H
holdencaulfield
Guest
Before the Reformation, Luther was a Catholic monk. He had taken a vow of celibacy. After the Reformation he got married. Did he break his vow. Was there an ulterior motive here?
True but I was really wondering what a Protestant thought of this. Weather you believe in celibacy of priests or not, Martin Luther did make a vow to God, which he did break.Unless Luther, in one of his writings or in a speech recorded on paper, claimed that one of his reasons to ‘break’ from the Roman Catholic Church was to ‘break’ his vow of celibacy, we’d only be speculating.
I would imagine he spent a fair amount of time in Purgatory, however I think he was in general a God-fearing man.I think Martin Luther could be seen as having broken several vows … but don’t we all in larger and/or smaller ways? More or less spectacular, but I know I have my good and bad days …
Vow of obedience … to the faith, the church, his superiors, etc …
Vow of celebacy …
Alas, these are ost probably a result of sin, lack of humility, act of pride … All of the same sins we all fall prey to and seek reconcilliation for …
I pray that Martin Luther was reconciled to our Lord upon his death…
Just as I hope I will be …Like St. Paul I am still working out my salvation with fear and trembling … I can only pray for Luther and not worry too much about the specifics of his immortal soul … I have to stay focused on my own
![]()
Yes I agree.I hope he is not still there when I arriveor I may be there a really … really long time myself
Thank God we have a forgiving Lordand a Church that helps keep us on track, reminding us of our Christian calling …
—um - deleting everything I could possibly say, lest I be horribly uncharitable.I would imagine he spent a fair amount of time in Purgatory…
I don’t actually know. I wasn’t sure if priestly vows were different than Augustinian vows. I understand there might also be a question if Staupitz even had authority to release Luther from his vows so the release might be considered invalid in some circles even though Staupitz remained in good standing with Rome.Angainor, That is interesting information. While Staupitz may have had the authority to release Luther from his monastic vows, was Martin Luther ever released from his vow as a priest as well?
As far as I know, Staupitz’ release was considered valid, as the head of the order may release as he sees fit.I don’t actually know. I wasn’t sure if priestly vows were different than Augustinian vows. I understand there might also be a question if Staupitz even had authority to release Luther from his vows so the release might be considered invalid in some circles even though Staupitz remained in good standing with Rome.
I just thought I’d throw that out there. It doesn’t really matter to me. For all I know it is an instance of Luther sinning boldly by ignoring his vows.Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.
1 Timothy 4:1–5
Depends on what you mean by priestly vows. He would have had no faculties to say mass or perform any sacraments, with the possible exception of last rights in an emergency (we would neeed to check that). He would have still been held to the vow of obedience and celebacy, as those do not require him to be a preist to perform. The vow of poverty is gone when he left the Augustinians.As far as I know, Staupitz’ release was considered valid, as the head of the order may release as he sees fit.
Of course, Luther’s priestly vows would’ve been null and void at his excommunication in 1521. I could be wrong about that, but it would seem that priestly vows are no longer binding if Rome no longer thinks you’re a priest.
But since he was no longer a priest, would he still have been held to celibacy laws?Depends on what you mean by priestly vows. He would have had no faculties to say mass or perform any sacraments, with the possible exception of last rights in an emergency (we would neeed to check that). He would have still been held to the vow of obedience and celebacy, as those do not require him to be a preist to perform. The vow of poverty is gone when he left the Augustinians.
Anyone can take a vow of celibacy. When you think about it, everyone is under a order of chastity: only sex with their properly married spouse. When you marry, the “forsaking all others” is a part of a vow of Chastity, a special version of Chastity that allows for one and only one sexual partner. The vow of celibacy adds to it a promise to God never to marry. Now, as far as I know, and I am not an expert on the exact words used, this vow is not tied specifically to the priesthood (i.e. so long as I am a priest). Therefore, he would have been held to that vow.But since he was no longer a priest, would he still have been held to celibacy laws?