FathersVia Patrum

A Candid Inquiry into the Controversies among Evangelicals · §88

Controv. XIII.II: Is the baptismal exorcism rite useful — or even necessary — in the church?

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

Second question under the rites head: the ceremony of exorcism in baptism.

The minister about to baptize an infant (1) asks whether the child believes, whether he renounces the world, and the like; (2) commands Satan to leave the infant — possessed by the demon not bodily, but spiritually — and give place to the Holy Spirit; (3) using the sign of the cross and a fixed form of words.

Is that rite usefully kept in the Christian church — or even necessary, and to be kept without fail? Some Lutherans affirm one or the other; most of them, with the Reformed, deny.

See the Cassel consensus on exorcism (above, p. 340). Saxons and the rest also grant that the rite is not essential to baptism, not commanded by Christ or the apostles, not a spiritual power in itself — only a sign that infants are born children of wrath and stand under Satan's power outside Christ.

Latin

XIV. II. An Exorcismi Ceremonia in Baptismi administratione, quâ Minister baptizaturus Infantem, 1. Quaerit an credat, an abrenunciet seculo, &c. 2. Imperat Satanae, ut ab infante baptizando, non corporaliter quidem, sed spiritualiter à Daemone possesso, exeat, detque locum Spiritui S. 3. Adhibito Crucis signo, & certâ verborum formula; An sit ille ritus vel etiam utiliter retentus in Ecclesia Christiana, vel etiam necessarius, & omninò retinendus? Affirm. alterutrum Luther. quidam; Negant cum Reform. eorum plurimi. VIDE consensum Cassellanum, circa Exorcismum, suprâ p. 340. Ac fassi etiam Saxonici, & reliqui, Ritum nec essentialem esse Baptismo, nec imperatum à Christo vel Apostolis, nec vis alicujus spiritualis, nec nisi σημαντικὸν nasci Infantes irae filios, & sub Satanae potestate, extrà Christum, constitutos.

About this text

Samuel Strimesius — Prefatio through Controversiae Post Lutherum Controv. III-XIII + XV Tolerantia, Hexades Annotationum Prooemium and Annotatio I through Decem Theses / Francus plus Annotatio II §.I-§.VI and Annotatio III §.I–§.VII (through Cassellanum 1661) from Ingenua in Controversias Evangelicorum (Frankfurt an der Oder, 1708). Honest partial; Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio III §.VIII+ fruits / §.IX+, Hexades theses body, deeper Controversiae / Part II remain.

English follows the locked 1708 Francofurti ad Viadrum Latin of Prefatio §I–II, Crimina defenses through III, Part I Protheoria through Controversiae Obices/Historia/Varii gradus, Formula Discord/Disparitas, Ulterius confirmatur / Classes / Formula protest / triplex differentia, Coena Domini Controversiae Priores through Precariae Hypotheses (Controv. print pp. 34–40), Controversiae Post Lutherum Natae Controv. III–XV tip (providence through De Tolerantia mutua; Controv. print pp. 40–78), Hexades Annotationum Prooemium H.I–§.III (Hexades print pp. 1–4 / PDF ~182–185), and Annotatio I De Augustana Confessione §.I–§.VIII tip (Hexades print pp. 5–24+ / PDF ~186–205+), reconstructed from Google Books PDF page images (ONB copy, id 3epYAAAAcAAJ) with pdftotext as check. No modern English was copied. Sister Halle digitization of Ingenua in Arminianismum (DOI 10.25673/65287) remains Anubis-blocked — skipped; Controversias only. Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio I §.IX+, Hexades theses body beyond §.VIII, and remainder of Controversiae / folio remain.

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.