1. whether to resist the emperor.
2. short list and summary of the concept of D. M. Luther from the warning to the Germans of the emergency defense.
3. from the deceitfulness of D. Luthern.
4. final speeches of the emergency defense.
6. another argument from the emergency defense.
6. D. Luther's brief concept on the warning.
7. whether to take revenge as well.
8. from the saying Matth. 5, 38.: Aug um Aug. etc.
9. the emergency defense.
(10) Whether to put to death a tyrant who acts contrary to justice and equity according to his pleasure.
11. D. Luther's concerns about the emergency defense to D. W. Link.
1. whether to resist the emperor.
(The first paragraph of this § in Lauterbach, April 3, Evening, p. 54.)
The question was raised: Whether it would be permissible to defend ourselves if the emperor took up arms against us? He answered: This is not a theological but a legal question. If he starts a war, he becomes a tyrant against our preaching ministry, but also against the secular regiment and household. There is no question whether one should not fight for religion. Yes, it is necessary to fight for the children and family. If I can, I will write an exhortation to all the world that they should defend their own; but this is my prophecy, that our princes will have peace, and I do not fear war for the sake of religion, but they themselves will sin against civil and domestic justice and invite punishment. It will be about the bishoprics and monasteries, for the emperor holds three bishoprics, Utrecht, Liège and Hildesheim, which he has offered to Brunswick; he thirsts and devours the church estates. Our princes will not suffer this, so they will raise their hoods over it.
(The following two paragraphs Cordatus No. 834. 835.)
If someone trespasses against me in my house, I am obliged as a landlord to defend myself, much more on the way, because neither the house thieves nor the robbers who camp along the ways do violence to us because of the gospel, nor do they attack us as preachers, but as a member of the prince, not as a
Member of Christ. Therefore, I will help keep the land pure as much as I can. In times of need, may I save a good journeyman, much more a prince his land.
But if I am attacked because of the word of God and as a preacher, then this must be endured and the judgment is to be brought home to God. A preacher should not take revenge, therefore I do not take a knife with me in the pulpit, but only on the way. Against robbers I would defend myself.
(The last three lines of this paragraph are omitted because contained in Cap. 37, § 93.)
(The following two paragraphs at Cordatus No. 381 and 382.)
It is said that the German princes are officials, therefore they could defend theirs against the emperor, if, after the concilium, the emperor was ordered by the pope to execute them. But I say, not at all. For I say that the princes are private persons against the emperor. But we will leave this to the jurists to discuss.
There are three kinds of government: despotic, civil and tyrannical. The despotic wants to have full power, as a householder has over his chickens, cows, etc., which he kills when he wants. Incidentally, according to civil law the servants are subject to the masters, so we are also subject to the emperor by certain laws, and on the other hand he is also bound by certain laws against us. If he transgressed these, he would become a tyrant by oppressing us against law and justice. Moreover, the emperor does not have as great a right over Germany as another king has in his
Rich, because he has neither coin, nor mines, nor customs, and if we theologians said otherwise, namely that one must not resist the evil, then one would speak, as the landgrave said: Herr Doctor, you advise well fine, but how, if we did not follow you ?
Item, Anno 1539, the 7th of February, was asked: Whether Christian princes also wanted to resist and defend themselves against the emperor, since he wanted to conquer and war against them for the sake of the gospel? M. Luther answered: "This question has often arisen, has been disputed, and has troubled many people, myself, Pomerania, Philip etc. But we will deal with it here recently in a few words, and say: First, in worldly affairs, scholars and jurists do not dispute it, but approve and teach to resist the emperor who exercises unjust power, because they say that rights permit such a thing; just as one should take a sword from an insane, foolish man, so that he does not do harm. Secondly, economy and natural law teach that a son may resist and defend himself against a foolish, delusional father who wants to harm him; but godliness and respectability teach that the son should suffer and be killed rather than strangle his father. Thirdly, reason also teaches that if the head is mad and senseless and wants to destroy the other members, he should be controlled, resisted and bound.
But in theology it is argued differently when one asks: Is it proper for a Christian to resist the emperor who exercises unjust authority, because the Scripture teaches that one should suffer injustice from the authorities? Rom. 13, 2. 1 Petr. 2, 13.
1) Answer: In the secular realm and body, the emperor is the head, whose body is every subject and private person's piece and limb, to whom, as a secular and civil person, the rights of emergency defense are left, even commanded and called; for since he does not defend himself, he is a killer of his own body.
2) Secondly, the emperor is not a monarch and is the only ruler in the German Empire, just as the king of France and England are monarchs in their kingdoms and rule alone.
But the Electors are at the same time secular members with the Emperor, and members of the Emperor, to each of whom it is especially incumbent and entrusted to care for the Empire, to promote its best, and to prevent and ward off harm, although not as the most noble and supreme head, like the Emperor. For although the Electors have equal authority with the Emperor, they do not have the same dignity and dignity. These same electors, as far as they are members of the empire and emperor, are secular members and not Christians; therefore they should not be silent in what concerns the empire and their office, but should be careful and do what their duty demands. As an example: Just as a mayor and rector do not govern the city and university alone, but have next to them councilors and collegiates, professors, who are in the regiment and keep them in check, persuade them and resist them: if something should be done that would be detrimental to the city and university, then they should certainly not remain silent nor watch, and let the heads do as they wish. In the same way, the princes and other princes of the empire shall also The princes of the empire shall also defend the emperor, because he wants to do something improper against God and rights.
Moreover, when the emperor deposed one of the electors, he deposed them all, which he should not be allowed to do. Therefore, before we finally answer this question: Whether the emperor should remove the electors or the electors should remove and kill the emperor, it has already happened. Therefore, a proper distinction must be made here, namely: A Christian leads two kinds of persons, namely, a religious or spiritual one, and the other, a civil or secular one. The believing or spiritual one suffers everything, neither eats nor drinks, does not beget children, etc., nor does not take on this worldly being or doing. The civil, however, is subject to worldly rights and laws, and is obliged to obey, must defend and protect itself and its own, as the laws command.
Now if a bad guy, regardless of what kind of person he is, wants to violate my wife and virgins, and watch me
I would truly put Christian 1) back and use the worldly person, strangle him in the work, or cry for help. For in the absence of authority, since it cannot be had, there is the law of the people, which allows one to call upon neighbors for help. For Christ and the gospel do not abrogate worldly rights and order, nor reprove them, but confirm and confirm them.
Summa, because the emperor is neither a monarch nor a lord who rules alone; but the electors are in equal power and administration with him, so that he does not have the power nor the right to make laws and orders alone: much less does he have the power, the authority nor the right to draw the sword and to overrun the subjects and members of the empire, unknowingly of the right, and without the prior knowledge and consent of the entire empire. Therefore, Emperor Otto wisely and well did and ordered that he placed the seven Electors next to the Emperor, 2) otherwise the Empire would not have stood for long.
This question was not difficult in the time of the apostles, for then all the authorities were Gentiles, not Christians: but now, because the princes are also Christians, or ever want to be, it is difficult to conclude; for a prince and a Christian are the closest relatives.
and best, so with understanding, honor and virtue-
1) I.e. the Christians.
2) Cf. cap. 27, § 35, zü end.
who are gifted above others, have the rule, as in Germany and the Roman Empire, and in Venice. Thirdly, Democratia, since many of the common man rule, as in Switzerland and Ditmars. Fourth, oligocratia, 3) where few of them rule, as in Erfurt.
Finally, one should also know this: Since the emperor wants to invade us and wage war against us, he does it not for himself, on his own authority, but for the sake of the pope, in his stead, as his liegeman and sworn servant, who would support himself to defend the pope's tyranny and atrocious idolatry. For the pope does not ask anything about the gospel. Therefore, if he disputes the gospel and starts a war over it, he wants to protect and preserve his authority, power and tyranny through the emperor. Therefore neither the emperor for his own person, nor for the sake of the gospel wars against us; but the person of Pabst, the godless archbishop, in order to preserve his abominations, wants to invade us and wage war against us. Therefore, one should not remain silent and sit still.
But since one would reproach and say: David, being chosen of God to be king, and anointed of Samuel, would not resist king Saul, nor lay his hand upon him: so shall we not resist Caesar. etc. Answer: David had his kingdom then only by promise, not in posse, that is, it was only promised to him, but he was not in possession nor in command. But here, in this matter, we are not fighting against Saul, but against Absalom, against whom David made war, and Joab killed the rebel Absalom.
Luther said: "He would like to argue about this matter, whether the emperor should be resisted and defended? Although natural and secular laws and jurists allow it, it is a dangerous question among theologians for the sake of the saying Matth. 5, 39: "If someone strikes you on one cheek, hand him the other also"; and 1 Petr. 2, 18: "You servants, be subject with all fear.
3) So Stangwald instead of Olicratia.
the Lord, not only the kind and gentle, but also the whimsical."
Therefore, we must be sure that we do not do anything contrary to God's word, and then be tormented and tortured in our conscience in such a dangerous matter. Therefore, one must properly distinguish a Christian from a worldly person, both of whom can be a Christian. For Christ does not abolish worldly authority and rule. If a murderer or highwayman wanted to kill me and take what is mine, I would truly need the political and secular person against him, and would not suffer his rage, but would defend myself as long as I could, I would take action. Therefore, this dispute is de facto, non de jure, what happens with the deed, not what should happen with rights. And it is not against peace, where counter- and emergency defense is permitted and allowed. But that a Christian may defend himself against his authorities is a matter of great concern.
He repeated and repeated again this question: Whether one would like to defend oneself against the overlord, who suddenly attacks one and acts against rights, also with a good conscience? Answer: The lawyers have played an evil game with the emperor, he has given away the sword, so that we have the handed over sword in our possession, gladium traditum possessorium. The emperor, however, has only gladium petitorium over us, must ask and seek it from us, since he wants to punish with it, because he alone can do nothing with rights, without the knowledge and unanimous consent of the princes, princes, and the whole empire.
These are not the times, as in the time of the martyrs, when Diocletianus alone ruled and tyrannized against the Christians. Now there is another empire, since the emperor rules with the seven princes, therefore his power is nothing without the seven; indeed, if one does not pollute, it is nothing. It is no longer a monarchy, since the regiment rests with one alone, as it did with the Turk. But if it were Diocletianus, and such a regiment, we would gladly yield to him and suffer. Nor do I hope that such a case will come to pass, nor that the emperor
If he were to become an Arian and publicly fight against God's word for himself, as an un-Christian and a pagan, then one should give way to him and suffer. Summa, I take the sword to the pope, not to the emperor; for the pope shall not be an authority nor a tyrant.
2. brief list of the arguments and summaries of Luther's concept on
the warning to the Germans, from the Nothwehr. 1)
First of all, the emperor has neither the right nor the power to command this, that is certain; and since he gives it immediately, one should not obey him.
Secondly: I neither stir up nor cause a riot, but forbid and ward off the same. Let them see to it that they do not cause one, because they mandate and command what is unjust and against God, for I cannot turn it away afterward, nor control and ward it off. It is in vain for them to say, "Behold, these are the fruits of schism, discord and dissension. They want it so, so let it be done to them.
Third, do not joke too much: if you fools make Luprian drunk, see that he does not feed you in the bosom, for he is otherwise thirsty enough and likes to be filled.
The fourth: Well then, if you want to win, bow your heads in blessing. As good a cause as you have, so happy victory give you God. I D. M. Luther, your apostle, have told you, and admonished you, as I have been guilty.
3. deceit Against D. Luthern.
You despise my teaching and want to see Luther in his words as the Pharisees did to Christ. But if I wanted to, as I do not want to, I would have a gloss that such resistance is not against the emperor, but against H[archduke] G[eorg]. And that a
1) This warning to the dear Germans, of which this is a summarium, is found in Walch, old edition, vol. XVI, 1959 ff.
The worldly man, subject and citizen of the empire is not a Christian. For it is not Christ's opinion that he would abolish and disturb the police, the secular government and the rights. O no; but that every man in his commanded office do what he is bound to do, without violation of faith and conscience: give to God that which is God's, and to Caesar that which is Caesar's: be not obedient in that which is contrary to God and his word. This rebellion of the princes now breaks out; for they say: It is not our duty to change anything without the prior knowledge and permission of the pope; he has our souls in his hand, let him do as he pleases etc. The wicked are not only satisfied that we teach nothing contrary to the holy Scriptures and articles of faith, but also want us to approve and praise all false doctrine, error, heresy, and idolatry, and to make ourselves partakers of all their past and future sins, and to condemn everything we have written and done that is good etc.
Let the devil do this in my place. If the priests were pious, they would not be allowed to use Luther. Absalom was a king, and David nevertheless did not recognize him for it, but drove him out. They also steal the church goods: what one has put behind them in faithful hands, they keep, and take love and gifts.
4. final speeches of the emergency defense.
First of all, our princes are not serfs.
On the other hand: The emperor is master of certain pacta and measures.
Thirdly, it is sworn to the kingdom, churl and princes.
Fourth, he swore an oath to them to preserve the kingdom in its dignity, honor, glory and justice, and to protect each one of them in what he has authority and right to do; therefore, he is not to be allowed, nor to suffer, to make it subservient and serf.
Fifth: One may well need the rights of good deeds.
The sixth: He softens cheaply and in all rights to the Christians.
The seventh: Our princes are bound by oath to the realm that they will faithfully uphold the realm's freedom and justice in political and secular matters and things, and that they will not allow anything to be taken away from them, nor will they give way to them.
Eighth: This trade is among equals, since no one is more and higher than the other; for the emperor as an emperor does not do it, cannot do it even with rights, but is driven, and forced by the pope and his bribed bishops and corrupted 1) bunch, the papists, to do it, just as if he were under the appearance of writing in Hispania.
5. other arguments.
First, in this case, a Christian does not stand against his authority, which is above him, but equal to him.
Secondly: He resists, as a secular person, subject, citizen and member of the realm, who is obliged to protect his people from unjust violence.
Thirdly: If a sovereign acts tyrannically, against the law, he becomes equal to the others; for he thereby abdicates the person of the sovereign, therefore he justly loses his right against the subject, per naturam Relativorum. For lord and subject are equally bound to each other, and are obliged to keep what they have promised and pledged, according to the common saying: faithful lord, faithful servant.
Fourthly: If a tyrant attacks and persecutes one of his subjects, he attacks and persecutes all the others, or one after the other; from this it would follow, if he should be allowed to do so, that he would disrupt, devastate and destroy the whole regiment and empire.
Fifth: He is earnestly commanded and bound by his duties, indeed, he has pledged, vowed and sworn with a bodily oath to faithfully keep above the police, laws, rights and orders of the realm and to administer the same.
1) In the editions: sworn.
The sixth: The rights are over a lord and tyrant, yes, more; for these are unstable, but always certain and constant, but a man is fickle and inconstant, follows most and most gladly his lusts, where he is not kept: therefore one is more indebted and obliged to follow the rights and laws, than a tyrant.
6. short concept of D. M. Luther on the warning.
First: It is not the emperor, but H[archduke] Georg's and the M[arkgrafen's] hatred and envy. Secondly: One should not be obedient to them, but more GOtte. Thirdly: He who is obedient is obedient to the devil, not to the emperor, nor to God. Cause: 1) Because it is not a common mandate, which would have been granted, decided and issued by the whole empire; because many princes and estates have not consented to it. 2) The Margrave spoke more than he should have and was ordered to. 3) The others opposed it and revoked it. 4) Duke Ludwig of Bavaria interpreted it differently. 5) It is an untruth and a lie that our Confession is confuted with the Holy Scriptures and has been mislaid. 6) They have not wanted to deliver their confession to us, nor have they publicly announced it. 7) They do not want to hear us, nor show us the cause, they have condemned us unheard and unconquered. 8) Will have approved all their things, and each one in particular, and pledged them to be right, will still defend even what they themselves have previously confessed with their own mouths to be ungodly and unjust. 9) And have condemned all of ours, and have neither changed nor punished anything in theirs. Therefore, all those who obey the emperor in such a mandate are guilty of murder, blasphemy, and theft. Above this, they do against the natural law and the order of the Holy Roman Empire; they force people to break up marriages, to rob parents of their children; against their will and the consent of the estates of the empire, they force people to attend false services, since no one should be forced to attend true services. All in all, they do as tyrants what they do.
not what they should and are obliged to do. But it is the Pabst's diabolical council and practices, want no peace, no truth, want to have only war, public lies and murders. We pray for it, but there is no hearing, we must be heretics and damned, always down with us, drowned, hanged, burned etc. as the world's sweep offering.
I condemn rebellion with danger to life and limb, honor and property, and would gladly silence and preserve you. If you stir up and start something, I will keep quiet about it and perish with you; then you will go to hell in the name of all devils, but I will go to heaven in the name of Christ. They want to abuse our teaching, but they may see to it that they do not go astray in it. Therefore, whoever is obedient to them and serves them not only persecutes God's word, but also makes himself a party to it and becomes guilty that so many souls have been lost and condemned until now and will be condemned in the future, of all sins and abominations in the papacy. The emperor does against his baptism, vows and oath, against Christ, God and his word. Perhaps the nobility and many warriors will not respect this, nor will they ask for it. But let them come, as wild untamed beasts and swine, that they may receive and get their deserved reward. They reproach us with having taken the monasteries and ecclesiastical estates; but their lawyers have taken much more of them than ours; they can neither hold nor possess them with right and good conscience. Let it be said that ours have taken a thousand monasteries and bishoprics, but what would it be but a drop or a grain of hops compared with these atrocious, diabolical sins, so now told? But of this mote they say, and they magnify it, lest their beams should be seen.
7. whether to take revenge as well.
To the saying where Christ says Matth. 5, 39: "But I say to you that you should not resist evil" etc., there are many different solutions and answers. Some say that there are private and particular, own
Revenge is forbidden, but it is also forbidden by Moses in the law, otherwise the kingdom and reign could not have existed. That is why Christ does not rebuke special, own, self-willed, but public, common, and official revenge, otherwise he would have taught nothing more than Moses. For Christ says to his own: But you are not like this. Here three kinds of solutiones and responsibilities are given. The first, as the scholars in schools call it, ab instantia, that one throws another in the way and resists, namely, that it must be understood from the self-powerful and private speech, otherwise it would be unacceptable, yes, Christ reproves the worldly government and the authorities, which his opinion has not been, nor is; but he confirms it, as established by God, Proverbs 8, 15. 16. 1 Mos. 9, 6. 2 Chron. 19, 6. 10. Rom. 13, 1. ff. Matth. 26, 52. The other, that a distinction is made, namely, that the gospel only has to do with spiritual things, does not concern itself with worldly things. The third, that Christ here does not forbid anything that Moses forbade, but only teaches against the abuse of the law that was then among the people. The last one is a bit too weak. The first and previous answers do not rhyme with the form and essence of the argument, but they indicate that it is neither appropriate nor rhyme.
I do not know, so that I may also indicate my thoughts, whether this may be the right solution and understanding, that Christ speaks plainly of the law, and teaches that the righteousness of faith condemns the worldly and civil or external human righteousness, so that they should not think that they are therefore righteous before God, that they do not quarrel nor right before the court; and if such were to happen, and let them take everything willingly, yet the righteousness of the law would not be the right righteousness that is valid before God etc. So that he teaches both against political and civil worldly righteousness, and against the righteousness that God demands in the law.
8. an eye for an eye, Matth. 5, 38.
This saying, when Christ says: "It was said to the ancients: an eye for an eye" etc., is to be
understand public vengeance and official punishment. As if he wanted to say v. 39: "You shall not resist evil," that is, suffer it. Item v. 40: "Whoever wants to be right with you in court" etc. There he means the authorities: "Will the authorities compel you by force? This is a force of the tongue; the other is and happens with the deed and the work.
9. emergency defense.
Nothwehr, said D. M. Luther, is absolutely urgent. Then H. asked him: Would he also want to defend himself if he were attacked by robbers? Yes, said the doctor, certainly, because then I wanted to be judge and prince and confidently wield the sword, because otherwise there would be no one around me who could protect me, and then I wanted to take the holy sacrament and have done a good work.
But if I were attacked as a preacher for the sake of the gospel, I would lift up my eyes to heaven with fallen hands and say: "My Lord Christ, here I am, I have confessed you, I have preached etc. Now is the time, I commend my spirit into thy hands; and so would die.
(10) Whether to put to death a tyrant who acts contrary to justice and equity according to his pleasure.
A private and common man, who is in no public office or command, is not to be killed, even if he could; for the fifth commandment of God says: Thou shalt not kill. But if I were to seize a man, even if he were not a tyrant, by my wife or daughter, I would surely kill him. Item: If he should take by force this man's wife, another man's daughter, a third man's land and goods, and the citizens and subjects should come together, and could no longer tolerate nor suffer his violence and tyranny, they would put him to death, as they would another murderer and highwayman.
11. M. Luther's concerns about the emergency defense, to D. Wenzel Link.
(This § is Walch, old edition, Vol. XXI, 1220, No. 790.)