The Apology [Defense] of the Augsburg Confession
Article XXVII:
(XIII): Of Monastic Vows.
1] In the town of Eisenach, in Thuringia, there was, to our knowledge,
a monk, John Hilten, who, thirty years ago, was cast by his fraternity
into prison because he had protested against certain most notorious abuses.
For we have seen his writings, from which it can be well understood what
the nature of his doctrine was [that he was a Christian, and preached according
to the Scriptures]. And those who knew him testify that he was a mild old
man, and serious indeed, 2] but without moroseness. He predicted
many things, some of which have thus far transpired, and others still seem
to impend, which we do not wish to recite, lest it may be inferred that
they are narrated either from hatred toward one or from partiality to another.
But finally, when, either on account of his age or the foulness of the
prison, he fell into disease, he sent for the guardian in order to tell
him of his sickness; and when the guardian, inflamed with pharisaic hatred,
had begun to reprove the man harshly on account of his kind of doctrine,
which seemed to be injurious to the kitchen, then, omitting all mention
of his sickness, he said with a sigh that he was bearing these injuries
patiently for Christ's sake, since he had indeed neither written nor taught
anything which could overthrow the position of the monks, but had only
protested against some well-known abuses. 3] But another one,
he said,
will come in A. D. 1516, who will destroy You, neither
will you be able to resist him. This very opinion concerning the downward
career of the power of the monks, and this number of years, his friends
afterwards found also written by him in his commentaries, which he had
left, concerning certain passages of Daniel. 4] But although the
outcome will teach how much weight should be given to this declaration,
yet there are other signs which threaten a change in the power of the monks,
that are no less certain than oracles. For it is evident how much hypocrisy,
ambition, avarice there is in the monasteries, how much ignorance and cruelty
among all the unlearned, what vanity in their sermons and in devising continually
new means of gaining money. [The more stupid asses the monks are, the more
stubborn, furious, bitter, the more venomous asps they are in persecuting
the truth and the Word of God.] 5] And there are other faults, which
we do not care to mention. While they once were [not jails or everlasting
prisons, but] schools for Christian instruction, now they have degenerated,
as though from a golden to an iron age, or as the Platonic cube degenerates
into bad harmonies, which, Plato says, brings destruction. [Now this precious
gold is turned to dross, and the wine to water.] All the most wealthy monasteries
support only an idle crowd, which gluttonizes upon 6] the public
alms of the Church. Christ, however, teaches concerning the salt that
has lost its savor that it should be cast out and be trodden under foot,
Matt. 5, 13. Therefore 7] the monks by such morals are singing their
own fate [requiem, and it will soon be over with them]. And now another
sign is added, because they are, in many places, the instigators of the
death of good men. [This blood of Abel cries against them and] These murders
God undoubtedly will shortly avenge. 8] Nor indeed do we find fault
with all; for we are of the opinion that there are here and there some
good men in the monasteries who judge moderately concerning human and factitious
services, as some writers call them, and who do not approve of the cruelty
which the hypocrites among them exercise.
9] But we are now discussing the kind of doctrine which the composers
of the Confutation are now defending, and not the question whether vows
should be observed. For we hold that lawful vows ought to be observed;
but whether these services merit the remission of sins and justification;
whether they are satisfactions for sins; whether they are equal to Baptism;
whether they are the observance of precepts and counsels; whether they
are evangelical perfection; whether they have the merits of supererogation;
whether these merits, when applied on behalf of others, save them; whether
vows made with these opinions are lawful; whether vows are lawful that
are undertaken under the pretext of religion, merely for the sake of the
belly and idleness; whether those are truly vows that have been extorted
either from the unwilling, or from those who on account of age were not
able to judge concerning the kind of life, whom parents or friends thrust
into the monasteries that they might be supported at the public expense,
without the loss of private patrimony; whether vows are lawful that openly
tend to an evil issue, either because on account of weakness they are not
observed, or because those who are in these fraternities are compelled
10]
to approve and aid the abuses of the Mass, the godless worship of saints,
and the counsels to rage against good men: concerning these questions we
are treating. And although we have said very many things in the Confession
concerning such vows as even the canons of the Popes condemn, nevertheless
the adversaries command that all things which we have produced be rejected.
For they have used these words.
And it is worth while to hear how they pervert our reasons, and what
they adduce to fortify their own cause. Accordingly, we will briefly run
over a few of our arguments, and, in passing, explain away the sophistry
of the adversaries in reference to them. Since, however, this entire cause
has been carefully and fully treated by Luther in the book to which he
gave the title De Votis Monasticis, we wish here to consider that
book as reiterated.
11] First, it is very certain that a vow is not lawful
by which he who vows thinks that he merits the remission of sins before
God, or makes satisfaction before God for sins. For this opinion is a manifest
insult to the Gospel, which teaches that the remission of sins is freely
granted us for Christ's sake, as has been said above at some length. Therefore
we have correctly quoted the declaration of Paul to the Galatians, Gal.
5, 4: Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you
are justified by the Law; ye are fallen from grace. Those who seek
the remission of sins, not by faith in Christ, but by monastic works, detract
from the honor of Christ, and crucify Christ afresh. But hear, hear how
the composers of the Confutation escape in this place! 12] They
explain this passage of Paul only concerning the Law of Moses, and they
add that observe all things for Christ's sake, and endeavor to live the
nearer the Gospel in order to merit eternal life. And they add a horrible
peroration in these words: Wherefore those things are wicked that are
here 13] alleged against monasticism. O Christ, how long
wilt Thou bear these reproaches with which our enemies treat Thy Gospel?
We have said in the Confession that the remission of sins is received freely
for Christ's sake, through faith. If this is not the very voice of the
Gospel, if it is not the judgment of the eternal Father, which Thou who
art in the bosom of the Father hast revealed to the world, we are justly
blamed. But Thy death is a witness, Thy resurrection is a witness, the
Holy Ghost is a witness, Thy entire Church is a witness, that it is truly
the judgment of the Gospel that we obtain remission of sins, not on account
of our merits, but on account of Thee, through faith.
14] When Paul denies that by the Law of Moses men merit the remission
of sins, he withdraws this praise much more from human traditions; and
this he clearly testifies Col. 2, 16. If the Law of Moses, which was divinely
revealed, did not merit the remission of sins, how much less do these silly
observances [monasticism, rosaries, etc.], averse to the civil custom of
life, merit the remission of sins!
15] The adversaries feign that Paul abolishes the Law of Moses,
and that Christ succeeds in such a way that He does not freely grant the
remission of sins, but on account of the works of other laws, if any 16]
are now devised. By this godless and fanatical imagination they bury the
benefit of Christ. Then they feign that among those who observe this Law
of Christ, the monks observe it more closely than others, on account of
their hypocritical poverty, obedience, and chastity, since indeed all these
things are full of sham. In the greatest abundance of all things they boast
of poverty. Although no class of men has greater license than the monks
[who have masterfully decreed that they are exempt from obedience to bishops
and princes], they boast of obedience. Of celibacy we do not like to speak;
how pure this is in most of those who desire to be continent, Gerson indicates.
And how many of them desire to be continent [not to mention the thoughts
of their hearts]?
17] Of course, in this sham life the monks live more closely
in accordance with the Gospel! Christ does not succeed Moses in such a
way as to remit sins on account of our works, but so as to set His own
merits and His own propitiation on our behalf against God's wrath, that
we may be freely forgiven. Now, he who, apart from Christ's propitiation,
opposes his own merits to God's wrath, and on account of his own merits
endeavors to obtain the remission of sins, whether he present the works
of the Mosaic Law, or of the Decalog, or of the rule of Benedict, or of
the rule of Augustine, or of other rules, annuls the promise of Christ,
has
cast away Christ, and has fallen from grace. This is the verdict
of Paul.
18] But, behold, most clement Emperor Charles, behold, ye princes,
behold, all ye ranks, how, great is the impudence of the adversaries! Although
we have cited the declaration of Paul to this effect, they have written:
Wicked
are those things that are here cited against monasticism. But what
19]
is more certain than that men obtain the remission of sins by faith for
Christ's sake? And these wretches dare to call this a wicked opinion! We
do not at all doubt that if you had been advised of this passage, you would
have taken [will take] care that such blasphemy be removed from the Confutation.
But since it has been fully shown above that the opinion 20]
is wicked, that we obtain the remission of sins on account of our works,
we shall be briefer at this place. For the prudent reader will easily be
able to reason thence that we do not merit the remission of sins by monastic
works. Therefore this blasphemy also is in no way to be endured which is
read in Thomas, that the monastic profession is equal to Baptism.
It is madness to make human tradition, which has neither God's command
nor promise, equal to the ordinance of Christ, which has both the command
and promise of God, which contains the covenant of grace and of eternal
life.
21] Secondly. Obedience, poverty, and celibacy, provided
the latter is not impure, are, as exercises, adiaphora [in which we are
not to look for either sin or righteousness]. And for this reason the saints
can use these without impiety, just as Bernard, Franciscus, and other holy
men used them. And they used them on account of bodily advantage, that
they might have more leisure to teach and to perform other godly offices,
and not that the works themselves are, by themselves, works that justify
or merit eternal life. Finally, they belong to the class of which Paul
says, 1 Tim. 4, 8: Bodily exercise 22] profiteth little.
And it is credible that in some places there are also at present good men,
engaged in the ministry of the Word, who use these observances without
wicked opinions [without hypocrisy and with the understanding that they
do not regard their monasticism as holiness]. 23] But to hold that
these observances are services on account of which they are accounted just
before God, and through which they merit eternal life, conflicts with the
Gospel concerning the righteousness of faith, which teaches that for Christ's
sake righteousness and eternal life are granted us. It conflicts also with
the saying of Christ, Matt. 15, 9: In vain do they worship Me, teaching
for doctrines the commandments of men. It conflicts also with this
statement, Rom. 14, 23:
Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. But how
can they affirm that they are services which God approves as righteousness
before Him when they have no testimony of God's Word?
24] But look at the impudence of the adversaries! They not only
teach that these observances are justifying services, but they add that
these services are more perfect, i.e., meriting more the remission
of sins and justification, than do other kinds of life [that they are states
of perfection, i.e., holier and higher states than the rest, such
as marriage, rulership]. And here many false and pernicious opinions concur.
They imagine that they [are the most holy people who] observe [not only]
precepts and [but also] counsels [that is, the superior counsels, which
Scripture issues concerning exalted gifts, not by way of command, but of
advice]. Afterwards these liberal men, since they dream that they have
the merits of supererogation, sell these 25] to others. All these
things are full of pharisaic vanity. For it is the height of impiety, to
hold that they satisfy the Decalog in such a way that merits remain, while
such precepts as these are accusing all the saints: Thou shalt love
the Lord, thy God, with all thine heart, Deut. 6, 5.
Likewise: Thou shalt not covet, Rom. 7, 7. [For as the First Commandment
of God (Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, with all thy
heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind) is higher than a
man upon earth can comprehend, as it is the highest theology, from which
all the prophets and all the apostles have drawn as from a spring their
best and highest doctrines; yea, as it is such an exalted commandment,
according to which alone all divine service, all honor to God, every offering,
all thanksgiving in heaven and upon earth, must be regulated and judged,
so that all divine service, high and precious and holy though it appear,
if it be not in accordance with this commandment, is nothing but husks
and shells without a kernel, yea, nothing but filth and abomination before
God; which exalted commandment no saint whatever has perfectly fulfilled,
so that even Noah and Abraham, David, Peter and Paul acknowledged themselves
imperfect and sinners: it is an unheard-of, pharisaic, yea, an actually
diabolical pride for a sordid Barefooted monk or any similar godless hypocrite
to say, yea, preach and teach, that he has observed and fulfilled the holy
high commandment so perfectly, and according to the demands and will of
God has done so many good works, that merit even superabounds to him. Yea,
dear hypocrites, if the holy Ten Commandments and the exalted First Commandment
of God were fulfilled as easily as the bread and remnants are put into
the sack! They are shameless hypocrites with whom the world is plagued
in this last time.] The prophet says, Ps. 116, 11: All men are liars,
i.e.,
not thinking aright concerning God, not fearing God sufficiently, not believing
Him sufficiently. Therefore the monks falsely boast that in the observance
of a monastic life the commandments are fulfilled, and more is done than
what is commanded [that their good works and several hundred-weights of
superfluous, superabundant holiness remain in store for them].
26] Again, this also is false, namely, that monastic observances
are works of the counsels of the Gospel. For the Gospel does not advise
concerning distinctions of clothing and meats and the renunciation of property.
These are human traditions, concerning all of which it has been said, 1
Cor. 8, 8: Meat commendeth us not to God. Therefore they are neither
justifying services nor perfection; yea, when they are presented covered
with these titles, they are mere
doctrines of demons
27] Virginity is recommended, but to those who have the gift,
as has been said above. It is, however, a most pernicious error to hold
that evangelical perfection lies in human traditions. For thus the monks
even of the Mohammedans would be able to boast that they have evangelical
perfection. Neither does it he in the observance of other things which
are called adiaphora, but because the kingdom of God is righteousness
and life in hearts, Rom. 14, 17, perfection is growth in the fear of
God, and in confidence in the mercy promised in Christ, and in devotion
to one's calling; just as Paul also describes perfection 2 Cor. 3, 18:
We
are changed from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
He does not say: We are continually receiving another hood, or other sandals,
or other girdles. It is deplorable that in the Church such pharisaic, yea,
Mohammedan expressions should be read and heard as, that the perfection
of the Gospel, of the kingdom of Christ, which is eternal life, should
be placed in these foolish observances of vestments and of similar trifles.
28] Now hear our Areopagites [excellent teachers] as to what
an unworthy declaration they have recorded in the Confutation. Thus they
say: It has been expressly declared in the Holy Scriptures that the
monastic life merits eternal life if maintained by a due observance,
which
by the grace of God any monk can maintain; and, indeed, Christ
has promised this as much more abundant to those who have left home or
brothers, etc., Matt. 19, 29. 29] These are the words of the
adversaries, in which it is first said most impudently that it is expressed
in the Holy Scriptures that a monastic life merits eternal life. For where
do the Holy Scriptures speak of a monastic life? Thus the adversaries plead
their case, thus men of no account quote the Scriptures. Although no one
is ignorant that the monastic life has recently been devised, nevertheless
they cite the authority of Scripture, and say, too, that this their decree
has been expressly declared in the Scriptures.
30] Besides, they dishonor Christ when they say that by monasticism
men merit eternal life. God has ascribed not even to His Law the honor
that it should merit eternal life, as He clearly says in Ezek. 20, 25:
I gave them also statutes that were not good, 31] and
judgments whereby they should not live. In the first place, it is certain
that a monastic life does not merit the remission of sins, but we obtain
this by faith freely, as has been said above. 32] Secondly, for
Christ's sake, through mercy, eternal life is granted to those who by faith
receive remission, and do not set their own merits against God's judgment,
as Bernard also says with very great force: It is necessary first of
all to believe that you cannot have the remission of sins unless by God's
indulgence. Secondly, that you can have no good work whatever,
unless
He has given also this. Lastly, that you can merit eternal life
by no works, unless this also is given freely. The rest that
follows to the same effect we have above recited. Moreover, Bernard adds
at the end: Let no one deceive himself, because if he will reflect
well, he will undoubtedly find that with ten thousand he cannot
meet Him [namely, God] who cometh against him with
twenty thousand. 33] Since, however, we do not merit the remission
of sins or eternal life by the works of the divine Law, but it is necessary
to seek the mercy promised in Christ, much less is this honor of meriting
the remission of sins or eternal life to be ascribed to monastic observances,
since they are mere human traditions.
34] Thus those who teach that the monastic life merits the remission
of sins or eternal life, and transfer the confidence due Christ to these
foolish observances, altogether suppress the Gospel concerning the free
remission of sins and the promised mercy in Christ that is to be apprehended.
Instead of Christ they worship their own hoods and their own filth. But
since even they need mercy, they act wickedly in fabricating works of supererogation,
and selling them [their superfluous claim upon heaven] to others.
35] We speak the more briefly concerning these subjects, because
from those things which we have said above concerning justification, concerning
repentance, concerning human traditions, it is sufficiently evident that
monastic vows are not a price on account of which the remission of sins
and life eternal are granted. And since Christ calls traditions useless
services, they are in no way evangelical perfection.
36] But the adversaries cunningly wish to appear as if they modify
the common opinion concerning perfection. They say that a monastic life
is not perfection, but that it is a state in which to acquire perfection.
It is prettily phrased! We remember that this correction is found in Gerson.
For it is apparent that prudent men, offended by these immoderate praises
of monastic life, since they did not venture to remove entirely from it
the praise of perfection, have added the correction that it is a state
in which to acquire perfection. 37] If we follow this, monasticism
will be no more a state of perfection than the life of a farmer or mechanic.
For these are also, states in which to acquire perfection. For all men,
in every vocation, ought to seek perfection, that is, to grow in the fear
of God, in faith, in love towards one's neighbor, and similar spiritual
virtues.
38] In the histories of the hermits there are examples of Anthony
and of others which make the various spheres of life equal. It is written
that when Anthony asked God to show him what progress he was making in
this kind of life, a certain shoemaker in the city of Alexandria was indicated
to him in a dream to whom he should be compared. The next day Anthony came
into the city, and went to the shoemaker in order to ascertain his exercises
and gifts, and, having conversed with the man, heard nothing except that
early in the morning he prayed in a few words for the entire state, and
then attended to his trade. Here Anthony learned that justification is
not to be ascribed to the kind of life which he had entered [what God had
meant by the revelation; for we are justified before God not through this
or that life, but alone through faith in Christ].
39] But although the adversaries now moderate their praises concerning
perfection, yet they actually think otherwise. For they sell merits, and
apply them on behalf of others, under the pretext that they are observing
precepts and counsels; hence they actually hold that they have superfluous
merits. But what is it to arrogate to one's self perfection, if this is
not? Again, it has been laid down in the Confutation that the monks endeavor
to live more nearly in accordance with the Gospel. Therefore it ascribes
perfection to human traditions if they are living more nearly in accordance
with the Gospel by not having property, being unmarried, and obeying the
rule in clothing, meats, and like trifles.
40] Again, the Confutation says that the monks merit eternal
life the more abundantly, and quotes Scripture, Matt. 19, 29: Every
one that hath forsaken houses, etc. Accordingly, here, too, it claims
perfection also for factitious religious rites. But this passage of Scripture
in no way favors monastic life. For Christ does not mean that to forsake
parents, wife, brethren, is a work that must be done because it merits
the remission of sins and eternal life. Yea, such a, forsaking is cursed.
For if any one forsakes parents or wife in order by this very work to merit
the remission of sins or eternal life, this is done with dishonor to Christ.
41] There is, moreover, a two-fold forsaking. One occurs without
a call, without God's command; this Christ does not approve, Matt. 15,
9. For the works chosen by us are useless services. But that Christ does
not approve this flight appears the more clearly from the fact that He
speaks of forsaking wife and children. We know, however, that God's commandment
forbids the forsaking of wife and children. The forsaking which occurs
by God's command is of a different kind, namely, when power or tyranny
compels us either to depart or to deny the Gospel. Here we have the command
that we should rather bear injury, that we should rather suffer not only
wealth, wife, and children, but even life, to be taken from us. This forsaking
Christ approves, and accordingly He adds: For the Gospel's sake,
Mark 10, 29, in order to signify that He is speaking not of those who do
injury to wife and children, but who bear injury on account of the confession
of the Gospel. 42] For the Gospel's sake we ought even to forsake
our body. Here it would be ridiculous to hold that it would be a service
to God to kill one's self, and without God's command to leave the body.
So, too, it is ridiculous to hold that it is a service to God without God's
command to forsake possessions, friends, wife, children.
43] Therefore it is evident that they wickedly distort Christ's
word to a monastic life. Unless perhaps the declaration that they "receive
a hundred-fold in this life" be in place here. For very many become monks
not on account of the Gospel, but on account of sumptuous living and idleness,
who find 44] the most ample riches instead of slender patrimonies.
But as the entire subject of monasticism is full of shams, so, by a false
pretext, they quote testimonies of Scripture, and as a consequence they
sin doubly, i.e., they deceive men, and that, too, under the pretext
of the divine name.
45] Another passage is also cited concerning perfection Matt.
19, 21: If thou wilt be perfect,
go and sell that thou hast,
and
give to the poor, and come and follow Me. This passage has exercised
many, who have imagined that it is perfection to cast away possessions
and the control of property. 46] Let us allow the philosophers to
extol Aristippus, who cast a great weight of gold into the sea. [Cynics
like Diogenes, who would have no house, but lay in a tub, may commend such
heathenish holiness.] Such examples pertain in no way to Christian perfection.
[Christian holiness consists in much higher matters than such hypocrisy.]
The division, control, and possession of property are civil ordinances,
approved by God's Word in the commandment, Ex. 20, 15: Thou shalt not
steal. The abandonment of property has no command or advice in the
Scriptures. For evangelical poverty does not consist in the abandonment
of property, but in not being avaricious, in not trusting in wealth, just
as David was poor in a most wealthy kingdom.
47] Therefore, since the abandonment of property is merely a
human tradition, it is a useless service. Excessive also are the praises
in the Extravagant, which says that the abdication of the ownership
of all things for God's sake is meritorious and holy, and a way of perfection.
And it is very dangerous to extol with such excessive praises a matter
conflicting with political order. [When inexperienced people hear such
commendations, they conclude that it is unchristian to hold property; whence
many errors and seditions follow; through such commendations Muentzer was
deceived, and thereby many Anabaptists were led astray.] 48] But
[they say] Christ here speaks of perfection. Yea, they do violence to the
text who quote it mutilated. Perfection is in that which Christ adds: 49]Follow
Me. An example of obedience in one's calling is here presented. And
as callings are unlike [one is called to rulership, a second to be father
of a family, a third to be a preacher], so this calling does not belong
to all, but pertains properly to that person with whom Christ there speaks,
just as the call of David to the kingdom, and of Abraham to slay his son,
are not to be imitated by us. Callings are personal, just as matters of
business themselves vary with times and persons; but the example of obedience
is general. 50] Perfection would have belonged to that young man
if he had believed and obeyed this vocation. Thus perfection with us is
that every one with true faith should obey his own calling. [Not that I
should undertake a strange calling for which I have not the commission
or command of God.]
51] Thirdly. In monastic vows chastity is promised. We
have said above, however, concerning the marriage of priests, that the
law of nature [or of God] in men cannot be removed by vows or enactments.
And as all do not have the gift of continence, many because of weakness
are unsuccessfully continent. Neither, indeed, can any vows or any enactments
abolish the command of the Holy Ghost, 1 Cor. 7, 2: To avoid fornication,
let
every man have his own wife. Therefore this vow is not lawful in those
who do not have the gift of continence, but who are polluted on account
of weakness. 52] Concerning this entire topic enough has been said
above, in regard to which indeed it is strange, since the dangers and scandals
are occurring before men's eyes, that the adversaries still defend their
traditions contrary to the manifest command of God. Neither does the voice
of Christ move them, who chides the Pharisees, Matt. 23, 13f , who had
made traditions contrary to God's command.
53] Fourthly. Those who live in monasteries are released
from their vows by such godless ceremonies as of the Mass applied on behalf
of the dead for the sake of gain; the worship of saints, in which the fault
is two-fold, both that the saints are put in Christ's place, and that they
are wickedly worshiped, just as the Dominicasters invented the rosary of
the Blessed Virgin, which is mere babbling, not less foolish than it is
wicked, and nourishes the most vain presumption. Then, too, these very
impieties are applied only for the sake of 54] gain. Likewise, they
neither hear nor teach the Gospel concerning the free remission of sins
for Christ's sake, concerning the righteousness of faith, concerning true
repentance, concerning works which have God's command. But they are occupied
either in philosophic discussions or in the handing down of ceremonies
that obscure Christ.
55] We will not here speak of the entire service of ceremonies,
of the lessons, singing, and similar things, which could be tolerated if
they [were regulated as regards number, and if they] would be regarded
as exercises, after the manner of lessons in the schools [and preaching],
whose design is to teach the hearers, and, while teaching, to move some
to fear or faith. But now they feign that these ceremonies are services
of God, which merit the remission of sins for themselves and for others.
For on this account they increase these ceremonies. But if they would undertake
them in order to teach and exhort the hearers, brief and pointed lessons
would be of more profit than these infinite babblings. 56] Thus
the entire monastic life is full of hypocrisy and false opinions [against
the First and Second Commandments, against Christ]. To all these this danger
also is added, that those who are in these fraternities are compelled to
assent to those persecuting the truth. There are, therefore, many important
and forcible reasons which free good men from the obligation to this kind
of life.
57] Lastly, the canons themselves release many, who either
without judgment [before they have attained a proper age] have made vows
when enticed by the tricks of the monks, or have made vows under compulsion
by friends. Such vows not even the canons declare to be vows. From all
these considerations it is apparent that there are very many reasons which
teach that monastic vows such as have hitherto been made are not vows;
and for this reason a sphere of life full of hypocrisy and false opinions
can be safely abandoned.
58] Here they present an objection derived from the Law concerning
the Nazarites, Num. 6, 2f But the Nazarites did not take upon themselves
their vows with the opinions which, we have hitherto said, we censure in
the vows of the monks. The rite of the Nazarites was an exercise [a bodily
exercise with fasting and certain kinds of food] or declaration of faith
before men, and did not merit the remission of sins before God, did not
justify before God. [For they sought this elsewhere, namely, in the promise
of the blessed Seed.] Again, just as circumcision or the slaying of victims
would not be a service of God now, so the rite of the Nazarites ought not
to be presented now as a service, but it ought to be judged simply as an
adiaphoron. It is not right to compare monasticism, devised without God's
Word, as a service which should merit the remission of sins and justification,
with the rite of the Nazarites, which had God's Word, and was not taught
for the purpose of meriting the remission of sins, but to be an outward
exercise, just as other ceremonies of the Law. The same can be said concerning
other ceremonies prescribed in the Law.
59] The Rechabites also are cited, who did not have any possessions,
and did not drink wine, as Jeremiah 35, 6f says. Yea, truly, the example
of the Rechabites accords beautifully with our monks, whose monasteries
excel the palaces of kings, and who live most sumptuously! And the Rechabites,
in their poverty of all things, were nevertheless married. Our monks, although
abounding in all voluptuousness, profess celibacy.
60] Besides, examples ought to be interpreted according to the
rule, i.e., according to certain and clear passages of Scripture,
not contrary to the rule, that is, contrary to the Scriptures.
61]
It is very certain, however, that our observances do not merit the remission
of sins or justification. Therefore, when the Rechabites are praised, it
is necessary [it is certain] that these have observed their custom, not
because they believed that by this they merited remission of sins, or that
the work was itself a justifying service, or one on account of which they
obtained eternal life, instead of, by God's mercy, for the sake of the
promised Seed. But because they had the command of their parents, their
obedience is praised, concerning which there is the commandment of God:
Honor
thy father and mother
62] Then, too, the custom had a particular purpose: Because they
were foreigners, not Israelites, it is apparent that their father wished
to distinguish them by certain marks from their countrymen, so that they
might not relapse into the impiety of their countrymen. He wished by these
marks to admonish them of the [fear of God, the] doctrine of faith and
immortality. 63] Such an end is lawful. But for monasticism far
different ends are taught. They feign that the works of monasticism are
a service; they feign that they merit the remission of sins and justification.
The example of the Rechabites is therefore unlike monasticism; to omit
here other evils which inhere in monasticism at present.
64] They cite also from 1 Tim. 5, 11ff concerning widows, who,
as they served the Church, were supported at the public expense, where
it is said: They will marry, having damnation,
because65]they
have cast off their first faith. First, let us suppose that the Apostle
is here speaking of vows [which, however, he is not doing]; still this
passage will not favor monastic vows, which are made concerning godless
services, and in this opinion, that they merit the remission of sins and
justification. For Paul, with ringing voice, condemns all services, all
laws, all works, if they are observed in order to merit the remission of
sins, or that, on account of them, instead of through mercy on account
of Christ, we obtain remission of sins. On this account the vows of widows,
if there were any, must have been unlike monastic vows.
66] Besides, if the adversaries do not cease to misapply the
passage to vows, the prohibition that no widow be selected who is less
than sixty years, 1 Tim. 5, 9, must be misapplied in the same way.
Thus vows 67] made before this age will be of no account. But the
Church did not yet know these vows. Therefore Paul condemns widows, not
because they marry, for he commands the younger to marry; but because,
when supported at the public expense, they became wanton, and thus cast
off faith. He calls this first faith, clearly not in a monastic
vow, but in Christianity (of their Baptism, their Christian duty, their
Christianity]. And in this sense he understands faith in the same chapter,
5, 8: If any one provide not for his own, and specialty for those
of his own house, he hath denied the faith. 68] For he
speaks otherwise of faith than the sophists. He does not ascribe faith
to those who have mortal sin. He, accordingly, says that those cast off
faith who do not care for their relatives. And in the same way he says
that wanton women cast off faith.
69] We have recounted some of our reasons, and, in passing, have
explained away the objections urged by the adversaries. And we have collected
these matters, not only on account of the adversaries, but much more on
account of godly minds, that they may have in view the reasons why they
ought to disapprove of hypocrisy and fictitious monastic services, all
of which indeed this one saying of Christ annuls, which reads, Matt. 15,
9: In vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments
of men. Therefore the vows themselves and the observances of meats,
lessons, chants, vestments, sandals, girdles, are useless services in God's
sight. And all godly minds should certainly know that the opinion is simply
pharisaic and condemned that these observances merit the remission of sins;
that on account of them we are accounted righteous; that on account of
them, and not through mercy on account of Christ, we obtain eternal life.
And the holy men who have lived in these kinds of life must necessarily
have learned, confidence in such observance having been rejected, that
they had the remission of sins freely; that for Christ's sake through mercy
they would obtain eternal life, and not for the sake of these services
[therefore godly persons who were saved and continued to live in monastic
life had finally come to this, namely, that they despaired of their monastic
life, despised all their works as dung, condemned all their hypocritical
service of God, and held fast to the promise of grace in Christ, as in
the example of St. Bernard, saying, Perdite vixi, I have lived in
a sinful way]; because God only approves services instituted by His Word,
which services avail when used in faith.
|