Feb. 15, 1531.
Optimo viro Lazaro Spenglero, apud Nuernbergenses a literis secretissimis, amico et fratri suo (i.e. to the honorable and wise Lazarus Spengler, Privy Councillor at Nuremberg, his dear friend and brother).
1. G. & P. (i.e. Gratia et pax, Grace and Peace.) Careful, dear Lord and friend! Magister Veit has informed me of your concern, how our speech complains to you, that they boast, as if we had revoked the previous advice, that one should not resist your emperor.
Now I am not aware of such revocation. But it happened that they sharply disputed with us in Torgau. That is why some of them wanted to know and do what they thought was right, without asking us; we had to let that happen. But since we finally insisted that the legal sentence: vim vi repellere licet (i.e. it is permitted to expel force with force) would not be enough, as we had also previously laid it in the council, they brought forth that the imperial law permitted to resistere potestati in notorie injustis violenter (i.e. in notoriously unjust resisters).
We said that we did not know whether this was the right thing to do.
(3) For if the emperor had thus entangled and bound himself, we would have let him remain, and they would have watched. Because our teaching says: Date Caesari, quae sunt Caesaris. Et Caesaris sit, sibi resistendum esse in notorie injustis (Pray to Caesar what is Caesar's.). And it is of the emperor that one must resist him in notoriously unjust things), we would not have his right to change nor to master, and things would remain on this syllogismo (reason conclusion): Quicquid statuit Caesar, seu lex Caesaris, est servandum. Sed lex statuit resistere sibi in tali casu. Ergo resistendum est etc. Nunc majorem nos hactenus docuimus: quod sit obediendum gladio in rebus politicis, Sed minorem nos neque asserimus, neque scimus. Quare nec concludam; sed ad Juristas hoc totum rejecimus, ut ipsi videant, nos neque statuere, neque consulere, neque impellere aut urgere volumus, nisi majorem hanc: Caesari est obediendum. Quia si ipsi minorem probaverint, de quo nihil ad nos, non possumus conclusionem negare,
qui docuimus majorem. Et sic non illo textu naturalis et divini juris (vim vi repellere licet, et aliis, quae consuluimus) resisteretur Caesari, sed novo jure, ultra naturale, sed politico et imperiali, quo suo juri Caesar renun- ciasset. At nos politico et imperiali juri non possumus detrahere usum et opus suum. Sic nos Theologi in nostra sententia mansimus priore, et posteriorem istam suspendimus, et juristarum probationem exspectamus, quam non videmus. Caetera Vitus. Festinanter 15. Februarii 1531.
Martinus Luther.
(Everything that the emperor has set, i.e. the emperor's law, is to be observed. But the law determines that in such a case one must resist it: consequently one must resist it etc. Now we have hitherto always taught the supersentence that the sword must be obeyed in political matters; but we have not asserted the subsentence, nor do we even know whether it is true. Therefore I did not want to conclude in this way, but we have referred the whole matter to the jurists.
m. Rathschlag D. Luther's, Melanchthon's and Bugenhagen's, whether a prince may protect his subjects against the emperor's or other princes' persecution, for the sake of faith, with war?
Doctor Martinus Luther.
1 This is my opinion. First of all, our prince has so far held himself that he neither condemned nor justified this matter as a layman; yet he was inclined and willing to yield to the prevailing truth. Because he rests in such a mind, he cannot take upon himself and wage war in this matter. For he is obliged to yield to the Emperor's Majesty and to capture and persecute in H.F.G. lands whom she wishes; for the Emperor is his lord with the approval of God and man, however godless.
2) On the other hand, if our prince wanted to wage a war to save this cause, then
First, that he publicly confesses that this matter is just and that he recants his previous impartial opinion.
Thirdly, that he does not wage war in the opinion that he is defending his subjects, but that he comes to help from a foreign country as a foreign friend. Thirdly, that our prince does this out of a special spirit and faith. For otherwise he shall give place and room to the superior in all ways, and die with the Christians whom he professes.
Fourthly, where someone in this matter, not by order of the emperor, but of his own will and iniquity, has overruled someone else, the emperor has overruled someone else.
If they were princes or others, they should do badly, as in other secular principalities, namely offer them the right and peace, and subsequently avert violence from their subjects.
Philip Melanchthon.
First of all, it is certain that no one can justly and fairly wage war in this matter, unless he believes that the cause is just and that it pleases God that it be defended with the sword and war, so that the conscience may not be moved when we already lose and are defeated.
Secondly, it is not proper for a prince to wage war without the consent of his country and subjects, from whom he has the land and principality. For it is not proper to burden the subjects with all kinds of burdens; and it is certain that the opinion and mind of the subjects is not that war should be waged on account of the gospel, for they do not believe and are not Christians. Therefore the prince should not wage war either. For they are princes of the heathen, that is, of unbelievers.
(3) Thirdly, if anyone would reproach me with the kings of Judah, I give this answer: that the Jewish people were commanded to war, therefore both their rulers and people had to wage war; for it was commanded them by the express words of God. Now our people have no command to defend and protect themselves; but they who are Christians must save their lives and limb for the sake of the gospel, and not allow themselves to be saved by others.
4 However, I will order others to discuss it. For I do not presume so much as to decide matters of war.
Johann Bugenhagen, Pomeranian.
Since in this matter, for the salvation of both others and our consciences, my concern is also sought, I am nevertheless too weak in these matters; but as in all of them,
Because I see that such things are also sought among others, I am not afraid of anything, therefore I say what I know.
(2) If a Christian prince is assaulted in his own person, and he is accused of doing something against the right faith or his own conscience, which after all is reported in the Word of God, such a prince may flee, but he will not deny it. Nor is it fitting for a prince to put his subjects in danger for his own sake. For he is not touched as a prince, but as a Christian; for why should he who has Christ himself lose everything?
(3) But if the subjects are attacked, and they desire to be protected, and call upon the prince for salvation to protect them with the sword, the prince wields the sword not in vain, but is quite sure and certain that the enemies have a wicked and unjust cause, as robbers and murderers, against whom is the law and justice of the sword. For they are not under the gospel, as St. Paul testifies in the 1st Epistle to Timothy. In the same way, a Christian prince does not act against the gospel, for he does not act like a Christian, but like a servant of the law and a protector of his subjects in a righteous cause according to God's order, as Romans 13:4 states. In this case, even a prince would not be a Christian, but a servant of the law, using all the law described in the way of the law. For true Christians must suffer injustice; but the servants of the sword and of the law cannot tolerate that someone is insulted and oppressed with injustice, otherwise they are guilty of such insult and oppression of innocent blood before God.
4 And if you ask whether a Christian people would call upon the secular sword for help, I answer thus: The right or perfect Christians, who are driven by the Spirit of God, do not protect themselves, except without molesting their neighbor. Where the subjects who are persecuted for the Christian faith say that they want to die for Christ's sake and do not defend themselves and defend themselves, I do not think that there are many of them.
576 E. IV. 442.443. IB. Rathschl. Luth., Melanchch. u. Bugenh. whether a prince etc. W. X, 676-681. 577
they are able to save the innocent; but where the authorities are not able, the innocent are strangled without the fault of the authorities.
(5) But where is it necessary that these things should be prevented by human suggestions, which I do not consider to be human? God the Lord will make a living beside temptation, so we should ask God to carry out our cause according to His mercy and to judge wherever He wills.
Then he will undoubtedly give ways and means either for victory against the enemies of the cross and gospel of Christ, or for blessed endurance, suffering and bearing.
Then unexpected advice will come to us from God, which we have never thought of. For God will help our conscience when it comes to action; for God began it, God will also lead it out and bring it to the end and complete it. You shall only say, Isa. 8:12, 13: "Fear not as they do, neither be dismayed: but sanctify the Lord of hosts; let him be your fear and your dread, and he shall be your sanctuary." "It is enough for every day to have its own evil," as Christ Himself says, Matt. 6:34. But let us follow our calling, for "the Lord is near. Do not worry," as St. Paul says, Phil. 4, 5. 6.