Comm8–RNE5: Luther on oppressors; Münster; French Revolutions: 1st & 2nd

 

    This continues from Part 7 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a series presenting a new translation of C.F.W. Walther's Communism and Socialism from 1878. — Now us Lutherans are given Martin Luther's sharp warning about why we are not to be misled into taking sides with the unjust rich, or those who oppress.  Luther's warning is much sharper against oppressors than the Communists, for he is speaking spiritually, not in a worldly way. One would think the Communists would even promote Luther for this… but of course they know nothing of the spiritual. 

      Then Walther begins his history of our modern world that is so much affected by the French Revolutions.  This extensive history is largely why I have spent so much time inserting images from Wikipedia and from other web sources, to bring History to an understandable level, for which Walther is the master teacher.  — The current leaders of racial unrest in America, according to a report, have dropped their goal of abolishing marriage and family. Their evident hatred of these institutions only mirrors those of the disastrous French Revolution as seen below. However today's agitators may attempt to mitigate their ideology, they have tipped their hand. They are open Communists, even by their own admission, and care only about this ideology. — My apologies to the reader for such lengthy blog posts and it is hoped the inconvenience may be overlooked for the benefit of learning from history.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Translation of Walther's 1878 Communismus und Socialismus by BackToLuther primarily using DeepL online translation service; highlighting and bolding are my emphases, red text within square brackets [] are my comments, underlining is Walther's emphasis. Red highlight indicates omitted in 1947 translation.

C.F.W. Walther's Communism and Socialism, (Part 7, p. 29-33)

So Luther writes at the very beginning of this writing: “We have no one on earth to thank for this disastrous rebellion, except you princes and lords, and especially you blind bishops and mad priests and monks, whose hearts are hardened, even to the present day. You do not cease to rant and rave against the Holy Gospel, even though you know that it is true and that you cannot refute it. In addition, as temporal rulers you do nothing but cheat and rob the people so that you may lead a life of luxury and extra vagance. The poor common people cannot bear it any longer.” [StL 16, 46, § 46; AE 46, 19]

Luther was no flatterer of the princes. He had no fear of their wrath, for he felt deeply that he was [1947-42] called by God, after a long time in which lies had triumphed, to speak the truth, not only to the poor people, but also to the big Jacks [großen Hansen], as he called them. — So he continues:

“The sword is already at your throats, but you think that you sit so firm in the saddle that no one can unhorse you. This false security and stubborn perversity will break your necks, as you will discover. I have often told you before to beware of the saying, in Psalm 107 [:40], “Effundit contemptum super principes,” “He pours contempt upon princes.” [Job 12:21] You, however, keep on asking for trouble and want to be hit over the head. And no warning or exhortation will keep you from getting what you want. Well, then, since you are the cause of this wrath of God, it will undoubtedly come upon you, unless you mend your ways in time. … For you ought to know, dear lords, that God is doing this because this raging of yours cannot, will not, and ought not be endured for long. You must become different men and yield to God’s word. If you do not do this amicably and willingly, then you will be compelled to do it by force and destruction. If these peasants do not compel you, others will. Even though you were to defeat them all, they would still not be defeated, for God will raise up others. It is his will to defeat you, and you will be defeated. It is not the peasants, dear lords, who are resisting you; it is God himself, to visit your raging upon you…  If it is still possible to give you advice, my lords, give way a little to the will and wrath of God. A cartload of hay must give way to a drunken man—how much more ought you to stop your raging and obstinate tyranny and not deal unreasonably with the peasants, as though they were drunk or out of their minds! Do not start a fight with them, for you do not know how it will end. Try, kindness first, for you do not know what God will do to prevent the spark that will kindle all Germany and start a fire that no one can extinguish. Our sins are before God [Ps. 90:8]; therefore we have to fear his wrath when even a leaf rustles [Lev. 26:36], let alone when such a multitude sets itself in motion.”

He says “our sins”. A true Lutheran should also count himself among those who are to blame when such terrible [page 30] parties are emerging in society that have nothing else in mind but to turn everything upside down and drown the world [1947-43] in its blood. This is a judgment of God on the world. — Luther continues:

“You will lose nothing by kindness; and even if you did lose something, the preservation of peace will pay you back ten times. But if there is open conflict you may lose both your property and your life… The peasants have just published twelve articles, some of which are so fair and just as to take away your reputation in the eyes of God and the world and fulfil what the Psalm [107:40] says about God pouring contempt upon princes. Nevertheless, almost all of the articles are framed in their own interest and for their own good, though not for their best good. Of course, I would have formulated other articles against you that would have dealt with all Germany and its government. I did this in my book To the German Nobility [AE 44, 115-217], when more was at stake.”

He means to say: Such articles that do not worry about whether otherwise the whole world will perish, if only one class is helped, bring pure harm to the world. Luther says: “When I thought about the misery and distress of Germany, even in the civil sphere, I also thought about giving advice for the improvement of all classes without exception and not only for the improvement of the spiritual class in which I was, if one can speak of a spiritual class at all. — He continues:

“But because you made light of that, you must now listen to and put up with these selfish articles. It serves you right for being a people to whom nothing can be told. In the first article they ask the right to hear the gospel and choose their pastors. You cannot reject this request with any show of right.” … 

That is what Luther said to the Princes and the Counts, and today the people in Germany still have mostly not the right to call their pastors, but the consistory does it, or the princes and the nobles do it, nobles do it, and the poor people must then let themselves be charged with anyone who stands well with the Princes, whom they hope will only attack the sins of the people, and not the sins of the great. — Luther goes on to say:

“No ruler can or ought to oppose this. Indeed, no ruler ought to prevent anyone from teaching or believing what he pleases, whether it is the gospel or lies. It is enough if he prevents the teaching of sedition and rebellion.” [1947-44] 

The dear brethren see from this that Luther was definitely in favor of religious freedom. The authorities should not refuse the preaching of anything, Gospel or lies. For the authority is not appointed for eternal life, but for earthly conditions. They have no right to dictate what anyone is to believe, nor what they should teach and preach. They have the right not to tolerate that which is publicly taught and printed, which disturbs the peace of the state. [page 31] 

“The other articles,” Luther continues, “protest economic injustices, such as the death tax.14 These protests are also right and just, for rulers are not appointed to exploit their subjects for their own profit and advantage, but to be concerned about the welfare of their subjects. And the people cannot tolerate it very long if their rulers set confiscatory tax rates and tax them out of their very skins. What good would it do a peasant if his field bore as many gulden as stalks of wheat if the rulers only taxed him all the more and then wasted it as though it were chaff to increase their luxury, and squandered his money on their own clothes, food, drink, and buildings? Would not the luxury and the extravagant spending have to be checked so that a poor man could keep something for himself?… Both Scripture and history are against you lords, for both tell how tyrants are punished. Even the heathen poets say that tyrants seldom die a dry death, but are usually slain and perish in their own blood.54 Because, then, it is an established fact that you rule tyrannically and with rage, prohibit preaching of the gospel, and cheat and oppress the poor, you have no reason to be confident or to hope that you will perish in any other way than your kind have always perished… I, therefore, sincerely advise you to choose certain counts and lords from among the nobility and certain councilmen from the cities and ask them to arbitrate and settle this dispute amicably. You lords, stop being so stubborn! You will finally have to stop being such oppressive tyrants—whether you want to or not. Give these poor people room in which to live and air to breath. You peasants, let yourselves be instructed and give up the excessive demands of some of your articles. In this way it may be possible to reach a solution of this dispute through human laws and agreements, if not through Christian means. *)

————————

*) Erl. Ed. 24, 260. f. 262. ff. 283. 285. [AE 46: 19-22, 41, 42-43]

————————

With this punishment and admonition to the princes and greats of his time, Luther begins his writing, [1947-45] and what is mentioned is only a small part of it. Afterwards he also tells the peasants the truth, and shows by name that they have no right to call themselves Christians if they want to overcome violence by force and take the sword that God has not given them. Otherwise he will prove them right in many things.

That was in 1524 and 1525, and ten years later a similar movement arose in Münster in Westphalia, where the Anabaptists were gathering [Münster Rebellion]. A certain tailor, Joh. Bockhold from Leyden, who is usually called John of Leiden, threw himself on the throne and [Jan] Matthys, a baker from Harlem, became his minister. They now set up a horrible economy. But it disgusts me to paint a picture of this society. It was no different than when the devil himself held a wedding, — that's how horrible it was. Among other things, they introduced communal women. On June 24 and 25, 1535, all this came [page 32] to a horrible end. Although they stayed in Münster for quite a long time, they were finally driven out of their nests, were mostly miserably beaten to death, and the prisoners were then cruelly executed. This is how these Communist movements began and this is how they ended.

First French Revolution, Jacobin Club meeting, Babeuf, Robespierre

In the period that followed, we find little worth mentioning as far as the theory of Communism is concerned, until the time of the first French Revolution in the years 1789 to 1797; while the leaders of the first French Revolution, the “Jacobins”, still recognized the inviolability of personal property, a certain [François-Noël] Babeuf after the fall of Robespierre from the ruins of the annex of the same in 1795 [?], founded a Communist conspiracy. His doctrine was as follows: “Every man has equal rights to the enjoyment of all goods, which is based on common work. Any exclusive appropriation of the goods of land and industry is a crime.” Some participants also stated that the necessary equality therefore required “the destruction of the cities of the aristocracy, the prevention of inequality in knowledge and education, and the application of strict censorship to create lasting conditions.”

So one just does not believe that the execution of the Communist ideas would lead to great freedom. Rather, it would only lead to the most horrible slavery imaginable. For it is precisely personal property, which the Communists reject, that is a main condition for a man to be able to develop and move freely in this world. [1947-46] But as soon as a Communist state was established, then everyone would be told “You do this and you do that, you get this and you get that.” Such people would then all be nothing more than Helots, as among the Spartans. Of course, if one of them has not had his dear bread for a long time and finally comes among the Communists, to a loaded table, then he must think that he has entered the kingdom of heaven. Why? Because for now he has no higher needs for now. But it does not take long before he will say: “God should protect me from such conditions, I want to get out of this slavery!” That's where censorship comes in. No one is more zealous against censorship than the Communists. It is something terrible to them; they are horrified at the very word. Yet they themselves, as often as they have come to power, have instituted the most severe censorship, for they have ever feared that if their principles were to be disproved before the poor, ignorant people, they would doubt their correctness and their kingdom would fall to pieces. — Babeuf's principles are further stated as follows:

“The only authority should be the divisional agency, which should distribute the work and administer the products collected in the public warehouses to the communities and individuals. A supreme being should be recognized, but not a church, not priests, still not marriage and family.” The conspiracy was discovered and put on trial; Babeuf had [page 33] himself stabbed voluntarily, the rest were guillotined or burned. This happened in 1796.

Thus the first Communist movement in the course of the first French Revolution had failed. The next one [“Society of Seasons”] began in the thirties of this [19th] century. After the so-called July Revolution, new Babeufs arose in France. The most determined among them called themselves Egaliteurs [“Equalizers” or “Conjuration of Equals”], who declared that they wanted to do everything the same, who preached not only abolition of personal property but also marriage and family, and also atheism. As a result of an uprising in 1839 [by “Society of Seasons”], they split and lost their influence, and so everything they had initially achieved was lost. However, the seed of these spirits has remained and is now growing up. Now onto some of the other Communists of this century.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -  Continued in Part 9:  - - - - - - - - - - - -

Comm7-RNE4: Communists never achieved goal, only misery; Spartans, Pythagoras, Plato, Essenes, Catholics, peasants

      This continues from Part 6 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a series presenting a new translation of C.F.W. Walther's Communism and Socialism from 1878. — Walther begins his look into all of History in this installment and we are treated to a major lesson as he tells of the times even before Christ. History has judged Communism… of all ages. — Then we begin to hear Luther's reaction, and we get another lesson. — I made note below in red where Wikipedia articles omitted certain points that Walther makes. — There is a Wikipedia article on "Pre-Marxist communism" that covers some of the material Walther does below.  But Walther's history is much better as he covers it from a spiritual, i.e. Scriptural, understanding. Wikipedia does not.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Translation of Walther's 1878 Communismus und Socialismus by BackToLuther primarily using DeepL online translation service; highlighting and bolding are my emphases, red text within square brackets [] are my comments, underlining is Walther's emphasis. Red highlight indicates omitted in 1947 translation.

C.F.W. Walther's Communism and Socialism, (Part 7, p. 25-28)

We are at the fourth subdivision of the first part of our presentation. The first part reads: “No sensible person, let alone a Christian, can take part in the efforts of the Communists and Socialists, much less become a member of one of their associations, because they are against reason, nature and experience.” There it says then:

4. It is a matter of experience that the Communists never achieved their goal and only caused misery and heartbreak. [page 26]

All the beautiful fantasy pictures that the Communists create of the future are of no use, nor is the representation of the golden age that will come when they have finally organized the world. History must decide. But history has judged Communism. And there the word of Schiller can probably be applied, which is admittedly used by him in a godless sense: “World history is the judgment of the world.” Yes, indeed, there are things that are already judged by history, and to these belong also these new systems, which are, however, already old.

Spartan theater,

Pythagoras, 

Plato

So if we go back in history, we find the first state that was reasonably Communist was that of the Spartans. There was general distribution of goods, but I doubt whether the Communists and Socialists will regard the Spartans as their real ancestors, because in addition to their Communist institutions they also had slavery, and a horrible one at that. So-called Helots had to work in agriculture, trade and the arts, and a Spartan of high nobility had nothing to do with any of these. He did nothing but the craft of war. So the Spartan was obviously not a truly Communist state. It was 800 years before Christ, when Lycurgus gave Sparta this constitution.

600 years before Christ, Pythagoras gave his philosophical school a Communist arrangement. But I believe that the Communists will not recognize him for a true ancestor either. For first of all, no one was accepted into society until he had observed silence for years — and the Communists will hardly understand themselves for this. But secondly, the Pythagoreans did not want to organize the whole society of men [1947-39] according to these principles, but only regarded his principles as a higher standpoint on which a philosopher should stand; he regards nothing for the earthly, the visible, but only regards the idea that was in his head.

400 years before Christ lived the famous philosopher Plato. Plato wrote a book which is explicitly about the state, about the republic. In it he also says that the most beautiful and perfect form of the republic is the Communist one. But strangely enough, he demanded that only the higher classes should not have private or personal property; the people, on the other hand, should not be organised in a Communist way. If one today wants to speak of an unworkable theory, one usually says: “Oh, that is a Platonic idea,” or: “This is the Platonic Republic!” Even in our Lutheran symbolical books, the word appears in the article about the Church [Ap VII/VIII “Of the Church”, 20: “Neither, indeed, are we dreaming of a Platonic state…”], because the enthusiasts imagined the church as a Platonic republic, whose description looks beautiful on paper, but which in reality cannot be carried out. [page 27]

Essenes
Monks and Nuns
Müntzer

200 years before Christ we finally find among the Jewish people the sects of the Essenes, who also lived together in community of property. But even they had no intention of recommending this constitution to the whole world, as our Communists do. They did not mean that this constitution would bring happiness to the people, but on the contrary, they wanted to live in this community of property in order to earn something by their renunciation before God. They did it out of self-righteousness, out of false holiness.

As far as the first Christians are concerned, we will find an opportunity to speak about them in the second main part, and we will see that the first Christians were not at all, as some have tried to pretend, also for Communism.

In the Roman Catholic Church there is a strong Communist tendency; for all orders of monks and nuns are built on Communist principles. But even our Communists will hardly ever call on them. The Roman monks and nuns also say explicitly that they went to the monastery not so that they could participate in the general happiness, but rather because they were running away [1947-40] from the happiness of the world, because they were leading a life of self-denial, because they wanted to attain a higher level in heaven by this way of living. So these too do not belong here.

It may well be said that it is only at the time of the Reformation that we see that Communism, as it is now, flourished somewhat and was already stirring. The first Communist to show himself at the time of Luther was Thomas Müntzer, a Lutheran preacher, a very talented man, but an enthusiastic and at the same time desolate character. History tells us the following about him:

In 1524, a Lutheran preacher in Thuringia, named Thomas Müntzer, appeared with Communist principles, which he summarized in the short words: “Omnia simul communia”, which he described in German as: “All things shall be common and shall be distributed to everyone according to need upon occasion; and whichever Prince, Count or lord will not do so, and being forewarned, their heads shall be cut off or hung.” *) He travelled around Germany and Switzerland, fanned the flame of revolt everywhere, carrying out this theme, returned to Thuringia, took possession of the city of Mühlhausen, had cannons cast in the Franciscan monastery, issued a proclamation to all the princes, calling on them to abdicate, finally gathered a bunch of 8000 men of peasantry, plundered the monasteries and the houses of the rich, and finally, after the peasants had refused the offer of mercy if they turned over the ringleaders, he gave the princes near Frankenhausen a battle under the chant: “Now we pray the 

————————

*) Luther, W1. XVI, 157 ff. [St. L. ed., 16, 125, § 22; not in AE; “The confession of Thomas Münzer…”]

———————— [page 28]

Holy Spirit”, but was beaten miserably. His whole army was wiped out, about 7000 perished, he himself was captured and executed. This was the beginning and the end of the first Communist movement at the time of the Reformation. [Münzer: Father of modern Communism]

During the same time a peasant uprising [Peasant Revolt] in Swabia caused by Communist ideas was also staged. [see “Twelve Articles”] They had simply misunderstood Luther's teaching on Christian freedom. What Luther had preached about freedom in the kingdom of God was also applied to the kingdom of this world. The peasants had their demands set out in “Twelve Articles” by a preacher. In them they demanded, among other things, free [1947-41] hunting, free fishing, free wood cutting, freedom from bondage, compulsory labor, etc.; but without waiting for the articles to be accepted, they roamed the land scorching, burning and murdering, storming and destroying castles and monasteries; everything wearing spurs had to die. [Again, this was not reported in the Wikipedia article] They caused a terrible bloodbath, some of it in the most cruel way. Count Ludwig von Helfenstein was driven into the peasants’ spear to the sound of drums and shawms. His wife, who kneeled down with her little son before the peasants and begged for mercy, was carried away on a dung cart under mockery and derision. Many of the nobility bowed down.

But even a Götz von Berlichingen, their captain, could only endure it for 8 days because of the atrocities that occurred. 179 castles and 28 monasteries burst into flames. All of Upper Germany bowed down. At last the princes had the courage to take action, and the end was that about 100,000 peasants perished miserably, partly in war, and partly were executed, and their lot became all the harder.

How Luther felt about this movement can be seen from a text that he published about it: “Admonition to Peace, A Reply to the Twelve Articles of the Peasants in Swabia.” [StL 16, 45-71; AE 46, 3-43] The peasants themselves had sent him a request, asking him to give his judgment; for they had seen how he had scourged all oppression, tyranny, and injustice. So they also hoped that he would stand on their side, and to some extent Luther did. For in the writing mentioned he first takes the princes and prelates, nobles and rich, and shows them that they, and no one else, are actually to blame for this misery. — This is a strong warning to us Lutherans of the present time that we must not allow ourselves to be misled when we see that the Communists and Socialists are not acting rightly in taking sides with all those against whom this struggle is being waged, without exception; for truly, if justice and love had always reigned in the world, such agitation would never have occurred. But injustice is the source of it; only that is wrong, that one should go too far and not take the right means to bring about better conditions. — [page 29] 

- - - - - - - - - - - - -  Continued in Part 8:  - - - - - - - - - - - -