4. The Secular Ruler must subject himself to God.
And if as a consequence of this, you cannot prevent some from becoming widows and orphans, you must nevertheless prevent all from going to ruin, where nothing is left but widows and orphans.
In this matter, subjects are in duty-bound to follow, and to risk life and property for the cause. For in such a case, one must risk his property and himself for the sake of the other.
And in such a war, it is a Christian act and an act of love, to confidently kill, rob, and pillage the enemy, and to do everything that can injure him, until one has conquered him according to the methods of war. Only, one must beware of sin, and not violate wives and virgins; when victory comes, offer mercy and peace to those who surrender and humble themselves.
Therefore, in such a case let the saying hold true, "God helps those who help themselves." So Abraham did when he killed the four kings, as Gen 14:14 1 tells us, when he certainly caused great slaughter and showed little mercy until he conquered them.
Such happenings must be considered as sent by God, that He may now and then cleanse the land and drive out the knaves.
But when a prince is in the wrong, are his people bound to follow him then too? I answer,
No; for it is no one's duty to do wrong. We ought to obey God, Who desires the right, rather than obey men. (Acts 5:29)2 What about when subjects do not know whether the prince is in the right or not? I answer, As long as they cannot know, nor find out by any possible means, they may obey without peril to their souls. For in such a case, one must apply the Law of Moses, when he writes in Exo 21:13, that a murderer who has unknowingly and involuntarily killed a man shall be delivered by fleeing to a city of refuge, and by the judgment of the congregation. (Num 35:12) For whichever side is defeated, whether it is in the right or in the wrong, that side must accept it as a punishment from God; but whichever side wars and wins in such ignorance, that side must regard their battle as though one fell from the roof and killed another, and leave the matter to God. For it is the same to God whether He deprives you of goods and life by a just lord or by an unjust lord. You are His creature, and He can do with you as He will — it only matters that your conscience is clear. God Himself thus excuses
Abimelech in Gen 20:6, when he took Abraham's wife, not because he had done right, but because he had not known that she was Abraham's wife.
4. The Secular Ruler must subject himself to God.
We come to what really should be foremost, and of which we spoke above. A prince must act also in a Christian way toward his God. That is, he must subject himself to God in entire confidence, and pray for wisdom to rule well, as Solomon did. (1Kng 3:9)3 But I have written so much elsewhere about faith and trust in God, that it is not necessary to say more here.
Therefore we will close by saying briefly that a prince's duty is fourfold:
First, that his duty toward God consists in true confidence and sincere prayer; second, that his duty toward his subjects consists in love and Christian service; third, that his duty toward his counselors and rulers consists in an open mind and unfettered judgment; fourth, that his duty toward evil-doers consists in proper zeal and firmness [against them]. Then his
1 The battle of four kings against five, when Abram's nephew Lot was taken captive: Gen 14:14 Now when
Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his three hundred and eighteen trained servants who were born in his own house, and went in pursuit as far as Dan.
2 Act 5:29 But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: "We ought to obey God rather than men.
3 1Kng 3:9 "Therefore give to Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people, that I may discern between good and evil. For who is able to judge this great people of Yours?"
state is right, outwardly and inwardly; it is pleasing to God and to the people. But he must expect much envy and sorrow— the cross will soon rest on the shoulders of such a ruler.
A FINAL WORD ABOUT RESTITUTION.
Finally, in addition, I must answer those who dispute about restitution, that is, about the returning of goods unlawfully acquired. This is a common task of the temporal sword, and much has been written concerning it; and there has been much hairsplitting in the discussion of it. I will put it all in a few words, and dispose at one and the same time of all these laws and the quibbles that follow. No more definite law can be found on this subject than the law of love. In the first place, when such a case is brought before you, in which one is to make restitution to another, the matter is soon settled if they are both Christians; for neither will withhold what belongs to the other, nor will either of them demand that it be returned. If only one is a Christian, namely, the one to whom restitution is to be made, it is again easy to settle, for he does not care whether it is never returned. The same is true if the one who is to make restitution is a Christian; he will do so. But whether one is a Christian or not a Christian, you must decide the restitution as follows. If the debtor is poor and unable to make restitution, and the other party is not poor, then you should let the law of love prevail and acquit the debtor. For, according to the law of love, the other party, too, owes it to him to relinquish the debt, and if necessary to give him something besides. But if the debtor is not poor, then let him restore as much as he can, all, half, a third, or a fourth of it, provided that you leave him enough to assure a house, food and clothing for himself, his wife and children; for this you would owe him if you could give it, much less ought you to take it away now, since you do not need it and he cannot do without it.
But if neither is a Christian, or if either is unwilling to be judged by the law of love, then you may ask them to call in another judge, and announce to them that they are acting against God and the law of nature 1 — even though they may obtain absolute justice through human law. For nature, like love, teaches that I should do as I would be done by. (Mat 7:12)2
Therefore I cannot strip anyone else of goods, even if I have the very best right to do so, if I myself am not willing to be stripped of my goods. But just as I would have another relinquish his rights to me in such an instance, even so I should relinquish my rights. Thus one should deal with all property that is unlawfully held, whether in public or private, so that love and the law of nature may always prevail. For when you judge according to love, you will easily decide and adjust matters without any law-books. But when you ignore love and natural law, you will never succeed in pleasing God. Though you have devoured all the law-books and jurists, they will only cause you to err, the more you depend on them. A good and just decision must not and cannot be given out of books; it must come from a free mind, as though there were not a single book. Such a free decision, however, is given by love and by the law of nature, which have filled the reason. But out of the books come rigid and vague judgments. I will give you an example of this.
An incident of this sort is told of Duke Charles of Burgundy.3 A certain nobleman took an enemy prisoner, whereupon the prisoner's wife came to redeem her husband. The nobleman
1 "The law of nature is the common opinion to which we all as men equally agree, and which God has engraved upon the heart of every one." — This "law of nature" played a large part in the teaching of the Roman Catholic
Church and in Luther's own thought. — MELANCHTHON, Loci Communes (1521), de lege. Ed. Plitt-Kolde, p. 111.
2 Mat 7.12 "Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
3 Charles the Bold (1467-77). The story is also quoted by Melanchthon (Corpus Ref., xx, 531).
promised to give her back her husband, provided she would lie with him. The woman was virtuous, yet desired to set her husband free; so she goes and asks her husband whether she should do this thing in order to set him free. The husband desired to be set free and to save his life, and gives his wife permission. After the nobleman had lain with the wife, he had the husband beheaded the next day and gave him to her, a corpse. She laid the whole case before Duke Charles, who summoned the nobleman and commanded him to marry the woman.
When the wedding day was over, he had the man beheaded, put the woman in possession of his property, and raised her again to honor. Thus he punished the crime in a princely way.
You see, this was such a decision that no pope, or jurist, and no law-book could have given him; but it sprang from untrammeled reason, above the law found in the books. And it is so excellent that everyone must approve of it, and find the justice of it written in his own heart.
St. Augustine in his Sermon of the Lord on the Mount writes in the same fashion.1 Therefore we should keep written laws subject to reason, from which indeed they have welled up as from the spring of justice; and not make the spring dependent on its rivulets, nor take reason captive to the letter.
1 In the Exposition of the Sermon on the Mount (Migne, xxxiv, 1254).