Again, chap. 33, Vicecomes writes: “Basilius is greatly astonished (in the 23d epistle to Boniface), at infant baptism and godfathership, saying: ‘Since you cannot promise anything certain, either with regard to the child’s future faith, or its present thoughts, I pray thee, beloved, what then does it signify that, when the children are brought to baptism, the parents, as sureties, answer in their stead, and say that the children do that which at that age they cannot even think, or, which if they can, is hid from us? But those who bring the child are asked: Does it believe in God? and, for this age, which knows not whether there is a God, the parents answer: It believes. Thus also the other questions are responded to. I am astonished that in such matters the parents answer so presumptuously for the child.’” _Bapt. Hist., pages 390, 391._
This can certainly be called a candid rejection of infant baptism, and not only of infant baptism, but of all the absurd questions and answers which customarily occurred at the baptism of children, and upon which infant baptism was founded. He accuses the children of ignorance, saying that they do not know whether there is a God; the parents he accuses of presumption because they thus boldly dare answer in their stead, and say: “The child believes.” The priests who baptize such children, he accuses of folly, because they presented such improper and unfounded questions respecting the ignorant infants, and demanded that they should be answered in the child’s name. Infant baptism itself he charges with worthlessness and falsity, seeing, as Vicecomes says, he, in his 23d epistle to Boniface, is greatly astonished at infant baptism.
Basilius, in order to still more fully state his views concerning this matter, adduces various passages, which effectually overthrow infant baptism, and establish baptism upon faith.
D. Vicecomes (_Lib. 2, cap. 3_), writes thus: “Basilius calls the catechumens _nurtured ones_, since they were fed and nurtured with instruction in the Christian faith.”
Again (_cap. 4, Basilius Serm. 1, de Bapt._) he says: “We must know that we must first teach and instruct, and ultimately administer holy baptism to those thus rightly instructed.” And, a little after this: “Instruction must precede baptism, and first of all everything which stands in the way of teaching and instruction, must be removed.”
Again, in _book 3, chapter 4_, of the _Exhortation to Baptism_, he writes: “Examine thy conscience; go into the secret chamber of thy heart; awaken within thee for a time the remembrance of former things.”
Again, chapter 5: “As soon as any one came to John, and confessed his sins, however great and heinous they were, he was baptized in Jordan’s floods, and immediately received remission of sins.” _Bapt. Hist., page 392._
All these passages of Basilius as cited by D. Vicecomes, himself a pedobaptist, and noted by _J. M. in Bapt. Hist._, are so clearly opposed to infant baptism, that further comment is unnecessary. We will therefore let this suffice, and proceed to the testimony of several other persons in the fourth century.
_A. D. 390._--John Chrysostom, born of Christian parents, was at this time baptized upon his faith by Bishop Melitius, being twenty-one years old. _Episcopii. Antew. op de proeve des Remonstr. Catechism., page 359._