(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, because 65] 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.