To Florus 1.57

The sequence of reasoning obliges me to linger over explaining the condition of infants, because it does not allow matters joined by its own law to be divided. Otherwise the loss of newborn children would be easier to bear if divine majesty itself were not endangered along with them. Clear God, then, and accuse the infant. Show that what he does is just, since he cannot be God without justice, and let any person you please undergo punishment. As things stand, however, quite apart from their sacrilege, the claims you think fit together fiercely contradict one another. You say that because idolaters, murderers of their own kin, and infants are initiated through the same mysteries, all can be proved wicked. Then you add something far more absurd: that the author of this sacrament we are discussing imputes other people's sins to the innocent. This is the contradiction I named. The nature of things does not permit God at one and the same time to be so merciful that he forgives each person who confesses that person's own sins, and so cruel that he fastens someone else's sins upon an innocent person. Grant either one and you have removed the other. If he gives pardon to the guilty, he does not falsely accuse the innocent. If he falsely accuses the innocent, he never spares the guilty.