Directory Index


  Martin Luther


Let Your Sins Be Strong:

A Letter From Luther to Melanchthon

Letter no. 99, 1 August 1521, From the Wartburg


Translated by

Erika Bullmann Flores

from: _Dr. Martin Luther's Saemmtliche Schriften_

Dr, Johannes Georg Walch, Ed.

(St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, N.D.),

Vol. 15,cols. 2585-2590.


Of course, you can only know and absolve those sins which have been

confessed to you; sins which have not been confessed to you, you

neither need to know nor can you absolve them. That is reaching too

high, dear gentlemen."

You cannot convince me that the same is true for the vows made by

priests and monks. For I am very concerned about the fact that the

order of priesthood was instituted by God as a free one. Not so that

of the monks who chose their position voluntarily, even though I have

almost come to the conclusion that those who have entered into that

state at an age prior to their manhood, or are currently at that

stage, may secede with a clear conscience. I am hesitant, however,

with a judgment about those who have been in this state for a long

time and have grown old in it.

2. By the way, St. Paul very freely speaks about the priests (1.Tim:

4, ff), that devils have forbidden them to marry; and St. Paul's

voice is the voice of the divine majesty. Therefore, I do not doubt

that they must depend on him to such a degree that even though they

agreed to this interdiction of the devil at the time, now--having

realized with whom they made their contract--they can cheerfully

break this contract.

3. This interdiction by the devil, which is clearly shown by God's

Word, urges and compels me to sanction the actions of the Bishop of

Kemberg. For God does not lie nor deceive when He says that this is

an interdiction from the devil. If a contract has been made with the

devil it must not endure since it was made in godless error against

God and was damned and repudiated by God. For He says very clearly

(1. Tim. 4:1 Vulg.) that those spirits are in error who are the

originators of the interdictions.

4. Why do you hesitate to join this divine judgment against the gates

of hell? That is not how it was with the oath of the children of

Israel which they gave to the Gibeons. They had it in their laws

that they must offer peace or accept peace offered to them, and

accept into their midst proselytes and those who adhered to their

customs. All this took place. Nothing happened there against the

Lord or by the advise of spirits. For even though in the beginning

they murmured, later on they approved.

5. In addition, consider that the state of being unmarried is only a

human statute and can be readily lifted. Therefore any Christian can

do this. I would make this statement even if the interdiction had

not come from a devil, but from a devout person. However, because

there is no such statement by God concerning the monks, I am

therefore not certain that I should make the same pronouncement

concerning them. For I would not dare to presume, neither advice

another to do so. Would God that we could do this, though, in order

to prevent someone from becoming a monk, or leaving his order during

the years of his virility. For we are to avoid vexations if there is

no relevant scriptural passage available to us, even when dealing

with things which are permitted.

6. Good old Carlstadt is also citing St. Paul (1 Tim.5:9-11), to let

go of the younger widows and select 60-year-olds, wish to God this

could be demonstrated. Quite easily someone might say that the

Apostle referred to the future, while in reference to the past (V.12)

they are condemned because they have broken their first troth.

Therefore this expression has come to naught and cannot be a

dependable basis for the conscience. For that is what we are

searching for. Moreover, this reasoning that it is better to be

married than to burn with vain desire (1 Cor.7:9), or to prevent the

sins of immorality (1 Cor.7:2), by entering into marriage while

committing the sin of the broken troth, that is nothing but common-

sense. We want the scripture and the witness of God's will. Who

knows if the one who is very enthusiastic today will still be so


7. I would not have allowed marriage for priests for the sole reason

of "burning" had not St. Paul called this interdiction devilish and

hypocritical, condemned by God. Even without the burning he urged

that this unmarried status be cast aside simply for the fear of God.

However, it is necessary to discuss these things more thoroughly. For

I too would love to come to the aid of the monks and nuns. I very

much pity these wretched human beings, these young men and girls who

suffer defilement and burning.

8. Concerning the two elements of the Holy Supper I will not give an

example, but give testimony with Christ's words. Carlstadt does not

show that those who have received only one element have sinned, or

not sinned. I am concerned that Christ did not command either one of

the two, just as He does not command baptism if the tyrant or the

world withhold the water. So also the violence of persecution

separates men and women, which God forbids to separate, neither do

they agree to be separated. Therefore, neither do godfearing hearts

agree that they should be robbed of one of the elements. However,

those who do agree and approve: who can deny that these are not

Christians but Papists who are sinning.

9. There HE does not demand it, and here the tyrant oppresses, I

therefore cannot agree that those who receive only one element are

sinning. For who can exert power to take something when the tyrant

is not willing? Therefore it is only common-sense which observes

here that Christ's institution is not adhered to. Scripture makes no

definition by which we could declare this act a sin. It is Christ's

institution, given in freedom, which cannot be incarcerated as a

whole or in part.

10. It happened to Donatus, the martyr, where several people could

not participate because the cup broke or the wine was spilled. What

if this happens and there is no other wine available? There are other

similar situations. In short, because Scripture does not speak of sin

here, I therefore say there is no sin involved.

11. I am quite pleased, though, that you are re-establishing Christ's

method. For it was just that which I planned to take up with you

first of all upon my return to you. For now we recognize this

tyranny and can oppose it, in order not to be forced to receive only

one of the elements.

12. From here on I will no longer conduct private mass. Rather we

should pray God to give us more of His Spirit. For I am expecting

that the Lord will soon ravish Germany--which she deserves because of

her unbelief, godlessness and hate of the Gospel. However, we shall

be blamed for this chastisement, as we are made out to be heretics

who have provoked God to this action. We shall be scorned by the

people and disdained by the nation. Those, however, will make

excuses for their sins, through which He will manifest that the hard-

hearted do not become godly neither by mercy nor wrath. Let it

happen, let the will of the Lord be done. Amen!

13. If you are a preacher of mercy, do not preach an imaginary but

the true mercy. If the mercy is true, you must therefore bear the

true, not an imaginary sin. God does not save those who are only

imaginary sinners. Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let

your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the

victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we

are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides. We,

however, says Peter (2. Peter 3:13) are looking forward to a new

heaven and a new earth where justice will reign. It suffices that

through God's glory we have recognized the Lamb who takes away the

sin of the world. No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to

kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. Do you think

such an exalted Lamb paid merely a small price with a meager

sacrifice for our sins? Pray hard for you are quite a sinner.

On the day of the Feast of St. Peter the Apostle, 1521