0

From some of Luther's quotes shown by his critics (such as Peter Hermann Wehner's book, Martin Luther: Hitler's Spiritual Ancestor), it seems Luther had an aversion to reasoning and free will. These famous quotes are said to be from the context of responding to the alleged heretics and "fanatics" on the topics like water baptism. What did he mean by such teachings, and how do the modern Lutheran followers respond to this reasoning, which appears to be self-refuting and irrational?

“Reason is the Devil’s greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil’s appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom … Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism… She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets.” [Martin Luther, Erlangen Edition v. 16, pp. 142-148]

And again

But since the devil’s bride, Reason, that pretty whore, comes in and thinks she’s wise, and what she says, what she thinks, is from the Holy Spirit, who can help us, then? Not judges, not doctors, no king or emperor, because [reason] is the Devil’s greatest whore. [Martin Luther’s Last Sermon in Wittenberg … Second Sunday in Epiphany, 17 January 1546. Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. (Weimar: Herman Boehlaus Nachfolger, 1914), Band 51:126, Line 7ff]

It is one thing for Luther to attack his enemies, but the constant, filthy abuses to reason itself seems to me to show he naively rejected all logical reasoning or what we call as the correspondence theory of truth and rationality itself, as he also abused Aristotle. I say "naively" because nobody can rationally condemn reason without employing reason itself, as Luther did throughout in his writings.

Improve this question
7
  • 3
    The subject matter of the question is good, but I think you should remove your interpretation of what Luther meant; it's not a charitable reading, and it's not necessary for the question. The first chapter of this journal explores what he meant. TL;DR: Luther was writing about what we now would call the noetic effects of sin, and those who place human reasoning above divine scripture (in a gross imbalance of the Wesleyan quadrilateral).
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Jun 23, 2021 at 11:40
  • 3
    There's really no doubt that Luther did say this, so what about changing the question to ask "What did Luther mean when he called reason "the Devil's greatest whore"?"
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Jun 23, 2021 at 11:41
  • The context and overall teachings of Luther don't show it is an isolated attack to some sinners; rather it was his philosophy to attack reason, logic and freewill itself, perhaps since he could not defend his positions rationally. This pro Luther blog gives context beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2015/04/… - and beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/search/label/Free%20Will Luther consistently forbid and abused reasoning (or whatever he disagreed with) as sinful from the devil.
    – Michael16
    Commented Jun 23, 2021 at 12:17
  • 3
    That's patently false. Read pages 2-4 of the article I linked to, quoting Luther: "[I]t is certainly true that reason is the most important and the highest in rank among all things and, in comparison with other things of this life, the best and something divine." And recall his famous words that he would not recant unless "convinced by the testimony of scripture or clear reason." We can't just apply his use of "reason" to refer to all that we think of as reason, any more than we can naively interpret "the writings" to refer to anything written rather than the scriptures.
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Jun 23, 2021 at 12:23
  • 2
    . . . in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe, 1 Corinthians 1:21. It is clear what Luther meant, in the context of Paul's epistles. What the question seems to object to is Martin Luther's style of writing and manner of expression.
    – Nigel J
    Commented Jun 23, 2021 at 12:35

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

Luther seems to have recognized that a mind not given humbly to God will find things to be "reasonable" that are completely outside of God's will and wisdom. Paul concurs along these lines: And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, (Rom 1:28) And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. (Rom 12:2 NASB95) So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, ... and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, (Eph 4:17, 23 NASB95)

Remember that the Gentiles spoken of here are those that had the tradition of Hellenism and its "rationality" as their basis for worldview. Nothing has changed really in the intervening millenia.

Improve this answer
3
  • Excellent response. Up-voted +1.
    – Nigel J
    Commented Jun 23, 2021 at 12:30
  • 1
    The first sentence of this answer is okay, but much too generic; any Christian who is not Luther (including non Protestants !) would have said it. The rest of the answer misrepresents what Luther's core issues were, doesn't quite vindicated the "whore" rhetoric Luther was using. See first article in this journal issue where it lists several reasons in its "Bad" and "Ugly" sections.
    – GratefulDisciple
    Commented Jun 23, 2021 at 14:34
  • My answer was intended to address the first part from an aerial viewpoint, and the second part in a little more detail, expressing one Protestant's view of Luther's comment (that is, my own), and so address part b) of the question. Anyway, thank you for the link; Jeffrey Mann's article was well written and a pleasure to read. He certainly took a deep dive into part a) of the question. Having read his thorough and thought-provoking essay, I would say that my answer is a pretty good one-sentence summary of Luther's thinking. (It must be kept in mind that Luther was a master of hyperbole.)
    – Provy
    Commented Jun 24, 2021 at 23:51
0

I don't have a complete answer, but want to address as a very limited point why Luther might have chosen that very specific metaphor 'whore' -- a point that wasn't addressed (I think) in a direct way by the other answers, although I think it is the main concern of the OP.

A "whore", meaning a prostitute, is somebody who acts for another, serving goals that are not one's own. Human reason, in this sense, is instrumental, a mechanism of setting up and organizing the means, but not one that has impact on the goals of action, of thought and of life. This kind of reason cannot and is not meant to reveal the ultimate goals, cannot find them or decide what they are, but it is an instrument. The goals it serves, it also must receive.

I think that what Luther calls "reason" in this context is by definition subservient, functionally so, operating to justify or reach goals that it cannot by itself create or judge, and which anachronistically could be called "irrational" (spiritual, either divine or diabolical).

Luther is not passing a judgement on what people would call "reason" in all circumstances. It is not like Luther was against the study of logic or science, as some have suggested here, or that he rejects logical (=reasonable) thought, but rather that he doesn't think that humans (through science, logic, philosophy, politics) can decide upon the ultimate (the spiritual) goals of existence. Those, in his view, can only be of a religious kind, and come, of course, either from the Holy Spirit or --otherwise-- the devil (who is thus making reason his "bride... that pretty whore" etc).

Improve this answer
4
  • Welcome to the site, that's an interesting answer. As an Orthodox Christian I would say that you cannot "reason" your way to things like God. But it is very easy to reason yourself to things like demons. As certainly they have been well practiced and experienced in twisting reason to turn us away from God. Our Rational thought is not evil, but boy oh boy can it really get us to Evil places with such perfect logic and good will.
    – Wyrsa
    Commented Oct 8 at 11:57
  • @Wyrsa - IMAO Luther's basic (thological) perspective here is rather "orthodox", not very striking, except as a matter of accent maybe. It is nonetheless related to his sola fide perspective I think, and that in a rather robust way: given that (1) only faith can make God become one's real goal (makes you one of the faithful) and (2) reason (or what he calles that) doesn't operate at the level of goals (but just means), "reason" stands as a mere instrument -- but also as an exemplar of human condition: something to be "bought" by the devil (like a "whore") or "ransomed" (redeemed) by Christ.
    – cipricus
    Commented Oct 8 at 17:25
  • @Wyrsa - I was trying to find a way of explaining how that shoking metaphor is more than just temperamental or populist choice.
    – cipricus
    Commented Oct 8 at 17:32
  • No worries. I didn't say it was bad. I disagree with Luther's end result of course, but he has some valid points.
    – Wyrsa
    Commented Oct 9 at 12:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .