De Votis Monachorum
The Corruption of Monastic Origins
The author describes how monasteries, once free communities, fell into corruption and began imposing vows and observances contrary to the Canons, often ensnaring young people and casting snares upon consciences.
What we teach about monastic vows will be clearer to anyone who recalls what monasteries were like, and how many things were being done in them day by day against the Canons. In Augustine's time the communities were free; afterward, when discipline had broken down everywhere, vows were introduced so that discipline might be restored, as if by a kind of devised prison. Many other observances were gradually added on top of the vows. And these obligations were forced on many before the lawful age, against the Canons. Many fell by mistake into this way of life who, even if they were old enough, still lacked the judgment to assess their own strength. Once caught in this way, they were compelled to stay, even though some could have been set free under the benefit of the Canons. And this happened even more in the monasteries of virgins than of monks, since the weaker sex must be treated more gently. This strictness displeased many good men before our time, who saw girls and young people thrust into monasteries to earn their living, and who saw how unhappily this arrangement turned out, what scandals it produced, and what snares it cast upon consciences.
The Idol of Monastic Merit
The text condemns the teaching that monastic vows are equal to or better than baptism and that the monastic life merits justification and grace above other God-ordained callings.
They were troubled that the authority of the Canons was being completely disregarded and treated as worthless in a matter of the greatest danger. Added to these evils was a persuasive conviction about vows — one that even the monks themselves, at least those who were a little more discerning, are known to have disapproved of in the past — they taught that vows were equal to baptism, and that by this way of life they merited the forgiveness of sins and justification before God.1 Indeed, they added that the monastic life merited not only justification before God, but even more besides — because it observed not just the commandments, but also the evangelical counsels.2 So they were arguing that monastic profession is far better than baptism, that the monastic life deserves more than the life of magistrates, of pastors, and of others who serve their own calling in the commandments of God without made-up religious practices.3 None of this can be denied, for it's there in their writings.
From Schools of Learning to Theaters of Perfection
The author contrasts the original purpose of monasteries as schools of sacred learning with their current pretension of being a state of perfection that earns grace and righteousness.
What's going on in monasteries these days? In the past, there were schools of sacred letters and other disciplines that are useful to the Church, and pastors and bishops were drawn from them. Now it's a different story — there's no need to go over what everyone already knows. They used to come together to learn; now they pretend that their way of life is a means of earning grace and righteousness — indeed, they proclaim it to be a state of perfection, and they place it far above all other ways of life ordained by God.
The Divine Commandment of Marriage
The confession teaches that all who are not suited for celibacy are permitted to marry, because no vow can set aside God's commandment and creative ordinance concerning marriage.
We've said all this — without exaggerating anything out of hostility — so that our people's teaching on this matter could be better understood. First, regarding those who enter into marriage, we teach among ourselves that it is permitted to all who are not suited for celibacy to marry, because vows cannot set aside the ordinance and commandment of God. Now this is the commandment of God: 'Let each one have his own wife, because of sexual immorality.'✦ Not only the commandment, but also the creation and ordinance of God compels those toward marriage who are not excepted by a singular work of God, according to that passage: 'It is not good for man to be alone.'✦ Therefore those who obey this commandment and ordinance of God do not sin. What can be opposed against these things? Let someone exaggerate the obligation of the vow as much as they wish; nevertheless, they will not be able to bring it about that the vow removes the commandment of God.
The Limits of Vow Obligation
The text argues that vows are not absolute, since canon law excepts the right of superiors and the Roman pontiffs have historically granted dispensations from monastic vows.
The canons teach that in every vow the right of a superior is excepted, and so these vows are much less valid against the commandments of God. If the obligation of vows had no grounds on which it could be changed, then not even the Roman pontiffs would have granted dispensations. After all, a person is not permitted to annul an obligation that belongs strictly to divine law. But the Roman pontiffs have prudently judged that equity should be applied to this obligation, and so records show that they have frequently granted dispensations from vows. The well-known account of the king of Aragon, who was called back from a monastery, is evidence for this, and examples from our own time still exist.
The Nature of a Valid Vow
The author insists that a true vow must be possible, voluntary, and undertaken with deliberate judgment, which many monastic vows clearly are not.
Then why do our opponents exaggerate the obligation or the effect of a vow, while staying silent about the nature of the vow itself — that it must concern something possible, that it must be voluntary, willingly and deliberately undertaken? But it's no secret that perpetual chastity isn't within a person's power. And how few have vowed willingly and deliberately? Girls and young people who can't yet judge for themselves are persuaded to make vows — sometimes even compelled. Therefore it isn't fair to argue so rigidly about obligation, since everyone admits that what isn't undertaken willingly, what is admitted without deliberation, is contrary to the nature of a vow.
Canonical Age Requirements
The canons require a minimum age for valid vows, with most authorities setting fifteen and others setting eighteen, which means most who leave monasteries have a legitimate excuse.
Most canons cancel vows made before the age of fifteen. The reasoning is that before that age, a person doesn't seem to have enough judgment to make a binding commitment about lifelong perseverance. Another canon, making more allowance for human weakness, adds several years and forbids taking vows before eighteen. A vow shouldn't be made before that age. But which rule should we follow? The greater part of those who leave monasteries have an excuse, because very many made their vows before this age.
Dissolving Questionable Marriages
Even if breaking a vow were blameworthy, it does not follow that the marriages of those who broke monastic vows must be dissolved, as Augustine himself testifies.
Finally, even if breaking a vow could be condemned, it still doesn't seem to follow right away that the marriages of such people must be dissolved. For Augustine denies that they ought to be dissolved, 27. question 1. chapter Of Marriages, whose authority is not slight, even if others later thought otherwise.
Humanly Devised Worship Cannot Justify
The confession argues that any form of worship invented by human beings without God's command, undertaken to merit justification and grace, is impious and contrary to the teaching of Christ and Paul.
Although God's commandment concerning marriage seems to free most people from vows, our people also put forward another reason that monastic vows are void: any worship of God instituted and chosen by human beings without God's command, in order to merit justification and grace, is impious, as Christ says, "They worship me in vain by the commandments of human beings."✦ And Paul everywhere teaches that righteousness is not to be sought from our observances and forms of worship that have been devised by human beings, but that it comes through faith, as those who believe are received into grace by God on account of Christ.✦
Monastic Voids Are Impious and Void
Since monks taught that their observances atone for sins and merit grace, their vows are impious cults made against God's commandments and therefore have no binding force.
It's well known that monks have taught that humanly devised religious practices atone for sins and merit grace and justification. What is this but detracting from and obscuring the glory of Christ, and denying the justice of faith? It follows, therefore, that these customary vows have been impious cults, and so they are void. For an impious vow, made against the commandments of God, has no force; nor, as the Canon says, ought a vow to be a bond of iniquity.
Estranged from Christ by Vows of Works
Those who seek justification by vows estrange themselves from Christ and fall from grace, attributing to their own works what belongs to the glory of Christ and creating a serious scandal in the Church.
Paul says, 'You are estranged from Christ, you who are justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.'✦45 So then, those who want to be justified by vows are also estranged from Christ and fall away from grace.6 For those who attribute justification to vows are attributing to their own works what properly belongs to the glory of Christ. And yet it cannot be denied that monks have taught that they are justified and merit the forgiveness of sins by their vows and their own observances; indeed, they have fabricated even more absurd claims, saying that they lend their own works to others.7 If anyone wanted to pile up such claims out of spite, how many things could they collect—things that the monks themselves are now ashamed of.8 Beyond this, they have persuaded people that invented forms of religious life are the state of Christian perfection.9 Isn't this precisely attributing justification to works? Isn't it a serious scandal in the Church to put before the people a particular form of worship devised by human beings without God's command, and to teach that such worship justifies people?10
True Christian Perfection
Christian perfection consists not in celibacy, poverty, or special garments but in fearing God, trusting in Christ through faith, and serving faithfully in one's vocation according to God's commandments.
Because the righteousness of faith—which must above all be handed down in the Church—is obscured whenever those dazzling religious practices, the pretense of poverty and humility, and celibacy are paraded before people's eyes. Furthermore, God's commands and the true worship of God are obscured when people hear that monks alone are in a state of perfection, because Christian perfection is to fear God seriously, and again to conceive great faith, and to trust on account of Christ that we have God appeased, to ask from God, and to expect help with certainty in all things to be done, according to vocation. Meanwhile, to do good works diligently outside, and to serve vocation. In these things is true perfection and true worship of God, not in celibacy or beggary or a filthy garment. But the people conceive many pernicious opinions from those false proclamations of the monastic life. He hears celibacy to be praised without measure, therefore with offense of conscience he is engaged in marriage. He hears that beggars alone are perfect, therefore with offense of conscience he retains possessions, he engages in business. He hears the evangelical counsel to be about not avenging, therefore others in private life do not fear to avenge, for they hear the counsel to be, not a precept. Others judge all magistracies and civil offices to be unworthy of Christians.
Fleeing the World Versus Serving in It
Those who abandon marriage and civil responsibility to hide in monasteries mistake human inventions for God's commandments, whereas a good and perfect life is one that has God's commandment, as Gerson also testified.
We read of men who, abandoning marriage and leaving behind the administration of the commonwealth, hid themselves away in monasteries. They called this fleeing the world and seeking a way of life that would be more pleasing to God, but they failed to see that God is to be served in the commandments he himself handed down, not in commandments invented by men. A good and perfect way of life is one that has the commandment of God. People need to be warned about these things. Even before these times, Gerson reproved the monks' error concerning perfection, and he testifies that in his own day it was a novel claim that the monastic life is a state of perfection.
The Emptiness of Monastic Claims
Since monastic vows falsely claim to justify, to constitute Christian perfection, to observe counsels and precepts, and to produce works of supererogation, all these claims are empty and make the vows themselves void.
So many impious opinions cling to monastic vows: that they justify, that they are Christian perfection, that they observe counsels and precepts, that they have works of supererogation. Since all these things are false and empty, they make vows void.
Read the original Latin
Quid de votis Monachorum apud nos doceatur, melius intelliget, si quis meminerit qualis status fuerit Monasteriorum, quam multa contra Canones in ipsis Monasteriis quotidie fiebant. Augustini tempore erant libera collegia, postea corrupta disciplina, ubique addita sunt vota, ut tanquam excogitato carcere, disciplina restitueretur. Additae sunt paulatim supra vota aliae multae observationes. Et haec vincula multis ante iustam aetatem contra Canones iniecta sunt. Multi inciderunt errore in hoc vitae genus, quibus etiamsi non deessent anni, tamen iudicium de suis viribus defuit. Qui sic irretiti erant, cogebantur manere, etiamsi quidam beneficio Canonum liberari possent. Et hoc accidit magis etiam in Monasteriis virginum, quam Monachorum, cum sexui imbecilliori magis parcendum esset. Hic rigor displicuit multis bonis viris ante haec tempora, qui videbant puellas et adolescentes in Monasteria detrudi propter victum, videbant quam infeliciter succederet hoc consilium, quae scandala pareret, quos laqueos conscientiis iniiceret.
Dolebant autoritatem Canonum in re periculosissima omnino negligi et contemni. Ad haec mala, accedebat talis persuasio de votis, quam constat etiam olim displicuisse ipsis Monachis, si qui paulo cordatiores fuerunt, docebant vota paria esse baptismo, docebant se hoc vitae genere mereri remissionem peccatorum, et iustificationem coram Deo. Imo addebant, vitam Monasticam non tantum iustitiam mereri coram Deo, sed amplius etiam, quia servaret non modo praecepta, sed etiam consilia Evangelica.
Ita persuadebant Monasticam professionem longe meliorem esse baptismo, vitam Monasticam plus mereri quam vitam Magistratuum, vitam pastorum et similium, qui in mandatis Dei sine facticiis religionibus suae vocationi serviunt. Nihil horum negari potest, extant enim in libris eorum.
Quid fiebat postea in Monasteriis? Olim erant scholae sacrarum literarum, et aliarum disciplinarum, quae sunt utiles Ecclesiae, et sumebantur inde pastores, et Episcopi. Nunc alia res est, nihil opus est recitare nota. Olim ad discendum conveniebant, nunc fingunt institutum esse vitae genus ad promerendam gratiam et iustitiam, imo praedicant esse statum perfectionis, et longe praeferunt omnibus aliis vitae generibus a Deo ordinatis.
Haec ideo recitavimus nihil odiose exaggerantes, ut melius intelligi posset de hac re, doctrina nostrorum. Primum de his, qui matrimonia contrahunt, sic docent apud nos, quod liceat omnibus, qui non sunt idonei ad coelibatum, contrahere matrimonium, quia vota non possunt ordinationem ac mandatum Dei tollere. Est autem hoc mandatum Dei: Propter fornicationem habeat unusquisque uxorem suam. Neque mandatum solum, sed etiam creatio et ordinatio Dei cogit hos ad coniugium, qui sine singulari Dei opere non sunt excepti, iuxta illud: Non est bonum homini esse solum. Igitur non peccant isti, qui obtemperant huic mandato et ordinationi Dei. Quid potest contra haec opponi? Exaggeret aliquis obligationem voti quantum volet, tamen non poterit efficere ut votum tollat mandatum Dei.
Canones docent in omni voto, ius superioris excipi, quare multo minus haec vota contra mandata Dei valent.
Quod si obligatio votorum, nullas haberet causas cur mutari possit, nec Romani Pontifices dispensassent. Neque enim licet homini obligationem, quae simpliciter est iuris divini, rescindere. Sed prudenter iudicaverunt Romani Pontifices aequitatem in hac obligatione adhibendam esse, Ideo saepe de votis dispensasse leguntur. Nota est enim historia de Rege Arragonum, revocato ex Monasterio, et extant exempla nostri temporis.
Deinde, cur obligationem exaggerant adversarii seu effectum voti, cum interim de ipsa voti natura sileant, quod debet esse in re possibili, quod debet esse voluntarium, sponte et consulto conceptum. At quomodo sit in potestate hominis perpetua castitas, non est ignotum. Et quotusquisque sponte et consulto vovit? Puellae et adolescentes priusquam iudicare possunt, persuadentur ad vovendum, interdum etiam coguntur. Quare non est aequum tam rigide de obligatione disputare, cum omnes fateantur contra voti naturam esse, quod non sponte, quod inconsulto admittitur.
Plerique Canones rescindunt vota ante annum 15. contracta, quia ante illam aetatem non videtur tantum esse iudicii, ut de perpetua vita constitui possit. Alius Canon plus concedens hominum imbecillitati, addit annos aliquot, vetat enim ante annum 18. votum fieri. Sed utrum sequemur, maxima pars habet excusationem, cur Monasteria deserant, quia plurimi ante hanc aetatem voverunt.
Postremo, etiamsi voti violatio reprehendi posset, tamen non videtur statim sequi, quod coniugia talium personarum, dissolvenda sint. Nam Augustinus negat debere dissolvi, 27. quaest. 1. cap. Nuptiarum, cuius non est levis autoritas, etiamsi alii postea aliter senserunt.
Quanquam autem mandatum Dei de coniugio videatur plerosque liberare a votis, tamen afferunt nostri et aliam rationem de votis, quod sint irrita, quia omnis cultus Dei, ab hominibus sine mandato Dei institutus et electus ad promerendam iustificationem et gratiam, impius est, sicut Christus ait, Frustra colunt me mandatis hominum. Et Paulus ubique docet, iustitiam non esse quaerendam ex nostris observationibus et cultibus, qui sint excogitati ab hominibus, sed contingere eam per fidem, credentibus se recipi in gratiam a Deo propter Christum.
Constat autem Monachos docuisse, quod facticiae religiones satisfaciant pro peccatis, mereantur gratiam et iustificationem. Quid hoc est aliud, quam de gloria Christi detrahere et obscurare, ac negare iustitiam fidei? Sequitur igitur ista vota usitata, impios cultus fuisse, quare sunt irrita. Nam votum impium, et factum contra mandata Dei non valet, neque enim debet votum vinculum esse iniquitatis, ut Canon dicit.
Paulus dicit, Evacuati estis a Christo, qui in lege iustificamini, a gratia excidistis. Ergo etiam qui votis iustificari volunt, evacuantur a Christo, et a gratia excidunt. Nam et hi, qui votis tribuunt iustificationem, tribuunt propriis operibus hoc, quod proprie ad gloriam Christi pertinet. Neque vero negari potest, quin Monachi docuerint se per vota et observationes suas iustificari et mereri remissionem peccatorum, imo affinxerunt absurdiora, dixerunt se aliis mutuari sua opera. Haec si quis velit odiose exaggerare, quam multa possit colligere, quorum iam ipsos Monachos pudet. Ad haec persuaserunt hominibus factitias religiones esse statum Christianae perfectionis. An non est hoc iustificationem tribuere operibus? Non est leve scandalum in Ecclesia populo proponere, certum cultum ab hominibus excogitatum sine mandato Dei, et docere quod talis cultus iustificet homines?
Quia iustitia fidei, quam maxime oportet tradi in Ecclesia, obscuratur, cum illae mirificae religiones Angelorum, simulatio paupertatis et humilitatis, et coelibatus offunduntur oculis hominum.
Praeterea obscurantur praecepta Dei, et verus cultus Dei, cum audiunt homines, solos Monachos esse in statu perfectionis, quia perfectio Christiana est serio timere Deum, et rursus concipere magnam fidem, et confidere propter Christum, quod habeamus Deum placatum, petere a Deo, et certo expectare auxilium in omnibus rebus gerendis, iuxta vocationem. Interim foris diligenter facere bona opera, et servire vocationi. In his rebus est vera perfectio, et verus cultus Dei, non est in coelibatu aut mendicitate, aut veste sordida. Verum populus concipit multas perniciosas opiniones ex illis falsis praeconiis vitae Monasticae. Audit sine modo laudari coelibatum, ideo cum offensione conscientiae versatur in coniugio. Audit solos mendicos esse perfectos, ideo cum offensione conscientiae retinet possessiones, negotiatur. Audit consilium Evangelicum esse de non vindicando, ideo alii in privata vita non verentur ulcisci, audiunt enim consilium esse, non praeceptum. Alii omnes magistratus et civilia officia iudicant indigna esse Christianis.
Leguntur exempla hominum, qui deserto coniugio, deserta reipublicae administratione, abdiderunt se in Monasteria. Id vocabant fugere ex mundo, et quaerere vitae genus, quod Deo magis placeret, nec videbant Deo serviendum esse in illis mandatis, quae ipse tradidit, non in mandatis, quae sunt excogitata ab hominibus. Bonum et perfectum vitae genus est, quod habet mandatum Dei. De his rebus necesse est admonere homines. Et ante haec tempora reprehendit Gerson errorem Monachorum de perfectione, et testatur suis temporibus novam vocem fuisse, quod vita Monastica sit status perfectionis.
Tam multae impiae opiniones haerent in votis, quod iustificent, quod sint perfectio Christiana, quod servent consilia et praecepta, quod habeant opera supererogationis. Haec omnia cum sint falsa et inania, faciunt vota irrita.
Scripture echoes
- ↩1Cor.7.2 — But because of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman should have her own husband.
- ↩Gen.2.18 — Then the LORD God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make a helper suitable for him.'
- ↩Mark.7.7 — But they worship me in vain, teaching human commandments as doctrines.
- ↩Rom.3.21-Rom.3.28;Eph.2.8-Eph.2.9 — But now, apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been revealed, attested by the Law and the Prophets." Removes the heavier "being attested" without losing the participial sense. Rom.3.22 — For The righteousness of God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe, for there is no distinction. Rom.3.23 — For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Rom.3.24 — being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Rom.3.25 — whom God put forward as a mercy seat through faith in His blood, to show His righteousness because of the passing over of sins previously committed Rom.3.26 — This was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the one who justifies the person who has faith in Jesus." Better sentence order for hearing and clearer antecedent from v.25. Rom.3.27 — Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By works? No, but by the law of faith." "By" reads more naturally than repeated "through" in the courtroom argument. Rom.3.28 — For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Eph.2.8 — For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not of yourselves; it is the gift of God. Eph.2.9 — not by works, so that no one may boast
- ↩Gal.5.4 — You have been severed from Christ, you who are being justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.
Notes
- 1 ↩paria esse baptismo rendered 'equal to baptism' — the comparison is about the binding force or spiritual efficacy claimed for monastic vows, not a sacramental equation.
- 2 ↩consilia Evangelica rendered 'evangelical counsels' — the standard theological term for the counsels of perfection (poverty, chastity, obedience) as distinct from the binding commandments.
- 3 ↩The form facticiis religionibus is rendered 'made-up religious practices' — literally 'artificial/fabricated religious observances.' The point is that these other callings serve God within the commandments without the added monastic framework.
- 4 ↩Source span echoes Galatians 5:4 (Vulgate: 'Evacuati estis a Christo, qui in lege iustificamini, a gratia excidistis'). Final source resolution belongs to a later stage.
- 5 ↩'Evacuati' rendered 'estranged' rather than 'emptied out' to reflect the likely sense of estrangement from Christ in this context.
- 6 ↩'Ergo' rendered 'So then' to capture the inferential force. 'Evacuantur' rendered 'estranged' in parallel with s1.
- 7 ↩'Affinxerunt' rendered 'fabricated' (sense: added on, invented). 'Mutuari' rendered 'lend' in the sense of crediting/transferring merit to others.
- 8 ↩'Exaggerare' rendered 'pile up' in the sense of amassing or heaping up examples. 'Odiose' rendered 'out of spite' to capture the hostile intent.
- 9 ↩'Factitias religiones' rendered 'invented forms of religious life'. 'Statum Christianae perfectionis' rendered 'the state of Christian perfection' — a technical monastic claim.
- 10 ↩'Non est leve scandalum' rendered 'Isn't it a serious scandal' — rhetorical question preserving the force of the Latin. 'Certum cultum ab hominibus excogitatum sine mandato Dei' rendered 'a particular form of worship devised by human beings without God's command'.
Augsburg Confession (Confessio Augustana) companion
Read the full Confession, one article a day
Chosen Portion serves the complete Augsburg Confession in daily readable portions — free on iOS
The Confession was written to be read aloud before an emperor in one afternoon; Chosen Portion breaks that same text into daily portions so you can confess it thoughtfully over a month.
- All 28 articles plus the preface, split into readings under 5 minutes each
- Finish the entire Confession in about 4 weeks of daily reading
- Continue into Dort, the church fathers, and 78+ other historic works