Media Catches Up To Luther on Celibacy, Whoremongers, Homosexuals & Pedophiles
By Rev. Jack Cascione

 

This writing by Luther is not appropriate for children.

It is 2002 and the media is finally focusing on the problems of the Catholic Church's promotion of celibate priests. Luther raised the issue in 1521. Luther claimed the requirement for celibacy was due to the perversion of the papacy. It has only taken the media 483 years to recognize what Luther wrote in some of his most vitriolic and graphic terms.

Luther wrote that there is nothing holy about celibacy. Rather imposed celibacy is perversion and marriage is holy, because God blessed marriage. Faithfulness in marriage is true chastity.

The introduction of celibacy was promoted by Pope Gregory VII in 1075 AD, who annulled the marriages of all priests. This madness was the result of the Catholic Church's flawed understanding of the "so-called" sacrament of ordination. They believe that ordination supposedly turns the priest into the equivalent of a transubstantiated communion wafer. Thus, the "holy priest" must have equally holy sons, who in turn inherit their father's office by divine rite. This is the inevitable direction of today's Hyper-Euro-Lutherans.

Pope Gregory solved the problem by imposing celibacy, thus making all the priests' sons bastards. Within a hundred years, celibacy made the Pope the most powerful man in the world because he now had the right to appoint all priests, bishops, archbishops, and cardinals and thus control all church property.

In answer to the Pope's perversion Luther wrote: "Answer to the Hyperchristian, Hyperspiritual, and Hyperlearned Book by Goat Emser in Leipzig-Including Some Thoughts Regarding His Companion, the Fool Murner" (1521) and other writing titled, "Against the Spiritual Estate of the Pope and The Bishops Falsely So Called" (1522).

Luther explains in his Genesis commentary that the sin of homosexuality had not infected the general population in his day as it did in Sodom and Gomorrah. There was a problem with an occasional traveling merchant or solider but, of all orders of monks, the Carthusians of Luther's day were notorious for the problems with homosexuality.

Luther writes as follows in his commentary about Genesis: Genesis 19: 4. But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; Genesis 19: 5. and they called to Lot: Where are the men who came go you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them. "Moses proceeds with a description of a terrible sin. I for my part do not enjoy dealing with this passage, because so far the ears of the Germans are innocent of and uncontaminated by this monstrous depravity; for even though this disgrace, like other sins, has crept in through an ungodly soldier and a lewd merchant, still the rest of the people are unaware of what is being done in secret. The Carthusian monks deserve to be hated because they were the first to bring this terrible pollution into Germany from the monasteries of Italy. Of course, they were trained and educated in such a praiseworthy manner at Rome." Luther's Works, Volume 3: page 251


Rather than a problem with homosexuality and pedophilia, in Luther's day, most of the priests kept whores, or their housekeepers, for some unknown reason, would conceive. Luther writes as follows in "Against the Spiritual Estate of the Pope and The Bishops Falsely So Called" (1522):

"The papal bishops certainly have noble attributes which cost less effort. What are they? They are: to be ignorant; to avoid marriage and instead to have little whores, as many as they need; to have a silver cane carried after themselves; to put on a precious hat; to have a big tonsure; to grab many towns and much land within the diocese; to ride fine horses; to hold princely court; to keep "episcopal officials," LW 39:255


(Same Writing)

"Adviser, advise well! Why do these whore-keepers dislike it when young men marry? No doubt because they lose their interest rates. For bishops receive the greater part of all their annual interest rates in almost all religious foundations from nothing but the priests' whores. Whoever wants to keep a little whore must give one guilder a year to the bishop. There is a proverb among them, 'Chaste priests are not liked by the bishop-indeed, they are his enemies.' Who else but a bishop could be a rich tradesman with women in this world? Who would blame the spiritual fathers for permitting whoredom for the sake of money, for selling living bodies of women and for prohibiting marriage, which does not yield money? People make their living in many ways. A merchant sells spices and linen, bishops sell the flesh of whores. How else could they make a living? To top it all, if a priest's maid stumbles over a dishpan and breaks in two, so that one part of her must be carried to baptism, the interest rate increases beyond the annual guilder. The bishop now has a reason to show his mercy by selling a mother to the poor priest. Blessed are the bellies that carry babies! But let the father worry about whether the breasts that are sucked are blessed too. The spiritual bishop has twice received his share from the belly. Are these not noble and dear female bellies, which have to be bought twice a year and which twice become pregnant with money for the spiritual lord!

My dear, do not think this a bad reason to motivate these holy spiritual people to forbid the poor priests to marry. Should they not prefer whores to pious wives? A married woman is a shameful and harmful thing; she does not produce a single penny for the most reverend fathers and lords in God. Forgive me this joke, my dear man; it comes not from a joking heart but rather from one made anxious by these very senseless and blind masks. They are completely deprived of all sense, wit, and reason by God's wrath so that pigs, oxen, and asses are smarter than they are. Yet they are spiritual rulers, which is really punishing the world with fools and babes, as Isaiah says [Isa. 3:4]! Do you think they can cite reasons and arguments other than those cited, which are only greed and money? Even if they were cruder than crude asses they still could not say that God has prohibited marriage to the priests. Indeed, St. Paul instituted it for the priests when he said, 'A bishop should be the husband of one wife, keeping his children submissive and respectful,' I Timothy 3[:2, 4], and Titus 1[:6]. Do you hear this, you masks and gaping fools? I mean you who are wolves and who subject innocent blood to tyranny. Answer me: what would you like to say or what could you say about St. Paul's statement that a priest should have no more than one wife? How are you going to interpret 'one wife'? As a priest's whore whose belly you sell twice a year? St. Paul means only one wife, not two or more wives as was custom and law in the Old Testament. So if a priest wanted to obey this divine saying, who are you, you bloodthirsty masks, to prevent him? What is your argument? What do you say against it? Why do you elevate yourselves above God and his words? Should one worship you unlearned asses more than God?

The pope prohibited it. What shall I say? My dear asses, if the pope commanded you not to honor your father and mother (which he really does) and destroyed all of God's commandments, should you not be the ones to oppose him, risking life and limb for the sake of God's word? Did you not read St. Peter's saying, Acts 4 [5:29], 'One must obey God rather than men'? Then you know that all human commandments, even if they were good and useful, are invalid and are no longer binding when they become unbearable. Your own fleshly law teaches you that. You can see that it is impossible for all priests to obey the accursed human law prohibiting marriage. Yet you great insatiable keepers of women still forcibly drive the poor souls into sin for the sake of your accursed greed. You can see and understand that they cannot obey the law, but [you say] they should obey it without any trouble. Oh, you murderers of souls! How shamefully you stain your hands with innocent blood! What an account you will have to render for such tyranny!

But now it is indeed clear that these human commandments regarding the prohibition of clerical marriage are not human commandments but rather commandments of the devil. Three passages from St. Paul prove it. Two of them are the passages to Titus [Titus 1:6] and to Timothy [I Tim. 3:2] mentioned above, that a priest shall have only one wife. This is God's word and order, [spoken] through St. Paul. That is why whatever is commanded contrary to this or what is commanded or ordered differently must be the devil's work. For God does not speak against himself or give the lie to his mouth, as all Scripture and all reason must confess. But all reason must also confess that these papal laws are indeed contrary to Paul's divine order. Is all this not clear enough, you silent and blind masks? How can you chafe against that? Are your iron heads and crude minds not ashamed publicly to command and force everyone to keep the commandments of the devil contrary to divine order? The third passage is I Timothy 4[:1-3], 'Teachers will come with pretensions, teaching devilish doctrines. They will forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created.' See, he himself calls it devilish teaching to prohibit marriage. Nor does he speak here of the Tatians, as the liar of Dresden says.49 The Tatians did not prohibit marriage; rather, they condemned it as something sinful. But St. Peter speaks here of those who prohibit it rather than condemning it or regarding it as sinful, just as they prohibit food without regarding it as sinful. The pope is doing just that: he does not, like the Tatians, say that marriage is an evil or a sin; again, he does not consider meat, eggs, milk evil or sin. Instead, he prohibits them in order to make a pretense of spirituality, as St. Paul says here. Thus they speak through pretensions based on the devil's teaching." Luther's Works Vol. 39: pages 289-292

Note: The reference "Luther's Works" and "LW" in all quotations and the body of this article refer (via volume and page number(s)) to the American Edition of Luther's Works, jointly published by Fortress Press and Concordia Publishing House.


[file:///D:/My Web/bronzebusiness/bio/biojmc.htm]

March 23, 2002