If it turns out that he wishes to do it for the sake of the good work, the priest or lord should boldly tread the vow and good work under foot, as though it were a lure of the devil, and show him how to apply the money and labor necessary for the pilgrimage to the keeping of G.o.d"s commandments and to works a thousandfold better, viz., by spending it on his own family or on his poor neighbors. But if he wishes to make the pilgrimage out of curiosity, to see new lands and cities, he may be allowed to do as he likes. If, however, he has made the vow while ill, then such vows ought to be forbidden and canceled, and the commandments of G.o.d exalted, and he ought to be shown that he should henceforth be satisfied with the vow he made in baptism[154], to keep the commandments of G.o.d. And yet, in order to quiet his conscience, he may be allowed this once to perform his foolish vow. No one wants to walk in the straight and common path of G.o.d"s commandments; everyone makes himself new roads and new vows, as though he had fulfilled all the commandments of G.o.d.
[Sidenote: Reform of the Mendicant Orders]
13. Next we come to that great crowd who vow much and keep little. Be not angry, dear lords! Truly, I mean it well. It is the truth, and bitter-sweet, and it is this,--the building of mendicant-houses[155]
should no more be permitted. G.o.d help us, there are already far too many of them! Would to G.o.d they were all done away, or at least given over to two or three orders! Wandering about the land has never brought any good, and never will bring any good. It is my advice, therefore, to put together ten of these houses, or as many as may be necessary, and out of them all to make one house, which will be well provided and need no more begging. It is much more important to consider what the common people need for their salvation, than what St. Francis, St. Dominic, St. Augustine[156] or any other man has decreed; especially since things have not turned out as they expected.
The mendicants should also be relieved of preaching and hearing confession, except when they are called to this work by the express desire of bishops, parishes, congregations or the temporal authorities. Out of their preaching and shriving there has come nothing but hatred and envy between priests and monks, and great offence and hindrance to the common people. For this reason it should properly and deservedly cease, because it can well be dispensed with[157]. It looks suspiciously as though it were not for nothing that the Holy Roman See has increased this army, so that the priests and bishops, tired of its tyranny, might not some time become too strong or it and begin a reformation which would not be to the liking of his Holiness.
At the same time the manifold divisions and differences within one and the same order should be abolished. These divisions have at times arisen for small reason and maintained themselves for still smaller, combatting one another with unspeakable hatred and envy[158].
Nevertheless the Christian faith, which can well exist without any of these distinctions, is lost by both sides, and a good Christian life is valued and sought after only in outward laws, works and forms; and this results only in the devising of hypocrisy and the destruction of souls, as everyone may see with his own eyes.
The pope must also be forbidden to found and confirm any more of these orders; nay, he must be commanded to abolish some of them and reduce their number, since the faith of Christ, which is alone the highest good and which exists without any orders, is in no small danger, because these many different works and forms easily mislead men into living for them instead of giving heed to the faith. Unless there are in the monasteries wise prelates, who preach and who concern themselves with faith more than with the rules of the orders, the order cannot but harm and delude simple souls who think only of works.
In our days, however, the prelates who have had faith and who founded the orders have almost all pa.s.sed away. Just as in olden days among the children of Israel, when the fathers, who knew G.o.d"s works and wonders, had pa.s.sed away, the children, from ignorance of G.o.d"s works and of faith, immediately became idolatrous and set up their own human works; so now, alas! these orders have lost the understanding of G.o.d"s works and of faith, and only torture themselves pitifully, with labor and sorrow, in their own rules, laws and customs, and withal never come to a right understanding of a good spiritual life, as the Apostle declared when he said, in II Timothy iii: "They have the appearance of a spiritual life, yet there is nothing back of it; they are ever and ever learning, but they never come to a knowledge of what a true spiritual life is." [2 Tim. 3:5, 7] There should be no monastery unless there were a spiritual prelate, learned in the Christian faith, to rule it, for no other kind of prelate can rule without injury and ruin, and the holier and better he appears to be in his outward works and life, the more injury and ruin he causes.
To my way of thinking it would be a necessary measure, especially in these perilous times of ours, that all foundations and monasteries should be re-established as they were at the first, in the days of the Apostles and for a long time afterwards, when they were all open to every man, and every man might remain in them as long as he pleased.
For what were the foundations and monasteries except Christian schools in which the Scriptures and Christian living were taught, and people were trained to rule and to preach? So we read that St. Agnes[159]
went to school, and we still see the same practice in some of the nunneries, like that at Quedlinburg[160] and others elsewhere. And in truth all monasteries and convents ought to be so free that G.o.d is served in them with free will and not with forced avarice. Afterward, however, they hedged them about with vows and turned them into a lifelong prison, so that these vows are thought to be of more account than the vows of baptism. What sort of fruit this has borne, we see, hear, read and learn more and more every day.
I suppose this advice of mine will be regarded as the height of foolishness; but I am not concerned about that just now. I advise what I think best; let him reject it who will! I see how the vows are kept, especially the vow of chast.i.ty, which has become so universal through these monasteries and yet is not commanded by Christ; on the contrary, it is given to very few to keep it, as He himself says [Matt. 19:11 ff.], and St. Paul [1 Cor. 7:7, Col. 2:20]. I would have all men to be helped, and not have Christian souls caught in human, self-devised customs and laws.
[Sidenote: Marriage of the Clergy]
14. We also see how the priesthood has fallen, and how many a poor priest is overburdened with wife and child, and his conscience troubled, yet no one does anything to help him though he might easily be helped. Though pope and bishops may let things go as they go, and let them go to ruin if they will, I will save my conscience and open my mouth freely, whether it vex pope, bishops or any one else.
Wherefore I say that according to the inst.i.tution of Christ and the Apostles every city should have a priest or bishop, as St. Paul clearly says in t.i.tus i [t.i.t. 1:6]; and this priest should not be compelled to live without a wedded wife, but should be permitted to have one, as St. Paul says in I Timothy iii, and t.i.tus i, "A bishop should be a man who is blameless, and the husband of but one wedded wife, whose children are obedient and virtuous," etc. [1 Tim. 3:2, t.i.t. 1:6] For with St. Paul a bishop and a priest are one and the same thing, as witness also St. Jerome[161]. But of bishops as they now are, the Scriptures know nothing; they have been appointed by the ordinance of the Christian Church, that one of them may rule over many priests.
So then we clearly learn from the Apostle that it should be the custom for every town to choose out of the congregation[162] a learned and pious citizen, entrust to him the office of the ministry, and support him at the expense of the community, leaving him free choice to marry or not. He should have with him several priests or deacons, who might also be married or not, as they chose, to help him rule the people of the community[163] by means of preaching and the sacraments, as is still the practice in the Greek Church. At a later time[164], when there were so many persecutions and controversies with heretics, there were many holy fathers who of their own accord abstained from matrimony, to the end that they might the better devote themselves to study and be prepared at any time for death or for controversy. Then the Roman See interfered, out of sheer wantonness, and made a universal commandment forbidding priests to marry[165]. This was done at the bidding of the devil, as St. Paul declares in I Timothy iv, "There shall come teachers who bring doctrines of devils, and forbid to marry." From this has arisen so much untold misery, occasion was given for the withdrawal of the Greek Church[166], and division, sin, shame and scandal were increased without end,--which is the result of everything the devil does.
What, then, shall we do about it? My advice is that matrimony be again made free[167], and that every one be let free choice to marry or not to marry. In that case, however, there must be a very different government and administration of Church property, the whole canon law must go to pieces and not many benefices find their way to Rome[168].
I fear that greed has been a cause of this wretched unchaste chast.i.ty, and as a result of greed every man has wished to become a priest and everyone wants his son to study for the priesthood, not with the idea of living in chast.i.ty, for that could be done outside the priesthood, but of being supported in temporal things without care or labor, contrary to the command of G.o.d in Genesis iii, "In the sweat of thy face shat thou eat thy bread." [Gen. 3:19] They have construed this to mean that their labor was to pray and say ma.s.s.
I am not referring here to popes, bishops, canons and monks. G.o.d has not inst.i.tuted these offices. They have taken burdens on themselves; let them bear them. I would speak only of the ministry which G.o.d has inst.i.tuted[169] and which is to rule a congregation by means of preaching and sacraments, whose inc.u.mbents are to live and be at home among the people. Such ministers should be granted liberty by a Christian council to marry, for the avoidance of temptation and sin.
For since G.o.d has not bound them, no one else ought to bind them or can bind them, even though he were an angel from heaven [Gal. 1:8], still less if he be only a pope; and everything that the canon law decrees to the contrary is mere fable and idle talk.
Furthermore, I advise that henceforth neither at his consecration to the priesthood nor at any other time shall any one under any circ.u.mstances promise the bishop to live in celibacy, but shall declare to the bishop that he has no authority to demand such a vow, and that to demand it is the devil"s own tyranny.
But if anyone is compelled to say or wishes to say, as do some, "so far as human frailty permits,"[170] let everyone frankly interpret these words negatively, to mean "I do not promise chast.i.ty."[171] For human frailty does not permit a chaste life[172], but only angelic power and celestial might[2 Pet. 2:11][173] Thus he should keep his conscience free from all vows.
On the question whether those who are not yet married should marry or remain unmarried, I do not care to give advice either way. I leave that to common Christian order and to everyone"s better judgment. But as regards the wretched mult.i.tude who now sit in shame and heaviness of conscience because their wives are called "priests" harlots" and their children "priests" children" I will not withhold my faithful counsel nor deprive them of the comfort which is their due. I say this boldly by my jester"s right[174]. You will find many a pious priest against whom no one has anything to say except that he is weak and has come to shame with a woman, though both parties may be minded with all their heart to live always together in wedded love and troth, if only they could do it with a clear conscience, even though they might have to bear public shame. Two such persons are certainly married before G.o.d. And I say that where they are thus minded, and so come to live together, they should boldly save their consciences; let him take and keep her as his wedded wife, and live honestly with her as her husband, caring nothing whether the pope will have it so or not, whether it be against canon law or human law. The salvation of your soul is of more importance than tyrannical, arbitrary, wicked laws, which are not necessary for salvation and are not commanded by G.o.d.
You should do like the children of Israel, who stole from the Egyptians the hire they had earned [Ex. 12:35 f.], or like a servant who steals from his wicked master the wages he has earned. In like manner steal thou from the pope thy wife and child! Let the man who has faith enough to venture this, boldly follow me; I shall not lead him astray. Though I have not the authority of a pope, I have the authority of a Christian to advise and help my neighbor against sins and temptations; and that not without cause and reason.
_First_, Not every priest can do without a woman, not only on account of the weakness of the flesh, but much more because of the necessities of the household. If he, then, may have a woman, and the pope grants him that, and yet may not have her in marriage,--what is that but leaving a man and a woman alone and forbidding them to fall? It is as though one were to put fire and straw together and command that it shall neither smoke nor burn.
_Second_, The pope has as little power to command this, as he has to forbid eating, drinking, the natural movement of the bowels or growing fat. No one, therefore, is bound to keep it, but the pope is responsible for all the sins which are committed against this ordinance, for all the souls which are lost thereby, for all the consciences which are thereby confused and tortured; and therefore he has long deserved that some one should drive him out of the world, so many wretched souls has he strangled with this devil"s snare; though I hope that there are many to whom G.o.d has been more gracious at their last hour than the pope has been in their life. Nothing good has ever come out of the papacy and its laws, nor ever will.
_Third_, Although the law of the pope is against it, nevertheless, when the estate of matrimony has been entered against the pope"s law, then his law is at an end, and is no longer valid; for the commandment of G.o.d, which decrees that no one shall put man and wife asunder [Matt. 19:6], takes precedence of the law of the pope; and the commandments of G.o.d must not be broken and neglected for the sake of the pope"s commandment, though many mad jurists, in the papal interest, have devised "impediments"[175] and have prevented, destroyed and confused the estate of matrimony, until by their means G.o.d"s commandment has been altogether destroyed. To make a long story short, there are not in the whole "spiritual" law of the pope two lines which could be instructive to a pious Christian, and there are, alas! so many mistaken and dangerous laws that the best thing would be to make a bonfire of it[176].
But if you say that this[177] would give offence, and the pope must first grant dispensation, I reply that whatever offence is in it, is the fault of the Roman See, which has established such laws without right and against G.o.d; before G.o.d and the Scriptures it is no offence.
Moreover, if the pope can grant dispensations from his avaricious and tyrannical laws for money"s sake, then every Christian can grant dispensations from them--for the sake of G.o.d and the salvation of souls. For Christ has set us free from all human laws, especially when they are opposed to G.o.d and the salvation of souls, as St. Paul teaches in Galatians v [Gal. 5:1] and I Corinthians xi [1 Cor. 9:4 ff.; 10:23].
[Sidenote: Abolition of Reserved Cases in the Monasteries]
15. Nor must I forget the poor convents! The evil spirit, who by human laws now confuses all estates in life, and has made them unbearable, has taken possession of in certain abbots, abbesses and prelates also, and causes them so to govern their brethren and sisters as to send them the more speedily to h.e.l.l, and make them lead a wretched life even here; for such is the lot of all the devil"s martyrs. That is to say, they have reserved to themselves in confession, all, or at least some, of the mortal sins which are secret, so that no brother, on his obedience and on pain of the ban, can absolve another from these sins[178]. Now we do not always find angels everywhere, but we find also flesh and blood, which suffers all bannings and threatenings rather than confess secret sins to the prelates and the appointed confessors. Thus they go to the sacrament with such consciences that they become "irregular"[179] and all sorts of other terrible things. O blind shepherds! O mad prelates! O ravening wolves!
To this I say: If a sin is public or notorious, then it is proper that the prelate alone should punish it, and of these sins only and no others he may make exceptions, and reserve them to himself; over secret sins he has no authority, even though they were the worst sins that are or ever can be found, and if the prelate makes exceptions of these sins, he is a tyrant, for he has no such right and is interfering in the judgment of G.o.d.
And so I advise these children, brethren and sisters: If your superiors are unwilling to grant you permission to confess your secret sins to whomever you wish, then take them to whatever brother or sister you will and confess them, receive absolution, and then go and do whatever you wish and ought to do; only believe firmly that you are absolved, and nothing more is needed. And do not allow yourself to be troubled by ban, "irregularity," or any of the other things they threaten; these things are valid only in the case of public or notorious sins which one is unwilling to confess; they do not affect you at all. Why do you try by your threatenings, O blind prelate, to prevent secret sins? Let go what you cannot publicly prove, so that G.o.d"s judgment and grace may also have its work in your subjects! He did not give them so entirely into your hands as to let them go entirely out of His own! Nay, what you have under your rule is but the smaller part. Let your statutes be statutes, but do not exalt them to heaven, to the judgment-seat of G.o.d.
[Sidenote: Abolition of Mortuary Ma.s.ses]
16. It were also necessary to abolish all anniversary, mortuary and "soul" ma.s.ses[180], or at least to diminish their number, since we plainly see that they have become nothing but a mockery, by which G.o.d is deeply angered, and that their only purpose is money-getting, gorging and drunkenness. What kind of pleasure should G.o.d have in such a miserable gabbling of wretched vigils and ma.s.ses, which is neither reading nor praying, and even when prayed[181], they are performed not for G.o.d"s sake and out of willing love, but for money"s sake and because they are a bounden duty. Now it is not possible that any work not done out of willing love can please G.o.d or obtain anything from Him. And so it is altogether Christian to abolish, or at least diminish, everything which we see growing into an abuse, and which angers rather than reconciles G.o.d. It would please me more--nay, it would be more acceptable to G.o.d and far better--that a foundation, church or monastery should put all its anniversary ma.s.ses and vigils together, and on one day, with hearty sincerity, devotion and faith, hold a true vigil and ma.s.s for all its benefactors, rather than hold them by the thousand every year, for each benefactor a special ma.s.s, without this devotion and faith. O dear Christians! G.o.d cares not for much praying, but for true praying! Nay, He condemns the many and long prayers, and says in Matthew vi, they will only earn more punishment thereby [Matt. 67:7; 23:14]. But avarice, which cannot trust G.o.d, brings such things to pa.s.s, earing that otherwise it must die of hunger!
[Sidenote: Abolition of the Interdict]
17. Certain of the penalties or punishments of the canon law should also be abolished, especially the interdict[182], which is, beyond all doubt, an invention of the evil Spirit. Is it not a devil"s work to try to atone for one sin with many greater sins? And yet, to put G.o.d"s Word and worship to silence, or to do away with them, is a greater sin than strangling twenty popes at once, and far greater than killing a priest or keeping back some Church property. This is another of the tender virtues taught in the "spiritual law." For one of the reasons why this law is called "spiritual" is because it comes from the Spirit; not, however, from the Holy Spirit, but from the evil spirit.
The ban[183] is to be used in no case except where the Scriptures prescribe its use, i. e., against those who do not hold the true faith, or who live in open sin; it is not to be used for the sake of temporal possessions. But now it is the other way around. Everyone believes and lives as he pleases, most of all those who use the ban to plunder and defame other people, and all the bans are now laid only on account of temporal possessions, or which we have no one to thank but the holy "spiritual lawlessness."[184] Of this I have previously said more in the Discourse[185].
The other punishments and penalties,--suspension, irregularity, aggravation, reaggravation, deposition, lightnings, thunderings, cursings, d.a.m.nings and the rest of these devices,--should be buried ten fathoms deep in the earth, so that there should be neither name nor memory of them left on earth. The evil spirit, who has been let loose by the "spiritual law" has brought this terrible plague and misery into the heavenly kingdom of the holy Church, and has accomplished by it nothing else than the destruction and hindrance of souls, so that the word of Christ may well be applied to them[186]: "Woe unto you scribes! Ye have taken upon you the authority to teach, and ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men. Ye go not in yourselves, and ye suffer not them that are entering." [Matt. 23:13]
[Sidenote: Abolition of Saints"-Days]
18. All festivals[187] should be abolished, and Sunday alone retained.
If it were desired, however, to retain the festivals of Our Lady and of the greater saints, they should be transferred to Sunday, or observed only by a morning ma.s.s, after which all the rest of the day should be a working-day. The reason is this: The feast-days are now abused by drinking, gaming, idleness and all manner of sins, so that on the holy days we anger G.o.d more than on other days, and have altogether turned things around; the holy days are not holy and the working days are holy, and not only is no service done to G.o.d and His saints by the many holy days, but rather great dishonor. There are, indeed, some mad prelates who think they are doing a good work if they make a festival in honor of St. Ottilia or St. Barbara or some other saint, according to the promptings of their blind devotion; but they would be doing a far better work if they honored the saint by turning a saint"s-day into a working day.
Over and above the spiritual injury, the common man receives two material injuries from this practice, i. e., he neglects his work and he spends more than at other times; nay, he also weakens his body and unfits it for work. We see this every day, yet no one thinks to make it better. We ought not to consider whether or not the pope has inst.i.tuted the feasts, and whether we must have dispensation and permission to omit them. If a thing is opposed to G.o.d, and harmful to man in body and soul, any community[188], council[189] or government has not only the right to abolish it and put a stop to it, without the will or knowledge of pope or bishop, but they are bound on their souls" salvation to prevent it, even against the will of pope and bishop, though these ought to be themselves the first to forbid it.
Above all, we ought utterly to abolish the consecration days[190], since they have become nothing else than taverns, airs and gaming places[191], and serve only to the increase of G.o.d"s dishonor and to the d.a.m.nation of souls. All the pretence about the custom having had a good beginning and being a good work is of no avail. Did not G.o.d Himself set aside His own law, which He had given from heaven, when it was perverted and abused? And does He not still daily overturn what He has appointed and destroy what He has made, because of such perversion and abuse? As it is written of Him in Psalm xviii, "With the perverted Thou wilt show Thyself perverse." [Ps. 18:27]
[Sidenote: Extension of Right of Dispensation]
19. The grades or degrees within which marriage is forbidden should be changed, as, for instance, the sponsorships and the third and fourth degrees; and if the pope can grant dispensation in these matters or money and for the sake of his shameful traffic[192], then every parish priest may give the same dispensations gratis and or the salvation of souls. Yea, would to G.o.d that all the things which we must buy at Rome to free ourselves from that money-snare, the canon law,--such things as indulgences, letters of indulgence, "b.u.t.ter-letters,"[193]
"ma.s.s-letters,"[194] and all the rest of the _confessionalia_[195] and knaveries for sale at Rome, with which the poor folk are deceived and robbed of their money; would to G.o.d, I say, that any priest could, without payment, do and omit all these things! For if the pope has the authority to sell his snares for money and his spiritual nets (I should say laws)[196], surely any priest has much more authority to rend his nets and for G.o.d"s sake to tread them under foot. But if he has not this right, neither has the pope the right to sell them at his shameful fair[196].
This is the place to say too that the fasts should be matters of liberty, and all sorts of food made free, as the Gospel makes them [Matt. 15:11]. For at Rome they themselves laugh at the fasts, making us foreigners eat the oil with which they would not grease their shoes, and afterwards selling us liberty to eat b.u.t.ter and all sorts of other things; yet the holy Apostle says that in all these things we already have liberty through the Gospel [1 Cor. 10:25 ff.]. But they have caught us with their canon law and stolen our rights from us, so that we may have to buy them back with money. Thus they have made our consciences so timid and shy that it is no longer easy to preach about this liberty because the common people take such great offence, thinking it a greater sin to eat b.u.t.ter than to lie, to swear, or even to live unchastely. Nevertheless, what men have decreed, that is the work of man; put it where you will[198], nothing good ever comes out of it.
[Sidenote: Prohibition of Pilgrimages]
20. The forest chapels and rustic churches[199] must be utterly destroyed,--those, namely, to which the recent pilgrimages have been directed,--Wilsnack[200], Sternberg[201], Trier[202], the Grimmenthal[203], and now Regensburg[204] and a goodly number of others. Oh, what a terrible and heavy account will the bishops have to render, who permit this devilish deceit and receive its profits![205]
They should be the first to forbid it, and yet they think it a divine and holy thing, and do not see that it is the devil"s doing, to strengthen avarice, to create a false, feigned faith, to weaken the parish churches, to multiply taverns and harlotry, to waste money and labor, and to lead the poor folk by the nose. If they had only read the Scriptures to as good purpose as they have read their d.a.m.nable canon law, they would know well how to deal with this matter.
That miracles are done at these places does not help things, for the evil spirit can do miracles, as Christ has told us in Matthew xxiv [Matt. 24:24]. If they took the matter seriously and forbade this sort of thing, the miracles would quickly come to an end; on the other hand, if the thing were of G.o.d their prohibition would not hinder it [Acts 5:39]. And if there were no other evidence that it is not of G.o.d, this would be enough,--that people run to these places in excited crowds, as though they had lost their reason, like herds of cattle; for this cannot possibly be of G.o.d. Moreover, G.o.d has commanded nothing of all this; there is neither obedience nor merit in it; the bishops, therefore, should boldly step in and keep the folk away. For what is not commanded--and is concerned for self rather than for the commands of G.o.d--that is surely the devil himself. Then, too, the parish churches receive injury, because they are held in smaller honor. In short, these things are signs of great unbelief among the people; if they truly believed, they would have all that they need in their own churches, for to them they are commanded to go.
[Sidenote: Canonisations to be Prohibited]
But what shall I say? Every one[206] plans only how he may establish and maintain such a place of pilgrimage in his diocese and is not at all concerned to have the people believe and live aright; the rulers are like the people; one blind man leads another [Matt. 13:14]. Nay, where pilgrimages are not successful, they begin to canonise saints[207], not in honor of the saints--for they are sufficiently honored without canonisation--but in order to draw crowds and bring in money. Pope and bishop help along; it rains indulgences; there is always money enough for that. But for what G.o.d has commanded no one provides; no one runs after these things; there is no money or them.
Alas, that we should be so blind! We not only give the devil his own way in his tricks, but we even strengthen him in his wantonness and increase his pranks. I would that the dear saints were let in peace, and the poor folk not led astray! What spirit has given the pope the authority to canonise the saints? Who tells him whether they are saints or not? Are there not already sins enough on earth, that we too must tempt G.o.d, interfere in His judgment and set up the dear saints as lures for money?
Therefore I advise that the saints be left to canonise themselves.