It cannot be denied, that in all these marriages which Luther
promoted, or at least favoured, what he had his eye on was the
advantage of the new Church system. Of any raising of the moral
position of women, of any deepening of the significance of marriage,
there is here no trace; these marriages served quite another purpose.
The circumstances attending them were, moreover, frequently far from
dignified. “The Bishop of Samland,” so Philip von Creutz, a Knight
of the Teutonic Order, relates, “gave up his bishopric to the Duke
[Albert] in the presence of the whole assembly.... He caused his mitre
to be broken up and, out of its precious stones and jewels, he had
ornaments made for his wife.”[498]
_Practical Consequences of the New View of Woman: Matrimonial
Impediments, Divorce._
The readiness shown by Luther to annul valid marriages, and the wayward
manner in which he disposed of the impediments fixed by the Church,
were not calculated to enhance respect either for marriage or for woman.
As regards the impediments to marriage we shall here merely refer to
the practical and not uncommon case where a person wished to marry
a niece. Whereas Canon Law, at one with Roman Law, regarded this
relationship as constituting an impediment, which might, however, be
dispensed from by the Pope, Luther at first saw fit to declare it no
impediment at all; he even issued memoranda to this effect, one of
which was printed in 1526 and circulated widely.[499] “If the Pope
was able to dispense,” he said later on concerning this, “why can’t I
too?”[500] In favour of the lawfulness of such marriages he appealed to
the example of Abraham, and in reply to objections declared: “If they
blame the work and example of the holy Patriarch Abraham, then let them
be scandalised.”[501] At a later date, nevertheless, he changed his
mind and held such marriages to be unlawful. His previous statements he
explained by saying that once he had indeed given a different decision,
not in order to lead others into excesses but in order “to assist
consciences at the hour of death against the Pope”; he had merely
given advice in Confession to troubled consciences, and had not laid
down any law; to make laws was not within his province, either in the
State or in the Church. His former memoranda were not to be alleged
now; a certain man of the name of Borner, who, on the strength of them,
had married his niece, had acted very ill and done injustice to his
(Luther’s) decision. The Pope alone, so Luther says, was to blame for
his previous advice--because many, owing to his laws, were reduced to
despair and had come to Luther for help. “It is true that in Confession
and in order to pacify consciences I have advised differently, but
I made a mistake in allowing such counsels to be made public. Now,
however, it is done. This is a matter for Confession only.”[502]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account