Luther on Dancing: "as many paces as the man takes in his dance, so many steps he takes towards hell"

Here's something presented by a Ph.D philosopher from Rockford University:

Martin Luther on Dancing

“As many paces as the man takes in his dance, so many steps he takes toward Hell.”Quoted here.

Crossing Martin off my next party-invitation list.

I like to contrast Luther with John Locke who, in his thoughts on education, mentions dancing first as an essential element of a child’s formal instruction. My explication is here in Part 8 of my online Philosophy of Education course.

We'll see that this is a gross historical misrepresentation. Luther probably didn't say it, nor did he take the severe position on dancing being attributed to him.

Documentation
The documentation provided consists simply of a hyperlink to a blog entry entitled, Book Review: Albion's Seed written by psychiatrist Scott Alexander. Alexander's review is of a book by David Hackett Fischer entitled Albion's Seed. The reviewer states the book is about "patterns of early immigration to the Eastern United States." One of the groups covered were the Quakers. The reviewer lists "Interesting Quaker Facts" taken from Albion's Seed:

9. “A Quaker preacher, traveling in the more complaisant colony of Maryland, came upon a party of young people who were dancing merrily together. He broke in upon them like an avenging angel, stopped the dance, anddemanded [sic] to know if they considered Martin Luther to be a good man. The astonished youngsters answered in the affirmative. The Quaker evangelist then quoted Luther on the subject of dancing: ‘as many paces as the man takes in his dance, so many steps he takes toward Hell. This, the Quaker missionary gloated with a gleam of sadistic satisfaction, ‘spoiled their sport’.”

This review does not document where this tidbit is found in Albion's Seed. I found it on page 511:

Albion's Seed author David Hackett Fischer does document this story, not to Luther's writings, but rather to, "Thomas Chalkley, Journal (New York, 1808), 93." Thomas Chalkley  (1675–1741) was "a Quaker missionary." "Journal" refers to "The Journal of Thomas Chalkley" documenting his Quaker missionary experiences. Here is page 93 from the 1808 edition. Chalkley states, 

In the year 1721, Thomas Lightfoot and I, with William Browne, went to a meeting at Bush-River, and going over Susquehannah-Ferry, the people were fiddling and dancing. When their dance was over, I asked them, believing them to be Protestants, If they thought Luther to be a good man? They replied, Yes, there was no doubt of it. "Well," said I, "and so do I; and I will tell you what he says concerning dancing, That as many paces as a man takes in his dance, so many steps he takes towards hell;" which spoiled their sport, and they went away, and we went on ours towards the meeting; and a good meeting it was! and we after it returned by way of Nottingham, and had a meeting there, and one at New-Garden, and so on to Philadelphia. I was from home about a week, and travelled in this journey about one hundred and fifty miles, and was well satisfied therein.

A comparison of Chalkley's first-hand testimony and Fischer's recounting of it show blatant inconsistencies.  First, Fischer provided a gross mis-citation to build his point, then he poisons the well in regard to an historical figure. David Hackett Fischer says this story is representative of Quaker attitudes towards children, particularly "teenage children... a party of young people who were dancing merrily together." The very source he cites (Chalkley) though says only, "the people were fiddling and dancing." "Teenage children" and "young people" were not explicitly mentioned by Chalkley.  Notice also Fischer describes Chalkley as expressing "sadistic satisfaction." "Sadistic" is quite strong, and a rather unfair word describing Chalkley's motivations. He also maliciously refers to him as an "avenging angel." Further, Fischer's Chalkley stops the party by breaking in on them and demanding if they knew who Luther was. Chalkley though waits till their dance is over and then simply asks them a question.

Context
Thomas Chalkley does not identify his Luther-source, nor was I able to find anything similar to the purported quote in my cursory search of Luther's writings, nor do I think Luther actually said it. I believe though that there is still a context to be presented, or at least some clues as to who may have originally said it.  A basic search of key terms from the quote point to the following similar statement from William Penn:

Dancing is the devil's procession,* and he that entereth into a dance entereth into his procession, the devil is the guide, the middle, and the end of the dance; as many paces as man maketh in dancing, so many paces doth he make to go to hell..t

* La bal es la proces. del diavol, e qui intra en la bal, c.
t Sp. Alm. fol. 50-54.

This rendering by Penn is striking similar to that presented by Chalkley. Penn isn't claiming these words are his (or Luther's). He says he is presenting "the judgment and practice of the most christian times; as also of eminent writers, both ancient and modern." While Penn mentions Luther a few times, he doesn't in the immediate context, and neither of the sources appear to refer to Luther's writings. The first reference "*" appears to be referring to The Tenth Article of The Ancient Discipline of the Evangelical Churches in the Valley's of Piemont.  I'm not exactly sure what "Sp. Alm. fol. 50-54" refers to, but I've never come across such a reference to one of Luther's writings. Note also that a version of the quote can be found in the Tenth Article of the Ancient Discipline:

It is possible Chalkley utilized Penn. Penn's book would have popularly preceded the publication of Chalkley's Journal (as well as the journal date of 1721). Chalkley also refers to Penn a few times in his journal. Chalkley is simply writing a journal entry, not an exposition, essay, or documented text. While he misattributes the quote to Luther, it appear more as a simple error of memory.  The quote appears to have a murky history, so if Chalkley did not utilize Penn, he could have gotten it from a few different places. For instance, others have said of this quote:

Jean Paul Perrin published his History of the Waldenses in 1624, and it went through many editions. His use of the quote can be found here. It's much more probable that Chalkley was quoting either Perrin or Penn and simply misattributed the quote to Luther. If the story is true, it certainly demonstrates that whomever this group of dancing people were, Luther's name commanded respect and authority, even if the person utilizing it was an unknown stranger proselytizing for the Quakers.


Conclusion

An examination of this quote reveals a strong dose of Internet propaganda. First, what's presented is a poorly documented obfuscation not only from this particular philosopher, but also from the modern source this quote was taken from (David Hackett Fischer, Albion's Seed). Second, this quote is probably not from Luther. Even if Luther did say it somewhere, it pre-dates him as coming from at least the Waldensians, so he was either citing an earlier source or was himself borrowing it without attribution. Third, the Rockford University philosopher provided no meaningful documentation or argumentation that Luther's view of either dancing or education was inferior to John Locke. Luther certainly wrote about education, and these writings are readily available to anyone with access to a good college library.

Back in 2015 I put up an entry that delved into Luther and dancing. Luther was not against the concept of dancing, but rather inappropriate dancing. For instance, he complained to his wife in a letter about a dance that has "started to bare women and maidens in front and back" (LW 50:279). Elsewhere in a sermon he lamented of his hearers:

“Sober” means that we should not overload the body, and it applies to excess in outward gestures, clothing, ornament, or whatever kind of pomp it may be, such as we have at baptisms and the churching of women. There is no moderation in these things. When there is a wedding or a dance you always have to go to excess. Christmas and Pentecost mean nothing but beer. Christians should not walk around so bedizened that one hardly knows whether one is looking at a man or a beast. We Christians ought to be examples. (LW 51:296)

In fairness to the Albion's Seed reviewer and David Hackett Fischer, their point was not about Luther, but rather Quaker attitudes about children (even though the source they mis-cite doesn't say anything about children in the tale being reported). By the time the quote made it on to the radar of the Rockford University philosopher, what started out as a point about Quaker children became entirely about Luther, and also an opportunity for others in the comment box to say, "Yes, absolutely Luther was a repugnant figure" that "broke the chokehold of the Catholic Church over European society, triggering the long, often horrifically bloody chain of events that led to the secular liberalism of the Enlightenment."

Luther is also contrasted with John Locke who held "dancing first as an essential element of a child’s formal instruction." A link is given to the philosopher's video presentation of the Locke / Luther comparison (his "explication"), but one has wait until part three to finally get to Locke's views on dancing. These videos appear to predate the discovery of the bogus Luther quote, so there is no contrasting of the two views done in the videos, only a brief presentation of Locke's position.

There is no rational ground to cross Luther off the "party-invitation list." Rather, the quote and commentary are typical of Internet propaganda and ignorance, this time not perpetuated by someone posting anonymously on a discussion forum, but rather by someone with a Ph.D in philosophy.

Addendum 
I did leave a comment on the Stephen Hicks website:

• James Swan

  January 24, 2018 at 12:21 pm

  Permalink

  I looked up the documentation you provided for the quote. The documentation you gave is to a review of the book, Albion’s Seed. The author of that book (David Hackett Fischer) cites the quote via the Journal of Thomas Chalkley (1675-1741). Chalkley doesn’t cite a source, and appears to be in error in attributing the quote to Luther. Versions of the quote pre-date Luther. Further, David Hackett Fischer not only mis-cited Chalkley at this point in his book in regard to the story in which this Luther quote appears, he also engaged in a blatant poisoning of the well in regard to the character of Chalkley.

  I would hold off on crossing Luther off your next party list. Luther was not a Quaker like Chalkley. Luther was not against the concept of dancing, but rather inappropriate dancing. Luther loved to have a drink, had rather colorful (and at times crude) language, had a sense of humor, could tell a story, and was otherwise beloved by family and friends with a larger-than-life personality. Of course, Luther had serious flaws as well, including his anti-Semitism, but so did the bulk of 16th Century western culture. I’m sure we could also scrutinize John Locke and find reasons to scratch him off the party list as well, for as clear of thinker Locke was, I’m sure we could find ways in which he was infected by the culture of his day, for instance, slavery.
• 

  Stephen HicksPost author

  January 24, 2018 at 3:26 pm

  Permalink

  Thanks for the follow-up research, James.

Ballroom Dancing Lutherans

For those of you whose spouses have at some point badgered you into watching an hour (or more!) of Dancing with The Stars: here's an excerpt from A Sermon on Dancing by Rev. J.R. Sikes (Lutheran Church of Ashland) January 6, 1897:

II. THE RESULTS OF THE BALL ROOM.
 I. The Physical Results.—Injury to Health.
 I know that many argue that it is good for their health. I shall content myself at present with showing that the contrary is true. The mode of dressing for balls, the unnatural excitement, and the excessive exercise all tend to invite and develop disease. Cold is contracted, fever, rheumatism or consumption follows, and death often ensues as thee result. I have a case in point. Some years ago a young lady of, amiable disposition and the daughter of wealthy parents received and invitation to a ball. It was her first invitation; It came from a highly respectable young man whom she highly esteemed and very much desired to please. Her classmate said to her, "You are not going, are you?" "Why not?" was the rejoinder. "It is a dancing party," was the reply. "So much the better, I have long wanted to attend a ball, and now I mean to go just this once and see what it, is." She did go. But she was not satisfied with this once. Charmed with its fascinations she went again and again. Scarcely a ball came off in the town without Ellen being present: After some months had passed thus her friend and classmate one day surprised her in tears. Finding she was discovered, she said, "I have been reviewing, my life for the past few months." "And are you resolving to do better?" asked her classmate. "Not just yet. I have one more engagement for Christmas eve. I must fill that, and that shall be my last." She did fill that, and it was her last. She took cold, went home and, took her bed, grew worse from day to day, and after an illness of several weeks she died. In her last hours, as her classmate stood beside her bed, she looked up and exclaimed, "I am lost, forever lost!" When they spoke to her of Christ and his willingness to save, she would only repeat, "I am lost—forever lost! .... That ball—that, first ball has been my ruin!" and thus she died. Now, reviewing the direct moral results in this case, we argue that it is a sin thus wontonly to destroy the health of our bodies which God has given us, And as the ball room does, in many instances, lead to such results, therefore it is wrong.

OK, so maybe this archaic argument won't get you out of viewing Dancing With Stars (unless Ebola gains strength) but it does raise the issue as to whether or not dancing is appropriate for Christians. My quick 2 cents is that obviously dance as an art-form and as a social means of expression is similar to music in that it can demonstrate how people are made in the image of God. When I see a gifted musician or a skilled dancer (whether they are Christians or not), I'm awestruck as to the abilities God gives to certain people. Whether they know it or not, their skill and creativity speaks of God's glory as creator.  On the other hand, it doesn't surprise me at all that sinful people take their God-given abilities and use them in sinful ways, denying the very God that created them, or that dance can be combined with sin to produce even more sin. It also doesn't surprise me that two people watching a couple dance in a graceful and almost acrobatic and seemingly effortless way can come to very different conclusions: one sees the skill produced by the glory of God, the other sees a sinful display of lust and lewdness. It doesn't surprise me that a Christian could go to a wedding and dance to the same tired songs without feeling even a pinch of conviction, while someone else struggling with sexual addiction needs to turn the other way to watch the wedding cake melt.


Luther and Dancing
Digging around I came across this old Lutheran sermon being cited in Adversaries of Dance: From the Puritans to the Present (Ann Louise Wagner), so of course, I did a quick search of the book to see what she said about Luther. She does so on page 25 in an undocumented statement:

Then in a footnote on page 41:

The Luther quote referenced by Wagner was interesting enough for me to look up. It's from WA 17 II: 64, which I cross-referenced to it's English equivalent, Lenker's Luther's Church Postil, Volume 1. Note the asterisk in the quote:

10. What then is moderation? Reason should teach that, and cite examples from other countries and cities where such pomp and excess are unknown. But to give my opinion, I would say a farmer is well adorned if for his wedding he have clothes twice as fine as he daily wears at his work; a burgher likewise; and a nobleman, if he have garments twice as costly as a townsman; a count, twice as costly as a nobleman; a duke, twice as costly as a count, and so in due order. In like manner food and drink and the entertainment of guests should be governed by their social position, and the purpose of the table should be pleasure not debauchery.

11. Now is it a sin to play and dance at a wedding,* inasmuch as some declare great sin is caused by dancing? Whether the Jews had dances I do not know; but since it is the custom of the country, like inviting guests, decorating, eating and drinking and being merry, I see no reason to condemn it, save its excess when it goes beyond decency and moderation. That sin should be committed is not the fault of dancing alone; since at a table or in church that may happen; even as it is not the fault of eating that some while so engaged should turn themselves into swine. Where things are decently conducted I will not interfere with the marriage rites and customs, and dance and never mind. Faith and love cannot be driven away either by dancing or by sitting still, as long as you keep to decency and moderation. Young children certainly dance without sin; do the same also, and be a child, then dancing will not harm you. Otherwise were dancing a sin in itself, children should not be allowed to dance. This is sufficient concerning marriage.

Lenker's translations of Luther's sermons were rarely adorned with extensive explanatory notes, but in this instance, Lenker actually wrote a short essay. Dancing must've been something he was rather concerned about. He included the following directed at "those who quote Luther to support the modern dance":

We are to remember that when Luther did not protest against the dance at a wedding he had in mind the dance of his day. The round dance in vogue among us was not then the general custom of the country. The dancers touched one another only with their hands and moved about in the room in measured time or sprang here and there, especially when in the open air. To be sure at that time also there were connected with dancing all kinds of immorality. But "all intemperance and whatever was unchaste" Luther did not approve, but forbade and chastised it. And we know that he considered the round dance as unchaste, and condemned it with sharp words.

In Luther's Letters by De Wette, 6 vol., 435p. in his "Sendschreiben und Bedenken," he gives his judgment on the conduct at dances thus: "Dances are gotten up and allowed that politeness in conduct may be taught and that young men may learn to honor the female sex and that friendship may be formed between young men and refined young ladies in order that later they way be the more sure of that friendship. The pope condemned dances because he was the enemy of the true and natural marriage festival. Therefore certain honorable women and men were invited to the wedding festivals to see that every thing was done in a becoming way. But there is one thing that does not please me in the conducting of dances, and I would that it might be prohibited by the government; namely, that the young men swing the girls around in a circle, especially publicly, when many are looking on." And as a result many governments, especially city councils in the days of Luther and later, passed public ordinances against "Dancing in a circle without a cloak." In these ordinances "the swinging and whirling of the girl in a circle" was forbidden. Consequently, the round dance in vogue today does not belong to the unchaste dances, and not to dances that are allowed, and Christians should avoid them. See St. Louis Ed. vol. 11, 467.

Walch says in his II vol. p. 2: Luther's books have been subject to gross misuse, especially his Church Postil. Those who advocate the modern dance think they have here found a strong argument. Those who conclude from these words, however, that the modern dance is not sinful and it is not to be avoided and condemned, have no ground for their conclusion. Those who quote Luther to support the modern dance, because he had so deep an insight into the things of faith and life and is so highly esteemed in our church, accomplish nothing. For you can quote Luther against Luther. How if you cite the places in his writings where he clearly condemns the dance in general, as his explanation of the third commandment, in his short explanation of the ten commandments and his exposition of Gen 4, 21, etc. Then the passage here will give you no support in your defense of the sinful lust of the dance. For what you find here in Luther's words, you imagine. When I take this passage in its entire connection I find something entirely different.

Luther is not speaking of the dance here in general, but of the chaste dance that is conducted in childlike simplicity. Luther opposed sour-faced hypocrites and self-grown saints, who like the Pharisees could tolerate nothing, not even a child to dance. Luther, like Christ in this miracle, kept the middle way.

I found this fascinating because it speaks of a battle that ended long ago, with Luther being cited for support (the times have not changed in this regard). Since I have little knowledge of the history of dance,  I'm not exactly sure what Lenker meant by "modern dance." That is, was he battling against something akin to the Jitterbug or the ballet, or both? I don't know. My guess is he would not tolerate sitting through Dancing with the Stars. On the other hand, Rev. J.R. Sikes would probably rather have a drink (if in fact, he was the same author of this book, which I'm not sure if he was).