CeJ <jann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Also interesting is what Engels wrote in 1843: > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/10/23.htm > > The New Moral World No. 21, November 18, 1843 > > Germany had her Social Reformers as early as the Reformation. Soon > after Luther had begun to proclaim church reform and to agitate the > people against spiritual authority, the peasantry of Southern and > Middle Germany rose in a general insurrection against their temporal > lords. Luther always stated his object to be, to return to original > Christianity in doctrine and practice; the peasantry took exactly the > same standing, and demanded, therefore, not only the ecclesiastical, > but also the social practice of primitive Christianity. They conceived > a state of villainy and servitude, such as they lived under, to be > inconsistent with the doctrines of the Bible; they were oppressed by a > set of haughty barons and earls, robbed and treated like their cattle > every day, they had no law to protect them, and if they had, they > found nobody to enforce it. Such a state contrasted very much with the > communities of early Christians and the doctrines of Christ, as laid > down in the Bible. Therefore they arose and began a war against their > lords, which could only be a war of extermination. Thomas Munzer, a > preacher, whom they placed at their head, issued a proclamation, [162] > full, of course, of the religious and superstitious nonsense of the > age, but containing also among others, principles like these: That > according to the Bible, no Christian is entitled to hold any property > whatever exclusively for himself; that community of property is the > only proper state for a society of Christians; that it is not allowed > to any good Christian to have any authority or command over other > Christians, nor to hold any office of government or hereditary power, > but on the contrary, that, as all men are equal before God, so they > ought to be on earth also. These doctrines were nothing but > conclusions drawn from the Bible and from Luther’s own writings; but > the Reformer was not prepared to go as far as the people did; > notwithstanding the courage he displayed against the spiritual > authorities, he had not freed himself from the political and social > prejudices of his age; he believed as firmly in the right divine of > princes and landlords to trample upon the people, as he did in the > Bible.
^^^^^ CB: Luther didn't have that much of a conflict belieiving in both, as most of the Bible is Ye Olde Testament, which is full of affirmation of the right divine of princes and landlords. Moses was a "king" of sorts, handing down the Ten Commandments as law, i.e. state backed custom. Most of the Bible is the history of a state power, with standing bodies of armed men, and a repressive apparatus. David was a king. Solomon was a king. The communism is in the New Testament, which is a small section. ^^^^^^^ _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
