Luther: "The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart"

Here's an oft-used Martin Luther quote, usually presented by defenders of Roman Catholicism:

"The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart" (Sermon, September 1, 1522) 

If you search the Internet for this quote, you'll find it has traveled far, even making its way to a handful of (mostly Roman Catholic) books. One of Rome's online defenders uses this quote to prove "Luther held to the idea and devotional practice of the veneration of Mary and expressed this on innumerable occasions with the most effusive language." Another using this quote says, "Even Martin Luther, despite criticizing the Catholic doctrines of Mary's intercession and mediation, insisted on venerating Mary." Yet another using this quote says, "Not only was devotion to Mary a spiritually helpful practice, but it was an almost intrinsic aspect of healthy spirituality."

We'll see that in context, this quote doesn't substantiate any of these statements. Rather, the quote serves as an excellent example of why context matters. While Rome's defenders use the quote as positive proof that Luther venerated Mary, in context the quote actually says something negative about the veneration of Mary being inscribed in the very depths of the human heart. It says the contrary: that having the veneration of Mary being inscribed in the very depths of the human heart is excessive and should be avoided.

Let's take a look.

Documentation
The quote is often mis-documented as "Sermon, September 1, 1522." This sort of sparse documentation is a good indicator that the person using the quote copy and pasted it from a secondary source, never bothering to look it up. 

The quote in this form may have originally come from two secondary Roman Catholic sources, one of which may have come close to plagiarizing the other. One of Rome's defenders seems to have taken it from Thomas O'Meara's Mary in Protestant and Catholic Theology (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1966). On page 123, O'Meara states,

To the end of his life Mary was to be honored and to be imitated. Luther never stopped preaching on her feast days. After all, he had written on September 1, 1522: "The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart."(46)

46. WA 10, III, 313.

Sometimes the quote is documented as "Martin Luther, Weimar edition of Martin Luther's Works (Translation by William J. Cole) 10, III, p.313" (for instance, this is how some of the versions of the now anonymous The Protestant Reformers on Mary webpage reads). While this documentation does include accurate information, it does include some information that's ambiguous and incomplete at best: William Cole was not a translator of the Weimar edition of Luther's Works. This documentation error most likely refers to William Cole’s article “Was Luther a Devotee of Mary?” (Marian Studies Volume XXI, 1970), p.131. Cole states:

In spite of the most strenuous criticism of the actual practice of Marian devotion, Luther never deviated from this opinion to the end of his life: Mary was always to be honored, as a matter of record Luther himself never stopped preaching on her feast days and remained true to his own statement of September 1, 1522: "The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart." (139)

139. WA 10, III, 313.

There is a strong possibility that Cole took this quote from O'Meara. Cole cites Mary in Protestant and Catholic Theology in his article on page 108. He concludes a point by referring to a summary statement from O'Meara, "Thus, as Father Thomas O'Meara has pointed out so well...". It's also interesting there's a similarity in pointing out Luther's preaching on Marian feast days previous to the quote in question. The most striking similarity though is that both of Rome's literary defenders refer to the wrong date of the sermon, September 1, 1522. The correct date is September 8, 1522.  Both authors correctly refer to WA 10, III, 313.  

In an earlier Beggars All entry on this quote, I presented larger English excerpts of this context from WA 10 III. Since then, the entirety of the sermon has been translated into English.  I am grateful to the translation work of Joel Baseley for this English rendering. He put together a fresh English translation of these sermons, many of which had not been translated into English previously. I'm not sure if Baseley realized the modern Roman Catholic polemical use of many of these sermons. His work inadvertently gave me the contexts for a number of Roman Catholic propaganda Luther quotes.

This sermon was part of Luther's Kirchenpostille (festival sermons). Baseley explains in his introduction to these sermons,

Luther's goal in issuing the festival sermons was to wean his people away from the adoration and veneration of the saints which had crept into the church in order to lead them back to venerate Christ alone and to serve not the dead but the living saints in need, according to Christ's command.

According to this introductory comment, this Luther quote that states "The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart" is actually part of a collection of sermons intended to wean people away from venerating the saints! Amazing.

Basely translated the title of this sermon, "The Day of the Nativity of Mary. He identifies it as a sermon on Matthew 1 preached on September 8. In the original WA 10.3, there are two versions of the sermon presented on the same page (presented below).

Context

Today's feast of the blessed Virgin celebrates her birth. We also read today in the beginning of Matthew the accounting of part of the family tree including the great ancestors of Jesus Christ.  But you know, my friends in Christ, that the honor given to the mother of God has been rooted so deeply into the hearts of men that no one wants to hear any opposition to this celebration. There is rather a desire to further elevate it and make it even greater. We also grant that she should be honored, since we, according to Saint Paul's words [Romans 12] are indebted to show honor one to another for the sake of the One who dwells in us, Jesus Christ. Therefore we have an obligation to honor Mary. But be careful to give her honor that is fitting. Unfortunately, I worry that we give her all too high an honor for she is accorded much more esteem than she should be given or than she accounted to herself.

So from this comes two abuses. First Christ is diminished by those who place their hearts more upon Mary than upon Christ himself. In doing so Christ is forced into the background and completely forgotten. The other abuse is that the poor saints here on earth are forgotten.

I would allow a high regard for Mary and her praise, just so long as you do not get carried away and consider making a law out of it so that she must be honored as a condition for your salvation. For the Scriptures have recorded nothing about her birth or life. So your hearts must not be placed upon her and she must not be exalted above her proper status. The monks invented all this abuse. They wanted to praise the woman. They have used Mary as an excuse to invent all kinds of lies by which she could be used to establish their twaddle. They have used Scriptures to drag Mary by the hair and force her to go where she never intended. For the Gospel that is read today reveals Christ's nativity, not Mary's. See how many lies have come out of this which we can in no way tolerate. I can surely allow her to be honored but not in a way that belies the Scriptures (Festival Sermons of Martin Luther, pp. 157-158).

Original text, version #1: Ir wist, mein freund, das gar tieff in die hertzen der menschen gebildet ist die ere die man thüt der mütter gotes, also auch das man nicht gern dawider hört reden, sonder allain meret und grösser macht. Nun lassen wirs auch geschehen das man sy eret, dieweil wir in der schrifft schuldig seind ainander fürzukommen mit der ere, wie Paulus sagt Ro. xij. das ainer den anndern soll halten als ain obern umb des willen, der in uns wont Jesus Christus. Darumb ist man ir auch ain eer schuldig, aber da sehe man zü, das man sy recht ere, dann man ist also tyeff in die ere getretten, das man sy höher hebt dann man sol, darauß zwen schaden kommen seind: Ain abbruch Christo, das man meer hat die hertzen auff sy gestellt dann auff Christum selbst, das Christus gleich hinder ins finster gestellt ist unnd sein gantz vergessen. Darnach ist noch ain grosser schad darauß kommen, das auch dem gemainen volck ain abbruch geschehen ist, das man die mutter gottes und der hailigen dienst und ere so hoch erhaben hat, dardurch man der armen vergessen hat. Ich laß geschehen das du vil von ir haltest, sy hoch preyseast, aber also ferr das dein güter won nicht herauß breche und werd ain gesetz darauß. Darumb hat die schrifft gar nichts von ir geburt geschriben, auff das wir sy nicht so hoch erheben und unser hertzen auff sy stellen sollen. Nun haben die Münch der weiber ere preysen wöllen und sye so hoch erhept, unnd damit sy das bestetigeten, müsten sy lugen brauchen unnd die schrifft dahin zwingen do sye nit hyn gehört. Dann das Euangelium, das man heüt list, das zeücht sich auff Christi geburt und nicht Marie. Also seind lugen her kommen, das ist nu in kainen weg züleyden (WA 10.3:313-314).

Original text, version #2:Ir wyst, mein freundt, das gar tief in die herzenn der menschen gebildet ist die ehr so man erbeut der muter gottes, ia auch also tieff, daß nie mantz gern hört dar wider reden, sunder mehr und größer macht. Nu laßen wirs auch geschehen das sy geehrt wirt, die weil wir in der geschrifft schuldig seind an andren für zu kommen mit der ehr wie Paulus sagt, darum ist man ir auch ein ehr schuldig.

Aber da ist wol fur zu sehen das sy recht werde geehrt. Wan daß volk ist also tieff in dise ehr getretten, das sy fil höher wirdt geehrt dan recht ist, dar auß zwen schaden kommen: Ein abbruch Christo, das dye herzen der menschen mer auff sy dan auff Christum selbs gestellt seind, Christus ist doch gleich hinden in das fynster gesetzt und sein gantz vergeßen.

Der ander schad, daß auch dem gemeinen volck darvon ein mercklicher abbruch geschicht, wan die weil die muter gottes unnd der heiligen dienst und ehr also hoch erhaben ist, wirdt der armen durfftigen christen vergeßen. Ich las geschen das du fil von ir helst, sy gros lobst unnd preisyßt, aber also ferr das deinn gütter wann nit her aus breche unnd mache ein gesetz dar aus. Darum hat auch die geschrifft gar nichts von irer geburt beschrieben, da mit und keiner sein hertz auff sy stell. Nu haben pfaffen und munch der weiber ehr herfur ziehen wellen und Mariam so hoch erhept, das sy uns ein gottin (nach art der heiden) aus diser demutigen dienerin gemacht habenn. Solichs nu zu bestettigen müsten sy lugen brauchen und die geschrifft bey dem har da hin ziehen und zwingen da hyn sy nit gehort. Secht das euangelion, so heut gelesen ist, zeucht sich auff Cristi geburt und nit Marie. Also seind lugen her kommen, das doch nit zu leiden ist (WA 10.3:313-314). 

Conclusion
In context, Luther's point is that whatever respect Mary was due to her, the Roman church of his day had collectively gone far beyond it."The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart" is not a positive statement, but a negative statement. This sentence placed back in its context is in regard to excessive Marian devotion, a devotion so rooted in the human heart that "no one wants to hear any opposition to this celebration" of the feast of Mary's birth. Luther goes on to wish this festival day in regard to Mary should be forgotten, "For there is nothing in the Scriptures about it [Mary's birth]" (p. 158). Luther also says,

 "We are just as holy as Mary and the other saints, no matter how great they are, when we only believe in Christ" (p. 158).

"Her being given great grace is not done so that we should venerate her, but out of God's mercy for her. For we could not all be God's mother, but apart from that she is just like us and must also come to grace through the blood of Christ as we do" (p. 158).

And so on. Luther's view of the saints was still in transition during 1522. Reading through this short sermon demonstrates this. The veneration rooted so deeply in the hearts of Luther's hearers was not a positive thing. He's pointing out the result of excessive Marian piety.

Luther's Mariology is fascinating, not so much because I either care about learning Mariology or even what Luther thought about it. Rather, my fascination is the way in which Rome's defenders appeal to Luther in support of Mariology, often at the expense of research and a context. The quote examined above demonstrates that if a context is examined, it may say something quite different than what Rome's defenders are claiming. Ad fontes!

Addendum #3: Roman Catholic Historian Hartmann Grisar on the Quote

As long as he admitted the invocation of Saints, Luther assigned a prominent place  to that of the Blessed Virgin.  " She is to be invoked," he writes in 1521," that God may give and do according to her will what we ask."  After he had changed his mind concerning the saints, he was unwilling to allow this any longer. 

Owing, however, to the after effects of his Catholic education, here particularly noticeable in him, we meet with many beautiful sayings of hi  in support of the worship  of Mary, although as time went on he grew ever more hostile to it. 

" You know," so he says in a sermon published in 1522, "that the  honour  paid to  the Mother of God is so deeply implanted in the heart of man  that we dislike to  hear it spoken against, but would much rather  it were fostered and encouraged."5 

5 Ibid., 10, 3, p. 313=15(2), p. 495. Church-postils, Sermon on Mary's Nativity.

Hartmann Grisar, Luther IV, p. 500.

Addendum #2 Luther Rejected Preaching on Marian Feast Days
Both Roman Catholic writers Thomas O'Meara and William Cole say Martin Luther did not stop preaching on Marian feast days. They are partially in error. Luther abandoned the festival of Mary’s Immaculate Conception (Dec. 8), her birthday (Sept. 8), and her Assumption (Aug. 15).  Consider the following noted by Reformation historian Eric Gritsch in his article “The Views of Luther and Lutheranism on the Veneration of Mary,” found in: H. George Anderson, J. Francis Stafford, Joseph A. Burgess (editors) The One Mediator, The Saints, and Mary, Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue VII (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1992):

“He rejected the festivals of Mary's Immaculate Conception, December 8, and her Assumption, August 15” (p. 240).

“According to Luther Mary should be honored in festivals that focus on Christ, which is why he eventually rejected the celebrations of her Immaculate Conception (December 8), her birth (September 8), and her Assumption (August 15). He did honor her in the festivals of the Annunciation (March 25), the Visitation (July 2), and Purification (February 2), since these are connected with the birth of Christ. "We dare not put our faith in the mother but only in the fact that the child was born" (p. 241).

“Luther continued to preach on these festivals, but stopped preaching on the other three festivals after 1523”  (p. 382).

When one actually reads Luther’s Marian sermons, one finds that Mary is usually not the main subject, Jesus Christ is. Mary is often mentioned in passing with perhaps a few paragraphs allotted to any discussion about her. There are exceptions to this, but the older Luther got, the less his Marian sermons focused on Mary. For instance, here is a complete "Marian" sermon, “The Day of Annunciation to Mary” by Martin Luther (Luke 1:26-38, Second Sermon 1534). See for yourself how much Luther emphasized Mary in a Marian feast day sermon.

Addendum #3 Blog Entry Revision

This blog entry is a revision of an entry I posted back in 2012. The original can be found here. Because so many sources are now available online, I'm revising older entries by adding additional materials and commentary and also fixing or deleting dead hyperlinks. Nothing of any significant substance has changed in this entry from that presented in the former. 

Revised March 2026