Martin Luther's Devotion to Mary

Martin Luther's Devotion to Mary

Despite the radicalism of early Protestantism toward many ancient Catholic “distinctives, ” such
as the Communion of the Saints, Penance, Purgatory, Infused Justification, the Papacy, the
priesthood, sacramental marriage, etc., it may surprise many to discover that Martin Luther was
rather conservative in some of his doctrinal views, such as on baptismal regeneration, the
Eucharist, and particularly the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Luther indeed was quite devoted to Our Lady, and retained most of the traditional
Marian doctrines which were held then and now by the Catholic Church. This is often
not well-documented in Protestant biographies of Luther and histories of the 16th
century, yet it is undeniably true. It seems to be a natural human tendency for latter-day
followers to project back onto the founder of a movement their own prevailing

Since Lutheranism today does not possess a very robust Mariology, it is usually assumed
that Luther himself had similar opinions. We shall see, upon consulting the primary
sources (i.e., Luther’s own writings), that the historical facts are very different. We shall
consider, in turn, Luther’s position on the various aspects of Marian doctrine.

Along with virtually all important Protestant Founders (e.g., Calvin, Zwingli, Cranmer), Luther accepted the traditional belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary (Jesus had no
blood brothers), and her status as the Theotokos (Mother of God):

Christ...was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him... “brothers” really
means “cousins” here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers. (Sermons on John, chapters
1-4, 1537-39).

He, Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary’s virginal womb...This was without the
cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. (Ibid.)

God says.. .’’Mary’s Son is My only Son.” Thus Mary is the Mother of God. (Ibid.).

God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God
was born of Mary, that God is Mary’s Son, and that Mary is God’s mother... She is the true mother of God
and bearer of God...Mary suckled God, rocked God to sleep, prepared broth and soup for God, etc. For
God and man are one person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two Christs...just as your son is not two
sons.. .even though he has two natures, body and soul, the body from you, the soul from God alone. (On the 
Councils and the Church, 1539).

Probably the most astonishing Marian belief of Luther is his acceptance of Mary’s Immaculate Conception, which
wasn’t even definitively proclaimed as dogma by the Catholic Church until 1854. Concerning this question there
is some dispute, over the technical aspects of medieval theories of conception and the soul, and whether or not
Luther later changed his mind. Even some eminent Lutheran scholars, however, such as Arthur Carl Piepkorn
(1907-73) of Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, maintain his unswerving acceptance of the doctrine. Luther’s
words follow:

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in
the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving
a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all
sin” (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).

She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin—something exceedingly great. For God’s grace
fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. (Personal {“Little”} Prayer Book, 1522).

Later references to the Immaculate Conception appear in his House sermon for Christmas (1533) and Against the
Papacy of Rome (1545). In later life (he died in 1546), Luther did not believe that this doctrine should be imposed
on all believers, since he felt that the Bible didn’t explicitly and formally teach it. Such a view is consistent with
his notion of sola Scriptura and is similar to his opinion on the bodily Assumption of the Virgin, which he never
denied—although he was highly critical of what he felt were excesses in the celebration of this Feast. In his
sermon of August 15, 1522, the last time he preached on the Feast of the Assumption, he stated:

There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know. And since the
Holy Spirit has told us nothing about it, we can make of it no article of faith.. .It is enough to know that she
lives in Christ.

Luther held to the idea and devotional practice of the veneration of Mary and expressed this on innumerable
occasions with the most effusive language:

One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God
for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God’s
grace...Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ...Mary does not wish that we
come to her, but through her to God. (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521).

Luther did strongly condemn any devotional practices which implied that Mary was in any way equal to our Lord
or that she took anything away from His sole sufficiency as our Savior. This is, and always has been, the official
teaching of the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, Luther often “threw out the baby with the bath water,” when it
came to criticizing erroneous emphases and opinions which were prevalent in his time—falsely equating them
with Church doctrine. His attitude towards the use of the “Hail Mary” prayer (the first portion of the Rosary) is
illustrative. In certain polemical utterances he appears to condemn its recitation altogether, but he is only
forbidding a use of Marian devotions apart from heartfelt faith, as the following citation makes clear:

Whoever possesses a good (firm) faith, says the Hail Mary without danger! Whoever is weak in faith can
utter no Hail Mary without danger to his salvation. (Sermon, March 11, 1523).

To summarize, it is apparent that Luther was extraordinarily devoted to the Blessed Virgin Mary, which is notable
in light of his aversion to so many other “Papist” or “Romish” doctrines, as he was wont to describe them. His
major departure occurs with regard to the intercession and invocation of the saints, which he denied, in accord
with the earliest systematic Lutheran creed, the Augsburg Confession of 1530 (Article 21).

His views of Mary as Mother of God and as ever-Virgin were identical to those in Catholicism, and his opinions
on the Immaculate Conception, Mary’s “Spiritual Motherhood” and the use of the “Hail Mary” were substantially
the same. He didn’t deny the Assumption (he certainly didn’t hesitate to rail against doctrines he opposed!), and
venerated Mary in a very touching fashion which, as far as it goes, is not at all contrary to Catholic piety.

Therefore, it can be stated without fear of contradiction that Luther’s Mariology is very close to that of the
Catholic Church today, far more than it is to the theology of modern-day Lutheranism. To the extent that this fact
is dealt with at all by Protestants, it is usually explained as a “holdover” from the early Luther’s late medieval
Augustinian Catholic views (“everyone has their blind spots,” etc.). But this will not do for those who are serious
about consulting Luther in order to arrive at the true “Reformation heritage” and the roots of an authenticProtestantism. For if Luther’s views here can be so easily rationalized away, how can the Protestant know whether
he is trustworthy relative to his other innovative doctrines such as extrinsic justification by faith alone and sola

It appears, once again, that the truth about important historical figures is almost invariably more complex than the
“legends” and overly-simplistic generalizations which men often at the remove of centuries—create and accept

— Dave Armstrong

Dave Armstrong was received in to the Catholic Church in 1991 from Evangelical Protestantism. His complete
conversion story can be found in his book, “Surprised by Truth.Dave’s blog “Biblical Evidence for
Catholicism” can be found at This article is taken from the Coming Home
Network’s Journal “Mary ”, available online at