Christianity as Political Strategy (1)

Time for something a bit more serious and, hopefully, a bit more interesting: Christianity as political strategy, a new mini-series. (More on abortion may well follow but for now I'm following my current interest since that will make it more interesting reading.) This will be brought to you primarily by Dr Martin Luther of sixteenth-century Wittenberg, with a few comments of varying coherence and intelligence from me.

This post: Foundations and axioms.

Future posts: Repentance as Political Strategy; Prayer as Political Strategy; Preaching about Jesus as Political Strategy; Martyrdom as Political Strategy ... and possily more, but that lot will certainly keep us going for now!

Intro blurb:

In his Sincere Admonition to all Christians to Guard Against Insurrection and Rebellion of 1522, Martin Luther first outlines the various reasons why rebellion against the government is not a legitimate (or indeed effective) political strategy. He then balances this negative judgement by giving an account of a positive strategy for how Christians might respond to a government which seems hell-bent on acting wrongly. This post will outline the arguments which provide the foundation for his negative judgement on violent rebellion, and the subsequent (much shorter) ones will comment on his positive suggestions.

Foundation and Axioms:

1. God is in charge and you/me/he/they are not. This liberating truth means that it is not up to me or you to set everything right, since only God can and will do this. This does not mean that we can sit back and relax whilst the world goes to hell in a handbasket or any other kind of basket for that matter. But it means that we are set free from the idea that we must change the world by any and all means necessary, since God bears the ultimate responsibility.
2. Human judgement is, ironically, far too lax, since human judgement proceeds not from selfless compassion but self-justification, i.e. the desire to feel that one is in the right - which is usually accomplished by envisaging the other as in the wrong. Sin becomes petty as opposed to the radical rebellion and consequent plight into which humanity has been plunged by its vicious and evil ways. Luther made this comment in the light of the medieval papacy, which had grown fat by exploiting the superstitions of the people by selling indulgences: "when the penny rings in the collecting tin, the soul flies out of purgatory." Incencsed by this evil deception Luther envisaged a very, very angry God - angry because of his compassionate love for the exploited.
3. Judgement is God's work; rebellion takes the judgement of God upon the shoulders of man, putting yourself in the right, idolatrously usurping God's place.
4. Violence doesn't work: "it generally harms the innocent more than the guilty". Once again we see Luther's heart for the people at the bottom of the pile - the ones who get shafted whoever is in power, and the ones who really suffer as a result of civil war and rebellion. Furthermore, the need to resort to violence suggests that you lack confidence in the truthful force of your arguments. Truth commands assent. This is one of Luther's much more subtle arguments in this piece: written in the context of the early Reformation he could see the powerful effect his preaching and writing was having. The temptation to rise up by force and to physically cast off the shackles of papal control was therefore the devil's strategy to confuse and undermine the Reform movement: to diminish its credibility and scare people off. Insurrection is a sign of God's victory - the devil is running scared - but no compromise can be made with the methods of the world and the methods of the gospel.
5. This does not mean that no force can be used to impose what is right - but it must come from the proper source, i.e. the legit government. Luther was afraid of everyone trying to enforce their right and wrong all over the shop - but he strongly retained the idea that the secular government had an important role to play in shaping the moral and spiritual life of its people.

That will do for now. Not all of Luther's account will command equal assent in today's context, of course. But in order to understand what to me is the more interesting stuff of his positive account, one needs to have a basic understanding of where he was coming from, so hope this helps. More anon.

Comments

[Peter O]

This wouldn't have anything to do with a conversation, say sitting outside the Bookbinders yesterday?