January 7, 1527.
His brother in the Lord, N. Georg Spalatin, the servant of Christ at Altenburg.
Grace and peace in Christ the Lord. So many matrimonial matters are contending with us through Satan that we think to order these worldly matters to worldly judges. For hitherto, out of vain hope, I have given to men something other than human, namely, that they might be instructed by the gospel; but reality shows that men despise the gospel, and want to be ruled by laws and the sword.
2 The Gospel teaches us that parents should yield to children in proper requests, and children should be obedient to parents, on both sides with good will. This teaching is only among Christians. But because the ungodly now hear through the gospel that parents have authority over children, the parents go to them, abuse their authority, and become tyrants. Likewise, because the children hear that they are now permitted by the emperor and the pope to marry without and against the will of their parents, they abuse this in contempt of their parents; of which abuses and examples are many on both sides.
3 Therefore, in this case, you should take two things before you: First, the gospel, that is, that the daughter once again humbles herself and asks her father to give her son as a husband, either by herself or by others. If the daughter has a good will towards her husband, and the husband is honest, the father is obligated by the law of the gospel to listen to the daughter and give her to her husband. But if the father ever did not want to, the daughter has nothing to do against her tyrannical father. But you may resort to the other means, namely, to give the
Father, because he wants his daughter, who has a good will towards the N. and asks for that which concerns her welfare and piety, and according to the gospel he does not want to allow such in a fatherly and friendly way, he should let himself be directed to the secular, that is, to the imperial law, under which we live in the flesh; and so you will be discharged.
Now the old imperial laws set and order that the children shall marry with the knowledge, will and counsel of the parents, as also natural law teaches; but the pope, as a tyrant and end-Christian, has willed to be the sole judge in matrimonial matters and has abrogated the obedience of the children to the parents]. What the imperial law says in this case, however, is for the prince and the secular judge to pronounce and judge. For it does not behoove us preachers to deal with the stiff-necked or in matters of the stiff-necked, but only with the good-willed, the quiet, the peaceful, and those who, being ignorant, would like to be taught and instructed. But the hard and stubborn heads we refer to the imperial court, for there the stiff-necked are met with proper judgment and justice. Thus the emperor is a lord and protector, ordained by God, even of children against their tyrannical parents. Now, where the imperial law would not protect either, the child of the father shall tolerate tyranny. I remember that I had a booklet published about this. I am doing the same now in these matters. Those who want to follow me, I easily bring into harmony according to the gospel; but those who do not want to follow, I reject from the beginning the imperial law. So I am sure; for those who do not want to follow the gospel, they shall not enjoy anything from the gospel either.
But it is a ridiculous farce that expressions which read in the future time (e.g. accipiam te, I will take you) should not be binding. For all Germany knows that our language begins with the words: I will have you; I will take you, expresses and expresses the present sentiment and a presently given and meant promise. But if by these words the union of the bodies and the fulfillment of the promise is conceived as a future one, can the intention and the promise itself also be conceived as future? Certainly not; for the German words "ich will dich haben" (I will have you) cannot be interpreted in Latin in any other way than thus: Ego volo te habere, ober volo te accipere, even if you interpret it from word to word. Now the word volo, that is, I want, is a word of the present time.
6 This is what the usage of language demands. The lawyers, however, dream that "I will take you" is in German as much as the Latin Ero te accipere, or expressed with the future tense te accipiam, that is, I will take you; but no German understands by that expression a promise to be made in the future, but all understand it as one made now.
present promise. Moreover, when a father says: Dabo tibi filiam meam uxorem, that is, I will give you my daughter in marriage, this is a present promise of a present intention. For otherwise I do not see how any one could promise his daughter, if he would not express and assure his present intention and promise by a word which is future. For the word do, accipio, in the present time, that is, I give, I take, is rather a formula of the solemn conjugal union itself and denotes the real and personal surrender; and only incomprehensible and inexperienced washers can call this an engagement.
7. summa, the emperor must in this, as in all other matters, which is equity, so that he does not allow parents to rage against children and to be insolent, and again, children to spurn parents and to despise them. For us, who are to act with Christians, obedient and kind, where we want to be wise, these complaints do not bother us. Be well and pray for me. January 7, 1527.