Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
The Luther renaissance of our century was in large part a consequence of the determination of German scholars to find an explanation for the debacle of their nation following the First World War. For this reason the attitude of the first truly German genius of modern times toward the German territorial states and the Holy Roman Empire has been a matter of primary concern. This concern was intensified by the resurgence of German nationalism under the totalitarianism of the National Socialists who set about to interpret the life and work of every important historical figure of Germany in the light of the new national faith. German scholars will again study Luther's writings for the purpose of finding hope and inspiration after the catastrophic consequences of the Second World War is already indicated by the frequent references to the importance of religion in Germany's historical evolution.
1 Cf. Meineeke, Friedrich, Die deutsche Katastrophe (Zürich and Wiesbaden, 1946), especially 151–177.Google Scholar
2 Waring, Luther Hess, The Political Theories of Martin Luther (New York and London, 1910), 281.Google Scholar
3 Maritain, Jacques, Three Reformers: Luther—Descartes—Rousseau (New York, rev. ed., 1942), 14.Google Scholar
4 Kautsky, Karl, Communism in Central Europe in the Time of the Reformation (London, 1897), 128;Google Scholaridem , “Die Vorläufer des neueren Sozialismus,” Die Geschichte des Sozialismus, I, part one (Stuttgart, 1895), 250Google Scholar; Zimmermann, W., Grosser deutscher Bauernkrieg, ed. by Wilhelm, Blos (Stuttgart, 1891), 629–632.Google Scholar
5 Thiel, Rudolf, Luther (Berlin, 1935–1936), 2 vols., II, 847–348.Google Scholar For other accounts written from the National Socialist point of view, see Seheel, Otto, “Evangelium, Kirche und Volk bei Luther,” Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, 50–51 (Leipzig, 1934)Google Scholar; idem, “Der Volksgedanke bei Luther,” Historische Zeitschrift, 161 (1940), 477–497Google Scholar; Leisegang, Hans, Luther als deutscher Christ (Berlin, 1934)Google Scholar; Deutelmoser, Arno, Luther, Staat und Glaube (Jean, 1937)Google Scholar. For a bitter and hostile account, see Wiener, Peter F., Martin Luther, Hitler's Spiritual Ancestor (London. n.d.)Google Scholar. McGovern, William Montgomery, From Luther to Hitler (Boston, 1941)Google Scholar, confines his criticism of Luther largely to his freeing the state from all control of the church and permitting the territorial princes to control the church (30–35).
6 Weber, Alfred, “Unsere Erfahrung und unsere Aufgabe,” Die Wandlung (11, 1945)Google Scholar, as quoted in Price, Hoyt and Schorske, Carl E., The Problem of Germany (New York, 1947), 132.Google Scholar Cf. Ritter, Gerhard, Luther, Gestalt und Tat (Munich, 1943), 260,Google Scholar in which he refers to the “Daemonie der Macht” in the conflicts of the late Middle Ages.
7 Works (Holman ed.), II (1916), 301–348.Google Scholar Cf. Pauck, Wilhelm, “Luther and the Reformation,” Theology Today, III (10, 1946), 314–327.Google Scholar
8 Based on Romans xiii, I Cor. xii, and I Peter, ii. Cf. Sehwiebert, Ernest, “The Medieval Pattern in Luther's Views of the State,” Church History, XII (06, 1943), 3–22.Google Scholar Edgar M. Carlson, “Luther's Conception of Government,” Ibid., XV (December, 1946), 257–270.
9 Cf. Köhler, Walter, “Luther und das Luthertum in ihrer weltgeschiehtlichen Auswirkung,” Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, 50–51 (Leipzig, 1933), 102.Google Scholar Opposed to this view is Ritter, Gerhard, Die Weltwirkung der Reformation (Leipzig, 1941), 78–79.Google Scholar
10 Werke (Weimar ed.), VI, 408–410.Google Scholar
11 Tischreden (Weimar ed.), V, 5258.Google Scholar
12 Ibid., III, 2910 (1533).
13 Werke (Weimar ed.), XI, 262.Google Scholar
14 Tischreden (Weimar ed.), VI, 6672.Google Scholar
15 Works (Holman ed.), II, 61–164.Google Scholar
16 Tischreden (Weimar ed.), II, 1762 (1532); V, 5540 (1542–1543).Google Scholar
17 Ibid., I, 415 (1532).
18 Ibid., III, 2910 (1533). Cf. also his treatment of the question, “Ob Kriegsleutte auch ynn seligem stande seyn künden,” Werke (Weimar ed.), XIX, 623–662.Google Scholar
19 Ibid., 291–361; 386–401.
20 Ibid., V, 208; Wette, Wilhelm M. de and Seidemann, Th. K., Dr. Martin Luthers Briefe, Sendschreiben und Bedenken (Berlin, 1825–1828, 1856 ), 6 vols., VI, 127Google Scholar; Tischreden (Weimar ed.), IV, 4380, 4342.Google Scholar Cf. Schwiebert, , “The Medieval Pattern in Luther's View of the State,” 19–21.Google Scholar
21 Cf. Holl, Karl, Gesammelte Anfsätze zur Kirchengeschichte, I (Tübingen, 1923), 315–318.Google Scholar
22 Ritter, Gerhard, Luther, Gestalt und Tat (Munich, 1943), 236.Google Scholar
23 Hertz, Frederick, Nationality in History and Politics (London, 1944), 130.Google Scholar Cf. Sulzbach, Walter, National Consciousness (Washington, American Council on Public Affairs, 1943)Google Scholar, with a foreword by Hans Kohn, where one finds on p. 20 the following amazing statement: “Luther kept himself and Protestantism in good favor with his Saxon prince [sic] by acccpting the latter's right to two legitimate wives at the same time. By helping Protestantism at a critical time, he thus became an important factor in German national history.”
24 Hashagen, Justus, Staat und Kirche vor der Reformation (Essen, 1931), 558.Google Scholar
25 Lortz, Joseph, Die Reformation in Deutschland (Freiburg im Breisgan, 1939–1940), 2 vols., I, 363.Google Scholar Cf. also 262–263; II, 274–275.
26 Brandi, Karl, The Emperor Charles V, tr. by Wedgwood, C. V. (New York, 1939), 196.Google Scholar
27 Tischreden (Weimar ed.), I, 349; cf. VI, 7024, 7026–7031.Google Scholar
28 Cf. de Wette, , Luthers Briefe, II, 562Google Scholar; also his introduction to the Deudsehe Messe unel Ordnung Gottisdiensts, 1526, in Werke (Weimar ed.), XIX, 74, 76;Google ScholarHoll, , Gesammelte Aufsätze, 365,Google Scholar note 2.
29 Cf. Müller, Karl, “Über die Anfänge der Konsistorialverfassung,” Historische Zeitschrift, 102 (1911), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30 Cf. Holl, , Gesammelte Aufsätze, I, 378–380.Google Scholar
31 Cf. Tischreden (Weimar ed.), I, 42, 814; II, 2467a; III, 3287b; IV, 222, 223, 4445. Cf. Paul, Kirn, Friedrich der Weise und die Kirche (Berlin, 1926),Google Scholarpassim.
32 De Wette, , Luthers Briefe, II, 136.Google Scholar
33 Ibid., 137ff. 03 5, 1522.
34 At the funeral of the elector. Tischreden (Weimar ed.), II, 1738.Google Scholar
35 Ibid., II, 2645; VI, 6756.
36 Briefwechsel (Weimar ed.), IV (1933), No. 1332 (10 5, 1528), 576–580.Google Scholar
37 Tischreden (Weimar ed.), II, 1731, 1564.Google Scholar
38 Hartung, Fritz, Volk und Staat in der deutschen Gesohichte (Leipzig, 1940), 94–111.Google Scholar
39 Baron, Hans, “Imperial Reform and the Habsburgs, 1486–1504,” American Historical Review, XLIV, 293–303.Google Scholar
40 Hartung, Fritz, Volk und Staat, 11–12.Google Scholar
41 Tischreden (Weimar ed.), II, 1428.Google Scholar For a scholarly treatment of Luther's lack of national consciousness see Kohn, Hans, The Idea of National Consciousness (New York, 1944)Google Scholar, who states that “The connection of Lutheranism with the rise of nationalism in Germany is slight” (143).
42 Ibid., I, 904; III, 3636.
43 Ibid., VI, 7044.
44 Ibid., IV, 4018.
45 Ibid., I, 904; V, 6310, 6145; VI, 7043, 7054.
46 Ibid., IV, 4011, 4803; VI, 6546.
47 Ibid., IV, 4018; V, 6146.
48 Ibid., IV, 4380; cf. 4342.
49 Ibid., III, 3687.
50 Cf. Thiel, Rudolf, Luther, II, especially pp. 347–348,Google Scholar who interprets Luther's desire for a hero as a desire for a Führer in the National Socialist sense and states that he, as a German, “taught his people respect for the great leaders (Führer) whom fate has chosen.”
51 Tischreden (Weimar ed.), III, 3562, 3636; V, 5735, 5982.Google Scholar
52 Ibid., VI, 6955.
53 Ibid., V, 5540.
54 Ibid., V, 6118.
