Luther quote on monasticism

[AMM]

This afternoon someone shared this quote with me and I found it particularly interesting.

And so, if you vow to take up the religious life, and if you live with men of like mind, with a clear conscience that in monasticism you seek nothing to your advantage in your relationship with God, but because either your situation has brought you to embrace this kind of life, or it appeared to be the best way of life for you, without your thinking thereby that you are better than he who takes up a wife or takes up farming, then in that case you are neither wrong to take vows nor wrong to live in this way, insofar as the propriety of the vow is concerned. But if love should demand that the vow be broken and you were to hold fast to your vow, you would be sinning.
Martin Luther, The Judgement of Martin Luther on Monastic Vows, LW 44:304
​

Words from Luther

What are your thoughts? Is this "early Luther" and so it should be dismissed? Or is Luther on to something here? (I, as my username suggests, tend to agree with Luther on this point...)

 

[archer75]

What does it mean that "love should demand..."?

 

[prodromos]

Didn't Luther break his monastic vows?

 

[~Anastasia~]

I'm curious too what does it mean "if love should demand ..."?

I suppose if a monk is saving someone's life by marrying them that could enter into the equation. Does he simply mean if the monk develops an attachment and wishes to marry?

 

[FireDragon76]

Didn't Luther break his monastic vows?

No, he was released from his monastic vows by Johann von Staupitz, his spiritual father, to help protect Luther.

 

[Resha Caner]

I don't see anything to object to in the quote. He covers a lot of ground with respect to the mistaken motivations of many medieval monks. (cool alliteration, isn't it?)

 

[prodromos]

No, he was released from his monastic vows by Johann von Staupitz, his spiritual father, to help protect Luther.

Thanks. I'd only ever heard the former.

 

[FireDragon76]

Thanks. I'd only ever heard the former.

There's alot of modern mythology about Luther as a bold individualist who happily threw off monasticism and celibacy to liberate the world, but the actual history is more complicated.

 

[AMM]

What does it mean that "love should demand..."?

I'm curious too what does it mean "if love should demand ..."?

I suppose if a monk is saving someone's life by marrying them that could enter into the equation. Does he simply mean if the monk develops an attachment and wishes to marry?

I don't think he simply means that a monk desires to marry, then he should be free to marry. Luther usually uses "love" as "the fulfilling of the Law", not our romantic connotation today. So I think an example would be if a monk makes a vow of silence, but his neighbor is being falsely testified against. Love would have him break his silence to defend his neighbor. I.e. vows should be broken if it helps our neighbor (so your example of saving someone's life through marriage is also a good one)

 

[~Anastasia~]

I don't think he simply means that a monk desires to marry, then he should be free to marry. Luther usually uses "love" as "the fulfilling of the Law", not our romantic connotation today. So I think an example would be if a monk makes a vow of silence, but his neighbor is being falsely testified against. Love would have him break his silence to defend his neighbor. I.e. vows should be broken if it helps our neighbor (so your example of saving someone's life through marriage is also a good one)

That makes sense. That's how I would understand "love demands" ... Breaking a vow is a serious thing, but if one does it for the sake of someone else in a serious situation of need, that could be the right thing to do. Though we are only discussing theoreticals, aren't we?

 

[prodromos]

An everyday example is when you are offered non fasting food on a fast day.

 

[AMM]

An everyday example is when you are offered non fasting food on a fast day.

That's a good point. As I understand it, Orthodoxy teaches we should accept food in these circumstances, right? And although that's technically breaking the fast, it is not considered sin? Correct me if I'm wrong

 

[prodromos]

That's a good point. As I understand it, Orthodoxy teaches we should accept food in these circumstances, right? And although that's technically breaking the fast, it is not considered sin? Correct me if I'm wrong

If it is done in love so as not to offend or to draw attention to the fact that you are fasting, it is no sin.
If it is done to get out of fasting, it probably is.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Didn't Luther break his monastic vows?

His Spiritual Father, Johannes Von Staupitz released him from his vows.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

That makes sense. That's how I would understand "love demands" ... Breaking a vow is a serious thing, but if one does it for the sake of someone else in a serious situation of need, that could be the right thing to do. Though we are only discussing theoreticals, aren't we?

If a vow is made or taken for the right reasons, one would not have to break it.

In Catechism class, we were discussing Confession and Absolution, and the seal of the Confessional came up.

If an innocent man were convicted of murder and was sentenced to hang, and another individual came to you, a Pastor, and confessed to that same murder what should you do? You could save that person by directing the authorities to the real killer, but should you do so? No, you are bound by your ordinational vows to maintain that seal; all you could do is plead with the real killer to repent and turn himself in, because if he does not, you can give him Absolution for he has not really repented if he is not willing to confess to the authorities, and will be guilty of the death of innocent man.

However, as you said above, if vows are impeding your service of the Lord and His Church; how valid are such vows anyway?

 

[~Anastasia~]

If a vow is made or taken for the right reasons, one would not have to break it.

In Catechism class, we were discussing Confession and Absolution, and the seal of the Confessional came up.

If an innocent man were convicted of murder and was sentenced to hang, and another individual came to you, a Pastor, and confessed to that same murder what should you do? You could save that person by directing the authorities to the real killer, but should you do so? No, you are bound by your ordinational vows to maintain that seal; all you could do is plead with the real killer to repent and turn himself in, because if he does not, you can give him Absolution for he has not really repented if he is not willing to confess to the authorities, and will be guilty of the death of innocent man.

However, as you said above, if vows are impeding your service of the Lord and His Church; how valid are such vows anyway?

Well, it seems a strange situation to me, but suppose there was a woman who would be put to death if she were not married. But no one was willing to marry her to save her life. A monk is not allowed to marry of course. But I suppose he could seek the blessing of his SF to be released, so that he might through personal sacrifice marry the woman and so save her life. That wouldn't in any way invalidate the vows he had initially taken though.

It gets a bit stickier, but it's possible he could continue even to live as a monk under such circumstances, if the woman required legal marriage only to save her.

I know that sounds like a stretch. I just can't imagine a likely real-world scenario to demonstrate the principle, in our world today.

BTW, always great to see you, my brother. I pray you are well.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Well, it seems a strange situation to me, but suppose there was a woman who would be put to death if she were not married. But no one was willing to marry her to save her life. A monk is not allowed to marry of course. But I suppose he could seek the blessing of his SF to be released, so that he might through personal sacrifice marry the woman and so save her life. That wouldn't in any way invalidate the vows he had initially taken though.

It gets a bit stickier, but it's possible he could continue even to live as a monk under such circumstances, if the woman required legal marriage only to save her.

I know that sounds like a stretch. I just can't imagine a likely real-world scenario to demonstrate the principle, in our world today.

BTW, always great to see you, my brother. I pray you are well.

Good to see you as well. I am good, I trust you are doing well also!

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Well, it seems a strange situation to me, but suppose there was a woman who would be put to death if she were not married. But no one was willing to marry her to save her life. A monk is not allowed to marry of course. But I suppose he could seek the blessing of his SF to be released, so that he might through personal sacrifice marry the woman and so save her life. That wouldn't in any way invalidate the vows he had initially taken though.

It gets a bit stickier, but it's possible he could continue even to live as a monk under such circumstances, if the woman required legal marriage only to save her.

I know that sounds like a stretch. I just can't imagine a likely real-world scenario to demonstrate the principle, in our world today.

BTW, always great to see you, my brother. I pray you are well.

I'm not sure of the timing but possibly. Luther's wife Kate had no prospects for mariage, and Fr. Marty had no intention of marrying. He married her so she would not be left homeless and destitute, but later wrote that he had grown rather fond of "her curls on his pillow". . They both grew to love each other, and he wrote much about her always with fondness and love. He also complemented her on her beer brewing prowess. Apearantly she was also a good fisherwoman, catching fresh fish often and cooking them well.

 

[keith99]

I don't think he simply means that a monk desires to marry, then he should be free to marry. Luther usually uses "love" as "the fulfilling of the Law", not our romantic connotation today. So I think an example would be if a monk makes a vow of silence, but his neighbor is being falsely testified against. Love would have him break his silence to defend his neighbor. I.e. vows should be broken if it helps our neighbor (so your example of saving someone's life through marriage is also a good one)

Any chance someone has this in teh original language? I doubt Luther used English, which it seems is just about the worst there is for distinguishing different kinds of love.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I'm not sure of the timing but possibly. Luther's wife Kate had no prospects for mariage, and Fr. Marty had no intention of marrying. He married her so she would not be left homeless and destitute, but later wrote that he had grown rather fond of "her curls on his pillow". . They both grew to love each other, and he wrote much about her always with fondness and love. He also complemented her on her beer brewing prowess. Apearantly she was also a good fisherwoman, catching fresh fish often and cooking them well.

Ah I did not know that. So it wasn't so far off.

Though I kind of wonder how a monk might think to support someone? I never looked into what sort of work he did once out of the monastery. But in any case a man would have had more (and much better) prospects than any woman. Especially an educated man, I'd guess.