Luther's struggle with radicalism had begun within a year after his
stand at Worms. He had always been consistently opposed to mob
violence, even when he might have profited by it. At Worms he
disapproved Hutten's plans for drawing the sword against the Romanists.
When, from his "watchtower," he first spied the disorders at
Wittenberg, he wrote that notwithstanding the great provocation given
to the common man by the clergy, yet tumult was the work of {97} the
devil. When he returned home he preached that the only weapon the
Christian ought to use was the Word. "Had I wished it," said he then,
"I might have brought Germany to civil war. Yes, at Worms I might have
started a game that would not have been safe for the emperor, but it
would have been a fool's game. So I did nothing, but only let the Word
act." Driven from Wittenberg, the Zwickau prophets, assisted by Thomas
Muenzer, continued their agitation elsewhere. As long as their
propaganda was peaceful Luther was inclined to tolerate it. "Let them
teach what they like," said he, "be it gospel or lies." But when they
began to preach a campaign of fire and sword, Luther wrote, in July
1524, to his elector begging him "to act vigorously against their
storming and ranting, in order that God's kingdom may be advanced by
word only, as becomes Christians, and that all cause of sedition may be
taken from the multitude [Herr Omnes, literally Mr. Everybody], more
than enough inclined to it already."
When the revolt at last broke out Luther was looked up to and appealed
to by the people as their champion. In April 1525 he composed an
_Exhortation to Peace on the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants_,
[Sidenote: Exhortation to Peace] in which he distributed the blame for
the present conditions liberally, but impartially, on both sides,
aristocrats and peasants. To the former he said that their tyranny,
together with that of the clergy had brought this punishment on
themselves, and that God intended to smite them. To the peasants he
said that no tyranny was excuse for rebellion. Of their articles he
approved of two only, that demanding the right to choose their pastors
and that denouncing the heriot or death-duty. Their second demand, for
repeal of some of the tithes, he characterized as robbery, and the
third, for freedom of the serf, as unjustified because it made
Christian {98} liberty a merely external thing, and because Paul had
said that the bondman should not seek to be free (I Cor. vii, 20 f).
The other articles were referred to legal experts.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account