He is very bitter about the Landgrave’s purpose of making the marriage
and the Wittenberg “advice” public, should need arise. The fate of
the latter was, in fact, his chief anxiety. “In this the Landgrave
touches us too nearly, but himself even more, that he is determined
to do ‘_palam_’ what we arranged with him ‘_clam_,’ and to make of
a ‘_nullum_’ an ‘_omne_’; this we are unable either to defend or
to answer for, and we should certainly come to high words.” The
last sentence was, however, felt by Luther to be too strong and he
accordingly struck it out of the letter.
He also says that the Landgrave’s appeal to his sermon on Genesis
would be of no avail, because he (Luther) had taught, both previous to
and after it, that the law of Moses was not to be introduced, though
some of it “might be used secretly in cases of necessity, or even
publicly by order of the authorities.” But advice extorted from him
in Confession by the distress of a suffering conscience could “not be
held to constitute a true precedent in law.” He here touches upon a
thought to which he was to return in entirely different circumstances:
Neither the preachers, nor the Gospel, lay down outward laws, not
even concerning religion; the secular authorities are the only
legislators; ecclesiastical guidance comprises only advice, direction
and the expounding of Scripture, and has to do only with the interior
life, being without any jurisdiction, even spiritual; as public
men, the pastors were appointed to preach, pray and give advice; to
the individual they rendered service amidst the “secret needs of
conscience.”[103]
He thereby absolves himself from the consequence apparently involved
in the step he had taken, viz. the introduction of polygamy as a
“general right”; it does not follow that: “What you do from necessity,
I have a right to do”; “necessity knows no law or precedent,”
hence a man who is driven by hunger to steal bread, or who kills
in self-defence is not punished, yet what thus holds in cases of
necessity cannot be taken as a law or rule. On the other hand, Luther
will not listen to the proposal then being made in Hesse, viz. that,
in order to counteract the bad example, a special edict should be
issued declaring polygamy unlawful as a general rule, but allowable
in an exceptional case, on the strength “of secret advice given
in Confession”; on the contrary, it would be far better simply to
denounce polygamy as unlawful.
Hence if the Landgrave, so Luther concludes, “will not forsake the
sweetheart” on whom “he has so set his heart that she has become a need
to him,” and if, moreover, he will “keep her out of the way,” then “we
theologians and confessors shall vindicate it before God, as a case
of necessity to be excused by the examples of Genesis. But defend it
before the world and ‘_iure nunc regente_,’ that we cannot and shall
not do. Short of this the Landgrave may count upon our best service.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account