Chapter 56.—The Pelagians Allow that Christ Died Even for Infants; Julianus Slays Himself with His Own Sword.

But whatever opinion he may entertain about the shame-causing concupiscence of the flesh, I must request your attention to what he has said respecting infants (and it is in their behalf that we labour), as to their being supposed to need a Saviour, if they are not to die without salvation. I repeat his words once more: “You assert,” says he to me, “that they, indeed, who have not been ever born might possibly have been good; those, however, who have peopled the world, and for whom Christ died, you decide to be the work of the devil, born in a disordered state, and guilty from the very beginning.” Would that he only solved the entire controversy as he unties the knot of this question! For will he pretend to say that he merely spoke of adults in this passage? Why, the subject in hand is about infants, about human beings at their birth; and it is about these that he raises odium against us, because they are defined by us as guilty from the very first, because we declare them to be guilty, since Christ died for them. And why did Christ die for them if they are not guilty? It is entirely from them, yes, from them, we shall find the reason, wherefore he thought odium should be raised against me. He asks: “How are infants guilty, for whom Christ died?” We answer: Nay, how are infants not guilty, since Christ died for them? This dispute wants a judge to determine it. Let Christ be the Judge, and let Him tell us what is the object which has profited by His death? “This is my blood,” He says, “which shall be shed268    Effundetur. for many for the remission of sins.”269    Matt. xxvi. 28. Let the apostle, too, be His assessor in the judgment; since even in the apostle it is Christ Himself that speaks. Speaking of God the Father, he exclaims: “He who spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all!”270    Rom. viii. 32. I suppose that he describes Christ as so delivered up for us all, that infants in this matter are not separated from ourselves. But what need is there to dwell on this point, out of which even he no longer raises a contest? For the truth is, he not only confesses that Christ died even for infants, but he also reproves us out of this admission, because we say that these same infants are guilty for whom Christ died. Now, then, let the apostle, who says that Christ was delivered up for us all, also tell us why Christ was delivered up for us. “He was delivered,” says he, “for our offences, and rose again for our justification.”271    Rom. iv. 25. If, therefore, as even this man both confesses and professes, both admits and objects, infants, too, are included amongst those for whom Christ was delivered up; and if it was for our sins that Christ was delivered up, even infants, of course, must have original sins, for whom Christ was delivered up; He must have something in them to heal, who (as Himself affirms) is not needed as a Physician by the whole, but by the sick;272    Matt. ix. 12. He must have a reason for saving them, seeing that He came into the world, as the Apostle Paul says, “to save sinners;”273    1 Tim. i. 15. He must have something in them to remit, who testifies that He shed His blood “for the remission of sins;”274    Matt. xxvi. 28. He must have good reason for seeking them out, who “came,” as He says, “to seek and to save that which was lost;”275    Luke xix. 10. the Son of man must find in them something to destroy, who came for the express purpose, as the Apostle John says, “that He might destroy the works of the devil.”276    1 John iii. 8. Now to this salvation of infants He must be an enemy, who asserts their innocence, in such a way as to deny them the medicine which is required by the hurt and wounded.

56. Quodlibet autem de pudenda concupiscentia carnis iste sentiat, de parvulis, pro quibus laboramus, ut salvatore indigere credantur, ne sine salute moriantur, attende quid dixerit: verba ejus repeto. Illos ergo, inquit, qui nunquam nati sunt, bonos potuisse esse dicis: istos vero qui mundum impleverunt, pro quibus Christus mortuus est, diaboli opus, et de morbo natos, et ab exordio reos definis. O si nodum solvat etiam contentionis, quomodo nodum solvit istius quaestionis! Numquid enim se modo de majoribus ista locutum esse dicturus est? De parvulis agitur, de nascentibus agitur, de his nobis , quia rei ab exordio definiuntur a nobis, ab illo invidia commovetur, quia eos dicimus reos, pro quibus Christus mortuus est. Cur ergo pro illis Christus mortuus est, si non sunt rei? Inde prorsus, inde obtinebimus causam, unde excitandam putavit invidiam. Ipse dicit, 0470Quomodo rei sunt parvuli, pro quibus Christus mortuus est? Nos respondemus: Imo parvuli quomodo rei non sunt, pro quibus Christus mortuus est? Ista controversia judicem quaerit . Judicet ergo Christus, et cui rei mors ejus profecerit, ipse dicat. Hic est, inquit, sanguis meus, qui pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum (Matth. XXVI, 28). Judicet cum illo et Apostolus, quia et in Apostolo ipse loquitur Christus. Clamat et dicit de Deo Patre, Qui proprio Filio non pepercit, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit eum (Rom. VIII, 32). Puto quod ita dicat Christum traditum pro omnibus nobis, ut in hac causa parvuli non separentur a nobis. Sed quid opus est hinc satagere, unde jam nec iste contendit: quandoquidem non solum confitetur mortuum fuisse etiam pro parvulis Christum, verum etiam inde nos arguit, quod eosdem parvulos reos dicimus, pro quibus mortuus est Christus? Jam itaque Apostolus qui dixit, pro nobis omnibus traditum Christum, dicat etiam quare sit pro nobis traditus Christus. Traditus est, inquit, propter delicta nostra, et resurrexit propter justificationem nostram (Id. IV, 25). Si igitur, sicut iste et confitetur, et profitetur , et dicit, et objicit, in eis sunt et parvuli pro quibus traditus est Christus, et propter delicta nostra traditus est Christus; habent profecto et parvuli delicta originalia, pro quibus traditus est Christus: habet quod in eis sanet, qui, sicut ipse ait, non est opus sanis medicus, sed male habentibus (Matth. IX, 12): habet cur eos salvos faciat, qui venit in mundum, sicut dicit apostolus Paulus, peccatores salvos facere (I Tim. I, 15): habet quod in eis remittat, qui sanguinem se fudisse testatur in remissionem peccatorum: habet propter quod eos quaerat, qui venit, ut dicit, quaerere et salvum facere quod perierat (Luc. XIX, 10): habet quod in eis solvat Filius Dei, qui propterea venit, sicut dicit apostolus Joannes, ut solvat opera diaboli (I Joan. III, 8). Huic ergo parvulorum saluti inimicus est, qui eorum sic asserit innocentiam, ut sauciatis et vulneratis neget necessariam medicinam.