Bruno has claimed that one of Pope Adrian's predecessors, Julius, recognized the Holy Roman Emperor as his lord, which is so not cool in Adrian's book. But in his response, Adrian contradicts himself, which doesn't make his argument look so sound. First, he says that Julius's decrees were invalid because he gave the Church too much power. Then he's all, "the papal office is infallible" (unable to make a mistake). But wait—if the papal office is infallible, how could Pope Julius's decrees have been invalid? This guy, like Faustus, could have used a logic class or two.