164 MOEAL CONDITION OF THE CHILD 



ever, in harmony with the well-nigh unchallenged 

 phrase, extra ecclesiam nulla solus. It grew early 

 and extensively in the early Church, and at times 

 has held an almost universal sway. 



It has always been met, however, by two or 

 more beliefs that seemed to make it untenable. 

 The first was that baptism is for the "remission 

 of sins." If this sin was original sin, of course 

 it was logical for the child to be baptized as early 

 as possible; but if it were for the sins actually 

 committed by us, then it was best to defer bap- 

 tism to a period as late in life as possible. Or 

 if it were for both original and actual sins, as 

 many held, the latter position is inevitable. This 

 latter course was recommended by many and was 

 the one pursued by Constantino the Great. More- 

 over, it was regarded peculiarly sacrilegious for 

 a baptized person to commit sin, while an un- 

 baptized person was privileged in sin. Augustin 

 quotes the current saying, "Let him alone, let 

 him do as he likes, for he is yet unbaptized. ' ' 

 ("Confessions," I, xi.) The other belief was 

 that baptism was a sign of admission into the 

 Kingdom, which could be entered by those only 

 who personally by faith accepted Jesus Christ. 

 As this faith is impossible to children, they could 

 not enter, and logic would require that they should 

 be refused baptism, the initiatory rite. This atti- 

 tude toward the subject has played a much larger 

 role than the other, and is a very prevalent ob- 

 stacle to the custom even to this day. It has been 



