ECONOMIC WEWS OF LUTHER

MsfwfhoDefirudhiA.
WCHIGAN STATE UNWERS‘TY
Robert M. Mifchoii
E963

LIBRARY

Michigan Stan:
University

 

ECONOMIC VIEWS OF LUTHER

BY

Robe rt M. Mitchell

AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of History

1963

ABSTRACT

The main purpose of this thesis is to present a detailed study
of Luther's ideas concerning economics. In making this study the
author has used both primary and secondary materials; however, the
major portion of this work is based on Luther's own thoughts as he
expressed them in his writings.

Since the time of the sixteenth century and the rise of what
has been called a capitalistic type of economy, the issues concerning
economic activity, as they relate to individuals and nations, have
sometimes been vehemently criticized as being wrong and unethical
by some people and defended with the same vigor and enthusiasm as
being legitimate and morally right by other people.

The economic thoughts and activities of men prior to the six-
teenth century had not been rationally systematized to the extent that
they have been in our own day. However. as opinions vary in the
twentieth century concerning economic ideas. so there were differ-
ences of opinion during the Reformation period of history concerning
this particular field of study.

Luther, as the first and foremost leader in the movement,
was called upon to express his views as they related to economics.

even as others were so doing.

Luther was primarily a theologian and a leader and guide to
the souls of men. Although he placed temporal activity on a plain
lower than that of the spiritual realm, he did set forth his thoughts
in many tracts and treatises dealing with different phases of life's
activities.

Luther comments on the subjects of usury and theft as early

as 1516-1517 in his Sermons On The Ten Commandments Preached

 

To The People Of Wittenberg. His first important reference to

 

questions relating to economics appeared in his Short Sermon On

 

Usurz, dated 1519. This was reproduced in his Long Sermon On

 

Usury in 1520, which in turn was reprinted in 1524 in what has
come to be most commonly understood to be his most important

work dealing with economic questions in his treatise On Trade and

 

Usury. However, this treatise, along with most of his other thoughts
in later life concerning economic problems. conform to those views
expressed in 1519 and 1520.

The basis for Luther's economic ideas rest upon the teachings
found in the Bible. All the direction necessary for the Christian in
this present world could be found in the Word of God.

Material wealth was from God and should be used for the
betterment of man's life on earth. Luther did not condemn all
economic activity nor did he condemn wealth per se. Judgment con-

cerning economic matters should vary according to circumstances,

and all economic transactions should be entered upon in the spirit
of Christian love.

It is possible for the student of history in his study of Luther's
economic thoughts to gain a broad knowledge of Luther's ideas as
they relate to other aspects of life as well. Some of the major ideas
involved would be his thoughts concerning government, society, man
and things sacred. With this View in mind the author would hope the
reader will have a better understanding of Luther as the leading
figure of one of the most dramatic periods of history, the Reforma-

tion.

ECONOMIC VIEWS OF LUTHER

By

Robert M . Mitchell

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS

Department of History

1963

A CKNOWLEDGE MENT
I would like to express my appreciation to Dr. John B.
Harrison for the time he has spent with me in the writing of this
thesis and also for his helpful suggestions and constructive criti-
cism. I wish also to express gratitude to my wife, Ruth, for her

patience and help throughout this study.

ii

TA BLE OF CONT ENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT . ........... . .......

INTRODUCTION........... ..... .. ......

Chapter

I.

II.

III.
IV.

V.
VI.

VII.

THE BIBLE AS THE BASIS OF LUTHER'S
ECONOMIC THOUGHTS ...............

THE CHRISTIAN MAN AND THE ECONOMIC
THEORIES OF LUTHER . ..... . . . . . . o .

TRADE AND USURY ......... . . . . . . . .
LUTHER'S VIEWS ON MONEY AND WEALTH . . .
LUTHER AND THE PEASANTS' WAR . ......
LUTHER, SOCIETY, AND GOVERNMENT .....

CONCLUSIONS. ......

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE ........... . . . . . . . .

iii

10

17

36

75

80

100

113

117

INTRODUCTION

It is not the purpose of this study to develop a lengthy discourse
on the economic views before or during the sixteenth century apart
from the ideas of Luther, but in order to have some basis of compari-
son for this particular study and to have some insight into the
prevailing ideas of Luther‘s own time it will be necessary to establish
a brief frame of reference for the major portion of this paper.

When the Roman Empire began to disintegrate from within and
without, the feudal order became the established way of life. ”Within
the domain of each lord the distribution of the product was regulated
not by purchase and sale but by traditional rules of sharing. The
lords themselves we re graduated in a hierarchy. Society was stratified
in classes, each of which had a fixed status, with certain duties and

"l The primary concern of both the lowly peasant-serf and the

rights.
rich feudal lord was the salvation of the soul. They knew that their

time on earth was short and would to a great extent be filled with trials

and tribulations. 2

 

lGeorge Soule, Ideas of the Great Economists (New York,
19591. p. 11. Hereafter cited as Soule, Great Economists.

 

 

ZMarquis W. Childs and Douglass Carter, Ethics in a
Business Society (New York, 1957), p. 11. Hereafter cited as
Childs and Carter, Ethics.

 

 

-1-

-2-
"By the beginning of the fourteenth century the Schoolmen had
prepared a comprehensive body of theological law covering every

phase of life. "3

Most of the educated men and writers of this period were
churchmen because the church was the controlling force in all things
pertaining to this world as well as things pertaining to the world to
come. The scholars and writers considered Aristotle as the great
authority with regard to science and the temporal matters of this
world, including ethics. It was St. Thomas Acquinas who was the
guiding light for the minds of men during this period. He developed
Aristotle's idea that justice could be divided into two categories.

The first of these two categories would be that of distributive justice.
This would apply to the distribution of the product of the household,
feudal estate or any other economic entity. Distributive justice would
be that which was customary with regard to income. It should be
according to the station of the person receiving it. In considering the
subject of exchange, both parties should be compensated in a fair
manner. In other words it was a matter of the just wage and the fair

price.4

 

3Chi1ds and Carter, Ethics, p. 11.

4Soule, Great Economists, p. 312.

 

-3-

"Usury was a sin. Trade itself was dubious in the ethical view
of the church. As one authority expressed it, 'whosoever buys a thing,
not that he may sell it whole and unchanged, but that it may be a
material for fashioning something, he is no merchant. But the man
who buys it in order that he may gain by selling it again unchanged and
as he bought it, that man is of the buyers and sellers who are cast forth
from God's temple. "'5 St. Thomas Aquinas felt ". . .that barren metal
does not breed. Money was regarded merely as a medium of exchange:
the modern concept of capital had not been evolved. "6

"The hair-splittings of the doctrine of usury had had such a dis-
torting effect on the feelings of merchants, reputed conscientious, that
they regarded it as a sin to 'commit usury' with their own but not with
borrowed money. ...Even when the voice of conscience was silent,
people knew that the loan at interest was forbidden both by the ecclesi-

astical and secular law.”7 As we can see, the economic ideas were

limited and influenced almost completely by the church.

 

5Chi1ds and Carter, Ethics, p. 12.

6J. Dow, ”Christian Usury," Encyclopaedia of Religion
and Ethics, ed. James Hastings (New York, 1922), XII, 551.

 

 

7Richard Ehrenberg, Capital and Finance in the .15.: of
the Renaissance, trans. H. M. Lucas (New York: Harcourt,
Brace and Co.), p. 42. Hereafter cited as Ehrenberg, Capital
and Finance.

 

 

 

-4-
R. H. Tawney in his book, Religion and the Rise of Capitalism, states

that,

Hence all activities fall within a single system, because all,
though with different degrees of immediateness, are related to a single
end, and derive their significance from it. The Church in its wider
sense is the Christian Commonwealth, within which that end is to be
realized; in its narrower sense it is the hierarchy divinely commis-
sioned for its interpretation; in both it embraces the whole of life, and
its authority is final. Though practice is perpetually at variance with
theory, there is no absolute division between the inner and personal
life. which is 'the sphere of religion', and the practical interests, the
external order, the impersonal mechanism, to which, if some modern
teachers may be trusted, religion is irrelevant. 8
The extended struggle between the Medieval Church and the Empire,
between the priests and the warriors, came to an end in the earlier
part of the thirteenth century, in the defeat of the Hohenstaufens, and
left the Papacy sole inheritor of the claim of ancient Rome to be sov-
ereign of the civilized world. 9 This sovereignty exerted itself in the
daily lives of the people from the cradle to the grave in all areas of
life. The Church kept a heavy and restraining hand on the merchants
and traders throughout the Middle Age period. Although the activities
with regard to trade during the period were limited because of the
political situation, these activities never completely stopped.

The Renaissance was a period of transition and change in

relation to the economic, social, political, and cultural lives of the

 

8New York: Mentor Book, 1926, p. 25. Hereafter cited
as Tawney.

9T. M. Lindsay, A History of the Reformation, 2nd ed...
2 vols. (New York, 1907), I. 1.

 

-5-
peOple in Europe. 10 It was a time when men were turning from the
views of the early Church Fathers with regard to sacred ideals to
the secular way of life. The Renaissance season in history brought
to focus in the minds of scholarly men the realities of existing
economic practices and the need for some adjustments to the actuality
of the existing situations. For ". ..the Church was not herself
detached from the realities of the economic world. She was one of
the largest holders of property and monies, and Churchmen, as
stewards of that mate rial wealth, were driven to find ways and means
of investment."11
Basic changes had taken place in the lives of the laymen as well
as the Church in relation to economic attitudes and realities. During
the Middle Ages life had been based on an agricultural way of life
centered about a self-sufficient manorial economy. What trading
existed was to a great extent based on a barter system. As the end
of the period drew near, the use of money was becoming a prominent
feature of the times which in turn was a stimulus to trade and industry.

There was a marked trend toward the development of towns until one

can see a steady decline in serfdom and the manorial way of life. At

 

lOHenry 5. Lucas, The Renaissance and the Reformation
(New York, 1934), p. 3.

113. Dow, ”Christian Usury," Encyclopaedia of Religion
and Ethics. ed. James Hastings (New York, 1922), XII, 552.

 

 

 

 

. ’ '0"qu ‘fl' “WHN ’2 .“PM. '3 ."O‘JD '0 ‘0 .l ‘u! H": l
u. .534.” 61 lUépnfiftl to in. I, r .H .u fiauiw 3.. 110' 1 l- 3 ..n-

. . 1 am- e! 10 summonses on“? w M‘s/0:81.43 - .:-' t .I '.

. 184;.“3”:

.901" to ylwqfipttw germ. .nybh .3 at 1anst tan

_ O

     
   

 

.
_. ---A AA“
.—"' V‘Yf -wvv - - - ———-...—
. v 7 v C
Ctr ' I‘
I

, .1... . .1 ,__. 3 . 3 .
assassins}! mu; ““5,“ ,.,_ .. -44”.
9M“- _ - .
’ ' l 1’1 .u .. ”.t’a ,xlto .’ '2 put

 

-6-
one time the manor had been the corner stone upon which society was
founded. Its population had been small in comparison to the towns
which began to spring up. As the use of money progressed and trade
and industry increased, the manor became less important an-i the
social center of the times shifted to the towns. It was an age of towns,
commerce, and small scale mamifactziring.

There were great political changes that came as a result of
social and economic upheaval. This is the time when the modern
national state began to emerge as a force with which to be reckoned.
The Middle Ages was a period of decentralization in government. The
present day countries of Europe we re then divided into many small
political units managed by the princes and their vassels. With the
increase of coined money there developed a system of taxes. The
princes gained not Only wealth by taxes but also the support of the
townsmen who disliked the turbulent habits of the nobility. Along
with the taxes and support of the towns emerged the absolute monarch
that became characteristic of the Renaissance.

The cultural changes were far-reaching with respect to all
phases of life. As already mentioned, man's attitude was changed
toward the world in which he lived. This in turn influenced his think-

ing toward science, art, literature and philosophy. 12

 

l")‘lwlenr'y 3. Lucas, The Renaissance and the Reformation
(New York, 1934), pp. 3-6.

 

-7-

The Church at the close of the Middle Ages faced a serious
crisis. The question of how she would meet the demands of the new
social, economic, and political order was yet to be answered. 13 For
our study it is particularly important to know how she reacted to the
new order of economic thought that had been developing.

The canon law concerning the subject of usury and money-
lending were undergoing definite changes, brought about by the necessity
of adapting it to the ever increasing intricacy of business organization,
down at least to the Lateran Council of 1515. 14

"But, however lawyers might distinguish and refine, the essen-
tial facts were simple. The Church sees buying and selling, lending
and borrowing, as a simple case of neighborly or unneighborly conduct.
Though a rationalist like Bishop Pecock may insist that the rich, as
such, are not hateful to God, it has a traditional prejudice against the
arts by which men-~or at least laymen--acquire riches, and is apt to
lump them together under the ugly name of Avarice. ”15

It is sufficient at this time to say that the Church modified her

position before the laymen by her actions. The acts of individual per-

sons within the Church did not always harmonize with the canon law,

 

”Ibid” p. 49.

14Tawney, p. 53.

15mm... p. 54.

-3-
due probably to a great extent by the secular spirit created in the
Church by the Renaissance Popes. 16

Before we begin an inquiry into some of Luther's thoughts with
relation to economics, it would be well to reconsider a few of the basic

economic doctrines held by the early Church Fathers and which often

reappear in modern thought. George Soule in his book Ideas of the

 

Great Economists lists them as:

 

The primacy of agriculture as the basis of all other means
of life.

The concept that economic practices and orders were closely
related to some social unit in which management could be exercised,
like a household, a city, a feudal domain, an organized group of
traders or craftmen.

The desirability of wise and prudent management of economic
processes.

The legitimacy of production and exchange so long--and only
so long-~as the product was destined for use.

The Biblical warning that 'love of money is the root of all
evil. '

The feeling that certain types of occupation are ignoble and
unfit men to participate in public life or government. Among these
were manual labor without leisure or opportunity for education, and
pursuit of gain for its own sake.

The belief that distribution and exchange of goods should be
regulated justly and that this end could be achieved by a society in
which each contributed what he was best fitted or destined to do and
receive in return a 'fair' or customary share of the general product.

Such doctrines were not a subject of study kept separate in a
water-tight compartment from other observations of human behavior.
They were parts of general codes of morals or philosophy that aimed

 

I
1"The development of the Church's attitude toward trade and
usury will be dealt with more extensively later in relation to Luther‘s
ideas on these two subjects.

-9-

to cover the whole range of human experience, both mate rial and
spiritual. 17

It will be necessary to keep these ideas in mind as we consider

the thoughts of Luther concerning economics.

 

‘7 . 13.

CHAPTER I
THE BIBLE AS THE BASIS OF LUTHER'S
ECONOMIC THOUGHTS

In order to have some frame of reference for Luther‘s mature
thoughts it would be well to consider briefly his early life and training.
Martin Luther was born of modest, land-owning peasant stock in the
year 1483. His father had made his living by means of agriculture
before he entered mining for a living and by the time of his death was
considered to be a man of some wealth. Luther grew up in a pious
household, more strict than most homes of the day, and it seems the
clergy in the area of his home-~in the district of Mansfield, in Middle
Germany--were serious minded, for in later life he could remember
nothing that would discredit them. 1

Luther was able to get an excellent elementary and secondary
education, ”which, in accordance with his father's wishes, was to
have been followed by a complete course in the faculty of law at the

University of Erfurt. "2

 

1E. G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times; The Reformation
From A New Perspective (Saint Louis, 1950), pp. 102-110. Here-
after cited as Schwiebert, Luther and His Times.

 

 

 

zAlbert Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation (Grand Rapids,
1951), p. 279.

 

-10-

-11-

When Luther became a monk and his father received the news
he was highly enraged. "The father was utterly unreconciled until he
saw in the deaths of two other sons a chastisement for his rebellion. "3

Luther, in telling of his father's displeasure in his taking of the
vow of a monk, says, ”He was greatly displeased, and did not want to
give his consent. When I wrote him, he answered me, calling me Du,
whereas before he had called me Ihr, because of my Master's degree.
Then came a pestilence, which robbed him of two of his sons. He was
urged to make a holy sacrifice and give his consent to my entrance into
the monastery. Father hesitated a long time, till he yielded. However,
he did not do it willingly, with a free and happy heart. "4

In the fact that Luther was willing to give up a promising profes-
sion and enter the monastery against his father's will would indicate a
strong, sincere desire to seek his peace with God. Another indication
of his sincerity was that he chose to enter a strict monastery, "the
reformed congregation of the Agustinians. "5

Luther's great spiritual struggle in the monastery is an indica-

tion that he sincerely tried to conform to his life as a monk. His

 

3Roland H. Bainton, Here IStand: A Life of Martin Luther
(New York, 1950), p. 34. Hereafter cited as Bainton, Here I
Stand.

 

 

Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 279.

 

5Bainton, Here I Stand, p. 34.

 

-12-
break with the Roman Catholic Church came about mainly because of
the theological beliefs he had been developing between the years 1505

to 1515.6

As one approaches the study of the age of the Reformation, it
seemingly is not difficult to look at the period as a time of social,
political, cultural and economic revolution. It is true that there were
great changes with relation to all of these fields of daily life. But it
is important not ". . .to forget for the moment that the religious and
theological experiences of Luther from 1515 to 1525 form the chief

H7 It is important in the study Of

factor in the rise of Protestantism.
Luther's economic ideas as to how one interprets the forces at work
in this great movement. "Luther's political and economic theories
are decidedly determined by his religious convictions. "8

Throughout his later life nearly all of his writings and actions
were influenced by the religious ideas he came to possess as a result

of his continual study of the Bible. If one would doubt this fact, it

would be well for him to turn for example to the article, On Trade and

 

Usury, written by him in 1524. There are at least thirty references

to the Bible in a space of about twenty-four pages in length. In his

 

6Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 280.

 

7mm... p. 231.

 

81bid., p. 281.

 

-13..

work, A Treatise on Usury, there are over forty references to the
Bible in about thirty-three pages. These are only a sampling of
Luthe r‘s works, but it is possible to go to such works of his as,
Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants, or A
Sermon on Keeping Children in School, and find that he repeatedly
uses the Bible as his authority for making statements. ”His
attempted return to the spirit of St. Paul and St. Augustine became
the primary cause of Protestantism. "9

"As an Ockhamist, Luther concentrated on the study of the
Bible as the divinely inspired Word of God, which he considered

10 As he studied the

more important than all theolOgical works. ”
Bible he began to turn from the scholastic philosophy. This can
be seen from the fact that his method of Bible exposition changed
with relation to the ". . .four-fold interpretation of the scholastics--
the literal, allegorical, trapological, and analogical-"for the newer

”11

grammatical-historical interpretation. At the same time his

Opinion of Aristotle and the Canon Law declined. 12 In 1518 he wrote:

 

91bid., p. 281.

10Harold J. Grimm, The Reformation Era: 1500-1650
(New York, 1954), p. 102. Hereafter cited as Grimm, The
Reformation Era.

 

 

 

“mud” p. 102.

12Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 281.

-14-
"I do not read the scholastics blindfolded, . . .but ponder them. . . .1
do not despise all theirs, neither consider it all good."13 In the
following year he reveals his mind thus: ". . .I simply believe that it
is impossible to reform the Church unless the Canon Law, scholastic
theology, philosophy and logic, as they are now taught, are thoroughly
rooted out and other studies put in their stead. I am so fixed in this
opinion that I daily ask the Lord, as far as now may be, that the pure

study of the Bible and the Fathers may be restored. . . In 15l7

when writing the Dispgtation Against Scholastic Theology he says,

 

"Virtually the entire Ethic of Aristotle is the worst enemy of grace.
. . .It is an error to say that no man can become a theologian without
Aristotle. ...Indeed no one can become a the010gian unless he

”15 In 1519 in a letter to John

becomes one without Aristotle.
Eck, Luther reveals the attitude of his mind once again when he

speaks of Tauler, saying, ". . .I give my reason for preferring him

to schoolmen, namely, that I learned more from him alone than all

 

13"Luther to Staupitz, " The Letters of Martin Luther,
trans. Margaret A. Currie (London, 1908), p. 25. Hereafter
cited as Currie, Letters of Luther.

 

 

l4”Luther to Trutfetter at Erfurt, ” Luther's Correspond-
ence and Other Contemporary Letters, trans. P. Smith
(Philadelphia, 1913), p. 83. Hereafter cited as Smith, Luther's
Correspondence.

 

 

 

15"Disputation Against Scholastic Theology, " Luther‘s
Works: Career of the Reformer: I. , ed. Jaroslav Pelikan,
55 vols. (Philadelphia, 1957), XXXI, 12. Hereafter cited as
Pelikan, Luther's Works.

 

 

-15-

others.”16 Views quite similar to these were revealed by him in his
Resolutiones super Propositionibus Suis Lipsia Disputatis, dated
1519: "I know and confess that I learned nothing from the scholastic
theologians but ignorance of sin, righteousness, baptism, and the
whole Christian life. Briefly, Inot Only learned nothing, but I
learned only what I had to unlearn as contrary to the divine Scrip-
tures."17

When Luther first began to stray from the teaching of the
Church he had hoped to gain the aid of the humanists. But as time
passed it became evident that the great humanist Erasmus did not
fully agree with his ideas or all of the methods of propagating them.

It was Luther's criticisms of the humanists that finally con-
firms the importance he came to place in the Bible. 18

g In a letter to John Lang at Erfurt dated March 1, 1517 it is

‘ possible to see the attitude of Luther's mind toward the great
humanist. "I am reading our Erasmus, and my opinion of him

becomes daily worse. He pleases me, indeed, for boldly and

learnedly convicting and condemning monks and priests of inveterate

 

16"Luther to John Eck at Ingolstadt, " Smith, Luther's
Correspondence, I, 146-147.

 

l7Albert: Hyma, Luther's Theological Development From
Erfurt to Augsburg (New York, 1928), p. lbr.

 

 

18Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 282.

 

-16-

ignorance, but I fear that he does not sufficiently advance the cause
of Christ and God's grace, in which he is much more ignorant than
Lefe’vre d'E/taples, for human considerations weigh with him more
than divine. I judge him with reluctance, . . ."19

Luther cared little for the pronouncements of the learned
men of his day or of the medieval scholars. The final authority
to answer questions related to daily living and salvation resided
for him in the Word of God. As far as the realm of the spirit was
concerned he placed it far above the material. In comparison he
devoted only about one-hundred folio pages to issues concerning
economics out of a total of about forty thousand pages. He did not
consider himself to be a great authority on the subject of economics
and neither did he consider any of his fellow men to be one either.
If a Christian knew the teachings of the Bible, that was all that he
needed to guide him concerning this life's experiences and keep

him on the right path that led to heaven. 20

 

19Smith, Luther's Correspondence, p. 54.

 

onyma, Renaissance to Reformation, pp. 282-283.

 

CHAPTER II
THE CHRISTIAN MAN AND THE ECONOMIC
THEORIES OF LUTHER

Many of Luther's views concerning economics are related
to the teachings of the Bible and the Christian life.

Luther did not look upon poverty or wealth as good or evil
in themselves. "Luther's life is an exemplification of the Biblical
passage 'Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness,
and all of these things shall be added unto you.’ Most of Luther's
property, and he died a comparatively wealthy man, was received
in the form of donations and gifts from the Princes and his many
friends."1

He did receive a fairly good salary from the university,
however, as well as a pension of $5, 360 in the last years of his
life. In the year 1525 he received $2,680; in 1536, $4,020; in
1541. $4,690.2

"In 1542, when his property was assessed for the Tuerk-

ensteuer, Luther evaluated his real estate at 900 gulden. [a gulden

equals about $13.40 [less a debt against it of 450 gulden. In his

 

lE3. G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 267.

 

ZIbid.. pp. 266-267.
-17..

-13-
second will he evaluates his books and jewels, including rings, chains,
and silver and gold gift coins, at approximately I, 000 gulden. Thus
the grand total of Luther's possessions must have been around 10, 000
gulden or, roughly, $134, 000. "3 It is evident from his own temporal
possessions that he did not frown upon them.

His attitude toward material wealth is shown in a sermon of
June 6, 1535 on Luke 16:19-31. "A poor man does not go to heaven
because he is poor, and a rich man does not go to hell because he is
rich. On the contrary, the poor man is saved because he adapts him-
self aright to his poverty and uses it correctly, and the rich man is
lost because he does not adapt himself aright to his wealth and uses
it badly. "4 He feels that this is an easy statement to make but,
”One must use these two economic conditions aright and must know
how to adapt oneself correctly to them. And immediately the old
Adam proceeds to misuse this distinction as a cover for his dirty
work. "5

Neither did Luther teach that a man's economic status proves
God's favor or His disfavor. In a sermon presented on October 1,

1525 he makes this comment: "To be sure, God may fill the coffers

3Schwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 267.

 

4What Luther Says: An Anthology, ed. E. M. Plass,
3 vols. (Saint Louis, 1959), I, 434. Hereafter cited as
Plass, What Luther Says.

 

 

51bid., p. 434.

-19-

of a rascal. But it does not follow from this that the fellow is pious,
for God wants to pay him here. On the other hand, He may let a
pious man have a hard and bitter lot. But He is not his enemy
because of this; nay, in a fatherly way He has his welfare at heart.
For it is the greatest punishment that God does not punish but holds
still and allows him to live on, day by day, in his wantonness. "6

Although Luther does not condemn riches as such he feels he
should exhort the Christians to shun economic worries and security
with respect to this world's needs. He speaks in a sermon of 1533
on Mark 8:19. "How does it happen that although all of us are cer-
tainly Christian, or at least want to be such, we do not take this
attitude of unconcern. . . For if we faithfully and devotedly cling to
God's Word, there shall be no want. Christ takes care of us, and
from this it must follow that we shall have something to eat. "7 In
the same year in his sermon on Exodus 20:5 he feels that it was a
common weakness of his day to worry about security concerning
sustenance. He goes on to say that it would be better to let God
take over and not to worry about earthly necessities and that ". . . In
all kinds of needs God marvelously and unexpectedly supplies help,

8

for He is almighty and has promised us aid."

__‘_.

61hid., p. 434.
71bid., p. 436.

8Ihid. , pp. 437-438.

-20-

Luther could assign the poor and rich to their respected
places in life but he could see the dangers in economic extremes.
"Nothing in the world, ” according to Luther, "would so effectively
hinder faith as mammon, or riches, on the one hand and poverty
on the other. He who is rich and has something simply ignores
God's Word and treads it under foot. . . .He who is poor does
everything that pleases the devil and the world in Order to stave
off p0verty. "9

The opening remarks of this chapter have dealt with Luther's
general attitude toward economic affairs and the Christian man. In
the remaining portion more specific ideas will be dealt with.

Although Luther did not die with as many temporal posses-
sions as some people of his day, he was by no means poor. What
he specifically thought about such things can be most readily under-
stood from his own words as they are recorded in his sermons and
writings.

He finds that the faulty issue is not to be found in the thing
itself, but in the heart of man. In his sermonic exposition of Deu-
teronomy he states: "We do not want to change the things, but we

do want to change the perverted heart. For money is money; the

sun is the sun. This we should preach, not what is to be changed

 

91bid., p. 435.

-21-

in the creatures, but only how the misuse of these things by the dis-

honest heart may be changed. "10

Man himself must be changed and not things.

The philosophers indeed believed that they would achieve a
great reputation, [wrote Luther in his exposition on Genesis 13:2]
if they disposed of their money and called themselves beggars.
. . . The Anabaptists, too, think that those who have any possessions
of their own are not Christians. . . .All this proves the extreme
ignorance of the human mind, which lacks the knowledge not only
of God but even of creatures. . . . But, as I have said, it is the
utmost blindness and the most execrable ignorance that they trans—
ferred human faults from man to creatures, which in themselves
are good and are gifts of God. One must distinguish between the
thing possessed and the possessor. The thing possessed is as God
created it, but the possessor is different from the way he was
created by God. Hence the fault lies not in the thing but in the
possessor.12

Another foundation on which Luther bases his thoughts concerning
temporal possessions is found in Psalm 62:10. "Even if you should
become rich justly and with God's help, do not depend on this either,
and do not make mammon your god. Property is not given to you
for you to build your trust on or boast about, all of which is vanity
and nothing, but for you to use, enjoy, and share with others.

Possessions belong in your hands, not in your heart, as Paul says

 

”Plan, What Luther Says. 111, 1338-39.

 

11Ibid. , p. 1339.

”Pelikan, Luther's Works, 11. 326.

 

-22..

in I Cor. 7:31 that we should deal with the world as though we had

no dealings with it."13

"All this is intended to say, " he remarks in his exposition of
Matt. 5:3, "that while we live here we should use all temporal goods
and physical necessities the way a guest does in a strange place
where he stays overnight and leaves in the morning. . . .The tem-
poral goods you have God has given to you for this life. . . . But you
should not fasten or hang your heart on them as though you were
. . ..14
gomg to live forever.

Once again Luther did not condemn temporal goods, but he
definitely felt they we re to be held to lightly.

He could see a danger in people becoming overly prosperous
with things of this world. In a sermon delivered during the week of
the Holy Cross in 1519 he makes these comments:

We should ask God to bless our use of the creatures, not
only for the benefit of our body, as just said, but still more for
the benefit of our soul, so that our soul may not suffer all sorts
of plagues and pestilence because of their misuse. I mean this:
The pestilence and plague of the soul is sin. Now when God grants
us a sufficient crop, we see what good we derive from these gifts.
People swill daily; there is idleness, unchasteness, adultery,
cursing, swearing, murdering, fighting, and all sorts of calamities

follow. . . . Consequently, it would be better if the crop had not
turned out so very well. ...For to be full and idle is the

 

”Ibis. , XIV, 240.

l‘I’Plass, What Luther Says, 111, 1340.

 

-23..

greatest plague on earth; it is the trouble whence all other
plagues come.

Luther feels that the prosperous individual has a burden
to carry and must struggle to keep his equilibrium between Chris-
tian living and mammon. Commenting on Deuteronomy 6210-12 he

quotes a German proverb to make his point: "Es miissen starke

 

Beine sein, die gute Tage tragen k6nnen (The legs that are able to

 

carry good days must be strong); again, Der Mensch kann alles

 

erleiden, allein gute Tags nicht (Man can endure every thing except

 

good days). They also say: Wenn dem Esel EH wohl lit, gehet _e_i_'

 

aufs Eis tanzen und bricht ein Bein (When a mule feels to well, he

 

w”

goes dancing on the ice and breaks a leg
Part of the Christian man's struggle is to maintain his fel-
lowship with God and his fellow men in the event of a highly inflated
ego. "It is not given to human nature, " says Luther, ”to conquer
itself when conditions are prosperous. "17
Luther is cautious with respect to prosperity and temporal
possessions for the Christian man. But even if he suffers want,
he should not despair for his need, neither should he become

impatient and deny Christ. He should continue to hope for the hand

 

15mm. . I, 436.

lbIbid” III, 1148.

”Ibis. . m, 1149.

-24-
of the Lord to intervene in his behalf. Luther feels that one should
not only trust in Christ but should continue to work hard every day. 18
". . .Christ does not give Peter fish by having them leap into his boat
of their own accord. He must launch out into the deep, must pre-
pare his net and get ready to work like any other fisherman,
although he has now turned Christian and must let the Lord take care
of providing a catch. "19

Even though Luther trusted God to provide his needs, he
believed in the adage that "God helps those who help themselves. "

In his exposition concerning "The Sermon On The Mount, "
he gives a very blunt and concise statement of his view concerning
man's duty to work. He first cites Proverbs 10:4: "'The hand of
the diligent makes rich.‘ He [referring to God] wants nothing to do
with the lazy, gluttonous bellies who are neither concerned nor busy;
they act as if they just had to sit and wait for Him to drop a roasted
goose into their mouth. He commands you to get an honest grip on
your work, and then He will be present with His blessing and give

you plenty. "20

 

13mm. , 111, 1148.
19

 

Ibid. , III, 1148.

t)

(.0
Pelikan, Luther's Works, XXI, 209.

 

-25-

Luther not only feels man should work diligently, but that
it would be an unwarranted assumption for the Christian to be lazy
and idle. Just because a person professes to trust in God and does
nothing to help himself is a complete distortion of the facts in this
case. Luther finds this illustration in Exodus 13:18. Though
directed to trust in God, the Israelites were well armed.21

He also sees a relationship between the effort that is put
forth and God's blessing on that effort. In his notes concerning
Psalm 127:1 he thinks that one's effort will come to nothing if the
person labors with the thought in mind that he is completely sup-
porting himself without the help of God. 22

Luther recognized the fact that many people are continually
worrying about their financial troubles and working situation. He
could also see that Christian men we re anxious about the troubles
of tomorrow. In the Bible he finds the admonition in Matt. 6:34:
"‘Why be concerned about more than the present day and take on the
troubles of two days? Be content with the trouble that the present
day lays upon you. Tomorrow will bring you another one. "'23 He

emphasizes the fact still more a little further on in the same ser-

mon when he says, ”Forget about your anxiety, which only

 

lelass, What Luther Says, 111. 1495.

 

22mm, m, 1496.

Z3Pelikan, Luther's Works, XXI, 209.

 

' -26-
increases and aggravates the trouble. . . . God never used anyone's
anxiety to make him rich; . . . What He does is this: when He sees
someone fulfilling his office diligently and faithfully, being con-
cerned to do so in a God-pleasing way, and leaving the concern
over its success to God, He is generous in His gifts to such a per-

son.”24

Luther did not condemn the fact that a man had accumulated
possessions through honest labor.25 This one can see when read-
ing his sermon on Matt. 6:24 where he says, "It is no sin to have
money and property, wife and children, house and home.”26

In spite of all that Luther could say with reference to work-
ing with the right end in view, he could see that there were many
who cared only for what they could get out of life with the least
energy expended.

”Thus all the world is adroit in avoiding toil. Yet it insists
on sharing in the fruit of toil. Thus the pagan poet remarks:
'Everyone is naturally inclined to prefer pleasure to labor.‘ Every—

body likes to have honor and wealth. All aspire to advance in life

and to attain high position. But when they obtain this and feel

 

24‘Ibic1.. XXI, 209.

25For a fairly comprehensive view of Luther's attitude
toward work and possessions see Ibid. , XXI, 186-209.

26Ibid., XXI, 189.

-27..
the labor and the worry it involves, they soon grow weary and stop
their efforts; for they sought only pleasure and ease. "27

Luther's ideas on temporal possessions, prosperity, and
work are at close proximity with his views concerning selfishness,
service to others, and contentment as they relate to the life of the
Christian man.

It would be a legitimate question to ask at this point, "What
does selfishness, service to others, or contentment have to do with
economics?" Near the beginning of this study the statement was
made that nearly all of Luther's writings were influenced by his

religious and theological experiences. Tawney in his book Religion

and the Rise of Capitalism states: "When the sixteenth century

 

opens, not only political but social theory is saturated with doc-
trines drawn from the sphere of ethics and religion, and economic
phenomena are expressed in terms of personal conduct, . . ."28
Thus these topics are but three strokes of the painters brush as
he develops a more complete picture of Luther's thoughts as they
concern man in relation to one's personal attitudes and actions in
the daily life of economic activity.

”Martin Luther believed that though a Christian should

never be satisfied with what he is, he should always be content

 

27Ibid., XXIV, 161-162.

2813. 15.

-23-
with‘what he has, with whatever blessings God sees fit to give him
in answer to his prayers and efforts. "29 These thoughts are
expressed in his remarks on Ecc. Z;l in 1532 when he states,
”Nothing is better than to walk in the Word and the work of God
and so to fashion one's heart that it is quiet and satisfied. . . . The
true despise rs of the world are the people who accept what God
sends them, gratefully use all things when they have them, and
gladly do without them if God takes them away. "30

Many people see the troubles of life or something that they
do not have and become dissatisfied and want to change to some-
thing they think is better. This Luther feels should not be. "A
person who wants to change and improve everything, " he states,
"and who refuses to put up with any inadequacies, but insists on
having everything clean and comfortable, will usually get in
exchange something twice as uncomfortable or ten times as uncom-

fortable. "31

He goes on to say that everyone has some trouble.
That a change can be brought to a person's life quickly, but an
improvement does not take place too often. Christians should be

content with what they have and the place that they fill in life.

This piece of advice is founded upon John 21:19-24. "The fact that

 

nglass, What Luther Says, I, 341.

 

30Ibid., 1, 341.

3
1Pelikan, Luther's Works, XXI, 95.

 

-29-
no one is satisfied with what he has," Luther says, ”is a very com-
mon plague. . . .Everybody is disgusted with his station in life and
sighs for that of another. . . .If we are to avoid such restlessness,
disquiet, and disgust, we must have faith. Faith is firmly con-
vinced that God governs equitably and places every man into that
station which is best and most fitting for him. "32

These words of Luther are quite revealing and will also be
an important attitude to recognize in his ideas on society and the
Peasants' War.

It is the evil and sinful eye that goes, ”lusting after lofty
things andsatisfaction with self, which is the death of humility,"
says Luther. 33 It is because of their secret false pride that men
are not cement with the low estate and are always trying to attain
that which is higher. 34 He says, "A bird pipes its lay and is happy
in the gifts it has; nor does it murmur because it lacks the gift of
speech. . . .All animals live in contentment and serve God, . . .Only
the evil, villainous eye of man is never satisfied, nor can it ever

be really satisfied because of its ingratitude and pride."35 He con-

tinues to comment by telling a tale that was supposed to date back

 

32Plass, What Luther Says, I, 341-342.

 

33Pelikan, Luther's Work, XXI, 317.

 

34Ibid. , xxx, 315.

BSIbid” XXI, 320.

 

-30..

to the Council of Constance. It seems two cardinals were riding one
day when they spied a shepherd standing in a field weeping to himself.
". . .One of the two cardinals, being a good soul and unwilling to pass
by without offering the man some comfort, rode up to him and asked
him why he wept. The shepherd, who was weeping bitterly, was a
long time replying to the Cardinal's question. At last, pointing his
finger at a toad, he said: 'I weep because God has made me so well
favored a creature, and not hideous like the reptile, and I have never
yet acknowledged it or thande and praised Him for it. "'36 It was
Luther's motto to be content and to give thanks for what God gives
him, but what God withholds, he did not need anyway. 37

Closely related is Luther's position concerning selfishness.
He recognizes the fact of its existence in the lives of men when he
quotes St. Augustine as saying: "'The beginning of all sin is the love
of one's own self.”38

In his study of Romans 3.9-10 he finds that the basis for all
of man's faults is the fact that he seeks only his own interests and

39

loves himself above all things.

 

36Ibid. . xxx, 320-321.

3..IPlass, What Luther Says, I, 341.

 

38Ibid., 111, 1270.

39Ibid., 111, 1270.

-31-

He finds that the very nature of man is selfish when he says,
". . .Our flesh and blood, and also our reason and nature, are not
given to serve God or do His work one whit. Our flesh and blood
serve only themselves."

Luther states that people are not happy to see others doing
better than they. People grow fat on the harm that they see come
to others. Envy is the very life of Satan, who would rather lose
what he has than to see anyone else receive anything at all. These
views based on John 16:16-23 were expressed by Luther in 1542.41

People are always green with envy when they are not first
in possessing the good things of God. They murmur instead of
praising Him when they see that they are equal to, or lower than
others.4‘3

The natural man is continually attempting to promote his
own interests in contrast to the example of Christ. Luther says,
"What the world busies itself with is clear. Everybody is intent
on promoting his own interests. "43

Finally, in his exposition on the Magnificat he points out

the fact that men are only using God for their own gratification.

 

40mm“. Luther's Works. XXIII. 21-

 

411315133, What Luther Says, 111, 1270-71.

 

42
Pelikan, Luther's Works, XXI, 319.

 

43Pla33, What Luther Says, 111, 1272.

 

-32-
"But the impure and perverted lovers, who are nothing else than
parasites and who seek their own advantage in God, neither love
nor praise His bare goodness, but have an eye to themselves and
consider only how good God is to them, that is, how deeply He
makes them feel His goodness and how many good things He does
to them. "44

Luther has more to say on the subject of the selfishness of
man, but it is sufficient for this study to have an insight into his
basic attitude in Order that we might have a basis for comparing
what he considered was the right frame of mind for the Christian
man.

One may see in the remarks of Luther the antithesis of the
selfish world in the contentment of the Christian. Also it will be
possible to see the workings of Luther's mind in that he believes
man is not a world unto himself and it is his Christian duty to serve
those who are a part of his daily life. This trend of thought may be
seen as it is reflected in his "Treatise On Christian Libe rty" when
he remarks: "A man does not live for himself alone in this mortal
body, so as to work for it alone, but he lives also for all men on

earth, nay, rather, he lives only for others and not for himself.

 

44Pelikan, Luther's Works, XXI, 309.

 

-33..
And to this end he brings his body into subjection, that he may the
more sincerely and freely serve others, . . . "45
Luther's opinion as to the attitude of a Christian with relation
to concern for his fellow man and not just a selfish heart is evident
in his interpretation of Cain's situation in Genesis 4:9. He sets
forth his thoughts in this manner: ”There is a common proverb:
'Of what concern is it to the Romans that Greeks are dying? ' We
suppose that only our own dangers concern us. But how does this
accord with God's command that He wants all of us to live together
as brothers? Therefore Cain brings a serious charge against him-
self by this very statement, when he declares that his brother's
care was of no concern to him."46
In Psalm 1:3 Luther points out the fact that even in nature
we find an example of service to others in that trees bear fruit for
others. Neither does the sun shine or the water flow just for them-
selves. "In fact, " he states, ”no creature lives for himself or
serves only himself except man and the devil. "47

Man is to use his position in life and his material goods as

an avenue of service. In his exposition of John 1:13 he speaks

 

45"A Treatise On Christian Liberty, ” Three Treatises,
trans. W. A. Lambert (Philadelphia, 1943), p. 275.

46Pelikan, Luther's Works, I, 2.76.

 

 

lfld. ' XIV, 300.

m

-34-

bluntly to the nobility when he states: "God did not grant you your
nobility as a cause for conceit, but for useful service. . . .His plan
was that these. . . were to be agents in the service of man's welfare."48

Luther contends in his famous letter to Frederick of Saxony
that ". . . Christ has not taught me to be a Christian to the injury of
others."49 It is not a matter of living and getting, to the hurt of
others, but ”. . .a true Christian lives and labors on earth not for
himself, but for his neighbor, therefore the whole spirit of his life
impels to do even that which he need not do, but which is profitaole
and necessary for his neighbor. "50

It is possi'ile to see in the above passage the same refrain
that has continually appeared in the writings of Luther with regard
to the Christian man and daily living, a 1d it will continue to be the
basis of most of his works throwghout life. Love and service to

I.

those aL‘OHt him is a necessity for every Christian. w. necessity

J't‘t“

which is not CilaJlCLlll. in that he does it out of brotherly love, and

because he knows it pleases God. He says, "This should be the

 

481mm, XXII, 95.

4
9Currie, Letters of Luther, p. 100.

 

Works of Martin Luther, ed. Henry Eyster Jacobs,
trans. J. J. Schimlcl, A, T. W. Stehhaeuser ct 23.1., 6 vols.
(Philadelphia, 1915), V, 239. Hereafter cited as WML.

 

-35-
character of our works: they should flow forth freely from our
affections and love and should all be directed toward our neighbor."51

He expresses the truth of Luke 17:11-19 when he states:
"Everything you do for your neighbor is also a service rendered
to God.”52

The individuals should be willing to serve no matter how others
treat them in return. "I do it gladly [he re he refers to the Christian
once again] willingly, and take delight in it; let a man react however
he pleases. God, too, gives many things in vain and expects nothing
in return. "53

It is difficult to be able to put oneself in the position of a ser-
vant because the "old Adam” finds this to be ”very sour work." There-
fore, Luther concludes that ". . . we need not only diligent practice but
constant prayer that God would give us His grace to be patient and
humble.”54 In this statement is found the essence of Luther's ideas
with relation to service to others.

Thus it has been pointed out what Luther felt the Christian's

personal attitude and conduct should be toward the attainment, pos-

session and use of material wealth.

 

51P1ass, What Luther Says, 111, 1283.
5

 

ZIbid. . m, 1284.

531'bid. , III, 1285.

54].'bid., III, 1285.

CHAPTER III

TRADE AND USURY

The subject of usury has been a controversial one throughout
the history of the Church. There were few subjects that claimed so
generally the attention of the synods during the medieval period as
that of usury. 1

Before the study of Luther's attitude and ideas on usury are
discussed, it would be well to briefly consider the historical views
of the early Church Fathers concerning the subject.

It can be found in the New Testament that Jesus makes some
comment with respect to borrowing and lending. "Give to him that
asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou
away." (Mt. 5:42) "And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to
receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to

receive as much again." (Lk. 6234) But there are no direct com-

mandments concerning usury. Z The great example set by His life,

 

lPhilip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 7 vols. ,
(New York, Charles Scribner's Sons: Reproduced by special
arrangements with the original publisher, 1907), V, 449-450.
Hereafter cited as Schaff.

 

2For additional references alluding to this subject see
Mt. 25:14-30, and Lk. 19:11-27.

-36-

-37-

perhaps more than His words, would suggest a more definite attitude
toward the goods of this world. The early Church Fathers severely
disapproved of the practice of usury. It is possible that they could
have been influenced in some cases by the classical moralists, but
the standard that was set by them was determined by the laws of the
Old Testament and the general principles set forth in the teachings
of the New Testament-40 a great extent a strained interpretation of,
"But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing
again;. . . " -- Luke 6:35. 3

At first the Church was antagonistic toward the practice of
usury. This antagonism finally hardened into prohibition over a
period of time. When she first began to pass legislation on the ques-
tion, it was only with regard to the clerics. 4

In the 17th Canon of the First Council of Nicaea5 the clerics
are forbidden to take usury in any form. The council declared:
”Since many clerics, lei by avarice and a Spirit of usury, have for-

gotten the divine word: 'he hath not put his money to usury, ’6 and

 

3Encyc10paedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Has-
tings, 12 vols., (New York, 1917-1922), XII, 550. Hereafter
cited as Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics.

 

 

4Ibid., x11, 551.

5Date of the Council was 325.

6P8. 14:5.

-38-

demand as veritable usurers a rate of one per cent interest per
month, this holy and great council decides that if anyone after the
publication of this ordinance takes interest in any way, or engages
in the business of usury in any manner, or demands back one and a
half times as much, or otherwise devises a scheme of dishonest
profit, he shall be ejected from the clerical state and his name
stricken from the register."7

Even before the Council of Nicaea usury had been condemned
in Canon 20 of the Synod of Elvira (305-306) and in Canon 12 of that
of Arles (314).3

By 345 we find that the Council of Carthage declares usury
not only reprehensible for the clerics but also for the laymen. We
find this view being repeated in 789 by the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle
and by the 9th century, ecclesiastical law definitely extends the pro-
hibition to the laity as well as the clerics. 9

Even though the Church did not at first make an official pro-
nouncement on its prohibition being extended to the laity, Jerome

(340-420) contended that usury had been prohibited among brothers

 

7Disciplinary Decrees of the General Councils, trans.
Rev. H. J. Schroeder (St. Louis, 1937), pp. 47-43. Hereafter
cited as Schroeder, Decrees of the Councils.

 

81bid., p. 48.

9Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, XII, 551.

 

-39-
in the Old Testament book of Deuteronomy and that it had been
universalized by the Prophets and the allusion to usury in the
words of Jesus found in the New Testament. 10

It is evident that usury continued to be a problem to the
Church in the 12th century. The Second Lateran Council in 1139
issued a proclamation in Canon 13 that usurers were to ”. ..be
stigmatized with the mark of infamy, and unless they repent let
them be deprived of Christian burial."ll

Legislation increased as the evil continued to grow. All of
the fortifications of the Church were strengthened to put down this
sinful practice. Thus the Third Lateran Council in 1179 states:
". . . we decree tnat notorious usure rs be not admitted to the com-
munion of the Altar, and if they die in that sin, that they shall not
receive Christian burial. Neither shall anyone accept their offer-
ing. He who has taken such an offering or given them Christian
burial, shall be compelled to return what he has taken, and, until

he has satisfied the wishes of the bishop, let him remain suspended

from his office. "12‘ The 26th Canon of the Second Council of Lyon

 

lOBenjamen N. Nelson, The Idea of Usury: From Tribal
Brotherhood to Universal Otherhood (Princeton, 1949), p. 3.

 

 

11Schroeder, Decrees of the Councils, p. 204.

 

”Ibid.. p. 233.

-40-
went so far as to say that, ”Associations and individuals are forbid-
den to permit strangers to practice usury within the limits of their
territory; . . .Nor shall anyone under whatever title lease them
houses for this purpose under penalty of suspension, excommunica-
tion, and interdict."l3 The spiritual penalties are made more
forceful by the civil pronouncement in Canon 27 of the same Council.
It states that, "No one may serve as a witness to testaments of
notorious usurers, and . . . Testaments of notorious usurers . . .are
null and void. ”1‘;

Finally the Council of Vienne in 1311-12 brought the matter
to a head when it stated: "We, therefore, wishing to put an end to
these pernicious practices, . . .decree that all civil officials of these
communities, be they rulers, judges, lawyers, or any others, who
in the future make, write, or dictate statutes of this kind or know-
ingly decide that usury may be paid or in case of having been paid
may not be freely and fully restored when its return is demanded,
incur the sentence of excommunication. "15

So it is that the Church finally places its power over the

civil authorities with relation to usury.

 

l3lbid., p. 355.
”Ibid. . p. 357.

151bid., p. 401.

-41..

The growing stringency during the Middle Ages against
usury was an indication that it would be difficult to check the
advance of this evil monster. The concessions made in favor of
the Jews by the 4th Late ran Council in that it forbade only grave
and excessive usury was a gap in the Church fortifications. By
the 11th century the rise of towns and markets gave commerce
a new life. The Church itself was in need of large sums of
money at various times for the Crusades and new buildings. The
older view that trade and commerce we re evil gave way to new
economic theories which would then be directed by Christian
principles. This task fell to the Schoolmen, most important
among whom stands the person of Thomas Aquinas. As he began
to formulate his system of ideas, he had to make some conces-
sions, and once that was done the freedom taken by men since
then over the centuries nearly by-passes the teachings of the
Church in many instances relating to the laws concerning usury.

The scholastics based their ideas on the Old and New Test-
aments and the works of Aristotle. 16

”Now money, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. V. 5;

Polit. i. 3) was invented chiefly for the purpose of exchange:

 

16Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, XII, 551.

 

-42-

it is by its very nature unlawful to take payment for the use of

money lent, which payment is knovm as usury: . . ."17

It was the decision of the canonist that a loan of money did
not in itself justify a charge for its use. However, when the oppor-
tunity for investing money was limited, it would probably be a gain
to the lender if he could find a man who was willing to accept the
responsibility of the money, if it was returned intact. The canon-
ists were willing to face the facts of making allowance for special
cases. Soon the custom developed of admitting compensation on
various extrinsic grounds. 18 The old position of the church regard-
ing usury was modified by some of its leaders to meet the demands
of the growing commercial centers. Benjamen Nelson in his book

The Idea of Usury put it so strongly as to say: "In fifteenth-

 

century Italy, economic expediencies completely overshadowed
moral philosophy as a force in the propagation of Christian uni-
versalism.”19 It would appear that this statement would have to
be modified with regard to the word ”completely" if one is to con-

sider the whole of Europe and even in the country of Italy itself.

 

17St. Thomas Aquinas, The Summa Theologica, trans.
Fathers of the English Dominican Province, 21 vols. (London,
1929), X, 331.

 

18Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, XII, 551.

 

19p. 19.

-43-

To what extent some leaders of the Church sanctioned the
traffic in usury can be seen by the fact that in 1515, Pope Leo X
gave his official pronouncement in favor of the legitimacy of the
interest clause in the m ii 293' This had been a bitter con-
troversy between Franciscan, Dominican, and Augustinian
theologians over the legality of establishing pawnshops by Chris-
tians with licenses to take from 20- to 50 per cent in loans. It
was also about this time that John Eck of Ingolstadt was on his
way to the University of Bologna on behalf of the Fuggers to attempt
to prove that the five per cent triple contract was legal.20 Pascal
in his book states that there was ". . .evidence that Canon law was
modifying itself to embrace the new conditions created by the pres-
ence of money in large quantities."21

The time in which Luther lived was a period in which usury
began to assert itself openly as an economic principle in Germany.
It had been condemned by Canon law, but partly through the agency
of the Church it had first been accepted in Italy and then in Europe
in general. Usury had been mainly under the control of the Jews
up to this time. But the practice of usury became such a large

scale operation that those interested could find it more profitable

 

20Nelson, The Idea of Usury, pp. 19-25.

 

21The Social Basis of the German Reformation, p. 181.

 

-44-
to ignore the statement of the Church that money in itself was not
capable of producing and by its very nature was incapable of bear-
ing fruit. 2'2
As other important sections of the society began to define
their position with relation to the subject, Luther was called upon
to express his opinions toward usury also.

The first references of importance by Luther to questions

of economics were given in the ShOrt Sermon on Usury, which

 

appeared in 1519. This was reproduced in his Leng Sermon on

 

Usury, dated 1520. This in turn appeared in le4 after being re-

printed in a treatise calle'l, On Trade and Usury, Luther had made

 

some comments earlier that dealt with theft and usury which occur

in the Sermon on the Ten Commandments, preached to the people

 

of Wittenberg, delivered in 1516 and the opening months of 1:317.23

Luther in this sermon shows the contrasts between the jurists,
who only regard the deed and the Bible which looks upon the heart.
The crime of theft may be committed by only thinking about the act.
l'le mentions five kinds of theft in order and the third one is called
usury'. i-ie likens it to a worm that brings destruction to the interior

of an apple. l-le compares this to the way usury was destroying the

 

22mm... p. 131.

23‘Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 283.

 

-45-
cities of his time. The Jewish law permitted the practice of usury
with the Gentiles so that they would not practice it with their own
race, but the Christians became worse than the Jews in that they
loaned money on interest to their own brethren. 2'4

The fourth kind of theft that is mentioned is fraud in business
dealings. In this case one should follow the rule found in Matt. 7:12:
‘Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men shoulddo to you,
do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prephets.' The tak-
ing of another man's property is considered to be theft at all times.
The last section considers the problem of contracts, whereby rents
are bought and sold, this in turn brings profits to individuals who
have not had to work at all. Luther in this instance refers to Gene-
sis 3:19 whereby men had been exhorted to work for their sustenance
and to Job 527 where it says that man was born to work for a living.
There are particular cases wherein the person may buy rents.
Decrepit people and children may avail themselves of it because they
have to do so much to make a living. Also the clergy and officials in
the government are given the privilege of buying rents. First of all
the clergy serve God and secondly the government officials serve the

25

people. "'There is no evil in the purchase of rents, except when

 

24Ibid.. pp. 283-284.

”Ibid.. pp. 284-285.

-46-
one serves thereby the evil of avarice, or seeks anything besides safe

riches.‘ which presumably means wealth intended for the use of char-

ity."26
The treatise On Trade and Usury, first published in 1524, is
considered to be the most important work written by Luther on eco-
nomic matters, but it does not add much to the ideas developed by him
in 1520. The theories set forth by him in his two sermons on usury
can be considered the basis of all his subsequent economic thoughts.
After 1520 the statements that he made are based upon the teachings
of the Bible and the early Christian Church. He supplemented his
two sermons in 1520 with his Address to the German Nobility, which
27

we will consider a little later.

It will be well for us to first look at his Treatise on Usury,

 

dated 1520. He began his treatise with a warning of the perilous
times coming upon the world as prophesied by the Apostle Paul.
Luther states that ”. . .avarice and usury have not only taken a
mighty hold in all the world, but have undertaken to see certain
cloaks under which they would be considered right and could thus
practice their wickedness freely, and things have gone almost so

28

far that we hold the Holy Gospel of no value.” There are three

 

26Ibid., p. 285.

27Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, pp. 290-292.

 

28w ML, iv, 37.

-47-
different degrees and ways of dealing well and rightly with temporal
goods according to Luther. "The first is that if anyone takes some
of our temporal goods by force, we shall not only permit it, and let
the goods go, but even be ready to let him take more, if he will. "29

With reference to his first degree, Luther turns to the teach-
ings of Jesus in Matthew 5:40 when He says: "If anyone will go to
law with you to take your coat, let him take your cloak also. ” Luther
feels that this can be understood to be the highest degree of works for
the Christian. ". . .In His entire Passion we see that He never repays
or returns an evil word or deed, but is always ready to endure more.”30

There are those who think that the first degree is not necessar-
ily a command and does not have to be observed by every Christian,
but is just good counsel to be kept by the perfect as in the case of
virginity and chastity. "Therefore they hold it proper that everyone
shall take back what is his own, and repel force with force according
to his ability and his knowledge; . . ."31 Luther says that, ". . .they
deck out their opinions with pretty flowers, and prove it, as they

think, with many strong arguments; namely, first, the canon law. . .

in the second place, the common proverb about self-defense, that it

 

29Ibid.. , IV, 37.

3OIbid., IV, 37.

31Ibid., IV, 38.

-43-
is not punishable for what it does. In the third place, they bring up
some illustrations from the Scriptures, such as Abraham and David.
. . .In the fourth place, they bring in reason, and say, . . .if this were
a commandment, it would give the wicked permission to steal, . ."32
They finally turn to St. Augustine to firmly prove their point. He
explains Christ's words as meaning that man should be ready in his
heart to let the cloak go after the cost. To this clear explanation
Luther says that they gloss over and add their own interpretation to
it by saying that it is enough to be willing to give in our hearts, but it
is not necessary to give it outwardly. "Hence it comes that lawsuits
and litigations, notaries, officials, jurists, and that whole noble race,
are as numerous as flies in summer. . . .Suits must also be carried to
Rome, for there much money is the thing most needed; and throughout
the Church the greatest and holiest and commonest work these days is
suing and being sued. "33 Luther goes on to say that this type of action
is contrary to the holy and peaceful life and doctrine of Christ. He
wants to warn everyone not to be led astray by those who would embel-
lish their ideas with flowery or colorful words. There are to be no
excuses! The commandment is pure and simple. The Christian is to

obey as Christ and His Saints have confirmed it and have exemplified

it in their lives. "Nevertheless, it is true that God has instituted the

 

321bid., IV, 38-39.

33Ibid.. IV, 39-40.

-49-
worldly sword and the spiritual power of the Church, and has com-
manded both kinds of rulers to punish the evil and rescue the opressed,
. . . But this should be done in such a way that no one would be an
accuser in his own case, but that others, in their brotherly fidelity
and their care for one another, would tell the rulers that his man was

”34 Luther feels that things would be

innocent and that man wrong.
conducted in a Christian manner this way and Christians would have
more regard for sin than injury. The reason that Christ gave this
commandment was ”in order to establish within us a peaceful, pure,
and heavenly life. . . .It would be impossible to become pure of our
attachment to temporal goods, if God did not decree that we should
be unjustly injured, and exercised thereby in turning our hearts away
from the false temporal goods of the world, . . .and setting our hopes
on the invisible and eternal goods.”35

In concluding his first section Luther says, "So much for the
first degree of dealing with temporal goods! It is also the foremost
and the greatest, and yet, sad to say! it has not only become the

least, but it has come to nothing and, amid the mists and clouds of

human laws, practices and customs, has become quite unknown. "36

 

34Ibid.. Iv, 41.

35mm. . IV, 42-43.

36Ibid. , IV, 43.

-50-

Now, Luther deals with his second degree concerning temporal
goods. "It is that we give our goods freely to everyone who needs
them or asks for them. Of this our Lord Jesus Christ speaks in
Matthew V, 'He who asks of thee, to him give. "'37

Even though this degree is much lower than the first, it is still
a hard and bitter row to hoe for those who place the temporal above
the eternal. It is because they do not have enough faith in God to
believe that He can or will keep them while tncy are here on earth.
”Therefore, they fear that they would die of hunger or be entirely
ruined if they were to do as God commands, and give to everyone
that asks them. . . .And yet they go about thinking that God will make
them eternally blessed, and believing that they have good confidence
in Him. though they will not heed this commandment of His, . . . ”38

Luther states that the second degree is such a small thing
that it was even commanded of the Jews in the Old Testament in
Deuteronomy XV. If this commandment was given of God in the Old
Testament, ”how much more ought we Christians be bound not only
to allow no one to suffer want or to beg, but also to keep the first
degree of this commandment, and let everything go that anyone will

39

take from us by force."

 

37Ibid., IV, 43.

38Ibid., IV, 44.

M

39Ibid. , IV, 44.

-51-

He also mentions that in Deuteronomy XV, God says, ”'There
shall be no beggar or indigent man among you. "'40 Luther contends
that there should be no begging and that the spiritual and temporal
rulers would be doing their duty if they would do away with the beg-
gars'sacks.

There are three practices that are carried on among men that
are contrary to this degree of dealing, according to Luther. ”The
first is that men give and present things to their friends, the rich
and powerful, who do not need them, and forget the needy; . . .0 what
a horrible judgment will fall upon these carefree spirits, when it is
asked at the Last Day, to whom they have given and done good W41
The second custom he points out ”. . . is that people refuse to give to
enemies and opponents."42 It is hard for men to do good to their
enemies for it is contrary to their nature. But that does not help the
matter as far as Luther is concerned. "The commandment is spoken
for all men alike, 'Give to him that asketh,‘ and it is clearly expressed
in Luke VI, 'To everyone that asketh of thee, give. "'43

Luther states that the third custom is pleasant to the eye and

does more harm to this giving than the other customs. "It is

 

4OIbid., IV, 44.

“Ibid.. IV, 45.

42Ibid., IV, 45.

43Ibid., IV, 45.

-52-
dangerous to speak of it, for it concerns those who ought to be teach-
ing and ruling others, and these are the folks who, from the beginning
of the world to its end, can never hear the truth or suffer others to
hear it.”44 Here he speaks concerning the giving of alms and costly
gifts such as organs and gold to the Church instead of giving to the
poor. "And this giving has become so precious and noble that God
Himself is not enough to recompense it, but has to have the help of
breves, bulls, . . . and wax, green, yellow and white. If it makes no

45 He speaks to the affect that it is regret-

show, it has no value;. . ."
table that people are carried away by these clamorous goings-on and
turned from God's commandments in so doing. He warns men to
beware and says, ”God will not ask you. . . at the Last Day, . . .
whether you have given so much or so much to churches; but He will
say to you, 'I was hungry and ye fed me not; I was naked and ye
clothed me not.‘ . . . Everything will depend on whether you have
given to your neighbor and done him good. Beware of show and
glitter and color that draw you away from this. "46

It is Luther's contention that leaders of the civil and spiritual

realms should establish a decree that every village should build its

own church and care for its own poor people.

 

441bid., IV, 46.

451b1d.. IV, 47.

461b1d., IV, 48-49.

-_

-53-
It seems a certain device was used with respect to avoiding
the commandment to give to the poor. "It is, 'No one is bound to
give the needy unless they are in extreme want.‘ . . . Thus we learn
that no one is to give or help until the needy are dying of hunger,
freezing to death, ruined by poverty, or running away because of
debts."4'7 [But this dishonest and fraudulent addition can be coun-
tered with the Bible also when it says, ”'What thou wilt that another

do to thee, that do thou also. "'48

But when it comes to giving to the
Church this is another story. He goes on to say that this lavish giv-
ing should be discontinued.

He then comes to the third degree of dealing with the goods of
this world. ". . .It is that we willingly and gladly lend without charge
or interest. Of this our Lord Jesus Christ says, in Matthew V, 'He
that would borrow of thee, from him turn not, ' that is, 'do not refuse
him. ”'49

Luther considers this to be the lowest degree of all, because
God had said in Deuteronomy XV, "'If anyone of thy brethren in the

city become poor, thou shalt not harden thy heart against him nor

shut thy hand; but that shalt open it and lend him all that he needs;'

 

47Ibid., IV, 49.

48Ibid., IV, 49-50.

49Ibid., IV. 51.

-54-
and they have allowed this degree to remain a commandment, for all
the doctors agree that borrowing and lending shall be free, . ."50

At the beginning of his twentieth point in this treatise Luther
defines usury and proceeds to set forth three laws that are to guide
the individual in lending. "First, . . .the Gospel commands that we
shall lend. Now lending is not lending unless it be done without
charge and without advantage to the lender, . . .Second, this is con-
trary to the natural law, . . . ‘What ye would that men should do to
you, that do also to them.‘ . . . Third, It is also against the Old and
the New Law, which commands, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself.”51 It is his belief that there is no more brief or better
instruction that a person can receive with regard to dealings with
his neighbor than to follow the above teaching of the Gospel. Here
he is met with two objections. “The first is that if lending were
done in this way, the interest would be lost. . . .The second is the
great example. Everywhere in the world it has become the custom
to lend for profit, and especially because scholars, priests, clergy,

and churches do it, . . .“52 To this he answers that there is nothing

in all of these arguments. In the first place you must lose the

 

50mm. , IV. 51.

“Ibid., IV, 53.

52Ibid., IV, 54.

M

-55-
interest and profit. It does not matter whether it is taken from you
or you give it to someone outright. In the second place, it does not
matter if the custom be bad or good it still is not Christian. Just
because the Church does it, that does not make it right. He selects
a passage of scripture once again to substantiate his words. ”For
it is written, ‘Thou shalt not follow the crowd to do evil, but honor
God and His commandments above all things. "'53 He closes this
section by quoting the words of Christ, who says, "‘If we lend and
give, we are children of the Highest, and our reward is great.‘ He
who does not believe this comforting promise and does not make it
a guide for his works, is not worthy of it.”54

It is in the beginning of the second part of his sermon that
Luther deals with another type of loan that had come into being.
This had to do with the buying of income, or the practice known as
Zinskauf. Luther feels he should deal with this subject of buying of
income, “. . .Since this makes a pretty show and seems to be a way
by which a man can burden others without sin and grow rich without
worry or trouble. . . .Although the buying of income is now estab-
lished as a proper trade. . .it is, nevertheless, to be hated and

55

opposed for many reasons. ” He feels that it is a slippery

 

53Ibid.. IV, 55.
54115101., IV, 55.

*

551bid., IV, 56.

~56-

invention for satisfying man‘s desire to gain wealth, honor and luxury
without limit. It also looks bad and St. Paul “. . . bids us avoid all
evil and offensive appearance, even though the thing itself were right
and proper--. . ."56 In this type of business, Luther perceives that
the advantage of the buyer, or receiver of income, is greater than
the payer of income. The business is too close to the conscience to
be safe according to Luther.

"This business, even though it be conducted without usury,
can scarcely be conducted without violation of the natural law and
the Christian law of 1ove."57

He continues to speak in this trend of thought a little further
on in the sermon by saying: "Everyone must admit that whether this
business be usury or not, it does exactly the same work that usury
does; that is to say, it lays burdens upon all lands, cities, lords and
people, sucks them dry and brings them to ruin, as no usury could
have done."58 Luther concludes that just because it is legal it is
not necessarily right. ”Therefore it is not enough that this business

should be rescued by canon law from the reproach of usury, . . . Money

won by gambling is not usury either, and yet it is not won without

 

56Ibid., IV, 56-57.
”Ibid., IV, 57.

58mm. , IV, 57-58.

-57-
self-seeking and love of self, and not without sin; . . .The refore I

cannot conclude that those who buy income which they do not need

are acting rightly and properly. "59

Luther then turns to consider the argument whereby this
type of business is justified. He mentions the fact that there is
a Latin word called interesse. ”This noble, . . . word may be
rendered in the German this way: If I have a hundred gulden with
which I can trade, and by my labor and trouble make in a year
five or six gulden or more, I place it with some one else, on a
productive property, so that not I, but he, can trade with it, and
for this I take from him five gulden, which I might have earned;
thus he sells me the income-”five gulden for a hundred--and I am
the buyer and he the seller. Here they say, now, that the pur-
chase of the income is proper. . ."60 This, according to Luther,
is all very nice in appearance, but ". . .the re is another, counter-
interest, which goes like this: If I have a hundred gulden, and am
to do business with it, I may run a hundred kinds of risk of making
no profit at all, nay, of losing four times as much besides. Because
of the money itself, or because of illness, I may not be able to do

business, or there may be no wares or goods on hand. Hindrances

 

591b1d., IV. 58.

60Ibid., IV, 59.

-53-

of this kind are innumerable, and we see that failures, losses, and
injuries are greater than profits. Thus the interest on loss is as
great as the interest of profit, or greater."61 This type of business
cannot compare with legitimate trade, for that involves labor and
risk; while with this other trade one does not have to assume the
troubles and risks, may be incompetent and slothful, and still make
a profit. Consequently, it is difficult to determine whether one is
entitled to any interest at all. 62

Luther does not see how this type of business can last. Any-
one would rather invest a hundred gulden for income than for trade.
It would be possible to lose twenty gulden a year in trade and his cap-
ital as well, while he could not lose more than five in this business
and he keeps his capital besides. It is no wonder that many of these
knights of income get rich faster than others. Since the element of
risk is present, it should not be permitted to loan money on mere
money, as is now the custom, especially among the great merchants,
but there should be some security in the form of real estate, and
this should be specifically indicated. 63

As long as there is a certain piece of land that can be used,

Luther feels the loan is safe, and it is proper to loan money to the

 

“Ibid. , IV, 59.

62Ibid. . IV, 59-60.

63mm... IV, 61.

-59-
person that owns the land. He takes it for granted that the person who
owns the land can be trusted.64

Luther says, "The only way of defending this business against
the charge of usury. . .would be that the buyer of income have the same

risk and uncertainty about his inc0me that he has about all his other

prope rty. "65

He also feels that the debtor in case of a bad year should be
able to say to the creditor, ”This year I owe you nothing, for I sold
you my labor for the production of income from this and that prop-
erty; I have not succeeded; the loss is yours and not mine; for if you
would have interest on my profits, you must also have an interest in
my losses, as the nature of the bargain requires."66 The owners
of income who will not consider such a bargain are compared in their
piety to robbers and murderers who take the poor man's property
and living. "If money is loaned to those who have need of it for mak-
ing their living, it must be given without interest. But in case both
men concerned will be much benefited by the transaction, it is to be

”67

commended. He mentions the fact that "...respect should be

always had for the fear of God, which fears to take too much rather

 

64Ibid., W. 62-63.
65Ibid.. IV, 63.
66D)id., IV, 63-64.

67Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 289.

 

-60-
than too little, in order that avarice may not have its way in a decent
business deal. The smaller the percentage the more divine and Chris-
tian the deal."68

He does not feel that it is his duty to say when someone ought
to pay five, four, or six per cent. He is content to leave this in the
hands of the law.

There are those that take as much as ten per cent and in these
cases the rulers should look into the matter because the poor people
are oppressed. "For this reason these robbers and usurers often
die an unnatural and sudden death, or come to a terrible end (as
tyrants and robbers deserve), for God is a judge for the poor and
needy, as He often says in the Old Law."69

Near the end of the sermon he states that, ". . . since this busi-
ness is in such a disordered state, we could have no better examples
or laws than the laws which God provided for His people, and with
which He ruled them . He is as wise as human Reason can be, and
we need not be ashamed to keep and follow the law of the Jews in this
n70

matter, for it is profitable and good.

In the same year that his Long Sermon On Usury appeared,

 

Luther wrote his well-known Address to the German Nobility, dated

 

 

68WML, IV, 65.

69mm” IV, 65.

70mm. , IV, 69.

 

-61-
1520. He does deal with the question of economic reform, but this
work is not of great importance with relation to our study, although
it does give us another idea of how Luther considered such questions
from time to time.

He had just been giving the P0pe and clergy a tongue-lashing
and then turns his attention to economic and social reforms.

He sees a need for a law against the extravagant and exces-
sive dress of the nobles and rich men. He goes on to say, "God has
given to us, as to other lands, enough wool, hair, flax and every-
thing else which properly serves for the seemly and honorable dress
of every rank, so that we do not need to spend and waste such enor-
mous sums for silk and velvet and golden ornaments and other

71 Even if the Pope had not robbed the Germans with

foreign wares. "
his many demands, Luther feels that the country would still have its
hands full controlling the silk and velvet merchants whom he likens
to domestic robbers.

”In like manner it is also necessary to restrict the spice-
traffic which is another of the great ships in which money is carried

out of German lands. There grows among us, by God's grace, more

to eat and drink than in any other land, and just as choice and good. "72

 

“Ibid., 11, 153.

7ZIbid., 11, 159.

-62-
He is not trying to do away with commerce, but he feels that is has
been of little benefit to the people of the nation.

”The greatest misfortune of the German nation is certainly
the traffic in annuities. 73 If that did not exist, many a man would
have to leave unbought his silks, velvets, golden ornaments, spices
and ornaments of every sort.”74 The practice had not existed much
over one hundred years and had already brought poverty to nearly
everyone. If it were to last another hundred years, there would not
be a penny left in all of Germany. He states that, ”In truth this
traffic in rents must be a sign and symbol that the world, for its
grievous sins, has been sold to the devil, so that both temporal and
spiritual possessions must fail us, and yet we do not notice it at
all. "75

Luther speaks in no uncertain terms at this time about the
large financial concerns of Germany. "He re, too, we must put a
bit in the mouth of the Fuggers and similar corporations. How is

it possible that in the lifetime of a single man such great posses-

sions, . . .can be piled up, . . .I do not understand how a man with a

 

73The Zinskauf or Rentenkauf was a means for evading
the prohibition on usury. The buyer purchased an annuity, but
the purchase price was not regarded as a loan, for it could not
be recalled, and the annual payments could not therefore be
called interest.

 

74WLAL,H,ITL

7’1bia., 11, 160.

-63...

hundred gulden can make a profit of twenty gulden in one year, . . .and
that, too, by another way than agriculture or cattle-raising, in which
increase of wealth depends not on human wits, but on God's blessing."76
He feels that it would please God if agriculture increased and com-
merce diminished. That people would do much better if they were
to abide by the admonition of the Scripture to till the ground and seek
their living from it.

The fact has already been mentioned that Luther did not add

many important thoughts to his previous works when in 1524 he pub-

lished the treatise On Trade and Usury which included the £1995

 

Sermon On Usury, dated 1520.77

 

Luther approves of trade and considers buying and selling
necessities that can not be dispensed with, but which should be
practiced in a Christian manner. However, foreign trade with
such a country as India, which only brings costly luxuries to Ger-
many and serves no useful purpose, should not be permitted.

Luther is concerned with the loss of gold and silver to Ger-
many as a result of her trade with other countries for luxury items.
”We have to throw our gold and silver into foreign lands and make

the whole world rich while we ourselves remain beggars. England

 

76Ibid., 11, 160-161.

77Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 292.

 

-64-
would have less gold if Germany let it keep its cloth, and the king of
Portugal, too, would have less if we let him keep his spices.
. . . Frankfurt is the golden and silver hole through which everything
that springs and grows, is minted or coined here, flows out of Ger-
many. "78 He is referring to the fairs held at Frankfurt.

Next follows a number of abuses and sins of trade as they
relate to the conscience. First, there is the common rule among
merchants to sell their goods as clear as they can. ". . .On this basis
trade can be nothing else than robbing and stealing other peoples
property."79 Luther says that, "The rule ought to be, not: I may
sell my wares as dear as I can or will, but: I may sell my wares as
dear as I ought, or as is right and proper."80 A merchant should
receive a profit that is fair and right for his labor and risk. The
problem to be settled is who is going to determine a just remunera-
tion for the merchant? "But in order not to leave this question
entirely unanswered, the best and safest way would be for the tem-
poral authorities to appoint over this matter wise and honest men who
would appraise the cost of all sorts of wares and fix accordingly the

outside price at which the merchants would get his due and have

 

73WML. Iv, 13.
79Ibid., IV, 14.

Bolbid. , IV, 15.

-65-
an honest living, . . . "81 In case the prices are not fixed by law the
individual, according to Luther, is to let his conscience be his guide.
He finally concludes that, "In deciding how much profit you ought to
take on your business and your labor, there is no better way to
reckon it than by estimating the amount of time and labor you have
put on it and comparing it with that of a day laborer, who works at
another occupation, and seeing how much he earns in a day."82
The individual is also to consider in his price the time it took to get
it to market and the risk involved.

The second evil or sin found to be prevalent among merchants
he states in this manner: ”There is a common error, which has be-
come a widespread custom, not only among merchants but throughout
the world, by which one man becomes surety for another; and although
this practice seems to be without sin and looks like a virtue springing
from love, nevertheless it causes the ruin of many and brings them

"83 Luther here refers to the fact that, ". . .King

irrevocable injury.
Solomon often forbade it and condemned it in his Proverbs, and says
in Chapter VI, 'My son, if thou be surety for the neighbor, thou hast

bound thine hand, thou art snared with the words of thy mouth. . . Do

this now, my son, and deliver thyself, for thou art come into the

“Ibid.. IV, 16.
azIbid., IV, 16.

831bid., IV, 18.

-66..

hand of thy neighbor; go, hasten, and urge thy neighbor; give not
sleep to thine eyes nor slumber to thine eyelids; deliver thyself as
a roe out of the hand and as a bird out of the hand of the fowler. "'84
Luther feels that this practice of giving security for someone else
is contrary to the Holy Scriptures and should not be practiced. It
is too lofty a work for man and is an invasion of God's rights. "In
the second place, a man puts his trust in himself and makes him-
self God, for that on which a man puts his trust and reliance is his
god.”8'5 He warns men not to disregard God and His hand of provi-
dence. In Luke XII, he finds the hand of God heavy against those
who have become presumptuous about the future. He speaks of the
rich man who wanted to pull down his barns and build greater, in
which to store all of his goods, but God required of him his soul
that very night. He points out the fact that nearly all of Ecclesi-
astes has been written by Solomon to show that man's planning and
presumption are vanity and trouble and misfortune, unless God is
taken into consideration.

Luther then sets forth four ways that a Christian may trade.

The first three have been dealt with in his Treatise On Usury. "The

 

Fourth way of trading is buying and selling, and that with cash

___

84Ibid.. IV, 18.

85Ibid., IV, 19.

-67-

”86

money or payment in kind. The advice he would give to the man

who would practice this method ”. . .is that he shall not borrow
anything or accept any security, but take only cash."87 It is his
contention that if the re was any such thing as becoming surety, and
the precepts of the Gospel well followed and only cash was used in
trade, the greatest and most harmful dangers and faults would be
done away with in the field of commerce. "For these three errors,
---that everyone may sell what is his own as dear as he will, borrow-
ing, and becoming surety, --these, I say, are the three sources
from which the stream of abomination, injustice, treachery and guile
flow far and wide: . . . "88
He then considers what has been referred to by the editors of
his works as the "tricks of the trade". "First, There are some who
have no conscientious scruples against selling their goods on credit
for a higher price than if they were sold for cash: nay, there are
some who wish to sell no goods for cash but everything on credit, so
that they may make large profits. "89 We are to observe by Luther's

remarks that this way of dealing is plainly against God's word and

arises from greed.

 

86Ibid. , IV. 24.

——-—¢—~

87Ibid. , IV, 24.

 

881bid., IV, 25.

39Ibid. , IV, 26.

-68-

Luther also attacks the practice of raising the prices on goods
when there is a scarcity of a particular commodity in the country.

The practice of cornering the entire supply of certain goods in
order to control the prices is also considered to be abominable. He
says that, "Even the imperial and temporal laws forbid this and call
it 'monopoly,‘ i.e. , purchase for self-interest, which is not to be
tolerated in city or country, and princes and lords would stop it and
punish it if they did their duty. "90

He contends that the example of Joseph in Genesis was not a
monopoly. The purchases of Joseph for the king was a common and
honest one. He did not stop anyone else from buying during the good
years, and it was only by God-given wisdom that he was able to gather
grain during the seven good years, while others were not putting forth
an effort to accumulate anything at all.

The persons who undersell to establish a monopoly ". . .are
not worthy to be called men or to live among other men, . . ."91

The practice of selling goods that a person does not have at
the time of the sale, but which can be purchased at a lower price
than that for which he sold them, promising to deliver them later to
the original buyer is called "'living off the street,‘ on someone else's

92

money;"

 

901bid., IV, 26.
91Ibid., 1v, 28-29.
4 921mm. IV, 29.

~69-

The practice of cheating by putting pepper, ginger and saffron
in damp cellars in order that they might gain in weight, along with
other dubious habits are also assailed.

In the closing pages of his treatise he takes time to discuss
the trading companies. "Of the companies I ought to say much, but
that whole subject is such a bottomless abyss of avarice and wrong
that there is nothing in it that can be discussed with a clear conscience.
For what man is so stupid as not to see that companies are nothing else
than mere monopolies?”g3 He states that even laws of the heathen for-
bid them. All commodities, he considers are under their control. If
they want to raise the price of ginger this year to make up for the loss
in some other commodity there is no one to stop them. "No wonder
they become kings and we beggars."94 The rulers of the land should
investigate these conditions, but Luther believed that they had an
interest in the companies themselves.

He ends by saying, "I know full well that this book of mine
will be taken ill, and perhaps they will throw it all to the wind and
remain as they are; but it will not be my fault, for I have done my
part to show how richly we have deserved it if God shall come with

a rod. . . .Let no one stop as a favor or a service to me, . . .It is

 

9311318., W, 34.

9471618., IV, 34-35.

-70-
your affair, not mine. May God enlighten us and strengthen us to do
His good will. Amen."95

All that was spoken by Luther concerning economics after

96 But for the sake of being

1524 c0nformed to his earlier opinions.
more complete in the study of his economic views, it would be well
to consider for a moment some of his later utterances concerning

the question of economics.

In June of 1524 Luther summarizes his views on the question
of taking interest in a letter to Duke John Frederic of Saxony. He
feels that the matter of interest taking should be regulated every-
where. To do away with it altogether would not be right either,

". . .for it can be made just."97 He does not think that Duke John
Frederic should protect people who refuse to pay the interest or to
stop them from paying it, ". . .for it is not a burden laid upon people
by a prince in his law, but it is a common plague that all have taken
upon themselves. We must put up with it, . . .until God puts it into
the hearts of the princes to agree to some change. In the meanwhile,

let the burden rest on the consciences of those who take unjust inter-

est."98 In saying what he does above, he refers only to that interest

 

951mm. 1v, 35-36.

96IIyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 298.

 

97Smith, Luther's Correspondence, II, 237.

 

981b1d., 11. 237.

-71-
which is not over four or five per cent. If it does exceed this amount
the prince should take steps to reduce it to the proper amount.
Thoughts that are quite similar to these also appear in Luther's
letters to Capito in Strasbourg, dated June 15, 1524; and to Spalatin in
June, 1524. Luther reveals his mind with regard to the law of Moses

as it concerns the tenth in a treatise entitled The Opinion of Luther

 

on the Law of Moses, written about the time as the letters mentioned

 

above. He also has something to say with regard to usury in his let-
ter to the City COuncil of Danzig in May of 1525.99

Because of a grain shortage in the spring of 1539 Luther made
inquiries to the Council of Wittenberg as to the cause of the shortage.
He was sure that some of the noblemen we re buying up the grain from
the farmers, were keeping it away from the market, and were bring-
ing about an artificial shortage. 100

The food shortage had continued. He wrote to John Frederic
of Saxony on April 9, 1539 and said: "a sudden shortage and unfore-

seen famine have overtaken us here. . . . some believe that the shortage

is not a result of actual scarcity, but that it is rather a result of the

 

99Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, pp. 299-300. A
lengthy analysis of the letter to the City Council of Danzig is
presented in this volume.

100

Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel, ed. and trans.
T. G. Tappert, The Library of Christian Classics, 26 Vols.
(Philadelphia, 1955), XVIII, 251. Hereafter cited as Tappert,
Letters of Spiritual Counsel.

 

 

 

-72-

greed and wickedness of rich noblemen.."ml He goes on to say that
there are all kinds of strange rumors, and he is not sure how to
reply to them. "For example, it is reported that N. N. declared
that he would not sell a single kernel of grain until a bushel is worth
a gulden, . . . Unless Your Grace provides help and counsel, the pres-
ent trouble will become more serious. Accordingly, all of us pray
that Your Grace may not only afford immediate relief in our want,
but may also intervene with the power of government to prevent noble-
men from selfishly buying up and exporting grain for purposes of
shameless usury, which is ruinous to Your Grace's land and people."102

After he had written to the Elector of Saxony on April 9, he
decided to speak concerning the problem from the pulpit. This was
reported by Anthony Lauterback. "On April 13 he Etiertin Luther]
delivered a sermon in which he sharply reproved the avarice of
usure rs. He declared that they deserved .to be cursed by all men,
for they are the greatest enemies of the country. With their devour-
”.103

ing, greed and usury they cause many to die. . .

In the year 1540 he published his treatise entitled Exhortation

 

to the Pastors, to Preach Against Usury. This also was a result of

 

101mm,. XVIII, 252.

103mm,, XVIII, 252-253.

103
Ibid. , XVIII, 2.53.

Q

-73-
the famine. He began with a discussion of what is meant by usury.
Luther also criticized the speculators. He feels that the world is
full of sin and corruption, slander, infidelity, avarice and usury. 104

On June 14, 1542 Mr. James Probst, who was pastor in
Bremen, came to see Luther. The conversation is reproduced for
us by Anthony Lauterback. The fact that usury was rife in Flanders
was discussed. Luther mentions the fact that usurers overrun the
whole world and that they should be convicted and punished. He
states: ”We are willing to allow five or six per cent interest, pro-
vided that there is security and that the agreement is kept whereby
the capital is not to be recalled by the 1ender--. . .And so we allow
six per cent interest because the cost of goods has risen and this
amount may be necessary. 105 The lender, however, should take
the risk in case, let us say, the house should burn or the soil should
wash away. It is this risk, and not the repayment of the capital,
that makes it a just contract."106

The question was asked of Luther, "If a poor man is in need

of money and has no security, should he not borrow money on the

 

104Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, pp. 300-301.

 

105The reader may recall that four or five per cent

was judged by Luther to be high enough of a rate.

106Tappert, Letters of Spiritual Counsel, XVIII, 254.

 

-74-
strength of his trustworthiness and ability to work?"107 His answer
to this was: "Let him live in his poverty and not sin. For money is
a sterile thing. We should not borrow on our ability to work and earn,
for this is uncertain. The peOple should be encouraged to work with
their hands, and the rich should be exhorted to do works of mercy.
We do not oppose those who engage in trade so long as they come to
just agreements among themselves without greed and fraud."108

We can find in this recorded conversation of Luther's, a little
under four years before his death, thoughts that were essentially the
same as those expressed in 1520.

One could find other materials written by Luther in his letters,
sermons, and lectures on the Bible concerning trade and usury, but

those that have been dealt with thus far could be considered some of

his more important works on these subjects.

 

107mm, XVIII, 254.

108mm. XVIII, 254.

CHAPTER IV

LUTHER'S VIEWS ON MONEY AND WEALTH

It is now our purpose to continue to look at other phases of
Luther's economic thoughts that are closely related to trade and
usury. This would be his attitude as it concerns money and wealth.
This will also be a short review of Chapter II, "The Christian Man
and the Economic Theories of Luther, " as these tOpiCS are closely
related to those discussed in that particular chapter.

In speaking of money in his Large Catechism, Luther refers

 

to it as that ”most popular idol on earth. ”1 In another place he
states: "He who has money and goods considers himself secure,
is happy and unafraid, as if he were sitting in the midst of Para-
dise. . . . This love of money clings firmly to human nature to the
very grave. "2
The copyist Lauterback in his Tagebuck of October 2, 1538,
quotes Luther as saying: "Everybody is concerned about piling up

much mOney for himself. Produce and victuals these avaricious

folks do not value so highly as money, although they cannot devour

A

lPlass, What Luther Says, II, 972.

 

2.11mi. . n. 972.

-75-

-76-

it. And yet the world considers money of sole importance, as though
body and soul depended on it. God and one's neighbors are despised,
and mammon is served."3

In a sermon on Luke 10:23-24 he refers to gold by saying that
"It cannot help a man attain life; it cannot give the grace of God or
turn aside His wrath. A fine god indeed! And yet people do not see
this."4 In spite of the fact that money can not bring to the individual
those things in life that count for real happiness he alludes to the fact
that "Nowadays one sees a scrambling after riches from the lowliest
station up to the highest, even among those who want to be called
Christians. It is a sin and a shame to hear this."5

In referring to Christ's request for a drink of water in
John 4:6, he feels the Christian would comply quickly except that
greed and usury have such a hold on people that they do not pay any
attention to the re quests of God. He states that, "God does not think
that such misers deserve the honor of giving one drink of cold water
to the Church. . . . Such misers will be the losers in the end. ”6 In

fact he feels so strongly about peeple hording money that in referring

’n

31bid., n. 972.
4Ibid., 11. 973.
5Ibid., 11, 973.

6Pe1ikan, Luther's Works, xxn, 518-519.

0

 

-77..

to Genesis 31:1,. he says that, "A miser can do nothing better and
more profitable than to die; for his life is spent in the interest
neither of God nor his fellow men nor, indeed, in his own interest.
He can do nothing but sin against God, against men, and against
himself."7

One of the curses of money, according to Luther, is the
fact that you can not see God for the money. 8

A good summary of Luther's thoughts on this subject can be
found in his work on Matthew 6224. After considering the teachings
of Jesus as to the fact that man cannot serve God and mammon at .
the same time, he makes this statement: "Thus the emphasis here
is on the little word 'serve.‘ It is no sin to have money and prop-
erty, wife and children, house and home. But you must not let it
be your master.”9

To consider Luther's thoughts on wealth is just to look at
the same picture we have been viewing only from another angle.

Riches to Luther were not important as can be seen from a

conversation taken from his Table Talk in the winter of 1542-43.

 

"Wealth, " he says, "is the most insignificant thing on earth, the

 

7Plass, What Luther Says, II, 974.

 

3mm. , n, 975.

9Pe1ikan, Luther's Works, xxx, 189.

 

-78..
smallest gift that God can give a man. What is it in comparison with
the Word of God? Indeed, what is it in comparison even with gifts of
the body, such as beauty? What is it in comparison with gifts of the
soul?. . .It is the material, formal, efficient, and final motive of men;
and yet there is nothing good in it. ”10

Luther alludes again to the degrading effect of wealth in his
exposition on Genesis 19:2-3. In most cases people ”. . .become
haughty because of their good fortune. Hence there is the proverb:
'Gold makes bold.’ ‘Good fortune commonly induces hearts to be
unrestrained.‘ Also: 'It takes strong legs to carry good days. “'11
It is impossible for men not to become corrupted by wealth unless
their hearts are enlightened by the Holy Spirit-«as was the case of
David.

It is Luther's contention that wealth is not necessarily a sign
of God's good favor. "But the world does not believe this. Together
with the people of Sodom it holds fast to this firm conclusion: Behold,
we have a very fertile land, a very powerful city; we have been
weighed down with gifts and with good fortune of many kinds. How,

then, could God hate us, or how could any misfortune befall us?"12

 

loPlass, What Luther Says. III: 1435-

 

“Pelikan, Luther's Works, III, 248.

 

”Ibid., III, 248.

-79-
He arrives at the conclusion that ". . .those who do not have
many treasures are the best off, for they do not have many rats to
feed and do not have to be afraid of thieves."l3
Probably the best piece of advice that Luther would give an
individual if he were to ask counsel of him concerning the problem
of wealth would be taken from Psalm 62:10: ”'If riches increase,
set not your heart on them. "'14
The man that can be considered to be truly rich is singled

out in his exposition of Exodus 20:5. "No one is rich, be he

emperor 01‘ pepe. except the man who is rich in God."15

 

”Ibid.. XXI, 169.
14Ibid.. 111, 248.

lsPlass, What Luther Says, 111, 1438.

 

CHAPTER V

LUTHER AND THE PEASANTS' WAR

Although some authors would deem the Peasants' War to be
more of a political uprising than economic, the fact must be recog-
nized that the two in this case are closely related. The economic
factor was a real and vital force in this movement. Therefore in
order to present a more complete picture of Luther's views as
they relate to economics, it would be well to consider this part
of the stage upon which the Reformation drama is unfolding to the
audience of the world.

For more than a millenium there had been peasant upris-
ings in Europe. Instances of rebellion had taken place in Gaul
during the time of the Romans. Examples of insurrections can
be {Ound in France in 1358 and the English labor strike of 1381.
The fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries witnessed many of
these local revolts. There were the old grievances of the peas-
ants regarding the tyranny of the lords. The burdensome taxes

and tithes, the laws concerning game, the corvee and serfdom

-30-

-31-
were common causes for most of the unrest. To these were added

the intellectual unrest and the powerful force of the new ideas in
religion. 1
A study has been made by Kurt Uhrig of the peasant as he was
reflected by the art and literature of this period. ”In poetry, play,
and song he was pictured as stupid, obscene, nasty, scheming,
stubborn, gluttonous, and hard-drinking, little above the level of an
animal. The minnesinger loved to ridicule him in court entertain-
ment. The burghers of the town made him the butt of their coarse
jokes. Contemporary artists treated him more kindly, portraying
him as he really was, not the degraded, depraved individual pre-
sented in literature. "2
Adolf Bartels, however, comes to the conclusion that there
did exist a definite peasant type. He came to this conclusion after
examining some 400 wood-cuts, etchings and pictures of this per-
iod. The peasants were aware of the fact that they were looked down
upon by their contemporaries, and by the middle of the fifteenth cen-

tury were bitter and resentful toward those about them who could be

considered their tormentors. 3

 

lPreserved Smith, The Life and Letters of Martin
Luther (Boston and New York, 1911), p. 157. Hereafter
cited as Smith, Life and Letters of Luther.

 

 

2Schwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 558.
3

 

Ibid., p. 558.

-82..

With the com ing of the printing press there emerged an
entirely new peasant as he is portrayed in contemporary literature.
A type of literature was developed for the peasant masses. Then
the pendulum began to swing to the opposite extreme. There was
developed by Luther the idea of the priesthood of all believers,
which the peasants were led to believe applied especially to them.
Once he was presented as the refuse of the earth. Now he was pre-
sented as a noble son of the soil. His profession was considered to
be far above all others and was particularly pleasing to God. It was
a pleasant picture for him to find himself a part of, but the sad fact
of the matter was it was not true. The psych010gical effect greatly
exceeded reality, however. The peasant considered himself an
important instrument in the hands of God to spread the Gospel and
bring about social and economic reforms. 4

If to this already dangerous situation can be added the explo-
sive preaching of Carlstadt and Miinze r, the whole of Germany would
soon be set ablaze. The doctrines of Luther as set forth in The

..—

Freedom of a Christian Man meant inner freedom of the reborn man.

 

This, however, was interpreted by some to mean freedom from bond-
age in the material world. Luther's doctrine of the "priesthood of

believers" became a potential bomb shell in the hands of the peasants. 5

 

4Rfid.,}nu 558-560.

51bid., p. 560.

-83-
The immediate cause for the unrest began in the summer of
1524 in the territory belonging to the Count of Lupfen in the area of
Stuehlingen near the Black Forest. It seems the countess antago-
nized the peasants by asking them to pick strawberries and snail
shells at the height of the harvest season. 6
By the autumn of 1524 the insurrection had swept north

through Franconia and Swabia. The'demands of the peasants were

presented in what has come to be known as the Twelve Articles.

 

These were organized by a Swabian, Sebastian Lotzer, no later
than February, 1525. 7‘ The claims of the document were based on
an appeal to the Gospel. They proposed a free election of their
pastors according to each parish. The abolition of serfdom, the
reduction of taxes and tithes, freedom to hunt, fish, and cut wood
in the forests, less forced labor, reopening of the commons to the
public, substitution of the old German for the new Roman law, and
the abolition of the heriot were all demands made by them at this
time. 8

The rebellion continued to spread and by April, 1525 it had

reached Thuringia and Saxony. It was in this region that the peasants

 

61bid., p. 562.

7The authorship is not certain according to the Holman
edition of Luther's works. Besides Lotzer, Christopher
Schappeler and Wilhelm Stolze have been suggested as possible
authors of the Twelve Articles. See Holman edition, IV, 207.

 

8Smith, Life and Letters of Luther, pp. 157-158.

 

-34-
asked Luther together with Melanchthon, Bugenhangen, and the Elector
Frederic to be mediators in the dispute with the lords. Luther, who
had traveled to Eisleben to look into the situation, had not as yet heard
of the atrocities committed by the insurrectionists. It was while he

was the guest of Chancellor Diirr that he wrote An Exhortation to Peace

 

on the Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants, during the 19th and

 

20th of April, 1525.9

Luther could foresee the dangers of preaching radical reform
long before the Peasants' War of 1525. He had seen the dangers of it
in the disturbances of Wittenberg in 1522. His methods of reform may

be found in the Eight Wittenberg Sermons of that same year. 10 In his

 

second sermon he says, "I will constrain no man by force, . . . Take
myself as an example. I have opposed the indulgences and all the
papists, but never by force. I simply taught, preached, wrote God's
Word; . . .1 did nothing; the Word did it all."”

In his two writings, Faithful Exhortation and On Temporal

 

 

Government, issued in 1522, Luther gives his warnings against vio-

 

lent measures and expressed his ideas in relation to the ruling

classes. 12 It is his contention that, "We must firmly establish

 

91bid. , p. 158.

lOWML. xv. 206.

llIbid. . 11. 399-400.

.— -

lZl'bid. , IV, 206-207.

-85..

secular law and the sword, that no one may doubt that it is in the world
by God's will and ordinance."l3 He bases his words on the thirteenth
chapter of Romans, "‘Lct every soul be subject to higher powers, for
there is no power but from God, and those that are, are Ordained of
God. "'14

With the coming of the war in 1525 he had to decide whether or
not it would be his policy to continue to hold to the principles that he
had already expressed. 15

The Admonitiflg is written in a calm and impartial spirit. It
is separated into three parts. The first section is addressed to the
princes and 10rds. Luther tells them in no uncertain words that they
are responsible for the existing situation: "We have no one on earth
to thank for this mischievous rebellion, except you princes and lords;
. . . Besides, in your temporal government you do nothing but flay and

rob your subjects, in order that you may lead a life of splendor and

pride, until the poor common people can bear it no longer. "16

 

l3Ibid.. III, 231.

l4Luther: Lectures on Romans. ed. and trans. W. Pauck,
The Library of Christian Classics, 26 Vols. (Philadelphia, 1961),
XV, 358. Hereafter cited as Pauck, Luther: Lectures on Romans.

 

 

ISWML, Iv, 207.

16Ibid. . IV, 220.

-86-
He considers it a judgment of God upon them ". . . because this

raging of yours cannot and will not and ought not be endured for

long."17

Luther begs them not to make light of the rebellion and to
". . .deal reasonably with the peasants, as though they we re drunk or
out of their mind. "18

His judgment is that "The peasants have put forth 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 fulfill the Psalm
about pouring contempt upon princes. "19 -

The second part is addressed to the peasants. The opening
words to the peasants are: "So far, dear friends, you have‘learned
only that I admit it to be (sad to say!) all too true and certain that
the princes and lords, . . .are worthy, and have well deserved, that

God put them down from their seats, as men who have sinned deeply

O

against God and man. "20

Although Luther will concede that the lords and nobles are
wrong, he warns the peasants to look at their own conscience and

to be sure their cause is just. He warns them not to bear the name

_I

l7Ibid., IV, 221.
18Ibid., IV, 223.
19Ibid.. IV, 223.

Z01”bid., IV, 224.

-87-
of God in vain. He then states that ". . .it is easy to prove that you
are bearing God's name in vain and putting: it to shame; . . . "21

Even though the national leaders are wicked and unjust, the
temporal rulers are to be obeyed.

It is not only contrary to national laws for them to rebel, but
it is against the law of Christ. Luther states: ”Listen, then, dear ‘
Christians, to your Christian law! Your Supreme Lord Christ,
whose name you bear, says, in Matthew VI, 'Ye shall not resist
evil, but if any one compels you to go one mile, go with him two
miles, and if anyone takes your cloak, let him have your coat, too;
and if anyone smites you on one cheek, offer him the other also."'22
It is his feeling that no matter how right their cause, it is not for the
Christian to appeal to law or take up arms, but they are ". . .to suffer
wrong and endure evil and there is no other way. "

He discusses the preface and the first three articles to some
extent. Most of his exposition on the first three articles deals. with

showing the insurrectionist how wrong they are in the light of the

Word of God upon which they base the justness of their cause. He

dismisses the rest of the articles when he says, ". . .these I leave

to the lawyers, for it is not fitting that I, an evangelist, should judge

 

21Ibid., IV, 226.
ZZIbid., IV, 230.

23Ibid.. IV, 233.

 

-83-
or decide them. It is for me to instruct and teach men's conscience
in things that concern divine and Christian matters; . . ."24
The third part is addressei‘ to both rulers and peasants.
Luther points out the fact that both sides are wrong when he says,
". . .there is nothing Christian on either side and nothing Christian
is at issue between you, but both lords and peasants are dealing

with heathenish, or worldly, right and wrong, and with temporal

goods; . . . moreover, both parties are acting against God and are
under His wrath, . "25 '
He sees in a continuation of the conflict a loss of their souls
for those slain in battle and the ruin of Germany. '’It would, there-
fore, be my faithful counsel to choose from among the nobles
certain counts and lords, and from the cities certain Councilmen,
and have these matters dealt with in a friendly way, and settled;
that you lords let down your stubborness. . .and give up a little of

your tyranny and oppression, [and]. . . that the peasants for their

part, let themselves be instructed, and give over and let go some

7‘

of the articles that grasp too far and too high, . . . ”‘6

24Ibid.. IV, 241.
251bid., IV, 241-242.

26mm. . IV, 244.

-39-
Luther en-ls the Admonition in a frank and honest manner,
devoid of the passiOnate spirit that he later displayed, by saying,
”I, however, will pray to my God that He will either bring both
your parties to agreement and unite you, or else prevent things
from turning out as you intend. . . .At all events, I have given all
of you, faithfully enough, Christian and brotherly advice. God
grant that it may help! Anien.”27
The fact that the Admonition failed to bring about a truce
was due in part to the rapidity with which events began to move.
Before it could be published, the war was in full stride, and the
peasants who earlier had sought his advice were burning and
destroying towns, castles, monasteries and taking all that could
be carried off.28
It was while Luther was waiting to see the effect of his
advice on the peasants and nobles, that the news arrived con-
cerning the tragedy of Weinsherg in which the fate of the Count
of Helfenstein was sealed along with the rest of the inhabitants.

It was at this time that Miinzer was reaching the most violent

e o l (
pomt of his madness. Z) According to Bayne, "The astounding

 

27mm” IV, 244.
28Ibid.. IV, 209.’
ngeter Bayne, Martin Luther: His Life and Work,

2 Vols. (London, Paris, New York 8: Melbourne, 1887), II,
303. Hereafter cited as Bayne, Martin Luther.

 

 

-90-
extravagance of spiritual pride to which he had attained, and the firm-
ness of his persuasion that one prophet was as good as another, may
be estimated from the saying imputed to him that if God would not

speak with him as readily as with Abraham he would spit in His

face."30

The peasants had taken Weinsberg on April 16 and for the next
few weeks anarchy followed with all the terrible deeds of class war-
fare. It was at Miilhausen that Milnzer considered that the hour of
triumph had come, and that the divine duty of slaughter was to be
carried out. The princes were caught unprepared, and it looked for
one terrible moment as if the rebellion would lay waste the land and
give the victory to the peasants. 31

Luther wrote a stern letter to John Riihel on May 4, 1525.
Shortly after this letter (the date is not known for sure) he wrote his

short tract, Against the Bobbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants.

 

"The peasants," says Luther, "have taken on themselves the
burden of three terrible sins against God and man, by which they
have abundantly merited death in body and soul. "32 First of all,

because they have broken their obedience to the temporal powers,

 

3°1bid., 11, 303-304.

31Smith, Life and Letters of Luther, pp. 159-160.

 

32WML, IV. 248.

-91-
which is decreed of God, ". . .they have forfeited body and soul, as
faithless, perjured, lying, disobedient knaves and scoundrels are
wont to do. In the second place, they are starting a rebellion, and
violently robbing and plundering monasteries and castles which are
not theirs, . . . In the third place, they cloak this terrible and hor-
rible sin with the Gospel, . . . Thus they become the greatest of all
blaSphemers of God and slande re rs of His Holy Name, serving the

."33 As a

devil, under the outward appearance of the Gospel, . .
result of these sins they deserve death in body and soul ten times
over.

"Since the peasants, then have brought both God and man
down upon them and are already so many times guilty of death in
the body and soul, since they submit to no court and wait for no
verdict, but only rage on, I must instruct the worldly governors
how they are to act in the matter with clear conscience. "34

First, Luther would not oppose a ruler who would punish
the rebels, even though he did not tolerate the Gospel. In fact it
was his duty to punish them because the peasants were not justi-
fied in their actions.

Secondly, if the prince is a Christian he has to be more

careful. He should seek the guidance of God and go beyond his

 

33Ibid. , IV, 248-250.

34Ibid. , 1v, 250-251.

0*.“

 

-92-
duty and give the peasants an opportunity to come to terms. "Finally,
if that does not help, then swiftly grasp the sword. . . . Here, then,
there is no time for sleeping, no place for patience or mercy. It is
the time of the sword, not the day of Grace."35

He feels that the rulers will be true martyrs in the eyes of
God. Therefore, they are to "Stab, smite and slay," the peasants
and if they die in doing so, it will be well for them. "If anyone think
this too hard, let him remember that rebellion is intolerable and that
the destruction of the world is to be expected every hour."36

Once again events were moving rapidly and almost at the same
time that Luther was writing his tract, steps were being taken to sup-
press the rebellion.

A band of peasants were scattered by a small force of personal
retainers of the Count of Mansfeld on April 5.

The decisive battle followed shortly thereafter. Philip of Hesse
had come to terms with his own peasants and gathered an army in coop-
eration with other lords. He marched on the enemy at Frankenhausen.
Philip hoped to bring the war to an end by peaceful negotiations. He.

found the peasants willing to talk terms until Milnzer arrived on May 12

with men from Mfihlhausen. He roused them to such a high pitch of

 

35xbid.. 1v, 251-252.

36Ibid.. IV, 254.

-93-
fanaticism that they refused to talk of any terms. The Count attacked
on May 15 and slaughtered more than half of the raw country troops.
Those that did not perish fled from the field in wild panic. 37 Miinzer
escaped from the field but was captured and put to death after taking

the Sacraments in one kind, and died a Roman Catholic. 33

By the end of June, 1525 the peasants were overcome. 39
The untimely appearance of Luther's tract had made his utter-
ances offensive to even some of his close friends and followers."’0
When the lords had gained the advantage, they put down —the
rebellion with utmost cruelty. After the danger had passed, a reac-'
tion set in against the harsh measures and the public's pity was
aroused in behalf of the peasants. IHis enemies accused Luther of

deserting and betraying his allies and the men who had gone astray

as the result of his teachings. Their cries were also against the

harsh language of his tract.41

In such a situation Luther decided that he must speak again.
He did so in a sermon delivered at Wittenberg sometime in the early

part of July. The re is, however, some doubt as to the exact date of

 

37Smith, Life and Letters of Luther, p. 163.

 

38Bayne, Martin Luther, 11. 314-315.

 

39$chwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 567.

 

40WML, IV, 257.

41Smith, Life and Letters of Luther, p. 164.

 

-94-
this exposition on An Open Letter Concerning the Hard Book Against

the Peasants.

 

In his defense Luther still holds to the Opinions already
expressed in his earlier tracts. He writes: Therefore, as I wrote
them'so I write now; On the obstinate, hardened, blinded peasants,
let no one have mercy, but let everyone, as he is able, hew, stab,
slay, lay about him as though among mad dogs, in order that, by so
doing, he may show mercy to those who are ruined, driven away,
and led astray by these peasants so that peace and safety may be
maintained. "42

Luther feels that the cry for mercy in behalf of the peasants
by his critics is not consistent with their earlier utterances. "My
good friends, you who are praising me my so highly because the peas-
ants are beaten, why did you not praise it when the peasants were
raging, smiting, robbing, burning, and plundering, until they were
terrible to men's eyes and ears?”43

Again Luther makes a distinction between the two kingdoms.
One is the kingdom of God and the other is the kingdom of the world.

He feels that if an individual can distinguish rightly between these

two kingdoms he will not be offended by his little book.

 

42WML, IV, 269.

43‘mm. , Iv, 263.

-95- .

"God's Kingdom is a kingdom of grace and mercy, not of wrath
and punishment. In it there is only forgiveness, consideration for one
another, love, service, the doing of good, peace, joy, etc. But the
kingdom of the world is a kingdom of wrath and severity. In it the re
is only punishment, repression, judgment, and condemnation, for the
suppressing of the wicked and the protection of the good."44

Luther contends that the words relating to mercy found in the
scripture apply only to the Christian and the kingdom of God. It is a
duty of the Christian to be merciful and to endure all kinds of suffer-
ings. He is not to slay or smite anyone. "But the kingdom of the
world is nothing else than the servant of God's wrath upon the wicked,
. . .It should not be merciful, but strict, severe and wrathful in the
fulfillment of its work and duty. Its tool is not a wreath of roses or
a flower of love, but a naked sword; . . . It is turned only against the
wicked, to hold them in check and keep them at peace, and to protect
and save the righteous."45 To confuse these two kingdoms, accord-
ing to Luther, would be to put wrath into the kingdom of God and
mercy into the world's kingdom. This would be the same as putting

God into hell and the devil in heaven. This is the position taken by

the individuals who are accusing Luther of betraying the peasants.

 

44mm. , IV, 265.

451bid., IV, 266.

-96-

The severity of the world's kingdom does not seem so unmerci-
ful when we see it rightly. "Suppose I had a wife and children, ” says
Luther, "a house, servant, and property, and a thief or murderer fell
upon me, killed me in my own house, ravished my wife and children,
took all that I had and went unpunished, . . . Tell me, who would be more
in need of mercy in such a case, I or the thief and murderer? Without
doubt it would be I who would need most that peeple should have mercy
on me. But how can this mercy be shown to me. . .except by suppres-
sing such a knave, and protecting me and maintaining my rights, . . . ”46

Luther‘s contention is that if peeple would have followed his
advice when the rebellion first began and a hundred of the peasants had
been knocked down so that the rest would have stumbled over them and
had not been given the opportunity to get the upper hand, many thous-
ands of lives would have been saved. This in his eyes would have been
a needful deed of mercy completed with little wrath.

But now God's will has been done in order to teach the peasants
and lords a lesson. "First, the peasants had to learn that things had
been too easy for them and that they we re not able to stand prosperity
and peace. . . . The peasants did not know what a precious thing it is to

be in peace and safety and to enjoy one's food and drink in happiness

and security, and so they did not thank God for it. He had to take this

 

46Ibid. , Iv, 267.

 

.'....

-97-
way to teach them, and relieve their itch. ”47
The lords on the other hand should have learned a valuable
lesson as well. They found out just how the rabble acted and how
far to trust them so that in the future they would learn to rule justly.
He states that, "The ass will have blows, and the people will be

ruled by force, God knew that full well, and so He gave the rule rs,

not a feather-duste r, but a sword. "48

 

Luther ends the sermon with a warning‘to tyrants. ”But the

 

furious, raving, senseless tyrants, who even after the battle cannot
get their fill of blood, and in all their lives ask scarcely a question
about Christ, --these I did not undertake to instruct. To these bloody
dogs it is all one whether they slay the guilty or the innocent, whether
it please God or the devil. . . .Hell-fire, trembling, and gnashing of .
teeth in hell will be their reward eternally, unless they repent."‘49
To what extent the war hurt the cause of Luthernism and its
leader is difficult to precisely ascertain. But hurt it did and the
reputation of Luther as well. By trying to steer too far from the
anarchism of the peasants, he steered too far to the opposite shore

and floundered on the rocks and lost part of his crew. From then

 

47mm. xv, 271.

481bid., IV, 272.

49161d., IV, 230-231.

 

-98-

until the present day his name has suffered from the discredit incur-
red from his publications. His name has been reproached with cruelty
to the peasants who were to some extent misguided by what they
thought were his ideas. And though one would regret his violent words,
it would be difficult to see how it could have ended any other way.
The re is not a country in the world today that would permit such a
rebellion to go unpunished, Luther first tried to settle the matter
in a peaceful way, but that failed. He then had to urge the way of
the worldly kingdom. Even though he was right, he hurt himself by
his excessive zeal. It would have been bette r.if Luther would have
shown himself to be more merciful and temperate in his remarks.
He would have spared himself the accusation of cruelty which has
' stained his name even to this day. 50

E. G. Schwiebert feels that many of the peasants were dis-
illusioned by Luther's denunciation and we re alienated from his
teachings. However, many did remain true to the new Gospel.
Even though Luther condemned the peasants in his tract, Against
the Murderous and Plundering Bands Among the Peasants, in all
fairness one could not conclude that Luther had a negative and con-

demning spirit toward all the peasants as a class. Viewing Luther's

writings as a whole, he constantly expresses his love and sympathy

 

50Smith, Life and Letters of Luther, pp. 166-167.

 

-99-
for the lowly and downtrodden. The peasants alsoexpress their love
for Luther by the interest showed in his teachings on his many preach-
ing trips and the respect and homage they paid his remains at the time
of his death.

Schwiebert also feels that it is difficult to evaluate the effect
the revolt had on the princes. The power of the princes was increased,
but to say the revolt created the German State Church as it was known
during the nineteenth century is to misconstrue history. He contends
that the German Territorial Church had been developing for centuries.
The development of the Church in Germany, with the State taking the
principle role in its administration and ecclesiastical polity, belongs

to the latter pa rt of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. 51

 

51Luther and His Times, pp. 565-570.

 

 

CHAPTER VI

LUTHER, SOCIETY, AND GOVERNMENT

To understand more fully Luther's mind and attitude in
relation to the Peasants' War it will be necessary to have some
knowledge of his ideas concerning society and government. It is
not possible in the time and space allowed to make a thorough
study of these phases of Luther's thought. Then, too, this would
be a large study in itself. But in order to better grasp the situa-
tion under consideration, we will quickly glance at his conception
of these two subjects.

"God,” states Luther in his lecture on Genesis 19:15, ”has
appointed three social classes to which he has given the command
not to let sins go unpunished. The first is that of the parents, who
should maintain strict discipline in their house. . . The second is the
government. . . .The third is that of the church, which governs by the
Word. By this threefold authority God has protected the human race
against the devil, the flesh, and the world, to the end that offences
may not increase but may be cut off. "1 In the case of the parents,

they are to act as guides or teachers to their children. If the father

 

lPelikan, Luther's Works, III, 279.

 

-lOO-

 

i-IOI-

does not censure the sin of his children, then it becomes his own sin.
It is the duty of the government to punish those who have committed
sins and crimes as adultery, murder, and usury. If they fail to pun-
ish the individual in these cases, then they become sins of the city
or public sins and usually disaster is the result of such acts. If the
person is obstinate, it is then the duty of the Church to excommuni-
cate them.

In Luther's mind society was based on the home. ”If obedi-
ence is not rendered in the homes, we shall never have a whole city,
country, principality, or kingdom well governed. For this order in
the home is the first rule; it is the source of all other rule and gov-
ernment.”2 If the roots of the tree are rotten, then you can not have
a good trunk or good fruit. He goes on to state that a city is no more
than a group of homes, and if the city is to be governed well, there
must be order in the home. In like manner he contends that a country
is a group of cities and hamlets. "If the homes are badly governed, "
Luther asks, "how can an entire country be well governed?"3

There are individuals in the history of man that have been called
levelers. Some of the leaders of the Peasants' War could be placed in
this category. It is because of these ideas of social equality that such

wars as this are fought.

 

3pm., What Luther Says, 111, 1322.

 

3mm. .-m, i322.

-102-

Luther was no social equalitarianist. He has much to say about
this in his lectures on the Gospel of St. John, chapter 1:12-13. Accord-
ing to him, "All of life's estates on earth, both the high and the low,
find their origin in this physical birth. 4 And all these estates, as we
have already heard, God wants us to respect and honor as His own
creations. God has ordered and commanded us to honor our parents,
to be obedient to spiritual and to temporal government, and to observe
certain differences in authority, setting the father above the child, the
master above the servant, the ruler above the subject, the husband
above the wife."5 He goes on to say a little later that "It is true that
you are the equal of father, mother, rulers, or masters when judged
on the basis of faith, spiritual birth and eternal inheritance. . . .Never-
theless, the spiritual birth does not abrogate the duty of obedience to
parents and to government, but confirms it."6 Luther contends that
". . .God does not belittle physical birth and position in life; He pre-
serves each with all its due dignity in the world."‘7 It is his feeling

that there are three types of fatherhood. These would be--by blood,

 

4He is considering spiritual and physical birth.

5mm“. Luther's Works, xxn, 93.

 

6mm. . xxn, 94.

71mm, xxn. 96.

 

 

-103-
by adoption, and by honor and are creations of God. Therefore, they
are pleasing and confirmed by Him. 8

The social strata is ordained of God and people are to serve
Him to the best of their ability in that station in life that has fallen to
them. ”To serve God properly means that everyone stay in his calling,
however humble it may be, and first heed the Word of God in church,
then the word of the government, superiors, or parents, and then live
accordingly. This means having served God properly.”9

In comparing the different stations in life Luther feels that the
farmer is the best situated. In referring to the life of a farmer he
quotes Vergil when he says: "'Exceedingly happy if they realized their
blessings “"10 Even though there are many hardships, that occupation
is seasoned with pleasure that can not be found in any other labor.

In his day many of the farmers were serfs. Not even this type
of labor and social position are incompatible with the Christian way of
life. He states: ”Whoever says it is, is lying. Christian liberty
frees souls, and Christ is the Founder of that spiritual liberty which
one does not see. What is external God allows to pass; He is not

greatly concerned about it. "11

 

8Ibid. . xxn, 99.

9Plass, What Luther Says, III, 1323.

 

loPelikan, Luther's Works, I, 212.

llPlass, What Luther Says, III, 1324.

 

 

 

 

-lO4-

Luther knew that there we re social, political and economic
reforms that needed to be dealt with, but in contrast to the peasants
he felt that society would have to be changed from within and not by
force. 12 In referring to Christian liberty in his works on Receiving

Both Kinds in the Sacrament, he expresses these words. "So the

 

rabble plunges in and tries in headstrong fashion to such freedom
with their fists, not remembering that they are supposed to exercise
faith and love. They remainas full as ever of greed,,hatred, unchas-
tity, wrath, swearing, and cursing. Let me say emphatically, Ido
not recognize such peeple as disciples of Christ. Christian people
fight against the devil's work and teaching only with the Word. First
they tear hearts and consciences from his grip, then everything else
takes care of itself.”13 All the attempts of pious people to remedy
the social structure by passing laws is to no avail if the root of the
problem is not destroyed. "No matter how long one restrains, '
improves, and heals the outside, the stem, the root, and the source
still remain on the inside. Above all, the source must be stopped up,
and the root must be taken from the tree; otherwise you may stop up

and restrain in one spot, only to find the evil breaking and rushing

 

12Ibid.. 111. 1327. ‘

”Pelikan, Luther‘s Works, xxxvx. 263.

 

 

-105-
out in ten others. "14 In Luther's mind it is a work of God in the heart
of man that shall bring reform to the world.
The works of Luther with regard to government are quite exten-

sive. He himself states: "...I have written in such glorification of

temporal government as no teacher has done since the days of the
apostles, except, perhaps, St. Augustine.”15 Luther again alludes
to the fact that he has written extensively on government, and in a

favorable manner toward it in his tract, Whether Soldiers, Too, Can

 

Be Saved. "For I might boast here that, since the time of the
Apostles, the temporal sword and temporal government have never
been. so clearly described or so highly praised as by me. “16

Power as it relates to government, in Luther's mind, comes
from and is ordained of God. In his marginal notes on Romans 13
he says, "'The powers that are, are ordered of God,‘ i.e., because
there are powers, they are ordered as they are by God alone. It is
the same as to say, 'There is no power but from God..' Therefore,

whatever powers exist and fourish, exist and fourish because God

has ordered them. "17 The importance he places on the rulers can

 

14913. , XXIV, 342.. See page 341 where the analogy begins.

ISWML, v. 82.

16Ibid., v. 35.

17I-"auck, Luther: Lectures on Romans, pp. 358-359.

 

-106-
be understood from his words when, he says, ”Whoever resists them
or is disobedient to them or despises them, who God names with His
own name and calls 'gods,‘ and to whom He attaches His own honor-.-
whoever I say, despises, disobeys, or resists them is thereby despis- .
ing, disobeying, and resisting the true Supreme God, who is in them,
who speaks and judges through them, and calls their judgment His

judgment."18 The office of the government is the highest service of

19

C

God and the most useful on earth next to preaching.
Luther realizes that there are harsh rulers who do not always
rule for the best interest of the people, but at the same time his eyes
are opened to the fact that government is highly desirable and should
be treasured. "In a word, after the Gospel or the ministry, " accord-
ing to his judgment, "there is on earth no better jewel, no greater
treasure, nor richer aims, no fairer endowment, no finer possession
than a ruler who makes and preserves just laws. Such men are
rightly called gods.”?‘0
Government is necessary in order to keep the world from

becoming worse than it already is and is a protection and check against

the wicked. If it did not exist, people would go about devouring one

 

”Pelikan, Luther's Works, x111, 44.

 

”Ibid., XIII, 51.

2oPelik.an, Luther's Works, XIII, 54.

 

-lO7-

anotherand nothing would be safe. Therefore, the sword has been
instituted of God to keep everything from perishing. 21

The cry has gone up that Luther was an authoritarian in mat-
ters concerning church and state. There is justification in this
judgment, but there is evidence that Luther had democra‘tic ideas
as well. It is true that his spoken and written words were harsh dur-
ing the Peasants' War, but between 1523 and 1525 he wrote and
lectured on the book of Deuteronomy from [which these thoughts are
taken. "Here you see that the magistrates should be chosen by the
votes of the people, as reason also demands. . . . For to thrust govern-
ment upon a people against its will is dangerous or destructive."2'2

At the same time, however, Luther was afraid to give the
pe0ple too much power lest it turn to mob rule. With the death of
Elector Frederick the Wise, he preached a sermon on I Thess. 4:
13-18, wherein we find these words: ”I wish herewith to have
besought you that we thank God, confess our gratitude to Him, and
pray for our government that the devil may not turn us into a mob.
For if government were to be laid low in this way, we would have
no peace. God does not want the common rabble (der gemeine Pobel)

to rule.”?‘3

 

lelsss, What Luther Says, 11, 578.

 

ZZPelikan, Luther's Works, IX, 18.

 

23Plass, What Luther Says, 11, 577.

 

 

 

 

~108—

Government is necessary to keep the mob in hand according to
Luther. Yet, he feels if everyone were a Christian, there would be
no need of secular government in the world. "Now observe, " he says,
"these people need no secular sword or law. And if all the world we re
composed of real Christians, that is, true believers, no prince, king,
lord, sword or law would be needed. For what was the use of them,

since Christians have in their hearts the Holy Spirit, who instructs

 

them and causes them to wrong no one, . . ."24

It is because of the pride of rulers that many states have come
to destruction. ”I am convinced," he says, "that monarchies would
have endured much longer if the monarchs had omitted the one pronoun
'I,’ that is, if they had not been proud in confidence placed in their own

.25

power and wisdom.’ It is because of this same pride that he lashes

the princes and lords in his Admonition to Peace. He says to them:

 

". . . rulers are not instituted in order that they may seek their own
profit and self-will, but in order to provide for the best interests of
their subjects.”26

Men must be educated in the law in order to become wise

worldly rule rs.27 He would rather have a wise ruler who is not a

 

Z4WML, III, 234.

25Plass, What Luther Says, II, 580.

 

Z6WML, Iv, 224.

27Ibid., Iv, 160.

I.“"iiiilllllnll'l‘lliii.lll !dfli’.|lll|i'll.

 

-109-

follower of God than a saintly man who is not too intelligent. This view
is set forth in his lectures on Deuteronomy 1:13-16 when he says: "The
question has been properly raised whether a prince is better if he is
good and imprudent or prudent yet also evil. He re Moses certainly
demands both. Nevertheless, if one cannot have both it is better for
him to be prudent and not good than good and not prudent; for the good
man would actually rule nothing but would be ruled only by others, and
at that only by the worst people. "28 The rulers are not to show favor-
itism with regard to their subjects. In referring to partiality in
judgment he has this to say: "This is the highest and most difficult
virtue of rulers, namely, justice and integrity of judgment. For it
is easy to pronounce judgment on poor and common peOple; but to con-
demn the powerful, the wealthy, and the friendly, to disregard blood,
honor, fear, favor, and gain, and simply to consider the issue--this
is a divine virtue. "29

Luther felt strongly that one ought not to rebel against the rulers
of a state or empire. This applied not only to the peasants and common
people, but he had equally strong convictions with regard to the lords
and nobles. It was during the winter months of 1529 and 1530 that the

governments of Saxony and Hesse we re considering the question of

 

2'8Peliks.n, Luther's Works, IX, 19.

 

29Ibid.. IX. 19.

 

 

 

-1 10-

whether it was right to resist the Emperor with force of arms because
of his attempts to suppress Protestantism. Luther wrote to the
Elector John of Saxony from Wittenberg on March 6, 1530. He states
that he had inquired and taken counsel of his friends concerning the
matter and finds ". . .that according to the imperial or civil laws cer-
tain people30 might conclude it allowable in such a case to defend
oneself against his Imperial Majesty, . . . But according to Scripture,
it is in no wise proper for anyone who would be a Christian to set
himself against his government, whether it act justly or unjustly, but
a Christian ought to endure oppressions and injustice, especially at
the hands of his government."31 Even though the Emperor had broken
his oath not to attack any of his people by force, Luther contends that
this does not destroy his imperial sovereignty or the obedience that is
due him from his subjects as long as he is legally recognized by the
empire and electors as the emperor. 32

It is possible to see from our consideration of Luther's politi-
cal thoughts that he felt strongly that government was necessary and

instituted of God. One should give his allegiance to it no matter if it

were wise or foolish, harsh or understanding. These are ideas that

 

,30The Saxon jurists had given this opinion.

3'lSmith, Luther's Correspondence, II, 519.
32

 

Ibid. , II, 519-520.

 

-111-

were consistently expounded upon by Luther over and over again. There
are those who have said Luther betrayed the peasants in order to flatter
the nobles. But he was as cutting in his criticism of their failure to
provide justice and Christian rule for the country as he was in his denun-
ciation of the peasants.

Luther dealt with these problems of his day not as a political
scientist or economist, but as a theologian who was concerned with
the ethical involvement of personal property and money. Luther
found to his own satisfaction that men are justified by faith. To him
faith was a dynamic force that could not allow or permit injustice in
the world. It was, therefore, the responsibility of the Christian to
consider and be concerned about corruption and abusive practices in
the world of business and comme rce.‘?'3

It was during the time that he wrote his treatises on usury that
he rejected the medieval concept of a M, or calling. He refused
to acknowledge the idea of a unique or particular calling for the clergy
that would elevate them far above the laity. To Luther every calling

was of God. It was in his Long Sermon on Usury, preached in 1520,

 

that he set forth for the first time his idea of the "priesthood of all
believers, " which was to do away with any special merit in the work

of those appointed by the Roman Church. 34

 

.33Schwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 451.

 

34Ibid.. p. 451.

 

,i‘ il I‘- i l I l

-l 12-

To the rejection of a special priesthood was added the stigma
of idleness and begging on the part of any within the community.
Those who could work should do so, and those who were not able to
support themselves should be taken care of by charity, but they
should not beg. 35

Luther did not only see in usury a means of getting excessive
rates of interest on money that had been loaned, but rather the taking '
of unjust advantage of someone in relation to a specific situation. He
did not condemn all usury, for there we re instances when Luther
would condone the practice. It was one thing to make a loan to a
businessman who would make a profit on the loan after he had invested
it, but at the same time it was a sin to charge any interest when mak-
ing a loan to the poor. In one transaction it was possible to charge as
much as five or six per cent interest while in the other case none was
permitted. Judgment should vary according to the circumstances.
All transactions should be entered upon in the spirit of Christian love,
and the one who gives credit should consider the ability of the debtor

to pay back the money that he borrowed. 36

 

35Roland H. Bainton, The Reformation of the Sixteenth
Century (Boston, 1952), pp. 246-247.

 

368chwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 451.

 

 

CHA PT ER VII

CONCLUSIONS

0

Luther never departed from the oasic principles that he set
forth in his early sermons and treatises on usury. He tried to be
fair-minded when considering individual cases involving loans in the
normal channels of business. Luther's willingness to be fair and to
adjust to the individual circumstance can be seen in his sermon on
Matthew 23:25 when he points out the fact that prices were higher at
that particular time, therefore, a higher rate of interest could be

charged.

Max Weber in his essay, The Protestant Ethic And The Spirit

 

of Capitalism, presents Luther as a peasant's son who was extremely

 

backward in relation to his ideas concerning trade and business. In

more recent years Albert Hyma in his Renaissance to Reformation

 

has capably analyzed both the views of Max Weber and Ernest
Troeltsch and finds that they ”. ..failed to study thoroughly the
medieval mind."2 Calvin is the man that is given credit for being

instrumental in the rise of capitalism and modern business, but

 

1Schwiebert, Luther and His Times, pp. 451-452.

 

2Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation, p. 94.

~113-

 

spams-9.3V... 1:39" 9,...- w

-ll4—
Hyma contends that Calvin was hesitant at times to answer questions
concerning the lending of money on interest. Actually Luther wrote
more on economic matters than Calvin, and if the writings of the two
men were compared, they would be very similar in point of view. In

fact, Luther's Treatise On Usury contains the germ of much that is

 

found in such writings of Calvin as his commentaries on Psalm and on
Ezekiel XVIII. 3 Hyma finds at least ten points of agreement between
Luther's views in the years 1520, 1524, and 1525, and Calvin's ideas
as they are set forth in his letter on usury, dated 1545: "First, the
Mosaic law and all other passages in the Old Testament are intended
for the Jews, and not necessarily for the gentiles. Secondly, no
statement to be found anywhere in the‘ Bible can be construed as con-
demning every form of lending money on interest. Thirdly, a
Christian. . . is to be subject to the laws and regulations of the country
or city in which he is residing. Fourthly, . . .it is prohibited to charge
interest of a poor person. Fifthly, one must constantly bear in mind
the injunction of Christ not to do unto others what one does not want
done to himself. Sixthly, the proper rate of interest is five per cent,
but in special cases it is permissible to charge up to eight per cent.
Seventhly, the ideal way is to loan money on security in the form of

real estate. Eighthly, Aristotle's dictum, 'money is sterile, ' is to

 

31bid.. pp. 450-452.

 

 

-115-

be interpreted to mean that money buried in a box is indeed sterile,
and nobody would be so foolish as to pay interest on such money.
Ninthly, it would be well if all manner of usury were abolished from
the face of the earth, for the name usury has rightly earned for itself
a very bad reputation. However, the word interest, newly introduced,
describes a practice which has been generally accepted since the first
of the fifteenth century. . . . Tenthly, the desire for personal gain must
always remain subordinated to that Christian spirit of brotherly love
which seeks to aid the poor and the outcasts, . . ."4

Luther's views concerning capitalism as we know it today
were no doubt naive and simple, but Europe of his day was just begin-
ning to emerge from the medieval guild system to what has been called
the capitalistic type of production. ‘ Luther, no doubt, did not com-
pletely understand all the facets of business life during his own day,
nor could he conceive of what was to come in the future. He did
observe the fact, however, that in the case of the Fuggers, who are
considered by some to be the first modern businessmen, that all too
often the poor common man was not given a fair consideration
because of high interest rates and foreclosures. 5 Luther could not

only see that the conditions relating to the practice of lending money

 

41bid., p. 455.

SSchwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 452.

 

Fl 47“ -m‘EH

 

 

-l 16-

were adversely affecting many people of his day, but he had a good
understanding of how businessmen of his day tried to manipulate the
market in such a way as to create for a few people a monopoly of a
given item -- a not-so-small problem confronting the government
of the United States for many years.

That Luther was a conservative amid an agrarian economy
that he loved can not be doubted. 6 However, for his day he was a
progressive thinker and held some views concerning economics that
are similar to those which were held by Thomas Jefferson in the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and would not be incompatible
with the ideas of some economists even in the day in which we live.
For those who would cast his views aside as simple and unrealistic
for a twentieth century business world, it might be well for them
to reconsider the thoughts of this great man. Even if there be but
rudimentary knowledge in his system of thought concerning economic
questions, and it is essentially true as truth can be known to man,
perhaps men of today could benefit by applying to their daily busi-
ness and social lives the principles set forth by Martin Luther

nearly four and one-half centuries ago.

 

6Roland Bainton, The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century
(Boston, 1952), p. 247.

 

 

..... 1 ’1 ll"! I ' In.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Primary Sources:
The major portion of this thesis is based upon the words and

writings of Luther himself. One edition used was Works of Martin

 

Luther, ed. Henry Eyster Jacobs, trans. J. J. Schindel, A. T. W.
Steinhaeuser, et. a1., 6 vols. (Philadelphia, 1915), commonly
known as the Philadelphia Edition. The small scope of this edition
limits its use for research concerning many of Luther's thoughts;
however, it was very valuable for this study as it contains his major
writings of 1520 and 1524 dealing with the questions of trade and
usury. This edition also contains his three major writings concern-
ing the Peasants' War of 1525 which is dealt with in chapter five of
this thesis.

Another valuable edition was Luther's Works, General eds.

 

Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut T. Lehmann, 55 vols; (St. Louis;
1955 - ). This edition was very helpful in that it contains many of .
Luther's lectures and writings on the Bible. However, during the
time this thesis was being prepared only about 23 vols. of this work
had been completed.

One of the most helpful works used in the writing of this

paper was What Luther Says: An Anthology, ed. Ewald M. Plaes,
~117-

l‘—- ' '—'-L_’ __

3N. -3'FE

vii—la: "out.

 

5‘1"“?! 0 ’4-

 

»: a r -‘

 

‘.' M‘A

 

-118-
3 vols. (Saint Louis, 1959). These vols. give a general knowledge of
many of Luther's thoughts concerning specific subjects such as gov-
ernment, money, wealth and many more. These vols. are also
helpful in that they direct the reader in finding materials in the orig-
inal writings of Luther.
Preserved Smith and Charles M. Jacobs, trans. and eds.,

Luther's Correspondence and Other Contemporary Letters, 2 vols.

.

 

(Philadelphia, 1913-1918) provides a good selection of Luther's
letters; These vols. give valuable insight into Luther's ideas as he
expressed them to individuals over a period of time. Another book
that furnished information that could not be found in the preceding

vols. was The Letters of Martin Luther, trans. Margaret A. Currie

 

C

(London, 1908).

Wilhelm Pauck, ed. and trans. , Luther: Lectures On Romans,

 

The Library of Christian Classics, 26 vols. (Philadelphia, 1961) was
an important source of information with regard to Luther's concept of
power as it relates to government as it is' found in Romans 13.

Another volume of the same series was Luther: Letters of Spiritual

 

Counsel, ed. and trans. Theodore G. Tappert, The Library of Chris-
tian Classics, 26 vols. (Philadelphia, 1961) which gives a limited
view of Luther's ideas concerning trade during the year 1539.

The principal value of the Three Treatises, trans. W. A.

 

Lambert, A. T. W. Steinhaeuser, et. a1. (Saint Louis, 1943) for

 

-ll9-
this study was for the information used from Luther's ”Treatise On
Christian Liberty. "
A very good source book that gives valuable information con-
cerning the ideas on usury as they were expressed by the early

church councils would be Disciplinary Decrees of the General Coun-

 

cils, trans. Rev. H. J. Schroeder (Saint Louis, 1937). Also the

 

writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, The Summa Theologica, trans.

 

Fathers of the English Dominican Province, 21 vols. (London, 1929)
we re used as a source of information concerning the attitude of the -
scholastics and canonists toward the use of money lent in the form

of usury.

Secondary Sources:
The standard work for the period known as the Reformation

is now Harold J. Grimm, The Reformation Era: 1500-1630 (New

 

York, 1954). A well~written survey of the Reformation, which is
pitched at the level of the educated layman in style and vocabulary,

will be found in The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century, Roland

 

H. Bainton (Boston, 1952.). Two other authors used for general

source material were Thomas M. Lindsay, A History of the

 

Reformation, 2 vols. (New York, 1907) and Henry S. Lucas, The

Renaissance and the Reformation (New York, 1934).

Ernest G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times: The Reforma-

 

tion from a New Perspective (Saint Louis, 1950) is one of the best

375! "7'7 = *‘_—_"’

 

l is is! ll. '1]. I 1 I i I. .I ‘Ilv 'II III, .1 1| \Ill 31' ills. ull'lll 11 . c'llllllu. il. all-I111 !.il I: I'll

-120-
biographies of Luther now available. It comprehensively covers all
aspects of Luther's life and the action of the Reformation. Less
comprehensive in its scope, but a well-written and interesting account
of Luther as the leader of the Reformation movement, is Roland H.

Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther (New York, 1950).

 

Another of the standard works on the life of Luther is Preserved

Smith, The Life and Letters of Martin Luther (Boston, 1911) although

 

he is not as sympathetic in his treatment of Luther at times as 1%
Schwiebert and Bainton. Two authors who would probably be rated
as secondary authors compared to the three previous ones would be

Peter Bayne, Martin Luther: His Life and Work, 2 vols. (London,

 

1887) and R. Pascal, The Social Basis of the German Reformation:

 

Martin Luther and His Times (London, 1933).

 

An excellent treatment and review of the rim: of the social,
political and economic developments in the medieval and Reforma-

tion periods would be Albert Hyma, Renaissance to Reformation

 

(Grand Rapids, 1951). Albert Hyma, Luther's Theological Devel-

 

opment From Erfurt to Augsburg (New York, 1928) was also used

 

in relation to Luther's thoughts on usury. R. H. Tawney, Religion

and the Rise of Capitalism (New York, 1926) is a study of the devel-

 

opment of religious thought in relation to social‘and economic
questions -- a book that would prooably be favorable to that individ-

ual who would tend to frown upon free enterprise as an economic

~121-

system. Douglas Carter and M. Childs, Ethics in a Business Society

 

(New York, 1954) and George Soule, Ideas of the Great Economists

 

(New York, 1952) are each books that give a good general survey of
prevailing economic thoughts during the Medieval and Reformation
periods of history. Two other books which the author consulted
which consider economic problems during the period before and
during the Reformation, but were of relatively minor importance

to this thesis, are Richard Ehrenberg, Capital and Finance in the

 

Age of the Renaissance, trans. H. M. Lucas (New York, N. D.)

 

and Benjamen N. Nelson, The Idea of Usury: From Tribal Brother-

 

hood to Universal Otherhood (Princeton, 1949). A good concise

 

picture of the attitude of the early Church toward usury can be found
in James Hastings, ed., The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics,

12 vols. (New York, 1908-1927) and in Philip Schaff, History of the

 

Christian Church, 7 vols. (New York, 1907).

 

 

[-4. ..I' l. .

III! .1 ll [.It

All I l 1"

I I I till] ’11)! ‘I‘I

AAAAAAAAAA

“lmxull‘l‘i

93

sluxxtglgiiijii)(11))?