Martin Luther – Whether Soldiers Too Can Be Saved
In light of the discussion on pacifism in the previous post, I thought it might be helpful to link to a work of Martin Luther’s called Whether Soldiers Too Can Be Saved. I know the point in dispute has nothing to do with the question of whether or not a soldier can be saved. But this work of Luther’s goes beyond the title of the piece.
I apologise for the crappiness of the links. It’s the only online copy I could find. I have in my hands a better edition from volume 46 of the American Edition of his Works, it’s volume 3 of The Christian in Society published by Fortress Press. If you can find that in a library, it makes for much easier reading. Here are a couple of good quotes that I stole from the blog Planet Augsburg:
…In the same way, when I think of a soldier fulfilling his office by punishing the wicked, killing the wicked, and creating so much misery, it seems an un-Christian work completely contrary to Christian love. But when I think of how it protects the good and keeps and preserves wife and child, house and farm, property, and honor and peace, then I see how precious and godly this work is; and I observe that it amputates a leg or a hand, so that the whole body may not perish…
…The office of the sword is in itself right and is a divine and useful ordinance, which God does not want us to despise, but to fear, honor, and obey, under penalty of punishment, as St. Paul says in Romans 13 [:1-5]…
…Self-defense is a proper ground for fighting and therefore all laws agree that self-defense shall go unpunished; and he who kills another in self-defense is innocent in the eyes of all men…
…When the battle begins…they [soldiers] should simply commend themselves to God’s grace and adopt a Christian attitude…everyone should also say this exhortation in his heart or with his lips, “Heavenly Father, here I am, according to your divine will, in the external work and service of my lord, which I owe you first and then to my lord for your sake. I thank your grace and mercy that you have put me into a work which I am sure is not sin, but right and pleasing obedience to your will. But because I know and have learned from your gracious word that none of our good works can help us and that no one is saved as a soldier but only as a Christian, therefore, I will not in any way rely on my obedience and work, but place myself freely at the service of your will. I believe with all my heart that only the innocent blood of your dear Son, my Lord Jesus Christ, redeems and saves me, which he shed for me in obedience to your holy will. In this faith I will live and die, fight, and do everything else. Dear Lord God the Father, preserve and strengthen this faith in me by your Spirit. Amen.”
The problem is that everyone claims that they are fighting a defensive war. Who was “protecting good” in World War I? Both the sides claimed such a mantle while slicing apart a fair part of French and Belgian countryside. WWI was an extreme case, but it was essentially waged at the behest of the inbred idiots (Douglas Haig was a truly useless man) of the upper classes of Europe in order to protect their colonial holdings. I say this as a descendant of a WWI vet too.
Yes all wars are just in theory. The actual contingent wars that get fought seldom are.
The same could be said about other societal institutions as well. Prisons are almost always unjust. So are courts and politicians. Perhaps we should get rid of them. Wait… that’s anarchy!
Yes, but these things seldom actually kill. We can work to revise our systems of accountability and justice for most of our civil institutions without killing anyone. I have a hard time not considering that in my calculations.
Let this be, then, the first thing to be said in this matter: No war is just, even if it is a war between equals, unless one has such a good reason for fighting and such a good conscience that he can say, “My neighbor compels and forces me to fight, though I would rather avoid it.” In that case, it can be called not only war, but lawful self-defense, for we must distinguish between wars that someone begins because that is what he wants to do and does before anyone else attacks him, and those wars that are provoked when an attack is made by someone else. The first kind can be called wars of desire; the second, wars of necessity. The first kind are of the devil; God does not give good fortune to the man who wages that kind of war. The second kind are human disasters; God help in them!
Greg,
The danger here is that everyone in a major war now sees themselves as defending against aggressors.