The answere.
I say first, that to reason ab auctoritate negatiue, is not hol∣den [ 1] good in schooles, and your selues doe often condemne in o∣thers, that kinde of disputation. I say secondly, that if these [ 2] writers had not been perswaded of the trueth of the storie, they would neuer haue published it to the worlde; because it maketh so much against Romish Religion, to which they were addic∣ted whollie. I say thirdly, that the said authors write of this [ 3] matter, euen as they doe of other thinges. Palmerius and Sege∣bertus both haue these expresse wordes;* 1.1 Fama est hunc Iohannē faeminam fuisse, & vni soli familiaritantum cognitam, qui eam complexus est, & grauis facta peperit papa existens. Quare eam inter pontifices non numerant quidam, ideo nomini numerū non facit. The report is, that this Iohn was a woman, and knowne onely to one that was her familiar friend. By whose familiaritie she became with childe, and was deliuered euen while she was pope (of Rome.) For which cause some doe not reckon her amongst the popes, and so shee maketh not vp the number. Marianus, Polonus, Bergomensis, Platina and Car∣ranza alreadie named, teach the same doctrine, writing vpon the same Iohn. And note wel, that M. Scotus affirmeth the sto∣rie constantly, without al ands or ifs. And so doth also M. Po∣lonus, who was the popes owne penitentiarie. To these I may fitly adde,* 1.2 that which your L. Abbot Bernard saith; the beast (saith he) mentioned in the reuelation, to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies, and to make warres with