Sermon 294
SERMO 294
Habitus in the basilica of the elders, on the birthday of the martyr Guddenis.
5th day before the Kalends of July
[On the Baptism of Little Ones, against the Pelagians]
The opportunity of speech.
On the birthday of Saint John, among other things that seemed appropriate to discuss, our discourse was led to the baptism of infants: and because it had already become lengthy, and thoughts turned to concluding it, not as much was said about this great question as should have been said by those concerned by such a great danger. It is not, however, the very judgment already long established in the Catholic Church with supreme authority that makes us anxious, but the disputes of certain individuals, which now endeavor to proliferate and overturn the minds of many. Therefore today, with the Lord's help, we have decided to speak on this matter. Indeed, we celebrate the solemn day of the Martyr: but the cause of all the faithful is greater than that of the martyrs only. For not all the faithful are also martyrs, but they are martyrs because they are faithful. Let us see then what they propose, what agitates them; since we ought to think not so much about refuting them as about healing them.
The Pelagians concede to baptize infants, not for eternal life, but for the kingdom of heaven.
They concede that infants ought to be baptized. Therefore, there is no question between us and them whether infants should be baptized; but the reason is sought, why they should be baptized. Therefore, let us hold without any doubt with them what they concede. No one doubts that infants must be baptized. Let no one doubt, since even those who in some way contradict do not doubt this.
But we say that they will not have salvation and eternal life otherwise, unless they are baptized in Christ: however, they say it is not for salvation, not for eternal life, but for the kingdom of heaven. What this is, while we explain it as best as we can, pay attention for a moment. They say that a little child, even if he is not baptized, due to the merit of innocence, because he has no sin at all, neither personal nor original, neither from himself nor traced from Adam, must have salvation and eternal life, even if he is not baptized; but he must be baptized in order to enter also into the kingdom of God, that is, into the kingdom of heaven. If this is to be discussed, it should indeed be discussed for their sake, not for ours. For they are our brothers, they are moved by the profundity of the question; but they ought to be ruled by the guidance of authority. For when they say that they should not be baptized for the sake of obtaining salvation and eternal life, but solely for the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God; they indeed admit they should be baptized, but not for eternal life, but for the kingdom of heaven. What about eternal life? They say, they will have it. Why will they have it? Because they have no sin, and cannot be associated with damnation. So, is there eternal life outside the kingdom of heaven?
Eternal life is not apart from the kingdom of heaven. Among the right side pertaining to the kingdom of God, and the left of the condemned, there is no intermediate place.
This first error must be avoided by the ears and eradicated from the minds. This notion is new in the Church, previously unheard of, that there is eternal life apart from the kingdom of heaven, that there is eternal salvation apart from the kingdom of God. First, see, brother, lest you perhaps need to agree with us here, that whoever does not belong to the kingdom of God, without a doubt belongs to damnation. The Lord is coming and will judge the living and the dead, as the Gospel says, dividing them into two groups, the right and the left. To those on the left, He will say: "Depart into the eternal fire, prepared for the devil and his angels"; to those on the right, He will say: "Come, blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." He names the kingdom here, and damnation with the devil there. No middle place is left where you could place infants. He will judge the living and the dead: some will be on the right, others on the left; I know of no other thing. You who introduce a middle ground, step away from the middle: do not be offended by the one who seeks the right. And I also warn you yourself: step away from the middle, but do not go to the left. Therefore, if there will be the right and the left, and we know no middle place in the Gospel: behold, on the right is the kingdom of heaven: "Inherit," He says, "the kingdom." Whoever is not there, is on the left. What will be on the left? "Depart into the eternal fire." On the right to the kingdom, indeed eternal; on the left to the eternal fire. Whoever is not on the right is undoubtedly on the left: therefore, whoever is not in the kingdom is undoubtedly in the eternal fire. Can he surely have eternal life who is not baptized? He will not be on the right, that is, he will not be in the kingdom. Do you reckon eternal life to be eternal fire? And about that very eternal life, listen more explicitly, because the kingdom is nothing other than eternal life. First, He named the kingdom, but to the right; eternal fire to the left. But the final judgment, to show what the kingdom is, and what eternal fire is: "Then," He says, "these will go into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Behold, he has explained to you what the kingdom is and what the eternal fire is; so that when you admit that the little one will not be in the kingdom, you acknowledge that he will be in the eternal fire. For the kingdom of heaven is eternal life.
The exclusion from the kingdom of God is linked with the punishment of eternal fire.
Nor did the apostle Paul, when he frightened men, frighten little ones, nor the baptized, but the wicked, the criminals, the contaminated, the lost; he did not frighten them by saying that they would be in eternal fire, where they will undoubtedly go if they are not corrected: but he only frightened them because they would not be in the kingdom; so that when they saw that they were losing the hope of the kingdom, they saw that nothing was consequent except the punishment of eternal fire. He says, “Do not be deceived: neither the fornicators, nor the idolaters, nor the adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor those who lie with men, nor the thieves, nor the greedy, nor the drunkards, nor the revilers, nor the rapacious will inherit the kingdom of God.” He did not say: Those and those, such and such will be tormented by eternal fire; but, “will not inherit the kingdom of God.” With the right hand removed, nothing remained but the left. From where, however, do they escape from eternal fire? For no other reason, except that they will be in the kingdom. It follows: “And such were some of you.” And how are they now no longer? “But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. For there is no other name under heaven in which we must be saved, all of us, the little ones with the great ones. But if we must be saved in this name, without this name, beyond a doubt there will not be salvation, which is promised without Christ to the little ones. With all due respect to those who promise salvation to anyone without Christ, I do not know whether he himself can have salvation in Christ.
The Pelagian distinction between eternal life and the kingdom of God is plainly arbitrary.
Then we ask them: What if someone says that infants, by virtue of their innocence, as it is said, and their immunity from all fault, would not only have salvation and eternal life, but also the kingdom of God? Whence it is defined and certain among you that without Baptism the infants will not have the kingdom of God. In order for you to distribute to them according to your will, not as helpers of the infants, but as oppressors of the miserable; in order for you to distribute to them according to your will, and give them salvation and eternal life apart from the kingdom of heaven? Another one, more benevolent and merciful to you, and as you think more just, will give them all, both eternal life and the kingdom of heaven. How will you surpass this one? Since sometimes you are delighted with human reasoning against the clearest authority, bring forth the very rule of your reason, and assert, with as much strength as you can muster, from where this one might be conquered, who wishes to give to infants, on account of their merits of innocence, on account of no fault, as you say, which is original sin, not only eternal life but also the kingdom of heaven: conquer this one. I, without prejudice, for a moment take the part of this one and will say what I do not feel myself: but I warn you, so that you may see a keener adversary.
Having once denied original sin, the Pelagians cannot overcome him who does not wish little ones to be excluded from the kingdom of God.
Behold, someone appears and says: A little child, having no sin at all, neither that which he has contracted by his own life nor that which he has derived from the life of the first parent, will have both eternal life and the kingdom of heaven.
Respond, conquer the man resisting you, who divides differently. For you say: This unbaptized one will indeed have eternal life, but will not have the kingdom of heaven. He, on the other hand: Indeed both life and the kingdom of heaven. Why do you take away the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven from the innocent? From whom the kingdom of heaven is not acquired, he is undoubtedly deprived of a great good. What is this justice? Say, why? What did the unbaptized infant offend, having no guilt, neither his own, nor inherited from his parent? What did he offend, tell me, that he may not enter into the kingdom of heaven, that he is separated from the lot of the saints, that he is an exile from the company of Angels? You seem to yourself merciful because you do not take away his life: yet you condemn, whom you separate from the kingdom of heaven. You condemn: you do not strike him, but you send him into exile. For even those who are exiled live, if they are healthy: they are not in bodily pains, they are not tormented, they are not afflicted by the darkness of a prison: this is their only punishment, not being in their country. If the country is loved, it is a great punishment: but if the country is not loved, the punishment of the heart is worse. Is it a small evil in the heart of man, who does not seek the company of saints, who does not desire the kingdom of heaven? If he does not desire it, the punishment is from perversity: but if he desires it, the punishment is from defrauded charity. But if, as you wish, the punishment be small; it is still great, if there is no fault. Here defend the justice of God. Why even a small punishment is inflicted on the innocent, in which no sin whatsoever is found? Speak against this adversary, who wishes to give to unbaptized infants, with greater mercy and justice than you, not only eternal life but also the kingdom of heaven: respond if you can, but bring forth reason; for you delight to glory in this.
On the question of unbaptized infants, one must turn to divine authority.
I feel the depth of this question, and I do not recognize my own strength as adequate to plumb its depths. Here too, I am inclined to exclaim with Paul: O the depth of the riches! An unbaptized infant goes to damnation: for these are the words of the Apostle: From one came condemnation: I do not find an adequate reason, not because there is none, but because I do not find it. Where then I do not find the deep in the deep, I ought to consider human frailty, not to condemn divine authority. I utterly exclaim, and I am not ashamed: O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and how inscrutable his ways! Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor? Or who has given him anything, and shall be repaid? For from him, and through him, and in him are all things: to him be glory forever and ever. I strengthen my weakness with these words, and surrounded by this precaution, I stand fortified against the arrows of your reasoning. But you, warrior, that is, strong reasoner, answer this, who says to you: An entirely innocent little one, and free from all sin, both personal and original, will not only have eternal life but also the kingdom of heaven. This is just. Why should one who has no evil not have some good? But you say, I know. How do you know? Because the Lord has said. At last, you have come to this. Therefore, it is not because you reason, but because the Lord has said. I plainly praise this, it is sound: just as a man you have not found the reason, you flee to authority. I approve, absolutely approve. You do well; you do not find what to answer, flee to authority: I do not pursue you there, nor expel you from there; rather I receive and embrace you as you flee.
The Lord's statement excluding the unbaptized from the kingdom of God, as acknowledged by the Pelagians.
Therefore, bring forth the authority, let us stand in it together against the common enemy. For you say and I say that a little one not baptized does not enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, let us both resist that common adversary, who says a little one not baptized will enter the kingdom of heaven, and let us bring forth the shield of faith against his most insidious darts.
Let human reasoning step aside for a moment, let divine arms be taken up. "Take up," says the Apostle, "the whole armor of God." Behold, let us say together to this man: Are you a Christian? I am a Christian, he says. Hear the Gospel, you who want to send unbaptized infants into the kingdom of heaven; hear the Gospel: "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." This is the Lord's ruling: no one resists this except a non-Christian. That one is refuted, the contest remains with you and me: and perhaps where you conquered him with his good, there you might be conquered with your own good. For if the one you conquered is not obstinate, you have taught him. Therefore, do not be obstinate yourself: let us hold together for the time being to this ruling: "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." Therefore, you say, I cannot promise the kingdom of God to an unbaptized infant against the Lord's clear ruling. Behold why I say: They will not have the kingdom of God. Behold why I say: Therefore they must be baptized, so that they may have the kingdom of God. Is this why you say it? This why, he says. However, consider, because of what we have said above, whether you might not find eternal life apart from the kingdom of God. For the statements about those two parts, right and left, are very clear, where no place for life without a kingdom was given in the middle. Does this correct you only a little? Warn you only a little? Pay a little attention with me to the very passage from which you drew this ruling.
From the same reading of the Gospel for overcoming the Pelagians. One person in two natures of Christ, who at the same time says He is on earth and in heaven.
For you said that you do not wish to promise the kingdom of heaven to unbaptized infants because the Lord's decree is clear: Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. There you did not notice, when Nicodemus asked how these things could happen, that is, how a man could be reborn, how he could be born again; since indeed he cannot enter into his mother's womb again and be born again; what did he hear from the Lord, what did he hear from the good teacher, what did he hear error from the truth?
Among other things, showing how it is done, he also provided a comparison. But first he said: No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven. He was on earth and said that he was in heaven; and what is greater, in heaven was the Son of Man: to show one person in both natures, and in that he was the Son of God equal to the Father, the Word of God in the beginning God with God, and in that he was the son of man, taking on a human soul and human flesh, and clothed as a man, coming out to humans: because in these two there are not two Christs, nor two sons of God but one person, one Christ the Son of God, and the same one Christ, not another, the son of man; but the Son of God according to divinity, the son of man according to the flesh. But which of us, who are little observant, or with little wisdom, would not prefer to distinguish that way, the Son of God in heaven, and the Son of Man on earth? But lest we divide that way, and thus by dividing introduce two persons: No one ascends into heaven, he says, except he who descended from heaven the Son of Man. Therefore the Son of Man descended from heaven. Was not the son of man made on earth? was not the son of man made through Mary? But, oh man, he says, do not separate whom I wish to unite. It is little that the Son of Man descended (for Christ descended, and the same son of man who is the Son of God); he walks on earth who sits in heaven. He was in heaven, because Christ is everywhere, and the same Christ is both the Son of God and the son of man. Because of the unity of the person, on earth the Son of God, because of the same unity of the person we have proved in heaven the son of man, from these words of the Lord: the Son of Man, he says, who is in heaven. Because of the unity of person, is it not on earth and seen that Peter says: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God?
Only Christ ascended into heaven. The members of Christ with the head are one Christ.
Therefore, let Nicodemus learn how that happens, which seemed incredible and almost impossible to him, who understands less: No one ascends into heaven except the one who descended from heaven.
All those who are reborn, indeed, ascend into heaven: none of the others at all. And all who are reborn, through the grace of God ascend into heaven: and no one ascends into heaven, except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven. Whence this? Because all who are reborn become members of him; and Christ alone born of Mary is the one Christ, and with his body the head is one Christ. Therefore, he wished to say this: No one ascends, except he who descended. Therefore, no one ascends, except Christ. If you wish to ascend, be in the body of Christ: if you wish to ascend, be a member of Christ. For as in one body we have many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body; so also is Christ: because the head and body are Christ. And how this happens, let us still seek. The question lies hidden, that depth is exalted.
How we become members of Christ. Faith in Christ is necessary for salvation.
Christ does not have sin, neither did He derive original sin, nor did He add His own: He came without the pleasure of carnal lust, there was no marital embrace: from the body of the Virgin, He did not assume a wound, but a remedy; He did not assume what He would heal, but from where He would heal: as far as sin is concerned, I say. Therefore, He alone is without sin: how will His members be, none of whom are without sin? How? Hear the likeness that follows: And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that all who believe in Him may not perish but have eternal life. Whence it did not seem to you that sinful men could become members of Christ, that is, of Him who would have no sin at all? You were moved by the serpent's bite: therefore, Christ is crucified, therefore Christ sheds His blood for the remission of sins; because of sin, that is, the serpent's venom: As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, from which those who were bitten by serpents in that desert might be healed, and they were commanded to look upon that lifted up one, and whosoever would look upon it, would be healed; so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that all who believe in Him, that is, who look upon Him lifted up, who are not ashamed of the crucified, who glory in the cross of Christ, may not perish but have eternal life. May not perish, from what? By believing in Him. From what will they not perish? By looking upon the lifted up one: otherwise, they would have perished. For this is the meaning: Whoever believes in Him, may not perish but have eternal life.
Help is given by another's faith to little ones wounded by the deeds of others.
You offer me a little child, and you order that it look up, whom you deny has the poison of the serpent. Actually, if you favor him, if his innocence in his own life moves you, do not deny some trace of guilt from the first life, not his own, but of his first parent. Do not deny; confess the poison, so that you may seek the remedy: otherwise, he is not healed. Or why do you tell him to believe? For this is what the one carrying the little child responds. He is healed by the words of another, because he is wounded by the deed of another. Is he asked, does he believe in Jesus Christ? The question is posed: it is answered, he believes. For the one who is not speaking, for the silent one, for the crying one, and crying in a way praying to be helped, it is responded, and it avails. Or does that serpent even try to persuade because it does not avail? May it be far from the hearts of any Christians. Therefore, it is responded, and it avails. The spirit communicates by a certain conspiracy; he believes in another, because he sinned in another. Or indeed, does he find the life of this present age, whom weakness gave birth to; and does he not find the life of the future age, whom charity gave birth to?
The bronze serpent lifted up is a figure of Christ crucified in the likeness of sinful flesh.
Therefore, just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so that everyone bitten by the serpent would look at it lifted up and be healed: so must the Son of Man be lifted up, so that everyone poisoned by the serpent looks at Him lifted up and is healed. The first Adam received the serpent's bite with venom. Therefore, born in the flesh of sin, he is saved in Christ through the likeness of the flesh of sin.
For God sent His Son, not in the flesh of sin; but, as he who wrote followed up, in the likeness of the flesh of sin; because it was not from marital union, but from a virginal womb. He sent Him in the likeness of the flesh of sin: why so? So that sin might be condemned in the flesh by sin: sin from sin, serpent from serpent. For who doubts that sin is called by the name serpent? Therefore, sin from sin, serpent from serpent: but from likeness, because there is no sin in Christ, only the likeness of the flesh of sin. Therefore, the serpent was lifted up, but made of bronze; the likeness of the flesh of sin was lifted up, so that the origin of sin might be healed. Because God sent His Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin. Not in the likeness of flesh; for it is true flesh, but in the likeness of the flesh of sin; because it is mortal flesh without any sin at all. So that by sin, on account of the likeness, He might condemn sin in the flesh, on account of true iniquity. There was no true iniquity in Christ: but there was mortality in Him. He did not take on sin, but He took on the punishment of sin. By taking on the punishment without guilt, He healed both the punishment and the guilt. Behold how these things are done. Which Nicodemus, amazed, had said: How can these things be? For thus we are healed, not because we deserve it. Behold how these things are done. Now where do you place little ones for me? Do you now say: They were struck by no poison. Take them away from the sight of the lifted serpent. But if you do not take them away, you say they need healing, you confess they are poisoned.
Whoever does not believe in Christ is condemned. Judgment for condemnation. Infants called faithful. Sin of origin.
Then the Lord himself in the same discourse to Nicodemus—did you not hear what he said when the same reading was read today? He who believes in him is not judged; but he who does not believe has already been judged. And here you seek a middle ground, man of mediation, and you dispute, and you listen attentively, yet you do not pay attention: He who believes in him is not judged; but he who does not believe has already been judged. What does it mean: Has already been judged? He is condemned. For you know that judgment is often used to mean condemnation: the scriptures testify to this, especially in that one most clear testimony, which no one contradicts. When the Lord spoke of the resurrection: Those who have done good, he says, to the resurrection of life; those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment: certainly, he used judgment to mean condemnation. And do you dare to discuss or believe otherwise? He who does not believe has already been judged. In another place: He who believes in the Son has eternal life: which you promised to infants who were not baptized. He who believes in the Son has eternal life. But he says, even the non-believing infant, although he does not have the kingdom of God, has it. But see what follows: But he who is disobedient to the Son will not see life; but the wrath of God remains on him. Where do you place the baptized infants? Surely among the number of the faithful. For this reason, by the ancient, canonical, and well-founded custom of the Church, baptized infants are called faithful. And thus we inquire about them: Is this infant a Christian? The answer is: Christian. Catechumen or faithful? Faithful; surely from faith, and faith from believing. Therefore, you will reckon baptized infants among the believers: nor will you dare to judge otherwise in any way if you do not wish to be a manifest heretic. Therefore, they have eternal life because he who believes in the Son has eternal life.
Do not promise eternal life to them without this faith, and without the sacrament of this faith. However, he who does not believe in the Son, and he who does not believe in the Son, does not have life, but the wrath of God remains upon him. He did not say: It will come upon him; but, it remains upon him. He looked to the origin when he said: The wrath of God remains upon him. The Apostle, looking to this, said: We were by nature children of wrath at one time. We do not accuse nature. The author of nature is God. Nature was established good by God; but by evil will from the serpent, it was corrupted. Therefore, what was in Adam of guilt, not of nature, has become nature to us, his descendants. From this vice of nature, with which man is born, none can liberate except him who was born without vice. From this flesh of sin, none can liberate except him who was born without sin in the likeness of the flesh of sin. From this poison of the serpent, none can liberate except the exaltation of the serpent. What do you say to these things? Is this enough?
The evasion of the Pelagians when pressed by the words of the Apostle about original sin. Not the first example of sinning, but the sin of origin is signified there.
Pay close attention to a certain very sharp argument that they bring forward. When they begin to be pressed by the words of the Apostle who says: Through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death; and thus death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned. I do not know who does not understand these words; in which words I do not know whether anyone requires an expositor: they try to reply and say it was said by the Apostle because Adam sinned first, and those who sinned afterward sinned by imitating him. What is this other than trying to cast darkness over the open light? Sin entered through one man and through sin death; and thus it passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned. You say it is because of imitation, because Adam sinned first.
I respond absolutely: Adam did not sin first. If you seek the first sinner, look at the devil. But the Apostle, wishing to show the human race contaminated from the origin, hence laid down from where we were born, not whom we had imitated. Your father is indeed also called, whom you would imitate: My children, he says, whom I travail with again. He likewise says: Be imitators of me. And on account of that very imitation it is said to the impious: You are from your father, the devil. For it is clear in the catholic faith that the devil neither begot our nature nor created it: there is only in him the seduction of the former, imitation of the latter. Finally, as it is said of Adam: In whom all have sinned; let it be read to me somewhere, All have sinned in the devil. It is one thing to sin with him preceding and seducing, another to sin in him. Because according to the propagation of the flesh we were all in him before we were born, just as in a parent, just as in a root we were there: thus this tree is poisoned, where we were. For since origin does not pertain to the devil, that is, the prince of sin, and truly the first sinner, but imitation; when Scripture spoke of him: By the envy of the devil, death entered the world: however, those who are from his side imitate him. By imitating him, they become from his side. Has it ever been said, They sinned in him? But when it was said of Adam, because of the origin, because of the posterity, because of the propagation of the entrails: In whom all have sinned, he says. For if Adam was therefore established first because he sinned first, as if he were an example, not in origin; why after such a long time, after such extended ages, is Christ sought against Adam? If all sinners pertain to Adam because he was the first sinner, all just ones ought to have pertained to Abel because he was the first just one. Why is Christ sought? Wake up, brother. Why is Christ sought, if not because in Adam the generation is condemned, in Christ regeneration is sought?
The objection of the Pelagians against original sin, Why is a person not born just after being baptized.
Therefore, let no one deceive us: Scripture is clear, authority is well-established, faith is most catholic. Everyone who is born is condemned: no one is liberated unless they are reborn. Hence also you, now instructed, respond to their other cunning arguments, dear ones, when they say, and disturb infants, "If sinners are born of sinners, why are the just not born from the baptized who are already faithful, to whom all sins have been forgiven?" Quickly respond: For this reason the just are not born from the baptized, because he does not generate from what he was regenerated, but from what he was generated. It was said of Christ: "Put to death in the flesh, made alive by the Spirit": thus it can be said of man, "Decomposed in flesh, justified in spirit." That which is born of the flesh is flesh. You ask that the just be born from the just, when you see that being just is impossible without being reborn. Nor do you consider the Lord's declaration, which you yourself have on your lips: "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit." I think this did not happen in intercourse. You wonder why a sinner is born from the seed of a just man: does it not delight you to wonder why an olive tree sprout comes from the seed of an olive tree? Receive another analogy. Place a baptized just man as a purified grain: do you not see that from the purified grain, wheat with chaff is born, without which it is sown. Moreover, since the generation of those who are born is carnal, and the generation of those who are reborn is spiritual, do you want the baptized to be born from the baptized, when you see that the circumcised are not born from the circumcised? This generation is certainly carnal, and circumcision is carnal, and yet the circumcised are not born from the circumcised: thus, therefore, the baptized cannot be born from the baptized; because no one is reborn before they are born.
Another mockery of the same is exploded. Christ benefits nothing to those who do not believe. Christ benefits baptized infants. Baptized infants are truly believing through the faith of others. Infants believe by the faith of their parents.
Another of their arguments seems very sharp: but what sharpness is not blunted by the shield of truth? Another thing they say, see what kind. If Adam, they say, harms those who have not sinned; therefore, Christ ought to benefit even those who have not believed. You certainly see how sharp this is against the truth: hear how much it helps the truth. For he who says this says nothing else except that Christ benefits nothing to unbelievers. This is true. Who would not accept it? Who would not agree that Christ is of no benefit to unbelievers, but is beneficial to believers? But tell me, I beg you, does Christ benefit baptized infants in any way, or not at all? It is necessary to say that He benefits them: they are pressed by the weight of Mother Church. Indeed, they would perhaps want to say this; for their arguments seem to compel them to it: but they are restrained by the authority of the Church, lest I should say they are overwhelmed not just by the spit of men, but carried off as if by a stream by the tears of the infants themselves. For if they say that Christ benefits baptized infants nothing at all; they say nothing other than, Infants are baptized in vain. However, that they are not baptized in vain, since they do not dare to say this, they confess that Christ benefits baptized infants.
If it benefits the baptized, I ask whom it benefits, believers or unbelievers? Let them choose what they wish. If they say, Unbelievers: where then is what you were slandering, because Christ cannot benefit unbelievers? Behold, you confess that it benefits infants, who are not yet believers. It benefits for any purpose: do you not believe for eternal life, do you not believe for eternal salvation: to receive the kingdom of heaven itself, Christ certainly benefits baptized infants. Does it therefore benefit unbelievers? But far be it, that I should say infants are unbelievers. I have already discussed above, one believes through another, who has sinned through another: it is said, He believes; and it is valid, and he is counted among the faithful baptized. This has the authority of Mother Church, this canon founded on truth prevails: against this strength, against this impregnable wall, whoever strikes, he himself is broken. Therefore Christ benefits the baptized infants in something; and just as I say, and just as the whole Church with me says, it benefits believers, it benefits the faithful: choose what you wish. Indeed, I want you to choose what is truer; so that you may say with us that it benefits believers. But if you say, It benefits unbelievers; you have spoken against yourself. If you say, It benefits believers; you have spoken with me. Choose, whether you will speak falsely against yourself, or speak truly with me. For a little while ago, you were saying that Christ benefits nothing to unbelievers, wishing to make it so because just as Adam harmed nothing to those who did not sin, just as Christ benefits nothing to unbelievers. Behold, you now confess that Christ benefits baptized infants who are not yet believers. But if you say it benefits believers, you speak well, you speak with me, infants also believe.
From where do they believe? How do they believe? By the faith of the parents. If they are cleansed by the faith of the parents, they were defiled by the sin of the parents. The body of death in the first parents begot them as sinners: the spirit of life in the later parents regenerated them as faithful. You give faith to him who does not answer, and I give sin to him who does nothing.
Against original sin the Apostle is improperly cited. There are many ways of sanctification.
The saints, he says, ought to be born from saints: because the Apostle said: Otherwise your children would be unclean; but now they are holy. And how do you understand this? How do you interpret a child born of believers as being so holy that he should not be baptized? Interpret this holiness however you wish. For there are many types of holiness, and many types of sanctification. Indeed, not everything that is sanctified is destined for the kingdom of heaven. The Apostle said concerning our food: It is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. Does this mean that because our food is sanctified, we do not know where it will go? Therefore, understand that there is a certain kind of sanctification, almost like a shadow, which is not sufficient for the attainment of salvation. There is a distinction, and what that distinction is, only God knows. However, when the child of believers is rushed to Baptism; parents should not err in believing that he was already born as a believer. For they can say he is born, but not reborn. For you must understand how the children of believers are sanctified, and I will not seek now, because it would take too long, the nature of this sanctification; where you also have an unbelieving husband, there you also have a believing wife. He said the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife by her believing husband. Does this mean that just because there is perhaps a certain kind of sanctification, so that the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, he should therefore receive assurance that he is going to enter the kingdom of heaven, and does not need to be baptized, regenerated, or redeemed by the blood of Christ? Just as the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife and yet perishes unless he is baptized—so too the children of believers, though sanctified to a certain extent, still perish if they are not baptized.
The authority of Cyprian concerning original sin.
I ask you to listen a little. I only read. It is Saint Cyprian, whose work I have taken in hand, an ancient bishop of this See: receive in a little what he thought concerning the Baptism of infants, indeed what shows that the Church has always thought. For it is of little concern that these people argue and dispute impious novelties, and strive to accuse us of saying something new. Therefore, I read Saint Cyprian, so that you may see how the canonical understanding and the catholic sense are in these words which I considered a little before. He was asked whether an infant ought to be baptized before the eighth day, because by the old Law it was not permitted to circumcise an infant except on the eighth day. The question arose from this, concerning the day of baptism: for concerning the origin of sin there was no question; and therefore from that matter, about which there was no question, the arisen question was resolved. Among other things which I mentioned above, Saint Cyprian said: For this reason, we think no one should be prevented from attaining grace by a law that is now established, nor should spiritual circumcision be hindered by carnal circumcision, but everyone should altogether be admitted to the grace of Christ: when even Peter speaks in the Acts of the Apostles and says: "God has shown me not to call any person common or unclean." Otherwise, if humans could impede anything to attain grace, then more adults, those advanced in age, and elders might be impeded by more serious sins. Nevertheless, if even to the gravest delinquents who sinned much before against the Lord, when later they have believed, forgiveness of sins is granted, and no one is prohibited from Baptism and grace: how much more should an infant not be prohibited, who, recently born, has committed no sin, except that having been carnally born according to Adam, contracted the contagion of ancient death through the first birth; who more easily approaches to receive the remission of sins precisely because their sins are pardoned, not personal ones, but those of another? See how, without doubting about this matter, he solves that from which doubt arose. He took this from the foundation of the Church, to confirm the wavering stone.
Enemies of the truth are to be endured to some extent patiently.
So let us ask our brothers, if we may, not to call us heretics, for we could perhaps call them so for disputing such things, if we wished, yet we do not do so. Let the mother bear them with loving affection to be healed, carry them to be taught, so that she does not mourn the dead. They go too far; it is too much, barely bearable, still borne with great patience. Let them not abuse this patience of the Church, let them be corrected, it is good. As friends, we exhort, not as enemies do we quarrel. They slander us, we endure: let them not slander the canon, let them not slander the truth; let them not contradict the holy Church laboring daily for the remission of original sin of infants. This matter is established. The disputant erring in other questions not diligently digested, not yet full of the authority of the Church, must be borne; there error must be tolerated: it should not go so far as to attempt to shake the very foundation of the Church. It is not expedient, perhaps our patience is not yet to be condemned: but we should fear lest negligence too be blamed. Let it suffice your Charity, treat them whom you know, treat with them amicably, fraternally, peacefully, lovingly, sorrowfully: let piety do whatever it can; because afterwards impiety will not be worthy of love. Turning to the Lord, etc.