Sauile who set them out It was not made by Malmsbury You may as well say that Malmsbury made the Index rerum verborum which followes after it But who is your next witnesse PAP Florentius in his Chronicle PROT. Doth Florentius in his Chronicle giue eight yeares and three moneths to Leo Now for shame of the world leaue lying Florentius notes that Leo began his papacie 853. and Benedict the 3,858 whereby it is apparent that in Florentius opinion Leo sate but fiue yeares So is it apparent that in his opinion Benedict sate fiue yeares for Benedict according to Florentius reckoning began 858 and Nicholas his next successor began 863. Now from 858. to 863. there cannot be fewer then fiue yeares So that in prosecuting of this argument which is of your owne deuising you haue scarce spoken one true word PAP I pray you tell me how they called this Ioane when she read publickly in the Schooles at Rome PROT. They called her Iohn How else PAP What Iohn and was she called Iohn after her election to the Popedome too PROT. Yea why not PAP That 's not likely For Sergius a few yeares before had brought in a laudable custome that the Pope elect should not step out of the Conclaue before he had changed his proper name PROT. Indeed there are 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 Yea but they who say so are greatly deceiued For Swines-snout was not his proper name but the sirname of a noble family whereof he was descended PRO. So are they greatly deceiued 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 Baronius notes The first who changed his name was Sergius the third and yet not for the filthinesse of his name but in reuerence to S. Peter Cum enim ille Petrus vocaretur indignum putauit se vocari eodem nomine quo Christus primum eius sedis Pontificem Principem Apostolorum ex Simone Petrum nominauerat 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 euen the prince of the Apostles whose name he changed from Simon to Peter as we reade in Baronius in the same place PAP I neuer heard this before But I◠like it the better if it be in Baronius For I cannot say too much good of that man Marry I had rather thought you would haue taken exception against me in respect that Platina ascribes this custome of the Popes in changing their names to Iohn the 12. who being called Octauian before his Papacie thought that name too warlicke for him after he was made Pope and therefore tooke the name of Iohn Now I could easily haue replied vnto this For besides that Platina speakes amisse in many other points it is not likely that Iohn the twelfth made any conscience by what name he was called seeing he liued as licentiously after he was Pope as before PROT. You haue your learning at the second hand Haue you not PAP I haue this out of Florimondus I confesse But what of that PROT. Your Leare-masters deceiue you and especially Florimondus For Platina is one of them who ascribes the originall of this papall custome to Sergius the second for which he is reproued by Onuphrius Onuphrius and not Platina ascribes the originall hereof to Iohn the
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-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
into a Monasterie for his adulterie with one Iudith that there he might apart do Penance for his sinne PROT. Gregorie the fifth liued almost 150. yeares after Pope Ioane and besides there was no Emperour called Ludouike in his time Perhaps Florimondus would haue said Gregorie the fourth for he liued not long before Pope Ioanes time and in his dayes there was one Ludouike an Emperour PAP Indeed it may be so for the numerall figure might soone be mistaken For Gregorie the fourth a man may easily set downe Gregorie the fifth And what say you to it PROT. I say Florimondus is a palterer For Ludouike who liued in Gregorie the fourths time was neuer noted for an adulterer with anie Iudith nor with anie woman else Iudith his wife was suspected of that sinne with others and thereupon was veiled and thrust into a Monasterie by some of the Princes of the Empire And Ludouicke himselfe vpon other pretences was for a time depriued of the Empire But Gregorie the fourth had no hand either in her veiling or in his depriuation as you may see by Baronius Besides this fell out before Pope Ioanes time and therefore doth not hinder but that there was such a Ioane Me thinks you should be drawne drie you talke so idlely PAP If there had bene such a Pope Ioane some historian would haue written either good or bad of her But we reade nothing of her in any historie PROT. Do we reade nothing of her in any history whence haue we this of her aspiring to the Popedome and of her lewd behauiour in the time of her Popedome haue I not proued it vnto you out of the histories PAP Yea but my meaning is that we reade nothing in any historie 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 affaires that she had with King or Emperour PROT. No more do we reade in any historian of any such act done by Anastasius the third who sate as Pope two years and vpward Anastasius the third as Platina witnesseth did nothing worthy of remembrance We reade nothing of any great Acts done by Leo the seuenth He sate 3 yeares and sixe moneths yet he did as little as Anastasius for any thing we reade he neither reformed the Church nor resolued any Bishop his doubts nor intermedled with any Princes PAP Oh but that age wherein you feigne that this Ioane liued was an age wherein fell out great varietie of matter both in the East and in the West In it many Princes and Emperours of great worth reigned In it many men of great learning liued And therefore if there had bene any such monster then we could not but haue heard of it on all sides PROT. So we haue as before I proued But what great varietie of matter fell there out in that age more then ordinarie PAP In that age there was old holding and drawing between the Easterne and Westerne Churches about Images Many Councels were kept by both sides and many euill words passed on all hands PROT. Go go I am ashamed of you and of Florimondus your maister All stories testifie that the difference betweene the Easterne and the Westerne Churches about Images began in the former ages and that though they continued some few yeares after the yeare 800 yet there was no talke of that matter for diuerse yeares before Pope Ioanes dayes Yet I am willing to heare you speake 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 who were but bare Grammarians And therefore were they neuer so many Pope Ioanes acts might passe vnwritten PAP Yea but I would gladly know of you what Dukes what Princes what Kings what Emperours this Ioane inaugured and crowned what Embassadors she entertained what honors she bestowed vpon any persons PROT. Indeed you pose me now especially in that which concerns the inauguring and crowning of Dukes and Princes and Kings and Emperour For I remember none inaugured or crowned by her PAP I thought so And therefore you do well to confesseâ—it I trust at length you will also confesse that there was no Pope Ioane PROT. Why I pray you did euery Pope inaugure and crowne either Dukes or Princes or Kings or Emperors PAP Nay I say not so But in that age the Emperours themselues had such a reuerend opinion of the Romane Popes that they would not take vpon them to reigne except they gaue them their consent and crowned them PROT. How proue you that PAP By this that Adrian the first baptized the two sonnes of Charles the great and after that annoynted them kings PROT. This proues not your purpose for this fell out in the yeare 781 as Baronius notes and not in that age wherin Pope Ioane liued But do you thinke that euery Pope in that age inaugured some Dukes or Princes or Kings or Emperours I would gladly know of you what Duke or Prince or King or Emperour was inaugured or crowned by Pope Eugenius the 2 who sate in the yeare 824 or by Pope Valentinus who sate in the yeare 827 or by Pope Gregory the 4. who succeeded Valentinus or by Pope Sergius the second who fate in the yeare 844. or by Pope Leo the 4 who sate in the yeare 847. I am sure neuer a one of these crowned any Emperour And I remember not that any one of these annoynted any Duke or King saue Leo the 4 who annoynted Alfred the yongest sonne of Athelwulfus king of England Which furthered him nothing to the attaining of the kingdome For till the death of his three elder brethren for all the Popes annoynting him he liued like a subiect he liued not like a king Wherefore to put you in mind of the maine point though Pope Ioane inaugured or crowned no such persons as you speake of yet you cannot conclude therupon Ergo there was no Pope Ioane PAP But if she bestowed no honors vpon any persons if she made no Bishops if she gaue no Bishoprickes it is more then probable there was neuer any such PROT. Oh but we reade that contulit sacros ordines promouit Episcopos ministrauit Sacramenta caeteraque Romanorum Pontificum exercuit munera she gaue orders she made Bishops she administred the Sacraments and she performed all other offices belonging vnto the Papacie PAP Where reade you that I warrant you you had it out of Bale of whom I wish you to see at your leasure what Florimondus censure is PROT. Iohn Bale for ought I know is farre honester man then Florimondus And to tell you truth if Florimondus raile vpon him I shall haue the better opinion of him For as Tertullian perswaded himselfe that whosoeuer knew Nero would easily beleeue Christianity