language of modern theology, spiritually impure, a condition which is technically expressed by the word taboo. It is well known, of course, that the mother, at this time, is also taboo, and it is possible that the child is infected by the mother, so to speak; but this consideration has nothing to do with our enquiry. For the removal of the child's taboo, which is fraught with peril not only to the child, but also to the community around, a ceremonial or religious purification by ritual washing is necessary. But it does not in the least matter where the water used in the mystic washing is obtained. Any water will serve the purpose, provided it is, or is rendered, sacred, that is, free from mystically deleterious qualities, by the officiating medicine-man or priest. Naturally, the water of a holy well or river, such as the Jordan, possesses qualities in virtue of which it is inherently sacred, and so the baby baptized by such water is twice blest. But the point to be noted is, that the water of the sacred spring or river used for baptism is already holy. It was sacred before it was used for baptism.
As time goes on and the world advances, a deeper meaning comes to be attached to the rite of baptism. It becomes the Church's opportunity of emphasizing the mystery of biogenesis. A child indeed is not, so to speak, born into the Church until it is baptized. And it is interesting to trace the original taboo in the comparatively modern doctrine of Original Sin, from which the infant is set free by the baptismal rite. Thus, in the primitive taboo lies the germ of the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration.
Returning to the primitive ritual bathing of children, to detail all the records of infant lustration-rites from all over the world of time and space would be wearisome, but perhaps I may describe a few instances in order to illustrate the several points in my argument.
