PBS Presents “Facts” That Luther Advocated Drunkenness and Promiscuity

"Luther thoroughly approved of drinking and sex."- PBS

In 2003 PBS ran a documentary on Martin Luther. To coincide with this documentary, PBS also added a webpage on Martin Luther. They included a weblink entitled, Luther Trivia: Ten Things you didn’t Know About Martin Luther from the PBS website. While not all of their trivia facts are wrong, the first two are not accurate: Luther's views on drinking and sex.  Let's take a look.

Documentation
The first thing to realize about these trivia facts is that PBS provides no documentation for any of them, nor do they mention who wrote the webpage. Neither do they appear to provide a contact e-mail address for someone to inquire into the lack of documentation. 

Drinking
Let's work through their "facts" about Luther and drinking alcohol:

1. Alcohol cures all evils. Luther thoroughly approved even advocated drinking heavily. When a young man wrote to him complaining of despair at the prospect of going to hell, Luther wrote back advising him to go and get drunk. That, he said, was what he did when he felt despair.

The historical record nowhere documents Martin Luther ever being drunk or advising someone to go drunk. It does provide evidence that he did drink alcohol and that he enjoyed drinking. One needs only survey the massive output of work that Luther physically did (preaching, teaching, social and political Involvement etc.) to settle the matter that Martin Luther did not have a drinking problem.

Luther preached and wrote against drunkenness throughout his entire life with vigor and force. As biographer Heinrich Boehmer notes,

Luther attacked the craving for drink with word and pen more vigorously than any German of his time. He told even princes his opinion of it, in private and public, blamed the elector himself publicly for this vice, and read the elector’s courtiers an astonishingly drastic lecture (Heinrich Boehmer, Luther and the Reformation in the Light of Modern Research (London: G. Bell and Sons LTD, 1930), 198). 

One example among many is Luther’s Sermon on Soberness and Moderation against Gluttony and Drunkenness (1539). Luther complaining about excessive drinking states:

What, therefore, shall we do? The secular government does not forbid it, the princes do nothing about it, and the rulers in the cities do nothing at all but wink at it and do the same themselves. We preach and the Holy Scriptures teach us otherwise; but you want to evade what is taught. Eating and drinking are not forbidden, but rather all food is a matter of freedom, even a modest drink for one’s pleasure. If you do not wish to conduct yourself this way, if you are going to go beyond this and be a born pig and guzzle beer and wine, then, if this cannot be stopped by the rulers, you must know that you cannot be saved. For God will not admit such piggish drinkers into the kingdom of heaven [cf. Gal. 5:19–21]. It is no wonder that all of you are beggars. How much money might not be saved [if excessive drinking were stopped]. [LW 51:293].

Original text: The English translation utilizes three different accounts of Luther's sermon: Quid ergo faciemus? Magistratus politicus non vetat, sed connivet et idem facit. (WA 47:762-763). Principes thun nichts dazu, regenten in stedten nihil. Nos praedicamus et scriptura sacra aliter dicit (WA 47:763) Ist dir doch wol vergünnet von Got und yederman, das du nicht allain nzür notdurft, sondern auch zür lust und freüde essest und trinckest und gütter dinge seyest, und du kanst an solchem nicht begnüget sein, du seyest dann auch ain solche Saw und unlust, als werestu dazü geborn (WA 47:762-763). Sic faciemus. Concedimus tibi ad gaudium potationem modestam, ein truncklin zur freuden, Si hoc non facere volueris, scias te non salvatum iri. Nam Deus huiusmodi potatores porcinos non intromittit in Regnum coelorum (WA 47:763). Non mirum, quod omnes Bettler, wie viel künde man ersparen (WA 47:763).

And also:

“Listen to the Word of God, which says, “Keep sane and sober,” that it may not be said to you in vain. You must not be pigs; neither do such belong among Christians. So also in I Cor. 6 [:9–10]: No drunkard, whoremonger, or adulterer can be saved. Do not think that you are saved if you are a drunken pig day and night. This is a great sin, and everybody should know that this is such a great iniquity, that it makes you guilty and excludes you from eternal life. Everybody should know that such a sin is contrary to his baptism and hinders his faith and his salvation. Therefore, if you wish to be a Christian, take care that you control yourself. If you do not wish to be saved, go ahead and steal, rob, profiteer as long as you can…. But if you do want to be saved, then listen to this: just as adultery and idolatry close up heaven, so does gluttony; for Christ says very clearly: Take heed “lest your hearts be weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and cares of this life, and that day come upon you suddenly” [Luke 21:34], “as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west” [Matt. 24:27]. Therefore be watchful and sober. That is what is preached to us, who want to be Christians” (LW 51:293-294).

Original text:  Ideo erschreckt mich schier des HERRn wort, quod fressen. Ideo audite verbum Dei, quod frustra non locutus, quod dicit, sollen messig [etc.]. Das nicht sollen sew sein vel gehorn nicht unter die Christen. Sie 1. Corint. 6. Ein trunckenbold [etc.] kan ein hurentreiber, Ehebrecher nicht selig werden, ne cogita te salvandum, si bist ein volle Saw tag und nacht. Sciat quisque tale peccatum, quod hindert an deiner Tauff, Glauben et ewiger seligkeit.Ideo si vis Christianus esse, cogita, ut te messigest. Si vero non vis salvari, still, raub, wucher, so lang du kanst... (WA 47:764-765) Si autem vis salvari, audi sicut adulterio, idolatriae claudit coelum, sie vollerey, quia Christus clare dicit: Videte, ne corda und kome uber euch, Sicut blix auff ꝛc. Sie dies, ideo vigilate et sobrii estote (WA 47:765).

In regard to the PBS statement about Luther writing to a young man and telling him to “go get drunk,”The reference can only be speculated. It’s probably Luther’s letter to Jerome Weller from July [?] 1530. Here is the letter in its entirety:

Grace and peace in Christ. My dear Jerome: you must believe that this temptation of yours is of the devil, who vexes you so because you believe in Christ. You see how contented and happy he permits the worst enemies of the gospel to be. Just think of Eck, Zwingli, and others. It is necessary for all of us who are Christians to have the devil as an adversary and enemy; as Saint Peter says, “Your adversary, the devil, walketh about.”

Excellent Jerome, you ought to rejoice in this temptation of the devil because it is a certain sign that God is propitious and merciful to you. You say that the temptation is heavier than you can bear, and that you fear that it will so break and beat you down as to drive you to despair and blasphemy. I know this wile of the devil. If he cannot break a person with his first attack, he tries by persevering to wear him out and weaken him until the person falls and confesses himself beaten. Whenever this temptation comes to you, avoid entering upon a disputation with the devil and do not allow yourself to dwell on those deadly thoughts, for to do so is nothing short of yielding to the devil and letting him have his way. Try as hard as you can to despise those thoughts which are induced by the devil. In this sort of temptation and struggle, contempt is the best and easiest method of winning over the devil. Laugh your adversary to scorn and ask who it is with whom you are talking. By all means flee solitude, for the devil watches and lies in wait for you most of all when you are alone. This devil is conquered by mocking and despising him, not by resisting and arguing with him. Therefore, Jerome, joke and play games with my wife and others. In this way you will drive out your diabolical thoughts and take courage.

This temptation is more necessary to you than food and drink. Let me remind you what happened to me when I was about your age. When I first entered the monastery it came to pass that I was sad and downcast, nor could I lay aside my melancholy. On this account I made confession to and took counsel with Dr. Staupitz (a man I gladly remember) and opened to him what horrible and terrible thoughts I had. Then said he: “Don't you know, Martin, that this temptation is useful and necessary to you? God does not exercise you thus without reason. You will see that he intends to use you as his servant to accomplish great things." And so it turned out. I was made a great doctor (for I may with propriety say this of myself) although at the time when I suffered this temptation I never would have believed it possible. I have no doubt that this will happen to you too. You will become a great man. Just see to it that you are of good courage in the meantime, and be persuaded that such utterances, especially those which fall from the lips of learned and great men, are not without prophetic quality.

I remember that a certain man whom I once comforted on the loss of his son said to me, "Wait and see, Martin, you will become a great man." I have often thought of these words, for, as I have said, such utterances have something of a prophetic quality. Be of good courage, therefore, and cast these dreadful thoughts out of your mind. Whenever the devil pesters you with these thoughts, at once seek out the company of men, drink more, joke and jest, or engage in some other form of merriment. Sometimes it is necessary to drink a little more, play, jest, or even commit some sin in defiance and contempt of the devil in order not to give him an opportunity to make us scrupulous about trifles. We shall be overcome if we worry too much about falling into some sin.

Accordingly if the devil should say, "Do not drink," you should reply to him, "On this very account, because you forbid it, I shall drink, and what is more, I shall drink a generous amount." Thus one must always do the opposite of that which Satan prohibits. What do you think is my reason for drinking wine undiluted, talking freely, and eating more often if it is not to torment and vex the devil who made up his mind to torment and vex me? Would that I could commit some token sin simply for the sake of mocking the devil, so that he might understand that I acknowledge no sin and am conscious of no sin. When the devil attacks and torments us, we must completely set aside the whole Decalogue. When the devil throws our sins up to us and declares that we deserve death and hell, we ought to speak thus: "I admit that I deserve death and hell. What of it? Does this mean that I shall be sentenced to eternal damnation? By no means. For I know One who suffered and made satisfaction in my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Where he is, there I shall be also.” Yours, Martin Luther (Tappert, Luther's Letters of Spiritual Counsel, pp. 84-87).

Original text: Gratiam et pacem in Christo. Mi charissime Hieronyme, statuere debes, hanc tentationem tuam esse a diabolo, et ideo te vexari sic, quia credis in Christum. Vides enim, quam securos et laetos esse sinit hostes infensissimos euangelii, ut puta Eccium, Zwinglium et alios. Oportet nos diabolum habere adversarium et hostem, omnes qui sumus christiani, quemadmodum Petrus inquit¹: "Adversarius vester Diabolus circuit" etc. Optime Hieronyme, debes gaudere ista tentatione diaboli, quia certum signum est, te propitium et misericordem habere Deum. Dices: tentatio illa gravior est, quam ut ferre possis, et vereris, ne te sic frangat et opprimat, ut in desperationem et blasphemiam incidas. Novi hanc technam diaboli: si quem primo impetu tentationis non potest frangere, eum assiduitate conatur fatigare et debilitare, ut cedat² et se victum esse fateatur. Proinde quoties tibi tentatio ista acciderit, caveas, ne disputationem cum diabolo instituas aut cogitationibus istis mortiferis indulgeas. Hoc enim nihil est aliud, quam cedere diabolo et succumbere. Sed operam dabis, ut fortissime istas cogitationes immissas a diabolo contemnas. Contemptus in hoc genere tentationis et pugnae est optima et facillima ratio vincendi diabolum, et fac rideas adversarium et quaeras, quocum confabuleris. Solitudinem modis omnibus fugito, tum enim potissimum te captat et insidiatur, cum es solus. Ludendo et contemnendo hic diabolus vincitur, non resistendo et disputando. Miscebis igitur ioca et ludos cum uxore mea et caeteris, quo cogitationes illas diabolicas fallas et bono fac sis animo, mi Hieronyme. Haec tentatio magis tibi est necessaria quam cibus et potus. Volo tibi commemorare, quid mihi olim, cum essem hac aetate fere, qua tu nunc es, acciderit. Cum primum in monasterium essem profectus, evenit, ut semper tristis et moestus incederem, nec poteram tristitiam illam deponere. Quapropter consulebam et confitebar Doctori Staupitio, cuius viri libenter facio mentionem², eique aperiebam, quam horrendas et terriferasᵇ cogitationes haberem. Tum ille: Nescis, Martine, quam tibi illa tentatio sit utilis et necessaria; non enim temere te sic exercet Deus, videbis, quod ad res magnas gerendas te ministro utetur.³ Atque ᶜ ita accidit. Nam ego magnus (licet enim hoc mihi de me iure praedicare) factus sum doctor, quod quidem tum, cum hanc tentationem patiebar, nunquam credidissem futurum. Sic et tibi procul dubio eveniet: tu vir magnus evades; videbis modo, ut interim bono et forti sis animo, et fac tibi persuadeas, istiusmodi voces, quae sic doctis praesertim et magnis hominibus excidunt, non carere oraculo et divinatione. Memini olim virum quendam, quem consolabar, eo quod amiserat filium, mihi dicere: videbis, Martine, quod vir magnus evades.⁴ Huius dicti saepissime memini, habent enim huiusmodi voces, ut dixi, aliquid divinationis et oraculi. Proinde bono ac forti fac sis animo, et cogitationes istas immanissimas prorsus eiice. Et quoties istis cogitationibus te vexaverit diabolus, illico quaere confabulationem hominum, aut largius bibe, aut iocare, nugare, aut aliquid aliud hilarius facito. Est nonnunquam largius bibendum, ludendum, nugandum, atque adeo peccatum aliquod faciendum in odium et contemptum diaboli, ne quid loci relinquamus illi, ut conscientiam nobis faciat de rebus levissimis; alioqui vincimus, si nimis anxie curaverimus, ne quid peccemus. Proinde si quando dixerit diabolus: noli bibere, tu sic illi respondeas: atqui ob eam causam maxime bibam, quod tu prohibes, atque adeo largius bibam. Sic semper contraria facienda sunt eorum, quae Satan vetat. Quid causae aliud esse censes, quod ego sic meracius bibam, liberius confabuler, comesser saepius, quam ut ludam diabolum ac vexem, qui me vexare et ludere paraverat? Utinam possem aliquid insigne peccati designare modo ad eludendum diabolum, ut intelligeret, me nullum peccatum agnoscere ac me nullius peccati mihi esse conscium! Omnino totus decalogus amovendus est nobis ex oculis et animo, nobis, inquam, quos sic petit ac vexat diabolus.⁵ Quodsi quando diabolus nobis obiecerit nostra peccata, ac reos egerit mortis et inferni, tunc sic debemus dicere: fateor quidem, me reum esse mortis ac inferni, quid tum postea? Ergoᵈ in aeternum condemnaberis? minime, novi enim quendam, qui passus est pro me ac satisfecit, et vocatur Iesus Christus, Dei filius. Ubi is manebit, manebo et ego. T. Martinus Luther (WA Br 5:518-520). 

Biographer W.H.T Dau comments on this letter:

When Luther advises Weller to drink somewhat more liberally, that does not mean that Luther advises Weller to get drunk. This, however, is exactly what Luther is made to say by his Catholic critics. They make no effort to understand the situation as it confronted Luther, but pounce upon a remark that can easily be understood to convey an offensive meaning. Neither does what Luther says about his own drinking mean that he ever got drunk… Luther's remarks about jesting, merry plays, and jolly pranks in which he would have Weller engage are likewise vitiated by the Catholic insinuation that he advises indecent frivolities, yea, immoralities. Why, all the merriment which he urges upon Weller is to take place in Luther's home and family circle, in the presence of Luther's wife and children, in the presence of Weller's little pupil Hans, who at that time was about four years old. The friends of the family members of the Faculty at the University, ministers, students who either stayed at Luther's home, like Weller, or frequently visited there, are also included in this circle whose company Weller is urged to seek. Imagine a young man coming into this circle drunk, or half drunk, and disporting himself hilariously before the company! We believe that not even all Catholics can be made to believe the insinuations of their writers against Luther when all the facts in the case are presented to them (W.H.T Dau, Luther Examined and Reexamined: A Review of Catholic Criticism and a Plea for Reevaluation, p. 123).

SEX

2. Let's talk about sex “Luther also thoroughly approved of sex; he said that a woman had the right to take on a lover, if her husband wasn't able to satisfy her in bed - and the husband should look on this with equanimity.

This is an outrageous trivia fact, very reminiscent of the negative pre-20th Century Roman Catholic invective hurled at Luther. With PBS though, the slant is probably not that Luther was sexually immoral (as Roman Catholics have argued), but rather that his views are not those of contemporary conservative Christians that frown upon sexual promiscuity and promote monogamous marriage.

It is true that Martin Luther “approved of sex,” but he did so while at the same time always strongly advocating marriage. Luther often spoke out against promiscuity and adultery in his writings and sermons. 

Like the previous statement about Luther advise getting drunk, it can only be speculated as to where PBS got this fact from. It is possible this mysterious PBS researcher got a hold of a negative Luther biography that referenced Luther’s 1522 treatise, On the Estate of Marriage.

In this treatise, Luther first exhorts a Christian to remain faithful to a sick spouse who is unable the “render the conjugal due.” Even in the case of severe sickness, the healthy spouse must remain faithful. Luther says to the spouse who tries to rationalize adultery because of a sick partner: “If you say: I cannot contain myself, then you are lying.” What Luther goes onto say is a little more curious. In commenting on reasons for divorce, Luther notes the situation is different when a wife simply refuses to give her husband his “conjugal due”:

The third case for divorce is that in which one of the parties deprives and avoids the other, refusing to fulfil the conjugal duty or to live with the other person. For example, one finds many a stubborn wife like that who will not give in, and who cares not a whit whether her husband falls into the sin of unchastity ten times over. Here it is time for the husband to say, “If you will not, another will; the maid will come if the wife will not.” Only first the husband should admonish and warn his wife two or three times, and let the situation be known to others so that her stubbornness becomes a matter of common knowledge and is rebuked before the congregation. If she still refuses, get rid of her; take an Esther and let Vashti go, as King Ahasuerus did [Esther 1:12–2:17] (LW 45:33).

Original text: Die dritte sache ist, wenn sich eyns dem andern selbs beraubt unnd entzeucht, das es die ehliche pflicht nicht halten, noch bey yhm seyn will. Als man wol findt so eyn halsstarrig weyb, das seynen kopff auff setzt, und sollt der man zehen mal ynn unkeuscheyt fallen, so fragt sie nicht darnach. Hie ists zeytt, das der man sage: "wiltu nicht, so wil eyn andere, wil fraw nicht, so kum die magd." So doch, das der man yhr zuvor zwey oder drey mal sage und warne sie und lasses fur ander leutt komen, das man offentlich yhre halsstarrickeyt wisse und fur der gemeyne straffe, will sie dann nicht, so laß sie von dyr und laß dyr eyne Esther geben unnd die Vasthi faren, wie der konig Assuerus thett (WA 10.2:290).

A tedious detail worth mentioning arises in the context above. Notice the phrase "If you will not, another will; the maid will come if the wife will not" (Wiltu nicht, szo will eyn andere, wil fraw nicht, szo kum die magd) is placed between quotation marks (" "). This indicates the phrase did not originate with Luther. LW 45 states it was a popular proverbial expression [LW 45:33, fn. 34]. 

Biographer Ewald Plass notes of this quote, 

The words, "If the wife is not willing, bring on the maid" have been notoriously misconstrued by having been quoted out of context. As the following words clearly show, Luther is thinking of a separation and a remarriage, not a sort of concubinage” [Ewald Plass, What Luther Says vol 2, p.901, footnote 20]. 

Luther outlines three reasons for divorce: the first a physical disability preventing the ability to have children, the second adultery, and thirdly, the reason quoted above. Luther goes on to explain,

Here you should be guided by the words of St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 7[:4–5], “The husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does; likewise the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does. Do not deprive each other, except by agreement,” etc. Notice that St. Paul forbids either party to deprive the other, for by the marriage vow each submits his body to the other in conjugal duty. When one resists the other and refuses the conjugal duty she is robbing the other of the body she had bestowed upon him. This is really contrary to marriage, and dissolves the marriage. For this reason the civil government must compel the wife, or put her to death. If the government fails to act, the husband must reason that his wife has been stolen away and slain by robbers; he must seek another. We would certainly have to accept it if someone’s life were taken from him. Why then should we not also accept it if a wife steals herself away from her husband, or is stolen away by others? (LW 45:33-34).

Original text: Hie solltu dich grunden auff S. Paulus wort 1. Corin. 7.: "Der man ist seyns leybs nicht mechtig sondern das weyb, und das weyb ist seyns leybs nicht mechtig sondern der man. Beraubt eyns das ander nicht, es sey denn auß beyder bewilligung" ꝛc. Sihe, da verbeutt S. Paulus, sich unternander berauben, denn die verlobniß gibt eyns dem andern seynen leyb zum ehlichen dienst. Wo nu eyns sich sperret und nicht wil, da nympt und raubet es seynen leyb, den es geben hatt dem andern, das ist denn eygentlich widder die ehe unnd die ehe zuryssen. Darumb muß hie weltliche ubirkeyt das weyb kwingen oder umb bringen. Wo sie das nicht thutt, muß der man dencken, seyn weyb sey yhm genomen von reubern und umb bracht und nach eyner andern trachten. Müssen wyr doch leyden, ob yhemand seyn leyb genomen wirt, Warumb sollt man denn nicht leyden, das eyn weyb sich selb dem man raubete odder von andern geraubt wurde? (WA 10.2:290-291).

These were words written by an unmarried monk. Yes, they come across as shocking, but keep the comparison in mind to what PBS has stated: “Luther also thoroughly approved of sex; he said that a woman had the right to take on a lover, if her husband wasn't able to satisfy her in bed - and the husband should look on this with equanimity.” Do a compare and contrast. Is the PBS version of Luther more reminiscent of a modern view of sexuality, or a medieval view? Biographer W.H.T Dau notes of Luther:

Moral cleanness is indelibly stamped upon hundreds of pages of Luther's writings. The Sixth Commandment in its wider application to the mutual relation of the sexes and the sexual condition of the individual was to Luther the solemn voice of God by which the holy and wise Creator guards and protects the fountains whence springs human life. "Because there is among us," he says, "such a shameful mixture and the very dregs of all kinds of vice and lewdness, this commandment is also directed against all manner of impurity, whatever it may be called; and not only is the external act forbidden, but every kind of cause, incitement, and means, so that the heart, the lips, and the whole body may be chaste and afford no opportunity, help, or persuasion for impurity. And not only this, but that we may also defend, protect, and rescue wherever there is danger and need; and give help and counsel, so as to maintain our neighbor's honor. For wherever you allow such a thing when you could prevent it, or connive at it as if it did not concern you, you are as truly guilty as the one perpetrating the deed. Thus it is required, in short, that every one both live chastely himself and help his neighbor do the same." (Large Catechism, p. 419.) The reason why God in the Sixth Commandment refers to only one form of sexual impurity Luther states correctly thus: "He expressly mentions adultery, because among the Jews it was a command and appointment that every one must be married. Therefore also the young were early married, so that the state of celibacy was held in small esteem, neither were public prostitution and lewdness tolerated as now. Therefore adultery was the most common form of unchastity among them [Luther Examined and Reexamined: A Review of Catholic Criticism and a Plea for Reevaluation (St Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1917), p. 210-211].

Something also to notice about the context above is to look beyond the shock value of the quote and understand the severity of the situation Luther is describing. In context, first, it's not only adamant denial of conjugal duty, but a spouse that possibly refuses to live under one roof with her husband. Second, the spouse is described as someone that does not care if her husband has repeated extra-marital sex. Luther recommends the husband seek to first keep this dysfunctional marriage intact by warning the wife of potential dissolution and also involving the church as a third-party arbiter. 

Revised, April 2026