(Fragment.)
Luther's opinion on the vows of chastity of the clergy and monks; he wants the former to be abolished, about the latter he is still uncertain. On the consumption of the Lord's Supper in both forms.
Printed in Aurifaber, vol. I, p. 343, with the remark that this fragment was found in Spalatin's library; in De Wette, vol. ll, p. 34 and in Erlanger Briefwechsel, vol. Ill, p. 205. In the latter two there is incorrect proof of Walch, namely XV, appendix CCIX instead of XOIX.
3) The remark that the Erlangen correspondence makes about this passage: "Our passage contradicts the statement in the letter addressed to Melanchthon on the same day" (St. Louis edition, vol. XIX, 1794) is invalid. There it is about a short secret meeting to discuss a theological question, but here it is about Luther's permanent return to the administration of his preaching ministry.
JEsus.
1) "Namely, that you must know and can solve only those sins which are confessed to you; but which are not confessed to you, you must neither know nor solve; that is too high, dear sirs."
You cannot yet persuade me that the same is true of the vows of priests and monks. For I am very much moved by the fact that the priesthood is instituted by God as a free one, but not that of the monks, who have voluntarily chosen the state and offered themselves to God, although I would almost like to conclude that those who are before the years of manhood or in the same, and have entered this maw, can leave without any qualms of conscience, only that the judgment of those who have already grown old and have spent a long time in this state still holds me back.
2 Incidentally, since Paul speaks quite freely about the priests [1 Tim. 4, 1. ff.] that their marriage is forbidden by the devils, and the voice of Paul is a voice of the divine majesty, I do not doubt that they must rely on him to such an extent that, even if they had consented to this prohibition of the devil when they were admitted, now that they have recognized the matter with whom they made this contract, they can quite confidently cancel this contract.
This prohibition of the devil, which is clearly shown by the word of God, is very urgent to me and compels me to approve the actions of the bishop of Kemberg 2). For God is not deceiving nor lying when He says that this is a prohibition of the devil. But if a contract has been made with the devil, it must not stand, since it was made in ungodly error against God, and since God rejects and condemns it. For he expressly says [1 Tim. 4, 1. Vulg.] that those spirits are of error who are the authors of the prohibitions.
1) These words may go to the first eight theses of Carlstadt's disputation of July 19, which dealt with sin and repentance. The second eight theses concerned the Lord's Supper, which may be referred to below. In total, there were 24 theses. Cf. Jäger, "Carlstadt," p. 202.
2) The marriage of the provost of Kemberg, Bartholomäus Bernhardt von Feldkirch.
4 Why are you afraid to join this divine judgment even against the gates of hell? This is not the case with the oath of the children of Israel, which was taken by the Gibeonites [Jos. 9:15], for they keep in their commandments that they should offer peace and, if it were offered to them, they should accept it, and then they should also accept the proselytes and those who would join their customs. All this was done among the Gibeonites. Nothing was done against the Lord or on the advice of the spirits of error. For though they murmured at the beginning, yet afterwards they approved it.
(5) Add to this that the celibate state is a mere human statute, which a man who has established it can abolish again; therefore any Christian can also do this. This I say, even if it were not ordered by the devils, but by a pious man. Since I do not have such a saying of God about the monks, it is not safe to say the same about them. For I would not dare to follow, therefore not even to advise a monk to follow. Would to God that we could do this, so that no one would become a monk or retire in the years of lust. For one must avoid aversions where there is not a revealed scripture for us, however much they may be permissible things.
6) That also the good man Carlstadt quotes from Paul [1 Tim. 5, 9. 11.]: 3) one should let the younger widows go and choose one of sixty years, - God would that this would be proving. For someone will easily be able to say that the apostle has ordered this with respect to the future, while with respect to the past he says [v. 12] that they are condemned because they have transgressed the first faith. And so that saying is nullified, and cannot be a reliable rock for consciences. For this we seek. Further, this reason, that it is better to be free than to suffer rutting [1 Cor. 7:9], or, that the sin of fornication may be avoided [1 Cor. 7:2], to enter into marriage in the sin of the broken faith [1 Cor. 7:9].
3) In his writing "Von Gelübden," Jäger, "Carlstadt," p. 195.
1) What is this but pure reason? We want the Scriptures and the testimony of the divine will. Who knows whether he who burns today will burn tomorrow?
(7) For I would not have given marriage to the priests for the sake of burning alone, if Paul had not called the prohibition an erroneous and devilish and hypocritical one, and condemned by God, so that even without burning he compelled them to leave this celibate state for the sake of the fear of God alone; but it will be useful to discuss these things in more detail. For I, too, would like to help the monks and nuns beyond measure. I lament so much for the wretched people, the young men and girls who are plagued with stains and burns.
(8) Regarding both forms of the Lord's Supper, I do not prove it with an example, but with the words of Christ. For he [Carlstadt] does not prove that those who receive one form have sinned or have not sinned, but I am moved by the fact that Christ did not require either, just as he does not necessarily require baptism if a tyrant or the world should resist the water. So also the violence of persecutions separates the man and the woman, whom God forbids to be separated, because they do not agree to be separated either. Nor do godly hearts consent to be deprived of the one form, but those who consent and approve, who will deny that they are papists, but not Christians, and sin?
(9) Since He does not require it by necessity, and here the tyrant presses, I do not see how those who receive only one form can sin. For who can take something away by force if the tyrant does not want it? Therefore, there is nothing here but reason, which asserts that the institution of Christ is not kept; but the Scripture does not establish anything, without which we cannot declare it to be sin. It is the institution of Christ, but left free, and cannot be imprisoned, either in whole or in part.
1) Carlstadt says: "It is true that one does wrong when one breaks the law. Jäger, I. o. p. 195.
(10) For what would become of it if what happened to the martyr Donatus happened, that since the cup was broken or [the wine] spilled, some could not partake, and that no other wine was at hand, and many similar cases? In short, because Scripture does not enforce that there is sin here, I claim no sin.
11 But it pleases me very much that you restore the institution of Christ. For that was what I intended to do above all things when I returned to you. For we now have the knowledge of this tyranny and can resist it, so that we are not forced to receive only one form.
12 But I will not hold a private mass anymore in eternity. Rather, we want to ask God to hasten to give us his spirit more abundantly. For I suspect that the Lord will soon punish Germany as her unbelief deserves, her godlessness and her hatred of the gospel. But this punishment will then be given to us, because we as heretics would have provoked God to it, and we will be a mockery of the people and contempt of the people. But those will take excuses in their sins and justify themselves, so that He may prove that the hardened do not become pious either by kindness or by anger, and many will be angered. Let it be done, let the will of the Lord be done, amen.
(13) If you are a preacher of grace, preach not a fictitious grace, but the true grace. If grace is true, you must also bear true sin, not fictitious sin. God does not make blessed those who are sinners only in a fictitious way. Be a sinner and have strong sins, 2) but trust even stronger and rejoice in Christ, who is the victor over sin, death and the world. We must sin as long as we are here; this life is not a dwelling place of righteousness, but we are waiting, says Peter [2 Ep. 3:13], for a new heaven and a new earth in which righteousness will be established.
2) This is indisputably the opinion of Luther with the words: pecca fortiter, which needs no further proof for a Christian; but the papists make a reproach out of it against Luther.
dwells. It is enough that through the riches of God's glory we have known the Lamb who bears the sin of the world; from whom no sin can tear us away, even if we hurl or kill a thousand, thousand times in one day. Do you think it is a small price and a small payment for our sin given by such and such a great Lamb?
Pray strongly, for you are an exceedingly strong sinner. On the day [of the chain celebration] of Peter the Apostle 1) [August 1] 1521.