PROTESTANT THEORY OF PERSECUTION 159
of all who believe in the Confession of Augsburg. 1 It is the most important element in Luther's political system, because, while it made all Protestant governments despotic, it led to the rejection of the authority of Catholic governments. This is the point where Protest- ant and Catholic intolerance meet. If the State were instituted to promote the faith, no obedience could be due to a State of a different faith. Protestants could not conscientiously be faithful subjects of Catholic Powers, and they could not therefore be tolerated. Misbelievers would have no rights under an orthodox State, and a misbelieving prince \vould have no authority over orthodox subjects. The more, therefore, Luther expounded the guilt of resistance and the Divine sanction of authority, the more subversive his influence became in Catholic countries. His system was alike revolutionary, whether he defied the Catholic powers or promoted a Protestant tyranny. He had no notion of political right. He found no authority fo
such a claim in the New Testament, and
he held that righteousness does not need to exhibit itself in works. It was the same helpless dependence on the letter of Scripture which led the reformers to consequences more subversive of Christian morality than their vie\vs on questions of polity. When Carlstadt cited the 110saic law in defence of polygamy, Luther was indignant. If the Mosaic law is to govern everything, he said, \ve should be compelled to adopt circumcision.! Nevertheless, as there is no prohibition of polygamy in the New Testament, the reformers were unable to condemn it. They did not forbid it as a matter of Divine law, and referred it entirely to the decision of the civil legislator. s This, accordingly 1 Möhler, Symbo/ik, 4 28 . 2 II Quodsi unam legem losi cogimur servare, eadem ratione et circumcidemur, et totam legem servare oportebit. , . . Nunc vero non sumus amplius sub lege Mosi, sed subjecti legibus civilibus in tali bus rebus" (Luther to Barnes, Sept. 5, 153 1 ; De Wette, iv, 296), 3 I I All things that we find done by the patriarchs in the Old Testament ought to be free and not forbidden, Circumcision is abolished, but not so that it would be a sin to perform it, but optional, neither sinful nor acceptable. , . . In like manner it is not forbidden that a man should have more than one wife. Even at the present day I could not prohibit it; but I would not recommend it ..
