Lutheranism was revolutionary because the established order, the Catholic Church, was removed in England, Scotland, Sweden and Northern Germany as a result of Protestantism. ‘In terms of late medieval political theory his ideas were revolutionary, for they challenged the theological assumptions which underlay the traditional medieval doctrine of the supremacy of the Church over the State.’
‘The cultural consensus of Europe based on universal participation in the Body of Christ was broken, never to be restored. Along with the Reformation came challenges to secular society. The nature and organization of power and government came under re-evaluation as well. No one could imagine religious change without it going hand-in-hand with social and political change, as indeed it did. ‘
On Secular authority intends to explain how far Christians owe obedience to secular authority and its sword. Luther attempts to create a more accurate interpretation of the previously unchallenged belief that all Christians and non-Christians have an unquestioned duty to obey the powers that be.
However Luther fundamentally respects the role of all powers and authorities and believes that it is a biblical principle to respect, acknowledge, follow and obey all secular rulers. Christians therefore cannot claim to only follow Christ and disobey secular authorities. Christians must follow their Lord and Saviour but at the same time be under the law instituted by the almighty God. Christians and non-Christians both need to be under the law. ‘Both the Church and the State must acknowledge their subjection to God and that each has a distinctive God given role.’
The aim of authority was to prevent chaos because of the ungodly and unchristian in the world. The sword was a symbol, emblem and substance of secular society and Luther explains that it has existed since the beginning of the world and is therefore legitimate. He states that ‘the sword is indispensable for the whole world, to preserve peace, punish sin, and restrain the wicked.’ Lutherans were Augustinian in their understanding of the nature of political authority as all were essentially sinful as a result of the fall. Politics was viewed as an instrument of power discipline, controlling the corruption of the human condition. Augustine’s view of obligation and duty was that ‘tyranny is never to be resisted but only to be endured.’
However, although maintaining and promoting allegiance to the secular realm Luther would in no way tolerate the authorities’ compromising people’s commitment to Christ and to God. He was not able to stand idly by and witness the denial of God’s word and blasphemy against God’s majesty. Initially Luther proposed that one should ‘resist not with force but with the confession of truth.’ He says that ‘you should thank God for counting you worthy to suffer for the sake of his Word’ but then states, ‘if you do not resist him and let him take away your faith or your books, then you will truly have denied God.’ He instructs individuals to say ‘I will not obey’ if a prince or secular Lord invokes laws which is against their conscience and would not be fulfilling their duty to God.
‘The spread of the Reformation led to a general upheaval in political thinking which was the direct consequence of his theology’. ‘It is doubtful how far Luther himself recognised the revolutionary consequences of his teaching at the beginning.’ On reflection Luther said, I simply taught, preached, wrote God’s word: otherwise I did nothing. And when, while I slept, or drank Wittenberg beer with my Philip and Amsdorf, the Word so greatly weakened the papacy that never a Prince or Emperors inflicted such damage upon it. I did nothing, the word did it all.’ ‘Luther was first and foremost a theologian. When he addressed political issues he did so as a theologian.’ ‘Despite their non-revolutionary aims, Martin Luther and his co-reformers profoundly changed central and northern Europe for good.’
Luther’s arguments were essentially conservative in responding to authority emphasising the duty of not obeying ungodly political authority. Luther preferred the principle of non-resistance. ‘Rebellion was, in Luther’s eyes, the worst of all possible sins, for it threatened the very foundations of civil society.’ All the early reformers, including Calvin, shared Luther’s belief in the divine character of government and the sinfulness of rebellion. Calvin maintained that civil government was a divine institution and that the church and state should cooperate whist respecting one another’s separate spheres. Secular government is a divine ordinance and of vital importance to Christians.
Calvin said that ‘those in authority ought to be valued and venerated by us for the sake of their high office.’ In terms of resistance against authority he says, ‘Christians are not only forbidden to avenge themselves, they are also commanded to wait for the hand of God, who has promised to avenge the oppressed and afflicted.’ ‘And make no mistake: it is impossible to resist the magistrate with also resisting God.’ Calvin’s theory of authority in fact seems to be endorsing Romans 13 rather than based on a revolutionary theory.
However, Thomas Jefferson’s motto that ‘Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God’ was one he credited as ‘unmistakably Calvinist’. In the Institutes, Calvin described a class of inferior magistrates who had a duty to restrain the unlawful wilfulness of Kings. Calvin argues that God raises up armed prophets to defend his cause such as Moses and Jehu. He therefore does not promote resistance of private men against authority but that tyrants should and could still be resisted.
The later Calvinist arguments were more revolutionary theories of authority (especially those developed in France after 1560) because they built upon the radical religious language of duty to formulate a theory of civil rights of resistance. In the second half of the sixteenth century ‘the principle of non-resistance began to be questioned by Knox and Buchanan in Scotland and Huguenot writers in France.’ Calvin’s ‘followers adopted his political and ecclesiastical thought to the circumstances of larger, monarchical states, usually in the face of determined royal hostility.
John Knox wrote The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women, (1558) which was a vigorous critique of the tyranny of "Bloody Mary's" reign in England, and a call to resist. He argued that it was people’s religious duty to uphold God’s law.
John Ponet, wrote the Calvinist document, A Short Treatise on Political Power in 1556. It was one of the first works out of the Reformation to advocate active resistance to tyrannical magistrates, with the exception of the Magdeburg Bekkentis (the Magdeburg Confession). He stated, the true believer was ‘not only permitted, but obliged’ to resist.
Christopher Goodman wrote, How Superior Powers Ought To Be Obeyed By Their Subjects: And Wherein They May Lawfully By God's Word Be disobeyed And Resisted (1558). He argued that it was both lawful and necessary some times to disobey and also to resist ungodly magistrates. He attempts to justify a Christian's right to resist a tyrannical ruler. Aquinas argued in a similar way in his discussion of tyranny. He suggested that in extremis there could be occasional resistance to established rulers. Goodman indicated that he had presented the thesis of this book to John Calvin, and Calvin endorsed it.
Theodore Beza, expanded upon Calvin's political resistance theory set forth in the final chapters of his Institutes. The Right of Magistrates Over Their Subjects (1574) was published in response to the growing tensions between Protestants and Catholics in France, which culminated in the St. Bartholomew Day Massacre in 1572. This text suggests that it is the right of a Christian to revolt against a tyrannical King. However, Beza stated if the inferior magistrates did nothing it was clear that each individuals must ‘go into exile or bear the yoke with trust in God’, otherwise a ‘thousand tyrants’ would rise up.
The anonymously written Calvinist document The Vindicae Contra Tyrannos was published to justify resistance amongst the Huguenot communities in France. It means A Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants or A Vindication Against Tyrants. Thousands of Hugenots were slaughtered in a systematic program initiated by the Catholic monarch. However The Vindicae also warned that if private men drew the sword against authority ‘they are seditious no matter how just the cause may be’.
The Calvinist George Buchanan wrote The right of the Kingdom among the Scots. He stated for the first time in defence of the Reformed Churches, a fully secularised and populist theory of political resistance.
The Dutch Declaration of Independence of 1581, was a Calvinist document that brought forward the idea that rulers are responsible to the people and can be deposed by them.
Resistance theories were not necessarily Lutheran and Calvinistic by nature. Michael Walzer, The Revolution of the Saints, 1966, argued that resistance theories were the product of a specifically Calvinist culture and mindset. Skinner however, views them as starting much earlier in medieval times, arguing against the priority of Calvinists in shaping the secular and populist right to political resistance. He maintains that it is misleading to look to sixteenth century Calvinist theories as the originators of radical resistance theory. Although Skinner concedes that the sixteenth century European revolutions were led by professed Calvinists, he argues that the justifying theories behind these actions were not specifically Calvinist.
For example Skinner claims that Buchanan was restating the ideas of John Mair (1467-1550). Mair was the channel of the radical scholastic ideas to the Calvinist revolutionaries. His pupils included Calvin, John Knox and George Buchanan.
Moreover Skinner sees the Calvinist theories as based upon the foundation of earlier Catholic political philosophy of the radical scholastics. Thus Skinner’s perspective asserts that Calvinist theories of authority were not as revolutionary as Walzer asserts as their origins were rooted in earlier political thinkers.
Although Luther and Calvin broke with the simplicity of Romans 13, the argument developed by Luther and Calvin laid considerable stress on the language of religious duty and the office of inferior magistrates. Emphasis was on inferior magistrates acting on behalf of the people against a tyrant rather than calling private men to arms. They were thus concerned to reinforce authority. Luther and Calvin did not seek to encourage rebellion against authority but were more concerned to preserve social order. They still fundamentally believed that resistance against authority was offensive to God. Nonetheless Lutheran and Calvinist theories of authority were revolutionary to the extent that Europe in the sixteenth century radically changed as a result.
Bibliography
Luther and Calvin, On Secular authority, Edited by Harro Hopfl, Cambridge Texts in the History of Political thought, (Cambridge University Press 1991)
John R. W. Stott, I believe in Preaching (Hodder and Stoughton 1982)
Robert Young, Luther and the Temporal Kingdom in Political thinkers, Edited by David Mushamp. (Macmillan 1986)
W. D. J. Cargill Thompson, Martin Luther and the ‘Two Kingdoms’ in Political Ideas, Edited by David Thompson, (Pelican books 1966)
Primary Sources and Works on English, French and American Political Thought,
Literature of Liberty, Scholastic Origins of Popular Resistance Theory, Quentin Skinner, The Origins of the Calvinist theory of Revolution. In After The Reformation: Essays in honour of J.H. Hexter. (Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Press, 1980, pp. 307 – 330.)
Lutheranism, http://www.wordtrade.com/religion/christianity/lutheranismR.htm
The Literary Encyclopedia Calvin, John. (1509 - 1564),
The Sixteenth Century,
Protestant theories of resistance, HS1007: Republics, Kings & People http://www.rhul.ac.uk/Educational-Development/Centre/learnwise.htm
Protestant theories of resistance, HS1007: Republics, Kings & People
Robert Young, Luther and the Temporal Kingdom in Political thinkers edited by David Mushamp, (Macmillan 1986) p. 66.
W. D. J. Cargill Thompson, Martin Luther and the ‘Two Kingdoms’ in Political Ideas, Edited by David Thompson, (Pelican books 1966) p. 35.
The Sixteenth Century, http://www.lepg.org/sixteen.htm
Robert Young, Luther and the Temporal Kingdom in Political thinkers, p. 71.
Luther and Calvin, On Secular authority, p. 29.
W. D. J. Cargill Thompson, Martin Luther and the ‘Two Kingdoms’, p. 37.
John R. W. Stott, I believe in Preaching (Hodder and Stoughton 1982), p. 25.
Robert Young, Luther and the Temporal Kingdom in Political thinkers, p. 75.
Lutheranism, http://www.wordtrade.com/religion/christianity/lutheranismR.htm
W. D. J. Cargill Thompson, Martin Luther and the ‘Two Kingdoms’. p. 44.
Luther and Calvin, On Secular authority, Edited by Harro Hopfl, Cambridge Texts in the History of Political thought, (Cambridge University Press 1991), p. 72.
Publications of Dordt College, Pro Rege http://www.dordt.edu/publications/pro_rege/crcpi/115756.pdf
Protestant theories of resistance, HS1007: Republics, Kings & People
Robert Young, Luther and the Temporal Kingdom in Political thinkers. p. 51.
Protestant theories of resistance, HS1007: Republics, Kings & People
Protestant theories of resistance, HS1007: Republics, Kings & People
Literature of Liberty, Scholastic Origins of Popular Resistance Theory, Quentin Skinner, University of Cambridge, The Origins of the Calvinist theory of Revolution. In After The Reformation: Essays in honour of J.H. Hexter. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Press, 1980, pp. 307 – 330.