Offering "an Opportunity to Come to Terms" before Taking the Sword. Luther on Princes, Peasants, and Peace.

Martin Luther traveled in the spring of 1525 to Eisleben and witnessed the devastations caused by the Peasant’s War. Luther had been aware of the growing unrest, but, as is agreed in scholarship, his personal experiences during his travels made him realize the full-scale destruction of churches, castles, and houses, and people in the name of God.

In May 1525, Luther published a fiery pamphlet titled Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants. Luther exhorted governmental authorities to extinguish the violent outbursts with a sword, which Luther found a legal and God-given duty of governmental rulers. The pamphlet is a short but well-known document in scholarship discussing Luther’s political thought regarding authorities and violence, presenting the ideas of a reformer shocked by the violent sights he had recently witnessed. Luther refers to some biblical passages, such as Jesus’ words in Luke 20 to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and Romans 13 on obedience to God-established authorities. Luther found little understanding for rebelling against legal authorities, destroying the images, and violent actions, especially when conducted under the name of Christ. After condemning the violence of the peasants, Luther encouraged rulers to strike them down. However, a short passage he wrote before this reveals a more peaceful approach. Luther states, that a Christian ruler should proceed in a situation like this with fear, contemplate and pray to God, and offer the peasants an opportunity to come to terms, “even though they are not worthy of it.” Should this not work, only then the ruler must take the sword and strike the rebels down.

This paper presents a historical arch, examining the development of Luther’s political thought and theology behind the well-known example he gives in the pamphlet. The paper presents the theological work Luther built his argumentation on in the pamphlet. The paper also examines the shifts in the historical context behind Luther’s teaching affecting his theological connotations.

Three months before witnessing the devastation and publishing the Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants, a biblical commentary containing Luther’s Lectures on Deuteronomy was published. The Lectures, produced in 1523–1525, are a commentary on the Decalogue, examining topics such as fair governmental leadership, just judgment and punishment of crimes, and promoting peace instead of violence and war. Luther’s teaching follows a form of promoting faith and trust in God. Luther elaborates on how the ancient Israelites had God' explicit promise behind their violent actions to occupy the Promised Land. Luther is strict that the example of Moses and the Israelites is not by any means justifying violence for contemporary leaders. Even though Moses and the Israelites had God’s promises on their side, they were still obliged to offer peace before attacking. Luther saw this as a general maxim for promoting peace instead of violence, which is something that a Christian leader can learn from the text. 

The analysis of the biblical commentary sheds light on Luther’s teaching in the much shorter and much more often quoted pamphlet. Luther fully supports the rights of the governmental rulers to use force to put down rebellions, for a just and rightminded ruler must use a sword to punish the evil to protect the innocent. Luther argues in the Lectures that this kind of duty is not an easy or pleasant task, but something a just ruler must be prepared to do. With leadership comes plenty of burdens and difficult decisions, for a ruler must not seek favors and an easy life in a position of power.

To provide comparison and evidence to Luther’s theological argumentation, the paper examines Luther's Sermons on Deuteronomy from 1529. The Peasants War and the uprising threat of the Turks, not to mention Luther’s theological opponents considering the Sacraments, had affected a shift in Luther’s emphasis on the same biblical book he lectured a few years before. 

Through the examples provided by the 1525 lectures, the pamphlet, and the 1529 sermons, the paper presents how Luther taught in different contexts on obeying legal authorities and the rulers to interpret the Scriptures with the context in mind instead of strict legalism.

Through the analysis of the sources and the historical contexts, the paper provides theological insight into Martin Luther’s teaching on just war and violence and how to prevent and avoid them. Luther intended his teaching to be literal in a certain historical context, just like he taught that Moses should be understood literally only in the historical context of the Israelites. Luehter taught to interpret and read the biblical text with a strict understanding of the surrounding world to promote faith and trust in God among the people.

Examining the path of Luther’s theological argumentation in a wider context sheds light on his stricter and shorter pamphlets. Luther supported the legal rulers, whom he saw as instruments of God to protect the pious and punish the impious. Luther, however, never promoted violence for the sake of it. He condemned the violent actions of the peasants, which he found especially severe for being conducted under the name of God, and he taught the rulers primarily to seek for peaceful solutions. The ruler’s heavy duty to carry a sword was unpleasant but necessary. The theological framework for Luther’s thought is in his teaching on the Decalogue, built on faith and trust towards God. 

The paper presents changes in Luther’s biblical teaching related to the lived experiences in the 1520s. It proposes that Luther stayed true to his teaching on faith as a foundation for love and good works in societal and ecclesial realms. However, the context affects Luther’s teaching on how love is expressed to ensure the stability of faith in a changing political context with uprising threats. Luther promoted peace as the primary solution but encouraged the rulers to carry on their duty to protect their innocent subjects from violence with the sword. He acknowledged the troubles this might cause to one’s conscience and comforted the rulers for carrying out God’s duty in their difficult decisions in leadership.