Schoolwork: Essay on the German Peasant's War of 1525 and Martin Luther's Response

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDIxDJRRWlQ&feature=player_embedded
I love the inMomentum soundtrack. It was also the soundtrack to my writing, so that's why it's relevant. This song is a great one, along with things like introMentum, Flux, and Zoned In.

So, considering the general success that was my previous essay here (which, by the way, got a 94%!), I figured I'll upload another essay. And then another tomorrow, because I had to write TWO yesterday.
This one is for my History of Early Modern Europe course again, which moved from the Renaissance into its Reformation stage. This essay is based upon three documents: the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants, Martin Luther's Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants, and Martin Luther's Concerning Governmental Authority. All of these were contained within a collection book called The Protestant Reformation, edited by Hans J. Hillerbrand.
The  prompt was:

The Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants (1525) uses many of Luther’s evangelical slogans in its list of grievances, yet Luther strongly rejected the demands of the German peasants and criticized their activities during the Peasant’s War.  What were the grievances of the German peasants and why did Luther reject them so strongly?

In addition to the text of the Twelve Articles, you should include a discussion of at least two (2) of the following three treatises from the Hillerbrand reader in your answer:  Luther’s Concerning Governmental Authority, Luther’s Friendly Admonition to Peace, Luther’s Freedom of a Christian. You may want to begin with a discussion of Luther’s writings, or present them after you have explained major peasant grievances. Be sure to comment on areas of agreement and disagreement (conflicting evidence and opinions) among the texts that you use.

So here it is, double-spaced as I typed it. Enjoy - maybe you learn something, maybe you have something to add, maybe you tell me how I'm an idiot or bad at writing (hopefully with how to not be those things), I'd love to hear from you regardless.
Note: I'm providing this of my own volition for the general information of others. This is NOT to be used by others without citing me (if you're citing me, stop what you're doing and go buy the book and cite the appropriate areas of that).

HIST260 – Essay 2, Protestant Reformation

            In the years leading up to 1525, unease was growing through the German regions of Europe. With the publication of Martin Luther's Freedom of a Christian in 1520, Luther's ideas were spreading faster than ever through the continent, and calls for reform were spreading with them. Alternate and extrapolated takes on Luther's works, such as those produced by Zwingli in Switzerland, also began cropping up. All of this reformation fever started to stir the emotions of the peasants all over the German countryside. These German peasants, influenced strongly by Luther's writings on freedom and devotion to Scripture, began to draw together their arguments against the lords and nobility that ruled over them. When they eventually produced this document, known as the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants, in 1525, the nobility and the peasant were immediately set opposed to each other, each preparing to fight for their argument. Luther, having caught wind of these articles and the grievances they listed, read through them and found them to be entirely misguided in the Christian way. The German peasants were angry about their oppression under the nobility and tried to use Scripture to back them up, but Luther argued back in his Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles if the Swabian Peasants that their methods were, while perhaps right and just, were highly un-Christian in their use of Scripture and their intention to fight for their freedoms.

            The grievances themselves are not particularly difficult to understand, nor are they particularly misguided from a secular point of view. The First Article concerns the desire of the peasants that their community as a whole would choose their minister to “teach us the holy gospel pure and simple, without any human addition, doctrine, or ordinance.”[1] This sounds like a fairly straightforward Lutheran concept, especially the desire to learn directly from the Word of God. As an aside, the latter segment of the quote may be interpreted as an instance of negative scriptural principle similar to that argued for by Zwingli, though the rest of the document is not particularly Zwinglian. The Second Article concerns tithes, requesting first and foremost that while they were willing to pay, “it should be done properly.”[2] What they desired was for any excess tithe not needed for the livelihood of the minister to be redistributed among the poor. This would prevent the gross excesses of church leaders that was being seen in the Catholic Church that contributed heavily to the start of the Reformation in the first place. The Third Article is very clearly an anti-slave message, saying that “It has been the custom heretofore for men to hold us as their own property, which is pitiable enough considering that Christ has redeemed and purchased us without exception by the shedding of His precious blood, the lowly as well as the great.” The following articles all express desires for freedoms, including, as Luther so puts it, “freedom of game, birds, fish, wood, forests; about services, tithe, imposts, excises, Todfall, etc.”[3] are all grievances against very specific worldly injustices to the people. Even more interesting than these, however, is the final article, which is not a grievance, but a special note claiming that, should any of their grievances be found to be in disagreement with the Word of God, they would be willing to recede the offending article.[4] Having delivered these articles and grievances against the nobility, Luther quickly wrote in response to them.

            Luther was decidedly not happy with what he saw. On the surface, the peasants were wielding Luther's ideas to create justice. But it was just that that Luther saw as a primary issue: the peasants “wielding” the ideas, as one would wield a weapon. Luther's immediate first response is one of satisfaction at the inclusion of the Twelfth Article, regarding their willingness to be humbled by Scripture should they be incorrect, primarily because Luther planned to make ample use of that article to try and get the peasants to revoke the entire dispute. Luther, extraordinarily well-versed in using the Word of God to prove things, set himself up to dispute every single claim they made, as well as the very fact that they were making argument. He does, however, continuously attempt to reaffirm that this disputation of their grievances is done in a helpful and Christian spirit – indeed, the title of his return paper includes the word “Friendly.” He also immediately makes it clear that any action upon these articles should and cannot be blamed on him[5], since indeed he was already a criminal in the eyes of the Holy Roman Emperor and didn't need yet more blame piled onto him. Luther had three major argument aimed at the document as a whole, but first his arguments against specific articles prove a valuable counterpoint to the peasants. Luther sympathizes more with the First Article than any of the others save for the last, though that isn't really saying much. Luther accepted the idea that if the rulers were unwilling to deliver a pastor, they should choose their own and support him with their own property rather than the ruler's, and that should the rulers “not tolerate the pastor whom they chose and support, then let him flee to another city, and let any flee with him who will, as Christ teaches.”[6] Rather than argue for the rulers to accept their chosen pastor, Luther advises simply doing so and not disobeying their lord. The Second Article Luther is entirely opposed to, claiming it to be “nothing but theft and highway robbery.”[7] The peasants are attempting to take the tithes and redistribute them when the tithes belong to the rulers, not the peasants. While he appreciates the idea of doing good with the tithes, he claims that they should only do so out of their own property, not by stealing it from what belongs to the ruler. The Third Article, to Luther, is a gross misinterpretation of Scripture. While Christ died for people's freedom, it was meant as spiritual freedom, not the freedom of the flesh that an anti-slavery message such as this holds up. Luther points out that “Did not Abraham and other patriarchs and prophets have slave?”[8] and that “a slave can be a Christian and have Christian liberty, in the same way that a prisoner or a sick man is a Christian, and yet not free.”[9] He declares the third article to be “dead against the gospel.”[10] All the following Articles (again save for the final Article) he deals with at once, declaring them matters more fit for lawyers to handle. He declares that “these things do not concern Christians, and that they care nothing about them.”[11]

            Luther's primary arguments against the peasants take three forms. The first is that they are blasphemers, by their own words calling themselves a “Christian covenant”[12], but their ideas and actions are profoundly un-Christian, as he makes clear with his other criticisms of the specific articles and of the movement as a whole. They take the name of the God in vain, violating the second commandment. He places flows into his second argument by claiming that “it is easy to prove that you are bearing God's name in vain and putting it to shame; nor is it to be doubted that you will, in the end, encounter all misfortune unless God is untrue. For here stands God's word, and says through the mouth of Christ, “He who take the sword shall perish by the sword.”[13] The very fact that they are willing and prepared to take up arms to defend their desires violated Scripture to Luther, and enforces this argument with many examples from the Bible, such as with the story of when St. Peter went to cut off Malchus's ear[14] or Christ's own words in Matt. 5 [: 39-41].[15] He argued that committing violence, even with justice on one's side, was horribly Un-Christian. He goes on to personalize his plea against the revolt and his emotional investment in his ideas is strongly evident when he follows up by stating that “leave out, I say, the name of Christian and do not make it a cloak for your impatient, disorderly, un-Christian undertaking. I shall not let you have that name, but as long as there is a heartbeat in my body, I shall do all I can to take that name from you.”[16] His third and final primary grievance against with the peasants is that they were being blasphemous by even daring to violate and disobey their lords. Despite the injustices that he repeatedly admits the lords are enforcing upon the peasants, it is not the peasant's place to challenge the lord. Suffering under the secular government is one of the tenets of being a Christian in a non-Christian world. They were not in a place to judge the behaviors of the lords and render judgment upon them. “If your enterprise were right,” he writes, “the any man might become judge over another, and there would remain in the world neither authority, nor government, nor order, nor land, but there would be only murder and bloodshed; for as soon as anyone saw that someone was wronging him, he would turn to and judge him and punish him.”[17]  Luther supports that claim with Scripture of course, referring to Paul and saying that “no one may be judge in his own cause or take his own revenge,”[18] which the peasants were surely trying to do.

            However, this is not the first time Luther has written of being submissive to the government. In a 1523 text of his, Concerning Governmental Authority, Luther discusses the very nature of government in a Christian context. He asserts that “the world is un-Christian,”[19], with Christians “always a minority in the midst of non-Christians.”[20] This may seem odd in a modern context (where often Christianity is the dominant religion), but Luther is talking only about that who are truly devout and following of the Christian ways, not simply Christian in name. As such, a common Christian government over the world is beyond improbable, either over the world or even a single country.[21] As such, both governments must be maintained over a given community: the first a Christian one, producing righteousness and goodness, and the second a non-Christian one to hold off external threats from other evil non-Christians.[22] Neither is sufficient on its own – without the Christians, the community would fall to evil as a whole, but without the non-Christian government, which is free to act with violence through the sword, the Christian community would be set upon by outside evildoers.[23] This stance on a pair of governments reflects upon Luther's own legal situation – set upon by the Catholic Church as a whole, Luther's beliefs prevented him from directly combating their attempts to arrest him. Instead, Frederick III of Saxony acted as his protector, shielding him within his land from the hand of the Catholic Church at large. Frederick, though, was not Lutheran, but Roman Catholic. Unburdened by many of the restrictions Luther placed on his actions due to his beliefs on violence, Frederick was free to protect him, forming the “non-Christian” second government that Luther is discussing here (as a Roman Catholic, Luther would not have considered him a true Christian by the standards set here). It had only been two years since he was taken under Frederick's protection when he wrote this paper, so it is very believable that he was thinking directly of Frederick as he wrote it. This belief in the necessity for a non-Christian government most likely was a driving factor for his argument against the peasants attempting to enfeeble and later combat their lords.

            Luther's work was powerful, but not enough so to halt the peasants in the end. They proceeded with their revolt, and Luther was extremely upset by this, producing another work striking out far more harshly at the peasants. If the multitude of criticisms contained here were in a document titled as “Friendly,” one need only imagine the scathing critique of the movement that would be contained in a paper titled “Against the Murderous, Thieving Hordes of Peasants.” The revolt eventually failed, however, and Germany continued to stand. The peasants believed it right to fight for their freedoms, but by branding their fight as a Christian endeavor fueled by Lutheranism, they invoked the ire of Luther himself, and it was perhaps his disagreement that led the peasants to be unable to support their cause.

---

[1]    "The Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants.," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 94.

[2]    "The Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants.," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 95.

[3]    Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 118.

[4]    "The Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants.," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 97.

[5]    Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 99.

[6]    Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 116.

[7]    Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 117.

[8]    Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 117.

[9]    Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 117.

[10]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 117.

[11]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 118.

[12]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 104.

[13]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 105.

[14]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 109-110.

[15]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 108.

[16]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 111.

[17]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 107.

[18]  Martin Luther, "Friendly Admonition to Peace Concerning the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 106.

[19]  Martin Luther, "Concerning Governmental Authority," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 75.

[20]  Martin Luther, "Concerning Governmental Authority," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 75.

[21]  Martin Luther, "Concerning Governmental Authority," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 74.

[22]  Martin Luther, "Concerning Governmental Authority," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 74.

[23]  Martin Luther, "Concerning Governmental Authority," The Protestant Reformation, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York City: Harper Perennial, 2009), 75. 

See you later - maybe I have something else to give, or else I'll just provide the other essay (which I'm even more fond of) tomorrow.

End Recording,

Ego.