(1) There are two questions: The first: Whether the authorities are obliged to protect themselves and their subjects against unjust violence, against equal princes and against the emperor, especially in this matter of religion? To this we have previously given our answer and raised our objections; and without doubt this is the right divine truth, which we are obliged to confess even in death: that not only the defension is permitted, but also that it is truly and earnestly commanded to every Potestat (authority) that they owe this service to God, to defend and protect themselves, if anyone, authority or otherwise, should dare to force them to accept Jdolatry and forbidden religious services: item, if anyone, to exercise unlawful violence on their subjects.
2 This is often commanded in God's word to the authorities: Judicate pupillo et viduae (Provide justice for the poor and the fatherless), Ps. 82, 3; item: Non assumas nomen Domini Dei tui vane (You shall not use the name of God your Lord uselessly), Ex. 20, 7. For the gospel does not deny the office of the authorities, but confirms it and commands the authorities to show their faith and to act.
by their ministry, and make them confess it, so that God may shine in their ministry and be known and praised through it. This is certainly true. As the kings of Judah are praised from the abhorrence of idolatry, and it is often commanded, Ps. 2, 10. 11: Erudi- mimi qui judicatis terram, servite Domino etc.. (Let yourselves now be instructed, O kings, serve the Lord etc.).
And as the gospel confirms the office of the authorities, so it also confirms natural and established rights; as Paul also says, 1 Tim. 1, 9: Lex est injustis posita (the law is given to the unjust). And there is no doubt that every father is obliged, according to his ability, to protect his wife and child against public murder. And there is no difference between a private murderer and the emperor, if he does unjust violence outside his office, and especially public or notorious unjust violence; because public violentia (violence) cancels all obligations between the subject and overlord jure naturae (according to natural law); likewise this casus (case): if the overlord wants to drive the subject to blasphemy and jdololatry. So Constantinus has his covenant
568 L- 54' 221.222. i. Fourth Concern of the Theologians at Wittenb. v. d. Gegenwehr. W. X. 668-670. 569
The king's brother-in-law, Licinius, was overdrawn because he did not want to let go of the tyranny, even though Licinius alone practiced such tyranny in his part.
4 All this, as told, is without doubt right and Christian. We are also obliged to confess this in all danger and in death. But all this is to be understood from the defension. How can a man use his body and this poor life in a higher and more praiseworthy way than for such a service to God, for the salvation of divine honor and the protection of poor Christianity? as David, Ezekiel and other holy kings and princes did. These things are worth risking life and limb for.
(5) The other question is: whether the defensor (defender) is obliged to wait until his enemy attacks? Here is our answer: If the eight is publicized against one or more confederates, then the enemy has indicated bellum (declared war), and the defensor may prevent and advance, as such is natural and written.
This is because of the prescribed rule that the gospel does not forbid, but confirms the authority and natural right of the authorities. For everyone understands that, if the eight is publicized, strife has already begun, and thus the outlaws are permitted to do everything that enemies can do against enemies. Yes, it is even more: the exbannitis (banished) and outlaws are already deprived of their status and dignity, so that not all enemies can be considered outlaws.
6 Although this is true, it is not for us to conclude that we should begin immediately; rather, let the gentlemen consider for themselves whether it is useful, and whether there are not other ways in which this can be done. At the same time, we are all obliged to call upon God to grant grace, peace and victory, and the people should be earnestly exhorted to such prayer and correction.
Martinus Luther. Justus Jonas. Martinus Bucerus. Philip Melanchthon.
k. Letter to a citizen of Nuremberg asking whether it is possible to enter into an alliance against the emperor's unjust authorities with a clear conscience etc.
March 18, 1531.
Grace and peace in Christ, honorable, prudent, dear Lord and friend. In response to your written question: whether one may, with God and a good conscience, enter into a union against Imperial Majesty's unjust and violent actions, this time, after I am almost weak to write much, is my brief opinion:
First of all, we have left such a matter to the jurists; where they find, as some think, that imperial rights in such a case teach resistance as an emergency defense, we cannot endure the secular law. For we, as theologians, must teach that a Christian should not resist, but suffer everything, not even the remedy: vim vi repellere licet (i.e. it is permissible to drive out violence with violence).
If the lawyers have the right that a Christian may resist, not as a Christian, but as a citizen or membrum corporis politici (member of the political body), we let it happen. We speak de membris Christi et corporis ecclesiastici (of the members of Christ and of the ecclesiastical body); otherwise we know well that a Christian as a citizen or membrum politici corporis may wield the sword and secular office; of this we have often written. But that we should give counsel for such resistance to the membro politico, our office does not suffer that, nor do they know their right; they must take it on their conscience themselves and see whether they have the right to resist the authorities in that case as membra corporis politici. Where such a right is invented, the covenant has already been sei-
Nevertheless, it does not behoove us theologians and is dangerous to our conscience to advise a covenant, for we do not know the hearts of the people, whether they do not begin such a covenant on the consolation of men. Just as in the prophets almost many covenants are condemned for seeking human comfort and defiance in them, which I do not advise, for it does not end well; for which reason I must also place it in every man's conscience. For it often happens that a man has a good cause and right, and yet loses, because he relies more on men than on God. In short, it is not enough to be right, but there must also be happiness and prosperity, which God also so
must be given, as the right, and not men, as Proverbs 8:14 says: Meum est consilium, et meus est successus (Mine is both, counsel and success). But what is begun on the right trust of God is successful, even if it were error and sin; just as it is not successful on the trust of men without God, even if it were right and vain right. For God also wants to have His glory in all our doings, lives and sufferings. I do not know and cannot write more now. E. E. wanted to take such things in advance. Hiemit GOtt befehlt, Amen. At Wittemberg, Saturday after Gertrudis, Anno 1531.
Martinus Luther, manu propris.