C
Curious11
Guest
Seeing as many protestants allow it nowadays, did Luther accept it?
The only time Luther mentions the government is here:But you ask: Is there then no reason for which there may be separation and divorce between man and wife? Answer: Christ states here (Matt. v. 31-32) and in Matthew xix. 9, only this one, which is called adultery, and he quotes it from the law of Moses, which punishes adultery with death. Since now death alone dissolves marriages and releases from the obligation, an adulterer is already divorced not by man but by God himself, and not only cut loose from his spouse, but from this life. For by adultery he has divorced himself from his wife, and has dissolved the marriage, which he has no right to do; and he has thereby made himself worthy of death, in such a way that he is already dead before God, although the judge does not take his life. Because now God here divorces, the other party is fully released, so that he or she is not bound to keep the spouse that has proved unfaithful, however much he or she may desire it.
Luther is saying that adultery dissolves a marriage and fully releases the innocent party. However, the innocent party doesn’t have to leave their adulterous spouse and, in fact, the church should encourage reconciliation. It should be the innocent party’s choice to stay or leave; however, since marriage is a civil institution even someone with grounds would still need to attain a divorce before remarrying.For we do not order or forbid this divorcing, but we ask the government to act in this matter, and we submit to what the secular authorities ordain in regard to it. Yet, our advice would be to such as claim to be Christians, that it would be much better to exhort and urge both parties to remain together, and that the innocent party should become reconciled to the guilty (if humbled and reformed) and exercise forgiveness in Christian love; unless no improvement could be hoped for, or the guilty person who had been pardoned and restored to favor persisted in abusing this kindness, and still continued in leading a public, loose life, and took it for granted that one must continue to spare and forgive him. . . .
To Luther, no vocation was more serious than that of spouse and parent. Luther took marriage deadly serious. Literally. He once, albeit somewhat facetiously, suggested the State should impose the heftiest of all penalties on those who consummated a marriage and then cruelly, unilaterally subjected their spouse to sexual abandonment.“The prince should think: Christ has served me and made everything to follow him; therefore, I should also serve my neighbor, protect him and everything that belongs to him. That is why God has given me this office, and I have it that I might serve him… The same is true for shoemaker, tailor, scribe, or reader. If he is a Christian tailor, he will say: I make these clothes because God has bidden me do so, so that I can earn a living, so that I can help and serve my neighbor. When a Christian does not serve the other, God is not present; that is not Christian living.”
Here is the quotation Dr. Anders mentioned from the Augsburg Confession:The first recorded case of a priest having sexual relations with a nun. Breaking their vows does not render them ineffective or invalid - it is only a sign of rebellion and slavishness to sensuality and pure human desire.
And Catholics are often accused of being obsessed with sex. Further explanation by Dr. David Anders begins at the 11:55 point in the video.
Martin Luther:His marriage, however, is a model for all Christians
THAT is an ad hominem!And the indignant, self-righteous chorus just keeps shrieking, even when presented with actual facts.