Do You Renounce the Devil?
The 1914 baptismal font at Salem Lutheran Church, Gretna, Louisiana
“Remember, therefore, that it is no joke to take sides against the devil and not only to drive him away from the little child, but to burden the child with such a mighty and lifelong enemy.”
— Martin Luther
A writer on Substack, whom I believe to be a Reformed Christian, expressed amazement that “ancient baptismal liturgies” included a renunciation of the devil and the recitation of the Apostles’ Creed. He very much liked the idea of renouncing Satan at baptism, and expressed dismay that this was not being done in his own church.
While the Holy Sacrament doesn’t require anything other than a celebrant, a candidate, water, and the Words of Institution, baptisms in Lutheran churches typically and ordinarily include, and have always included, the renunciation of the devil and the reciting (or confession) of the creed by the candidate. In fact, I cannot remember ever personally conducting a baptism without these liturgical words and acts. My own baptism (as an adult) included them. And in fact, following the alternative rite as found on page 14 of the Pastoral Care Companion (based on Luther’s 1526 rite), I always include the exorcism.
But what about non-liturgical Lutherans?
To be sure, they conduct proper, valid baptisms. Some LCMS megachurches put their baptisms on YouTube. But as one might expect, there is no renunciation of the devil, nor confession of the Apostles’ Creed - let alone the exorcism.
In fact, a recent example of an LCMS non-liturgical congregation’s baptismal service was widely circulated online because of some of those baptisms actually being “rebaptisms,” with one of them involving a man identifying as a woman (and there were other issues as well). The rites were confusing, with some of their baptisms being done by pouring, while others were done by immersion in a kiddie pool. The “transgender” individual appeared to have been (re-)baptized by a lady layman - though that does not seem to have actually been the case. When liturgical orders are abolished, quite often, disorder and confusion fill the vacuum. And the big question is “Qui bono?”
But it is also troublesome that this congregation, like some other LCMS congregations, also did away with the renunciation of the devil. One can only ask “Why?” I mean, who would want to abolish such a thing, besides Satan and his demons, that is?
In these dark days where evil runs rampant, why would any of our churches seek to cut out the renunciation of Satan, or the opportunity for a candidate to confess his faith? Why would they forego the giving of the sign of the cross to the candidate, and the opportunity to lay hands on the head of the candidate and pray the Lord’s Prayer? And what could be the rationale to ditch Luther’s “flood prayer,” which our churches have prayed together at Holy Baptism for more than five centuries now? What do they gain in return?
Obviously, these ceremonies are not essential to a baptism, but what is the rationale for their abolition? Does anyone other than the devil benefit?
And similarly, it’s my understanding that some of those who worked on the LSB project wanted to include the exorcism (as found on page 16 of the Pastoral Care Companion) in the standard baptismal liturgy that appears in our hymnal (LSB 268), but were opposed by some, and and the exorcism was removed. Once again, Qui bono?
I have to admit, I find it a bit creepy that we had men making liturgical decisions for our church body who opposed the inclusion of an exorcism. Again, the only beneficiaries of this omission are demonic.
Well, at least these rites are still available - and still commonly used by our pastors and congregations - by those who still believe that the church (including baptismal candidates) still ought to renounce the devil, all his works, and all his ways.
You can learn more about the traditional Lutheran ceremonies of the Sacrament of Holy Baptism from this helpful article by LCMS pastor, the Rev. Dr. Mark Birkholz: “Luther’s Baptismal Rites.”