Martin Luther
Living as Husband and Wife
(Vom Ehelichen Leben. WA
Jesus
How I dread preaching on the estate
of marriage! I am reluctant to do it because I am afraid if I once get really involved in the subject it will make a lot of work
for me and for others. The shameful confusion wrought by the accursed papal law
has occasioned so much distress, and the lax authority of both the spiritual
and the temporal swords has given rise to so many dreadful abuses and false situations,
that I would much prefer neither to look into the
matter nor to hear of it. But timidity is no help in
an emergency; I must proceed. I must try
to instruct poor bewildered consciences, and take up the matter boldly.
This sermon is divided into three parts.
Part One
Sex life is created by God
In the first part
we shall consider which persons may enter into marriage with one another. In
order to proceed aright let us direct our attention to Genesis 1 [:27], “So God
created man . . . male and female he created them.” From this passage we may be assured that God divided mankind into two classes, namely, male and female, or a
he and a she. This was so pleasing to him that he himself called it a good
creation [Gen. 1:31]. Therefore, each one of us must have the kind of body God
has created for us. I cannot make myself a woman, nor can you make yourself a
man; we do not have that power. But we are exactly as
he created us: I a man and you a woman. Moreover, he wills to have his
excellent handiwork honored as his
divine creation, and not despised. The man is not to despise or scoff at the
woman or her body, nor the woman the man. But each should honor the other’s image and body
as a divine and good creation that is well‑pleasing unto God himself.
In
the second place, after God had made man and woman he blessed them and said to
them, “Be fruitful and multiply” [Gen. 1:28]. From this passage
we may be assured that man and woman
should and must come together in order to multiply. Now this ordinance is
just as inflexible as the first, and no more to be despised
and made fun of than the other, since God
gives it his blessing and does something over and above the act of creation.
Hence, as it is not within my power not to be a man, so it is not my prerogative
to be without a woman. Again, as it is not in your power not to be a woman, so
it is not your prerogative to be without a man. For it is not a matter of free choice or decision but a natural and
necessary thing, that whatever is a man must have a woman and whatever is
a woman must have a man.
For
this word which God speaks, “Be fruitful and
multiply,” is not a command. It is more than a command, namely, a divine ordinance which
it is not our prerogative to hinder or ignore. Rather, it is just as necessary
as the fact that I am a man, and more
necessary than sleeping and waking, eating and drinking, and emptying the
bowels and bladder. It is a nature and
disposition just as innate as the organs involved in it. Therefore, just
as God does not command anyone to be a man or a woman but creates them the way they have to be, so he does not command them to
multiply but creates them so that they have to multiply. And
wherever men try to resist this, it remains irresistible nonetheless and goes
its way through fornication, adultery,
and secret sins, for this is a matter
of nature and not of choice.
In
the third place, from this ordinance of creation God has himself exempted three
categories of men, saying in Matthew 19 [:12], “There are eunuchs who have been
so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and
there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom
of heaven.” Apart from these three groups, let no man presume to be without a
spouse. And whoever does not fall within one of these
three categories should not consider anything except the estate of marriage. Otherwise it is simply impossible for you to remain
righteous. For the Word of God which created you and
said, “Be fruitful and multiply,” abides and rules within you; you can by no
means ignore it, or you will be bound to commit heinous sins without end.
Don’t let yourself be fooled on this score, even if you
should make ten oaths, vows, covenants, and adamantine or ironclad pledges. For as you cannot solemnly promise that you will not be a man or a
woman (and if you should make such a promise it would be foolishness and of no
avail since you cannot make yourself something other than what you are), so you
cannot promise that you will not produce seed or multiply, unless you belong to
one of the three categories mentioned above. And
should you make such a promise, it too would be foolishness and of no avail,
for to produce seed and to multiply is a matter of God’s ordinance, not your power.
From
this you can now see the extent of the validity of all
cloister vows. No vow of any youth or maiden is valid before God, except that
of a person in one of the three categories which God
alone has himself excepted. Therefore, priests, monks, and nuns are duty‑bound
to forsake their vows whenever they find that God’s ordinance to produce seed
and to multiply is powerful and strong within them. They have no power by any
authority, law, command, or vow to hinder this which
God has created within them. If they do hinder it, however, you may be sure
that they will not remain pure but inevitably
besmirch themselves with secret sins or fornication. For
they are simply incapable of resisting the word and ordinance of God within
them. Matters will take their course as God has ordained.
As
to the first category, which Christ calls “eunuchs who have been so from
birth,” these are the ones whom men call impotent, who are by nature not
equipped to produce seed and multiply because they are physically frigid or
weak or have some other bodily deficiency which makes them unfit for the estate
of marriage. Such cases occur among both men and women. These
we need not take into account, for God has himself exempted them and so formed
them that the blessing of being able to multiply has not come to them.
The injunction, “Be fruitful and multiply,” does not apply to them; just as
when God creates a person crippled or blind, that person is not obligated to
walk or see, because he cannot.
I once wrote down some advice concerning such persons for those who
hear confession. It related to those cases where a husband or wife
comes and wants to learn what he should do: his spouse is unable to fulfill the
conjugal duty, yet he cannot get along without it because he finds that God’s
ordinance to multiply is still in force within him. Here they have
accused me of teaching that when a husband is unable to satisfy his wife’s
sexual desire she should run to somebody else. Let the topsy-turvy liars spread
their lies. The words of Christ and his apostles were turned upside down; should they not also turn my words topsy‑turvy? To
whose detriment it will be they shall surely find out.
What I said was this: if a woman who is fit for marriage has a
husband who is not, and she is unable openly to take unto herself another –
and unwilling, too, to do anything dishonorable since the pope in such a case
demands without cause abundant testimony and evidence, she should say to her
husband, “Look, my dear husband, you are unable to fulfill your conjugal duty
toward me; you have cheated me out of my maidenhood and even imperiled my
honor and my soul’s salvation; in the sight of God there is no real marriage
between us. Grant me the privilege of contracting a secret marriage with
your brother or closest relative, and you retain the title of husband so that
your property will not fall to strangers. Consent to being betrayed voluntarily
by me, as you have betrayed me without my consent.”
I
stated further that the husband is obligated to consent to such an arrangement
and thus to provide for her the conjugal duty and children, and that if he
refuses to do so she should secretly flee from him to some other country and
there contract a marriage. I gave this advice at a time when I was still timid.
However, I should like now to give sounder advice in the matter, and take a
firmer grip on the wool of a man who thus makes a fool of
his wife. The same principle would apply if the circumstances were reversed, although this happens less frequently in the
case of wives than of husbands. It will not do to lead one’s fellowman
around by the nose so wantonly in matters of such great import
involving his body, goods, honor, and salvation. He has to be
told to make it right.
The
second category, those who Christ says “have been made eunuchs by men” [Matt.
The
third category consists of those spiritually rich and exalted persons, bridled
by the grace of God, who are equipped for marriage by nature and physical
capacity and nevertheless voluntarily remain celibate. These put it this way,
“I could marry if I wish, I am capable of it. But it does not attract me. I would rather work on the
kingdom of heaven, i.e., the gospel, and beget spiritual children.” Such
persons are rare, not one in a thousand, for they are a special miracle of God. No one should venture on such a life
unless he be especially
called by God, like Jeremiah [16:2], or unless he finds God’s grace to be
so powerful within him that the divine injunction, “Be fruitful and multiply,”
has no place in him.
Beyond
these three categories, however, the devil working through men has been smarter
than God, and found more people whom he has withdrawn
from the divine and natural ordinance, namely, those who are enmeshed in a
spider web of human commands and vows and are then locked up behind a mass of
iron bolts and bars. This is a fourth way of resisting nature so that, contrary
to God’s implanted ordinance and disposition, it does not produce seed and
multiply – as if it were within our power and discretion to possess virginity
as we do shoes and clothing! If men are really able to
resist God’s word and creation with iron bars and bolts, I should hope that we
would also set up iron bars so thick and massive that women would turn into men
or people into sticks and stones. It is the devil who
thus perpetrates his monkey‑tricks on the poor creature, and so gives
vent to his wrath.
Whom you are allowed to marry
In the fourth place, let us now
consider which persons may enter into marriage with one another, so that you
may see it is not my
pleasure or desire that a marriage be broken
and husband and wife separated. The pope in his canon law has
thought up eighteen distinct reasons for preventing or dissolving a marriage,
nearly all of which I reject and condemn. Indeed, the pope
himself does not adhere to them so strictly or firmly but what one can rescind
any of them with gold and silver. Actually, they were
only invented in order to be a net for gold and a noose for the soul, II
Peter 2 [:14]. In order to expose their folly we will take a look at all
eighteen of them in turn.
The
first impediment is blood relationship. Here they have forbidden marriage up to
the third and fourth degrees of consanguinity. If in this situation
you have no money, then even though God freely permits it you must nevertheless
not take in marriage your female relative within the third and fourth degrees,
or you must put her away if you have already married her. But
if you have the money, such a marriage is permitted. Those hucksters offer for
sale women who never have been their own. So that you can defend yourself
against this tyranny, I will now list for you the persons whom God has
forbidden, Leviticus 18 [:6‑13], namely, my mother, my stepmother; my
sister, my stepsister; my child’s daughter or stepdaughter; my father’s
sister; my mother’s sister. I am forbidden to marry
any of these persons.
From
this it follows that first cousins may contract a
godly and Christian marriage, and that I may marry my stepmother’s sister, my
father’s stepsister, or my mother’s stepsister. Further, I may marry the
daughter of my brother or sister, just as Abraham married Sarah. None of these persons is forbidden by God, for God does not
calculate according to degrees, as the jurists do, but enumerates directly
specific persons. Otherwise, since my father’s sister and my brother’s daughter
are related to me in the same degree, I would have to
say either that I cannot marry my brother’s daughter or that I may also marry
my father’s sister. Now God has forbidden my father’s sister, but he has not
forbidden my brother’s daughter, although both are related
to me in the same degree. We also find in Scripture that with respect to
various stepsisters there were not such strict prohibitions. For Tamar,
Absalom's sister, thought she could have married her stepbrother Amnon, II
Samuel 13 [:13].
The
second impediment is affinity or relationship through marriage. Here too they
have set up four degrees, so that after my wife’s death I may not marry into her
blood relationship, where my marriage extends up to the third and fourth
degrees - unless money comes to my rescue! But God has forbidden only these
persons, namely, my father’s brother’s wife; my son’s wife; my brother’s wife;
my stepdaughter; the child of my stepson or stepdaughter; my wife’s sister
while my wife is yet alive [Lev.18:14‑18]. I may not marry any of these
persons; but I may marry any others, and without putting up any money for the
privilege. For example, I may marry the sister of my deceased wife or fiancée;
the daughter of my wife’s brother; the daughter of my wife’s cousin; and any of
my wife’s nieces, aunts, or cousins. In the Old Testament, if a brother died
without leaving an heir, his widow was required to marry his closest relative
in order to provide her deceased husband with an heir [Deut. 25:5‑9].
This is no longer commanded, but neither is it
forbidden.
The
third impediment is spiritual relationship. If I sponsor a girl at baptism or
confirmation, then neither I nor my son may marry her,
or her mother, or her sister - unless an appropriate and substantial sum of
money is forthcoming! This is nothing but pure farce and foolishness, concocted
for the sake of money and to befuddle consciences.
Just tell me this: isn’t it a greater thing for me to
be baptized myself than merely to act as sponsor to another? Then I must be
forbidden to marry any Christian woman, since all baptized women are the
spiritual sisters of all baptized men by virtue of their common baptism,
sacrament, faith, Spirit, Lord, God, and eternal heritage [Eph. 4:4‑6].
Why
does not the pope also forbid a man to retain his wife if he teaches her the
gospel? For whoever teaches another becomes that
person’s spiritual father.
So
away with this foolishness; take as your spouse whomsoever you please, whether
it be godparent, godchild, or the daughter or sister of a sponsor, or whoever
it may be, and disregard these artificial, money‑seeking impediments. If
you are not prevented from marrying a girl by the fact
that she is a Christian, then do not let yourself be prevented by the fact that
you baptized her, taught her, or acted as her sponsor. In particular, avoid
that monkey business, confirmation, which is really a fanciful deception. I
would permit confirmation as long as it is understood that God knows nothing of
it, and has said nothing about it, and that what the bishops
claim for it is untrue. They mock our God when they say that it is one of God’s
sacraments, for it is a purely human contrivance.
The
fourth impediment is legal kinship; that is, when an unrelated child is adopted
as son or daughter it may not later marry a child born of its adoptive parents,
that is, one who is by law its own brother or sister. This is another worthless
human invention. Therefore, if you so desire, go ahead and
marry anyway. In the sight of God this adopted
person is neither your mother nor your sister, since there is no blood
relationship. She does work in the kitchen, however, and supplements the
income; this is why she has been placed on the
forbidden list!
The
fifth impediment is unbelief; that is, I may not marry a Turk, a Jew, or a
heretic. I marvel that the blasphemous tyrants are not in
their hearts ashamed to place themselves in such direct contradiction to the
clear text of Paul in I Corinthians 7 [:12‑13], where he says, “If a
heathen wife or husband consents to live with a Christian spouse, the Christian
should not get a divorce:” And St. Peter, in I Peter 3 [:1], says that
Christian wives should behave so well that they thereby convert their non‑Christian
husbands; as did Monica, the mother of St. Augustine.
Know therefore that marriage is an outward,
bodily thing, like any other worldly undertaking.
Just as I may eat, drink, sleep, walk, ride with, buy from, speak to, and deal
with a heathen, Jew, Turk, or heretic, so I may also
marry and continue in wedlock with him. Pay no attention to the precepts of
those fools who forbid it. You will find plenty of Christians – and indeed the
greater part of them – who are worse in their secret unbelief than any Jew,
heathen, Turk, or heretic. A heathen is just as much a man or a woman – God’s
good creation – as St. Peter,
The
sixth impediment is crime. They are not in agreement
as to how many instances of this impediment they should devise. However, there are actually these three: if someone lies with a
girl, he may not thereafter marry her sister or her aunt, niece, or cousin;
again, whoever commits adultery with a woman may not marry her after her
husband’s death; again, if a wife (or husband) should murder her spouse for
love of another, she may not subsequently marry the loved one. Here it
rains fools upon fools. Don’t you believe them, and don’t
be taken in by them; they are under the devil’s whip. Sins and crimes should be
punished, but with other penalties, not by forbidding marriage. Therefore, no
sin or crime is an impediment to marriage. David committed adultery with
Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife, and had her husband killed besides. He was guilty of
both crimes; still he took her to wife and begot King Solomon by her [II Samuel
11] – and without giving any money to the pope!
I
must pursue this subject a bit further. These wise guys posit the hypothetical
case of a man who sins with his wife’s mother or sister. Had this happened
before the marriage it would have been a crime which
would prevent and break up the proposed marriage. Since it happened subsequent
to the marriage, however, for the sake of the wife – who is innocent in the
matter – the marriage may not be dissolved.
Nevertheless, the husband’s punishment is to be that he shall live with his
wife but have no power to demand of her the conjugal duty. See what the devil through his fools does with the estate of
marriage! He puts husband and wife together, and then says, “Be neither man
nor woman.” As well put fire and straw together and
bid them not to burn! If one were to impose upon the pope a command one‑tenth
as hard as this, how he would rage and storm, and howl about unlawful
authority! Away with the big fools. You just let
marriage remain free, as God instituted it. Punish sins and crimes with other
penalties, not through marriage and fresh sins.
The
seventh impediment they call public decorum, respectability. For example, if
my fiancée should die before we consummate the marriage, I may not marry any
relative of hers up to the fourth degree, since the pope thinks and obviously
dreams that it is decent and respectable for me to refrain from so doing – unless
I put up the money, in which case the impediment of public decorum vanishes.
Now you have heard a moment ago that after my wife’s death I may marry her
sister or any of her relatives except for her mother and her daughter. You
stick to this, and let the fools go their way.
The
eighth impediment is a solemn vow, for example where
someone has taken the vow of chastity, either in or out of the cloister. Here I
offer this advice: if you would like to take a wise vow, then vow not to bite
off your own nose; you can keep that vow. If you have
already taken the monastic vow, however, then, as you have just heard, you
should yourself consider whether you belong in those three categories
which God has singled out. If you do not feel that you belong there,
then let the vows and the cloister go. Renew your natural companionships without delay and get married, for your vow is contrary to
God and has no validity, and say, “I have promised that which I do not have and
which is not mine.”
The
ninth impediment is error, as if I had been wed to Catherine but Barbara lay
down with me, as happened to Jacob with Leah and Rachel [Gen. 29:23‑25].
One may have such a marriage dissolved and take the other to wife.
The
tenth impediment is condition of servitude. When I marry one
who is supposed to be free and it turns out later that she is a serf, this
marriage too is null and void. However, I hold that if there were Christian
love the husband could easily adjust both of these impediments so that no great
distress would be occasioned. Furthermore, such cases
never occur today, or only rarely, and both might well be
combined in one category: error.
The
eleventh impediment is holy orders, namely, that the tonsure and sacred oil are
so potent that they devour marriage and unsex a man. For this reason a
subdeacon, a deacon, and a priest have to forego marriage, although St. Paul
commanded that they may and should be married, II Timothy 3 [I Tim. 3:2, 12],
Titus 1 [:6]. But I have elsewhere written so much
about this that there is no need to repeat it here. Their folly has been sufficiently exposed; how much help this impediment
has been to those in holy orders is obvious to all.
The
twelfth impediment is coercion, that is, when I have to take Grete to be my
wife and am coerced into it either by parents or by
governmental authority. That is to be sure no marriage in the sight of God.
However, such a person should not admit the coercion and leave the country on account of it, thus betraying the girl or making a fool
of her, for you are not excused by the fact that you were coerced into it. You
should not allow yourself to be coerced into injuring
your neighbor but should yield your life rather than act contrary to love. You
would not want anybody to injure you, whether he was acting under coercion or
not. For this reason I could not declare safe in the
sight of God a man who leaves his wife for such a cause. My dear fellow, if
someone should compel you to rob me or kill me, would it therefore be right?
Why do you yield to a coercion which compels you to
violate God’s commandment and harm your neighbor? I would freely absolve the
girl however, for, as we will hear later, you would be leaving her through no
fault of her own.
How
about a situation where a man is so attached to a girl that she is bestowed upon him at the point of a gun? Does the
principle of coercion apply here? It does not, because the girl understands
that coercion is involved, and is therefore not being
deceived. In this case it is indeed proper that
he be compelled to keep her, because of the fact that he has ruined her. For
Moses wrote that whoever lies with a girl shall keep her or, in the event that
her father is unwilling, pay money in accordance with her father’s demand,
Exodus 22 [:16‑17].
The
thirteenth impediment is betrothal, that is, if I am engaged to one girl but
then take another to wife. This is a widespread and common
practice in which many different solutions have also been attempted. In
the first place, if such an engagement occurs without the knowledge and
consent of the father and mother, or of the guardians, then let the [fiancée’s]
father decide which girl is to remain as the wife. If she is
betrayed it is her own fault, for she should know that a child is
supposed to be subordinate and obedient to its father, and not become engaged
without his knowledge. In this way, obedience to parental authority will put a
stop to all these secret engagements which occasion
such great unhappiness. Where this course is not followed,
however, I am of the opinion that the man should stick to the first girl. For
having given himself to her he no longer belongs to
himself. He was therefore incapable of promising to the second girl something
that already belonged to the first and was not his own.
If
he does so nonetheless and carries on to the point where he begets children by
her, then he should stick with her. For she too has been
betrayed, and would suffer even greater injury than the first girl were he to
leave her. He has therefore sinned against them both. The first girl,
however, is able to recover from the injury done her because she is yet without
children. She should therefore out of love yield to the second girl and marry
someone else; she is free from the man because he jilted her and gave himself
to another. The man himself though should be made to
suffer punishment and make amends to the first girl, for what he gave away
really belonged to her.
The
fourteenth impediment is the one touched on already, when a husband or wife is
unfit for marriage. Among these eighteen impediments
this one is the only sound reason for dissolving a marriage. Yet it is hedged about by so many laws that it is difficult to
accomplish with the ecclesiastical tyrants.
There
are still four more impediments, such as episcopal prohibition, restricted
times, custom, and defective eyesight and hearing. It is needless to discuss
them here. It is a dirty rotten business that a bishop should forbid me a wife
or specify the times when I may marry, or that a blind
and dumb person should not be allowed to enter into wedlock. So
much then for this foolishness at present in the first part.
(Lucas Cranach – The Ten Commandments)
(The sixth commandment)
Part Two
Divorce and new marriage
In the second part, we shall
consider which persons may be divorced. I know of three grounds for divorce.
The first, which has just been mentioned and was discussed above, is the
situation in which the husband or wife is not equipped for marriage because of
bodily or natural deficiencies of any sort. Of this
enough has already been said.
The
second ground is adultery. The popes have kept silent about this; therefore we must hear Christ, Matthew 19 [:3‑9]. When
the Jews asked him whether a husband might divorce his wife for any reason, he
answered, “‘Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made
them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father
and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one”? What
therefore God has joined together, let no man put
asunder.’ They said to him, ‘Why then did Moses command one to give a
certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your
wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces
his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery; and he
who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.’”
Here you see that in the case of adultery
Christ permits the divorce of husband and wife, so that the innocent person may
remarry. For in saying that he commits adultery who marries another after
divorcing his wife, “except for unchastity,” Christ is making it quite clear
that he who divorces his wife on account of unchastity and then marries another
does not commit adultery.
The Jews, however, were divorcing
their wives for all kinds of reasons whenever they saw fit, even though no unchastity was involved. That covers so much ground that they
themselves thought it was going too far. They therefore inquired of Christ
whether it was right; they were tempting him to see what he would say
concerning the law of Moses.
Now
in the law of Moses God established two types of governments;
he gave two types of commandments. Some are spiritual, teaching righteousness
in the sight of God, such as love and obedience; people who obeyed these
commandments did not thrust away their wives and never made use of certificates
of divorce, but tolerated and endured their wives’ conduct. Others are worldly,
however, drawn up for the sake of those who do not live up to the spiritual
commandments, in order to place a limit upon their misbehavior and prevent them
from doing worse and acting wholly on the basis of their
own maliciousness. Accordingly, he commanded them, if they could not endure
their wives, that they should not put them to death or harm them too severely,
but rather dismiss them with a certificate of divorce. This law, therefore, does not apply to Christians, who are supposed to
live in the spiritual government. In the case of some who live with their wives in an un‑Christian
fashion, however, it would still be a
good thing to permit them to use this law, just so they are
no longer regarded as Christians, which after all they really are not.
Thus it is that on the
grounds of adultery one person may leave the other, as Solomon also says in
Proverbs 18, “He that keepeth an adulteress is a fool.” We have an example of
this in Joseph too. In Matthew 1 [:19]
the gospel writer praises him as just because he did not put his wife to shame
when he found that she was with child, but was minded to divorce her quietly.
By this we are told plainly enough that it is
praiseworthy to divorce an adulterous
wife. If the adultery is clandestine, of course, the husband has the right
to follow either of two courses. First, he may rebuke his wife privately and in
a brotherly fashion, and keep her if she will mend her ways. Second, he may
divorce her, as Joseph wished to do. The same principle applies in the case of
a wife with an adulterous husband. These two types of discipline are both
Christian and laudable.
But a public divorce, whereby one is enabled to remarry, must take
place through the investigation and
decision of the civil authority so that the adultery may be manifest to all
– or, if the civil authority refuses to act, with the knowledge of the
congregation, again in order that it may not be left to each one to allege
anything he pleases as a ground for divorce.
You
may ask: What is to become of the other party if he too is perhaps unable to
lead a chaste life? Answer: It was for this reason
that God commanded in the law [Deut. 22:22‑24] that adulterers be stoned,
that they might not have to face this question. The temporal sword and
government should therefore still put adulterers to death, for whoever commits
adultery has in fact himself already departed and is considered as one dead.
Therefore, the other may remarry just as though his spouse had died, if it is
his intention to insist on his rights and not show mercy to the guilty party.
Where the government is negligent and lax, however, and fails to inflict the
death penalty, the adulterer may betake himself to a far country and there
remarry if he is unable to remain continent. But it
would be better to put him to death, lest a bad example be set.
Some may find fault with this solution and
contend that thereby license and opportunity is afforded
all wicked husbands and wives to desert their spouses and remarry in a foreign
country. Answer: Can I help it? The blame rests with the government. Why
do they not put adulterers to death? Then I would not need to give such advice.
Between two evils one is always the lesser, in this
case allowing the adulterer to remarry in a distant land in order to avoid
fornication. And I think he would be safer also in the
sight of God, because he has been allowed to live and yet is unable to remain
continent. If others also, however, following this example desert their
spouses, let them go. They have no excuse such as the adulterer has, for they
are neither driven nor compelled. God and their own conscience will catch up to
them in due time. Who can prevent all
wickedness?
Where the government fails to
inflict the death penalty and the one spouse wishes to retain the other, the
guilty one should still in Christian fashion be publicly rebuked and caused to
make amends according to the gospel, after the manner provided for the rebuking
of all other manifest sins, Matthew 18 [:15‑17]. For there are no more
than these three forms of discipline on earth among
men: private and brotherly, in public before the congregation according to the
gospel, and that inflicted by the civil government.
The
third case for divorce is that in which one of the parties deprives and avoids
the other, refusing to fulfill the conjugal duty or to live with the other
person. For example, one finds many a stubborn wife like that who will not give
in, and who cares not a whit whether her husband falls
into the sin of unchastity ten times over. Here it is time for the husband to
say, “If you will not, another will; the maid will come if the wife will not.”
Only first the husband should admonish and warn his wife two or three times,
and let the situation be known to others so that her stubbornness becomes a
matter of common knowledge and is rebuked before the
congregation. If she still refuses, get rid of her; take an Esther and let
Vashti go, as King Ahasuerus did [Esther 1:12‑2:17].
Here
you should be guided by the words of
In
addition to these three grounds for divorce there is one more which would
justify the sundering of husband and wife, but only in such a way that they
must both refrain from remarrying or else become reconciled. This
is the case where husband and wife cannot get along together for some reason
other than the matter of the conjugal duty.
Now if one of the parties were endowed with
Christian fortitude and could endure the other’s ill behavior, that would
doubtless be a wonderfully blessed cross and a right way to heaven. For an
evil spouse, in a manner of speaking, fulfils the devil’s function and sweeps
clean him who is able to recognize and bear it. If he cannot, however, let him
divorce her before he does anything worse, and remain unmarried for the rest of
his days. Should he try to say that the blame rests not upon him but upon his
spouse, and therefore try to marry another, this will not do, for he is under
obligation to endure evil, or to be released from his
cross only by God, since the conjugal duty has not been denied him. Here the
proverb applies, “He who wants a fire must endure the smoke.”
What about a situation where one’s wife is
an invalid and has therefore become incapable of fulfilling the conjugal duty?
May he not take another to wife? By no means. Let
him serve the Lord in the person of the invalid and await His good pleasure.
Consider that in this invalid God has provided your household with a healing
balm by which you are to gain heaven. Blessed and twice blessed are you when
you recognize such a gift of grace and therefore serve your invalid wife for
God’s sake.
But you may say: I am unable to remain continent. That is a
lie. If you will earnestly serve your invalid wife, recognize that God has
placed this burden upon you, and give thanks to him, then you may leave matters
in his care. He will surely grant you grace, that you will not have to bear
more than you are able. He is far too faithful to deprive you of your wife
through illness without at the same time subduing your carnal desire, if you
will but faithfully serve your invalid wife.
Part Three
Living as husband and wife
In the third part, in order that we
may say something about the estate of marriage which will be conducive toward
the soul’s salvation, we shall now consider how
to live a Christian and godly life in that estate. I will pass over in
silence the matter of the conjugal duty, the granting and the withholding of
it, since some filth‑preachers have been shameless enough in this matter
to rouse our disgust. Some of them designate special times for this, and
exclude holy nights and women who are pregnant. I will leave this as
What we would speak most of is the
fact that the estate of marriage has universally fallen into such awful
disrepute. There are many pagan books which treat of
nothing but the depravity of womankind and the unhappiness of the estate of
marriage, such that some have thought that even if Wisdom itself were a woman
one should not marry. A Roman official was once supposed to encourage young men
to take wives (because the country was in need of a large population on account of its incessant wars). Among other things he
said to them, “My dear young men, if we could only live without women we would
be spared a great deal of annoyance; but since we cannot do without them, take
to yourselves wives,” etc. He was criticized by some on the
ground that his words were ill‑considered and would only serve to discourage
the young men. Others, on the contrary, said that because Metellus was a
brave man he had spoken rightly, for an honorable man should speak the truth
without fear or hypocrisy.
So
they concluded that woman is a necessary evil,
and that no household can be without such an evil. These are the words of blind heathen, who are ignorant of the fact that man and woman are God’s
creation. They blaspheme his work, as if man and woman just came into being spontaneously! I imagine
that if women were to write books they would say exactly the same thing about
men. What they have failed to set down in writing, however, they express with
their grumbling and complaining whenever they get together.
Every
day one encounters parents who forget their former misery because, like the
mouse, they have now had their fill. They deter their children from
marriage but entice them into priesthood and nunnery, citing the trials and
troubles of married life. Thus do they bring their own
children home to the devil, as we daily observe; they provide them with ease
for the body and hell for the soul.
Since
God had to suffer such disdain of his work from the pagans, he therefore also
gave them their reward, of which Paul writes in Romans 1 [:24‑28], and
allowed them to fall into immorality and a stream of uncleanness until they
henceforth carnally abused not women but
boys and dumb beasts. Even their women carnally abused themselves and each
other. Because they blasphemed the work of God, he gave them up to a base
mind, of which the books of the pagans are full, most shamelessly crammed full.
In
order that we may not proceed as blindly, but rather conduct ourselves in a
Christian manner, hold fast first of all to this, that
man and woman are the work of God.
Keep a tight rein on your heart and your lips; do not criticize his work, or
call that evil which he himself has called good. He
knows better than you yourself what is good and to
your benefit, as he says in Genesis 1 [
For
this reason young men should be on their guard when
they read pagan books and hear the common complaints about marriage, lest they
inhale poison. For the estate of marriage does not set well with the devil,
because it is God’s good will and work. This is why the devil has contrived to
have so much shouted and written in the world against the institution of
marriage, to frighten men away from this godly life and entangle them in a web
of fornication and secret sins. Indeed, it seems to me that even Solomon,
although he amply censures evil women, was speaking against just such
blasphemers when he said in Proverbs 18 [:22], “He who finds a wife finds a
good thing, and obtains favor from the Lord.” What is
this good thing and this favor? Let us see.
The
world says of marriage, “Brief is the joy, lasting the bitterness.” Let them
say what they please; what God wills and creates is bound to be a laughingstock
to them. The kind of joy and pleasure they have outside of wedlock they will be
most acutely aware of, I suspect, in their consciences. To recognize the estate
of marriage is something quite different from merely being married. He who is
married but does not recognize the estate of marriage cannot continue in
wedlock without bitterness, drudgery, and anguish; he will inevitably complain
and blaspheme like the pagans and blind, irrational men. But
he who recognizes the estate of marriage
will find therein delight, love, and joy without end; as Solomon says, “He who
finds a wife finds a good thing,” etc. [Prov.
Now the ones who recognize the estate
of marriage are those who firmly believe that God himself instituted it, brought husband and wife together, and ordained that they should beget children
and care for them. For this they have
God’s word, Genesis 1 [:28], and they can be certain that he does not lie.
They can therefore also be certain that the estate of marriage and everything
that goes with it in the way of conduct,
works, and suffering is pleasing to God. Now tell me, how can the heart
have greater good, joy, and delight than in God, when one is certain that his
estate, conduct, and work is pleasing to God?
That
is what it means to find a wife. Many have wives, but few find wives. Why? They are blind; they fail to see that their life and
conduct with their wives is the work of God and pleasing in his sight. Could they but find that, then no wife would
be so hateful, so ill‑tempered, so ill‑mannered, so poor, so sick
that they would fail to find in her their heart’s delight and would always
be reproaching God for his work, creation, and will. And because they see that it is the good pleasure of their beloved Lord,
they would be able to have peace in grief, joy in the midst of bitterness,
happiness in the midst of tribulations, as the martyrs have in suffering.
We err in that we judge the work of
God according to our own feelings, and regard not his will but our own desire.
This is why we are unable to recognize his works and persist in making evil
that which is good, and regarding as bitter that which
is pleasant. Nothing is so bad, not even death itself, but
what it becomes sweet and tolerable if only I know and am certain that it is
pleasing to God. Then there follows immediately that of which Solomon
speaks, “He obtains favor from the Lord” [Prov.
Now observe that when that clever harlot, our natural reason (which
the pagans followed in trying to be most clever), takes a look at married life,
she turns up her nose and says, “Alas, must I rock the baby, wash its diapers,
make its bed, smell its stench, stay up nights with it, take care of it when it
cries, heal its rashes and sores, and on top of that care for my wife, provide
for her, labor at my trade, take care of this and take care of that, do this
and do that, endure this and endure that, and whatever else of bitterness and
drudgery married life involves? What, should I make such a prisoner of
myself? O you poor, wretched fellow, have you taken a wife? Fie,
fie upon such wretchedness and bitterness! It is better to remain free
and lead a peaceful, carefree life; I will become a priest or a nun and compel
my children to do likewise.”
What
then does Christian faith say to this? It opens its eyes, looks upon all these insignificant, distasteful, and despised duties in
the Spirit, and is aware that they are all adorned
with divine approval as with the costliest gold and jewels. It says, “O God,
because I am certain that thou hast created me as a man and hast from my body
begotten this child, I also know for a certainty that it meets with thy perfect
pleasure. I confess to thee that I am not
worthy to rock the little babe or wash its diapers, or to be
entrusted with the care of the child and its mother. How is it that
I, without any merit, have come to this distinction of being certain that I am
serving thy creature and thy most precious will? O how gladly will I do so,
though the duties should be even more insignificant and despised.
Neither frost nor heat, neither, drudgery nor labor, will distress or dissuade
me, for I am certain that it is thus pleasing in thy sight.”
A wife too should regard her duties in the
same light, as she suckles the child, rocks and bathes it, and cares for it
in other ways; and as she busies herself with other duties and renders help and obedience to her husband. These are truly golden and noble works.
This is also how to comfort and encourage a woman in the pangs of childbirth,
not by repeating St. Margaret legends and other silly old wives’ tales but by
speaking thus, “Dear Crete, remember that you are a woman, and that this work
of God in you is pleasing to him. Trust joyfully in his will, and let him have
his way with you. Work with all your might to bring forth the child. Should it
mean your death, then depart happily, for you will die
in a noble deed and in subservience to God. If you were not a woman you should
now wish to be one for the sake of this very work alone, that you might thus
gloriously suffer and even die in the performance of God’s work and will. For
here you have the word of God, who so created you and implanted within you this
extremity.” Tell me, is not this indeed (as Solomon says [Prov.
Now
you tell me, when a father goes ahead and
washes diapers or performs some other mean task for his child, and someone
ridicules him as an effeminate fool – though that father is acting in the
spirit just described and in Christian faith – my dear fellow you tell me,
which of the two is most keenly ridiculing the other? God, with all his angels
and creatures, is smiling – not because that father is washing diapers, but
because he is doing so in Christian faith. Those who sneer at him and see only
the task but not the faith are ridiculing God with all his creatures, as the
biggest fool on earth. Indeed, they are only ridiculing themselves; with all
their cleverness they are nothing but devil’s fools.
St.
Cyprian, that great and admirable man and holy martyr, wrote that one should
kiss the newborn infant, even before it is baptized,
in honor of the hands of God here engaged in a brand new deed. What do you
suppose he would have said about a baptized infant? There was a true Christian,
who correctly recognized and regarded God’s work and creature. Therefore, I
say that all nuns and monks who lack faith, and who trust in their own chastity
and in their order, are not worthy of rocking a baptized child or preparing its
pap, even if it were the child of a harlot. This is because their order and
manner of life has no word of God as its warrant. They cannot boast that what
they do is pleasing in God’s sight, as can the woman in childbirth, even if her
child is born out of wedlock.
I
say these things in order that we may learn how honorable a
thing it is to live in that estate which God has ordained. In it we find God’s word and good pleasure, by which all the works,
conduct, and sufferings of that estate become holy, godly, and precious so that
Solomon even congratulates such a man and says in Proverbs 5 [:18], “Rejoice in
the wife of your youth,” and again in Ecclesiastes 11 [9:9], “Enjoy life with
the wife whom you love all the days of your vain life.” Doubtless,
Solomon is not speaking here of carnal pleasure, since it is the Holy Spirit
who speaks through him. He is rather offering godly comfort to those who find
much drudgery in married life. This he does by way of defense against those who
scoff at the divine ordinance and, like the pagans, seek but fail to find in
marriage anything beyond a carnal and fleeting sensual pleasure.
Conversely,
we learn how wretched is the spiritual estate of monks and nuns by its very
nature, for it lacks the word and pleasure of God. All its works, conduct, and
sufferings are un-Christian, vain, and pernicious, so that Christ even says to
their warning in Matthew 15 [:9], “In vain do they worship me according to the
commandments of men.” There is therefore no comparison
between a married woman who lives in faith and in the recognition of her
estate, and a cloistered nun who lives in unbelief and in the presumptuousness
of her ecclesiastical estate, just as God’s ways and man’s ways are beyond
compare, as He says in Isaiah 55 [:9], “As the heavens are higher than the
earth, so are my ways higher than your ways.” It is a great blessing for
one to have God’s word as his warrant, so that he can speak right up and say to
God, “See, this thou hast spoken, it is thy good pleasure.” What does such a
man care if it seems to be displeasing and ridiculous to the whole world?
Small wonder that married folk for the most part experience little
but bitterness and anguish. They have no knowledge of God’s word and
will concerning their estate, and are therefore just as wretched as monks and
nuns since both lack the comfort and assurance of God’s good pleasure. This is
why it is impossible for them to endure outward bitterness and drudgery, for it
is too much for a man to have to suffer both inward and outward bitterness. If
they inwardly fail to realize that their estate is pleasing in the sight of
God, bitterness is already there; if they then seek an outward pleasure therein,
they fail to find it. Bitterness is joined with
bitterness, and thence arises of necessity the loud outcry and the writings
against women and the estate of marriage.
God’s work and ordinance must and will be
accepted and borne on the strength of God’s word and assurance; otherwise they do damage and become unbearable. Therefore,
Observe
that thus far I have told you nothing of the estate of marriage except that
which the world and reason in their blindness shrink from and sneer at as a
mean, unhappy, troublesome mode of life. We have seen how all these
shortcomings in fact comprise noble virtues and true delight if one but looks at God’s word and will, and thereby recognizes its
true nature. I will not mention the other
advantages and delights implicit in a marriage that goes well – that husband
and wife cherish one another, become one, serve one another, and other
attendant blessings – lest somebody shut me up by saying that I am speaking
about something I have not experienced, and that there is more gall than honey
in marriage. I base my remarks on Scripture, which to me is surer than all
experience and cannot lie to me. He who finds still other good things in
marriage profits all the more, and should give thanks
to God. Whatever God calls good must of necessity
always be good, unless men do not recognize it or perversely misuse it.
I
therefore pass over the good or evil which experience
offers, and confine myself to such good as Scripture and truth ascribe to
marriage. It is no slight boon that in wedlock fornication and unchastity are checked and eliminated. This in itself is so great a
good that it alone should be enough to induce men to marry forthwith, and for
many reasons.
The
first reason is that fornication destroys not only the soul but also body,
property, honor, and family as well. For we see how a licentious and wicked
life not only brings great disgrace but is also a spendthrift life, more costly
than wedlock, and that illicit partners necessarily occasion greater suffering
for one another than do married folk. Beyond that it consumes the body,
corrupts flesh and blood, nature, and physical constitution. Through such a
variety of evil consequences God takes a rigid
position, as though he would actually drive people away from fornication and
into marriage. However, few are thereby convinced or converted.
Some,
however, have given the matter thought and so learned from their own experience
that they have coined an excellent proverb, “Early to rise and early to wed;
that should no one ever regret.” Why? Well because
from that there come people who retain a sound body, a good conscience,
property, and honor and family, all of which are so ruined and dissipated by
fornication, that, once lost, it is well‑nigh impossible to regain them
– scarcely one in a hundred succeeds. This was the benefit cited by Paul in I
Corinthians 7 [:2], “To avoid immorality, each man
should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.”
The
estate of marriage, however, redounds to the benefit not alone of the body,
property, honor, and soul of an individual, but also to the benefit of whole
cities and countries, in that they remain exempt from the plagues imposed by
God. We know only too well that the most terrible
plagues have befallen lands and people because of fornication. This was the sin
cited as the reason why the world was drowned in the Deluge, Genesis 6 [:1‑13],
and
Many
think they can evade marriage by having their fling for a time, and then
becoming righteous. My dear fellow, if one in a thousand succeeds in this, that would be doing very well. He who intends to lead
a chaste life had better begin early, and attain it not with but without
fornication, either by the grace of God or through marriage. We see only too well how they make out every day. It might well be called
plunging into immorality rather than growing to maturity. It is the devil
who has brought this about, and coined such damnable sayings as, “One has to
play the fool at least once”; or, “He who does it not in his youth does it in
his old age”; or, “A young saint, an old devil.” Such
are the sentiments of the poet Terence and other pagans. This is heathenish;
they speak like heathens, yea, like devils.
It
is certainly a fact that he who refuses to marry must fall into immorality. How
could it be otherwise, since God has created man and woman to produce seed and
to multiply? Why should one not forestall immorality by means of marriage? For
if special grace does not exempt a person, his nature must and will compel him
to produce seed and to multiply. If this does not occur within marriage, how
else can it occur except in fornication or secret sins? But,
they say, suppose I am neither married nor immoral, and force myself to remain
continent? Do you not hear that restraint is impossible without the special
grace? For God’s word does not admit of restraint; neither does it lie when it says, “Be fruitful and multiply” [Gen. 1:28].
You can neither escape nor restrain yourself from being fruitful and multiplying;
it is God’s ordinance and takes its course.
Physicians
are not amiss when they say: If this natural function
is forcibly restrained it necessarily strikes into the flesh and blood and
becomes a poison, whence the body becomes unhealthy, enervated, sweaty, and
foul‑smelling. That which should have issued in fruitfulness and
propagation has to be absorbed within the body itself. Unless there is terrific
hunger or immense labor or the supreme grace, the body cannot take it; it
necessarily becomes unhealthy and sickly. Hence, we see how weak and sickly
barren women are. Those who are fruitful, however, are healthier, cleanlier,
and happier. And even if they bear themselves weary –
or ultimately bear themselves out – that does not hurt. Let them bear themselves out. This is the purpose for
which they exist. It is better to have a brief life with good health
than a long life in ill health.
But
the greatest good in married life, that which makes all suffering and labor
worthwhile, is that God grants offspring and commands that they be brought up
to worship and serve him. In all the world this is the
noblest and most precious work, because to God there can be nothing dearer than
the salvation of souls. Now since we are all duty bound to suffer death, if
need be, that we might bring a single soul to God, you can see how rich the
estate of marriage is in good works. God has entrusted to its bosom souls
begotten of its own body, on whom it can lavish all
manner of Christian works. Most certainly father and mother are apostles, bishops, and
priests to their children, for it is they who make them acquainted with the
gospel. In short, there is no greater or nobler authority on earth than
that of parents over their children, for this authority is both spiritual and
temporal. Whoever teaches the gospel to
another is truly his apostle and bishop. Mitre and staff and great estates indeed produce idols, but
teaching the gospel produces apostles and bishops. See therefore how good and
great is God’s work and ordinance!
Here
I will let the matter rest and leave to others the task of searching out
further benefits and advantages of the estate of marriage. My purpose was only
to enumerate those which a Christian can have for conducting his married life
in a Christian way, so that, as Solomon says, he may find his wife in the sight
of God and obtain favor from the Lord [Prov. 18:22]. In saying this I do not wish to disparage
virginity, or entice anyone away from virginity into marriage. Let each one act as he is able, and as he feels it has been given
to him by God. I simply
wanted to check those scandalmongers who place marriage so far beneath
virginity that they dare to say: Even if the children should become holy [I
Cor.
Finally,
we have before us one big, strong objection to answer. Yes, they say, it would
be a fine thing to be married, but how will I support myself? I have nothing;
take a wife and live on that, etc. Undoubtedly, this is the greatest obstacle
to marriage; it is this above all which prevents and breaks up marriage and is
the chief excuse for fornication. What shall I say to this objection? It shows
lack of faith and doubt of God’s goodness and truth. It is therefore no wonder
that where faith is lacking, nothing but fornication and all manner of
misfortune follow. They are lacking in this, that they want to be sure first of
their material resources, where they are to get their food, drink, and clothing
[Matt.
Let
such heathen go their way; we will not argue with them. If they should be lucky
enough to obtain such wives the marriages would still be un‑Christian and
without faith. They trust in God as long as they know that they do not need
him, and that they are well supplied. He who would enter into wedlock as a Christian
must not be ashamed of being poor and despised, and doing insignificant work.
He should take satisfaction in this: first, that his status and occupation are
pleasing to God; second, that God will most certainly provide for him if only
he does his job to the best of his ability, and that, if he cannot be a squire
or a prince, he is a manservant or a maidservant.
God
has promised in Matthew 6 [:25, 33], “Do not be anxious about what you shall
eat, drink, and put on; seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness,
and all these things shall be yours as well.” Again Psalm 37 [:25] says, “I
have been young and now am old, yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken, or
his children begging bread.” If a man does not believe this, is it any wonder
that he suffers hunger, thirst, and cold, and begs for bread? Look at Jacob,
the holy patriarch, who in
Indeed,
God has shown sufficiently in the first chapter of Genesis how he provides for
us. He first created and prepared all things in heaven and on earth, together
with the beasts and all growing things, before he created man. Thereby he demonstrated
how he has laid up for us at all times a sufficient store of food and clothing,
even before we ask him for it. All we need to do is to work and avoid idleness;
then we shall certainly be fed and clothed. But a pitiful unbelief refuses to admit this. The unbeliever
sees, comprehends, and feels all the same that even if he worries himself to
death over it, he can neither produce nor maintain a single grain of wheat in
the field. He knows too that even though all his storehouses were full to overflowing,
he could not make use of a single morsel or thread unless God sustains him in
life and health and preserves to him his possessions. Yet this has no effect
upon him.
To
sum the matter up: whoever finds himself unsuited to the celibate life should
see to it right away that he has something to do and to work at; then let him
strike out in God’s name and get married. A
young man should marry at the age of twenty at the latest, a young woman at
fifteen to eighteen; that’s when they are still in
good health and best suited for marriage. Let God worry about how they and
their children are to be fed. God makes children;
he will surely also feed them. Should he fail to exalt you and them here on
earth, then take satisfaction in the fact that he has granted you a Christian
marriage, and know that he will exalt you there; and be thankful to him for his
gifts and favors.
With
all this extolling of married life, however, I have not meant to ascribe to
nature a condition of sinlessness. On the contrary, I say that flesh and blood,
corrupted through Adam, is conceived and born in sin, as Psalm 51 [:5] says.
Intercourse is never without sin; but God excuses it by his grace because the
estate of marriage is his work, and he preserves in and through the sin all that
good which he has implanted and blessed in marriage.