Let us refer to our Saviour's words to Nicodemus in the text. Our Lord tells him none can enter into the kingdom of God who is not born of water and the Spirit. And why? _Because_ (He goes on to say) "that which is born of the flesh is flesh[2]." We need a new birth, because our first birth is a birth unto sin. Who does not see that this reason is equally cogent for _infant_ Baptism as for Baptism at all? Baptism by water and the Spirit is necessary for salvation (He says), because man's _nature_ is corrupt; therefore infants must need this regeneration too. If, indeed, sin were not planted deep in man's very heart,--if it were merely an accidental evil into which some fell while others escaped it.--nay, even if, though (as a fact) all men actually fall into sin, yet this general depravity arose merely from bad example, not from natural bias, then indeed Baptism of water and the Spirit would not be necessary except for those who, having come to years of understanding, had actual sin to answer for: but if, as our Saviour implies, even a child's heart, before he begins to think and act, is under Divine wrath, and contains the sure and miserable promise of future sin as the child grows up, can we do otherwise than thankfully accept the pledge and means which He has given us of a new birth unto holiness; and since, by not telling us the time for Baptism, He has in a way left it to ourselves to decide upon it, shall we not apply the medicine given us when we are sure of the disease? "Can any man _forbid_ water," to use St. Peter's words under different circumstances, "that" children "should not be baptized?" The burden of proof, as it is called, is with those who withhold the Sacrament.