FURTHER EXPLANATION TOUCHING SAID J. SCOTUS, ACCORDING TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE PAPIST BARONIUS, AS NOTED BY ABR. MELLINUS

"But let us add," says he,"the opinion of, Baronius, touching this Scotchman: As regards johannes Scotus, we have said above,.in the' proper place, that he was in bad repute with the Pope Nicholas I. Although he wrote so violently against the Catholic faith, yet, as he did not spread it among the people, so that his views became known to all, many had a good opinion of him, so much so, that they, though most inconsiderately (thus he speaks, from a papistic standpoint) gave him the title of martyr." Compare A: Mell., 2d book, fol. 393, col. 1, 2, with Ccesar. Baronius' account touching J. Scotus, Annal. T. 11, A. D. 1059.

From this account it appears that the papist Baronius, who was a cardinal of the Roman see, was not pleased that many had a good opinion of Johannes -Scotus, and, what is still more, gave him the title of martyr; but this is not to be wondered at, since the true papists have a good opinion of none but those who adhere to the Roman superstitions, and never dare to utter a word of censure against them; and they would confer the title of martyr upon none but those who have sufered for the Roman see and its traditions (which are a parcel of human inventions). However, we will let them answer for this, and leave it.

We return to Johannes Scotus and say that, as regards his boldness, he showed himself as behooves a true martyr, since, to clear his conscience and defend the oppressed truth, he did not hesitate to incur the hatred of the pope and the papists, yea, the prospect of being anathematized, excommunicated, and, finally, miserably tortured and put.to death for it. He died for the confession of the Christian and evangelical truth, particularly for the article by which we commemorate the Lord's death, and in which lies the consolation of the soul, with regard to our blessed redemption.

But, since Berengarius, who opposed not only transubstantiation and the mass, but also infant baptism; was afterwards charged with having imbibed and obtained his belief from Johannes Scotus, the afore-mentioned martyr, we may conclude that said martyr must have opposed infant baptism; otherwise it could not be said in general words, that Berengarius imbibed or obtained his views from J..Scotus, which is nevertheless frequently and confidently asserted by ancient writers. With this we will take our leave of J. Scotus and also of our account of the martyrs of this century; as being sufficient for the well-disposedfor the evil-disposed we care not; hence, our soul shall rest, and content itself with the pious.

AN ACCOUNT OF THOSE WHO SUFFERED IN THE TENTH CENTURY: SUMMARY OF THE MARTYRS WHO SUFFERED IN THE TENTH CENTURY