Chapter 31.—Infants are Not Judged According to that Which They are Foreknown as Likely to Do If They Should Live.

For you see, beloved, how absurd it is, and how foreign from soundness of faith and sincerity of truth, for us to say that infants, when they die, should be judged according to those things which they are foreknown to be going to do if they should live. For to this opinion, from which certainly every human feeling, on however little reason it may be founded, and especially every Christian feeling, revolts, they are compelled to advance who have chosen in such wise to be withdrawn from the error of the Pelagians as still to think that they must believe, and, moreover, must profess in argument, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord, by which alone after the fall of the first man, in whom we all fell, help is afforded to us, is given according to our merits. And this belief Pelagius himself, before the Eastern bishops as judges, condemned in fear of his own condemnation. And if this be not said of the good or bad works of those who have died, which they would have done if they had lived,—and thus of no works, and works that would never exist, even in the foreknowledge of God,—if this, therefore, be not said, and you see under how great a mistake it is said, what will remain but that we confess, when the darkness of contention is removed, that the grace of God is not given according to our merits, which position the catholic Church defends against the Pelagian heresy; and that we see this in more evident truth especially in infants? For God is not compelled by fate to come to the help of these infants, and not to come to the help of those,—since the case is alike to both. Or shall we think that human affairs in the case of infants are not managed by Divine Providence, but by fortuitous chances, when rational souls are either to be condemned or delivered, although, indeed, not a sparrow falls to the ground without the will of our Father which is in heaven?65    Matt. x. 29. Or must we so attribute it to the negligence of parents that infants die without baptism, as that heavenly judgments have nothing to do with it; as if they themselves who in this way die badly had of their own will chosen the negligent parents for themselves of whom they were born? What shall I say when an infant expires some time before he can possibly be advantaged by the ministry of baptism? For often when the parents are eager and the ministers prepared for giving baptism to the infants, it still is not given, because God does not choose; since He has not kept it in this life for a little while in order that baptism might be given it. What, moreover, when sometimes aid could be afforded by baptism to the children of unbelievers, that they should not go into perdition, and could not be afforded to the children of believers? In which case it is certainly shown that there is no acceptance of persons with God; otherwise He would rather deliver the children of His worshippers than the children of His enemies.

31. Videtis enim , charissimi, quam sit absurdum, et a fidei sanitate atque sinceritate veritatis alienum, ut dicamus parvulos mortuos secundum ea judicari, quae praesciti sunt facturi esse si viverent. In hanc autem sententiam, quam certe omnis sensus humanus quantulacumque ratione subnixus, maximeque christianus, exhorret, ire compulsi sunt, qui sic a Pelagianorum errore alieni esse voluerunt, ut tamen gratiam Dei per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum, qua nobis una post lapsum primi hominis, in quo omnes cecidimus, subvenitur, secundum merita nostra dari sibi adhuc existiment esse credendum, et disputatione insuper proferendum. Quod ipse Pelagius ante orientales episcopos judices, damnationis suae timore damnavit. Hoc autem si non dicatur, de mortuorum scilicet operibus, quae facturi fuerant si viverent, bonis aut malis, ac per hoc nullis et in ipsa Dei praescientia non futuris: hoc ergo si non dicatur, quod cernitis quanto errore dicatur; quid restabit, nisi ut gratiam Dei non secundum merita nostra dari, quod contra haeresim Pelagianam catholica defendit Ecclesia, remota contentionis caligine fateamur; atque id maxime in parvulis evidentiore veritate cernamus? Neque enim fato cogitur Deus illis infantibus subvenire, illis autem non subvenire; cum sit utrisque causa communis: aut res humanas in parvulis non divina providentia, sed fortuitis agi casibus opinabimur, cum rationales vel damnandae vel liberandae sint animae; quandoquidem nec passer cadit in terram sine voluntate Patris nostri qui in coelis est (Matth. X, 29): aut parentum negligentiae sic tribuendum est , quod parvuli sine Baptismate moriuntur, ut nihil ibi agant superna judicia; tanquam ipsi qui hoc modo male moriuntur, parentes sibi negligentes voluntate propria de quibus nascerentur, elegerint: quid dicam, quod parvulus aliquando antequam 1012 illi per ministerium baptizantis succurri possit, exspirat? Plerumque enim festinantibus parentibus et paratis ministris ut Baptismus parvulo detur, Deo tamen nolente non datur, qui eum paululum in hac vita non tenuit ut daretur. Quid etiam, quod aliquando parvulis infidelium filiis potuit, ne irent in perditionem, et filiis fidelium non potuit Baptismate subveniri? Ubi certe ostenditur quod personarum apud Deum non sit acceptio (Rom. II, 11): alioquin cultorum suorum potius, quam inimicorum filios liberaret.