Young children simply trust the authority over them. That is how we are to be towards God, simply trust Him, give ourselves over to His care. We thus trust and yield and this is what Biblical faith is. We look to God as our Father and He looks to us as His children, if so we have real faith. That is what Jesus was teaching.
As for Augustine, he wrote this...
"Seewhat he has said. I, however, affirm that an infant born in a placewhere it was not possible for him to be admitted to the baptism ofChrist, and being overtaken by death, was placed in suchcircumstances, that is to say, died without the bath of regeneration,because it was not possible for him to be otherwise. He wouldtherefore absolve him, and, in spite of the Lord's sentence, open tohim the kingdom of heaven. The apostle, however, does not absolvehim, when he says: "By one man sin entered into the world, anddeath by sin; by which death passed upon all men, for that all havesinned." Romans 5:12 Rightly, therefore, by virtueof that condemnation which runs throughout the mass, is he notadmitted into the kingdom of heaven, although he was not only not aChristian, but was unable to become one."Augustine of Hippo, OnNature and Grace, Ch.IX.
"letus suppose certain twins, born of a certain harlot, and exposed thatthey might be taken up by others. One of them has expired withoutbaptism; the other is baptized. What can we say was in this case the“fate” or the “fortune,” which are here absolutely nothing?What “acceptance of persons,” when with God there is none, evenif there could be any such thing in these cases, seeing that theycertainly had nothing for which the one could be preferred to theother, and no merits of their own,—whether good, for which the onemight deserve to be baptized; or evil, for which the other mightdeserve to die without baptism? Were there any merits in theirparents, when the father was a fornicator, the mother a harlot? Butof whatever kind those merits were, there were certainly not any thatwere different in those who died in such different conditions, butall were common to both. If, then, neither fate, since no stars madethem to differ; nor fortune, since no fortuitous accidents producethese things; nor the diversity of persons nor of merits have donethis; what remains, so far as it refers to the baptized child, savethe grace of God, which is given freely to vessels made unto honour;but, as it refers to the unbaptized child, the wrath ofGod, which is repaid to the vessels made for dishonour in respect ofthe deservings of the lump itself?But in that one which is baptized we constrain you to confess thegrace of God, and convince you that no merit of its own preceded; butas to that one which died without baptism, why that sacrament shouldhave been wanting to it, which even you confess to be needful for allages, and what in that manner may have been punished in him, it isfor you to see who will not have it that there is any original sin."Augustine, Anti-PelagianWritings, Ch. XIV.
Those quotes are the fruit of a deceived mind.
As for Augustine, he wrote this...
"Seewhat he has said. I, however, affirm that an infant born in a placewhere it was not possible for him to be admitted to the baptism ofChrist, and being overtaken by death, was placed in suchcircumstances, that is to say, died without the bath of regeneration,because it was not possible for him to be otherwise. He wouldtherefore absolve him, and, in spite of the Lord's sentence, open tohim the kingdom of heaven. The apostle, however, does not absolvehim, when he says: "By one man sin entered into the world, anddeath by sin; by which death passed upon all men, for that all havesinned." Romans 5:12 Rightly, therefore, by virtueof that condemnation which runs throughout the mass, is he notadmitted into the kingdom of heaven, although he was not only not aChristian, but was unable to become one."Augustine of Hippo, OnNature and Grace, Ch.IX.
"letus suppose certain twins, born of a certain harlot, and exposed thatthey might be taken up by others. One of them has expired withoutbaptism; the other is baptized. What can we say was in this case the“fate” or the “fortune,” which are here absolutely nothing?What “acceptance of persons,” when with God there is none, evenif there could be any such thing in these cases, seeing that theycertainly had nothing for which the one could be preferred to theother, and no merits of their own,—whether good, for which the onemight deserve to be baptized; or evil, for which the other mightdeserve to die without baptism? Were there any merits in theirparents, when the father was a fornicator, the mother a harlot? Butof whatever kind those merits were, there were certainly not any thatwere different in those who died in such different conditions, butall were common to both. If, then, neither fate, since no stars madethem to differ; nor fortune, since no fortuitous accidents producethese things; nor the diversity of persons nor of merits have donethis; what remains, so far as it refers to the baptized child, savethe grace of God, which is given freely to vessels made unto honour;but, as it refers to the unbaptized child, the wrath ofGod, which is repaid to the vessels made for dishonour in respect ofthe deservings of the lump itself?But in that one which is baptized we constrain you to confess thegrace of God, and convince you that no merit of its own preceded; butas to that one which died without baptism, why that sacrament shouldhave been wanting to it, which even you confess to be needful for allages, and what in that manner may have been punished in him, it isfor you to see who will not have it that there is any original sin."Augustine, Anti-PelagianWritings, Ch. XIV.
Those quotes are the fruit of a deceived mind.
